.
Showing posts with label Hitchens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hitchens. Show all posts
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Christopher Hitchens & William F. Buckley (5/5)
Hitchens admits that he was too impressed by the style of the Black Panthers and he missed seeing that MLK was the true revolutionary of those times.
Christopher Hitchens & William F. Buckley (4/5)
Buckley admits he was wrong to oppose the civil rights movement. But he will not admit that it was a great moment in American history since it was, "anti-thought and anti-rational; the kind of thing that causes Socratesto leave the Symposium."
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Christopher Hitchens & William F. Buckley (3/5)
Hitchen's self-righteousness with the stupid grin makes him look more superficial than he usually appears to me. Buckley is truly more serious. I liked hearing him say, "You might have been right. But it would have been romantic of me to assume you were right."
Christopher Hitchens and William F. Buckley (2/5)
Who were the bad guys in Viet Nam?
Did the doctrine of containment make sense?
Did the US take over the European empires?
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Christopher Hitchens & William F. Buckley (1/5)
Sorry for the BS lefty-moron intro. Such romanticizing of the protester’s sign is rather sad.
In the summer of 1968 Hitch was in Cuba as a volunteer agriculture worker. He was at that time a Luxembourger Trotskyite.
They argue a little about the sexual revolution.
In the summer of 1968 Hitch was in Cuba as a volunteer agriculture worker. He was at that time a Luxembourger Trotskyite.
They argue a little about the sexual revolution.
Labels:
Cuba,
Hitchens,
Jr.,
Viet Nam War,
William F. Buckley
Thursday, June 11, 2009
The Finest Links in All of Christendom
Pundit and Pundette gives a tour of sites rightfully skewering Dave Letterman for his boorish and tasteless attack on Willow Palin; my father would say that the man has no couth. Pundette notices that the MSM will go to foolish lengths to approve anything Michelle Obama does. P & P also have a funny piece about Team Obama’s ‘create or save’ lie. I especially like the observation quoted that Al Qaeda, “created or saved 10,000 jihadist jobs (resulting in a concurrent creation or saving of 720,000 virgins!). ”This pile of dishonesty was created in plain view of the public and is merely laughed at by anyone but Washington reporters and committed Democrats. We have yet to find one stupid thing Obama can say that the MSM will see for what it is. They will admiringly and credulously repeat ANYTHING the man says. No wonder Rush Limbaugh has taken to calling them ‘the state run media.’ There’s a short thing P & P put up recently that I have been quoting in comment threads around the net. It deals with the global warming insanity and I especially love this part: “Pundit, who knows from science, was talking the other day about the irrational "belief" in global warming and the "denier" label that's applied to those who don't "believe." Talk of belief has nothing to do with science, and the words belief and denier have no place in scientific discourse. Science is about data.” Another notable recent post from P & P is the quote from Hitchens about the naiveté demonstrated in the Cairo speech.
I am grateful to Pat from And So It Goes In Shreveport for the fine photo of Carrie Prejean in the not too large bikini: click on the photo and it doubles in size (sadly, this photo makes it obvious they are not real). Then Pat has a story about the Miranda warning being given to Gitmo detainees. [I think it’s named after Theophilis Miranda who wrote the 12th Amendment to our Constitution, which states, “And thou shalt render thyselves defenseless before any circumcised heathen who can manipulate a free lawyer out of your dumb a$$es”] Pat’s next post is titled, ‘Wright Reappears From Under Rock.’ Pat is the only blogger I have seen giving full coverage to the Uighurs. And this continues with her post about the possibility of them being sent to the tropical paradise of Palau. What ever could go wrong?
***************************************
UPDATE at 0730 ***********************
***************************************
Joe at Jo-Joe Politico gives it to that sad excuse for a comedian, Dave Letterman. He also throws in some good Obama jokes, you know, the kind of thing that Letterman lacks the guts and ingenuity to do. He has a good post that shows a continuing ability to be surprised at the MSM’s willingness to do or say any stupid or embarrassing thing in service of Obama. The Light of Chicago’s chattel in the MSM act like he has some special relationship with the beaches of Normandy because one of his uncles was there (with such illogic one could suppose him to be 50% Muslim). Joe also has a post about the national debt. The comments thread gets interesting in spite of running way off topic. Joe’s comment threads are often enlightening and entertaining.
I was looking at insert clever s.logan here and I noticed that Suzanna has 2.4 times as many followers on the Google widget as my site does. I immediately realized that she is at least 2.4 times as attractive as I am (though I think her writing is seldom more than 1.7 to 1.93 times as good as mine). Any attempt I might make to explain her post titled ‘A Very Nice Set of Tatas’ would not be helpful. But if you’re a fan of the Beaver and Eddie Haskell you’ll like it. There’s a funny clip of Bob Hope. And then Suzanna writes in praise of venturing out of your comfort zone. I have mixed feelings about this. I went to a lot of trouble to make it so comfortable. But there is no joy of discovery in my comfort zone. It is only outside of my comfort zone that I will ever again say, “OMG I never imagined the world could be this beautiful.” When I was as young as Suzanna I spent much more time on the outside.
I am grateful to Pat from And So It Goes In Shreveport for the fine photo of Carrie Prejean in the not too large bikini: click on the photo and it doubles in size (sadly, this photo makes it obvious they are not real). Then Pat has a story about the Miranda warning being given to Gitmo detainees. [I think it’s named after Theophilis Miranda who wrote the 12th Amendment to our Constitution, which states, “And thou shalt render thyselves defenseless before any circumcised heathen who can manipulate a free lawyer out of your dumb a$$es”] Pat’s next post is titled, ‘Wright Reappears From Under Rock.’ Pat is the only blogger I have seen giving full coverage to the Uighurs. And this continues with her post about the possibility of them being sent to the tropical paradise of Palau. What ever could go wrong?
***************************************
UPDATE at 0730 ***********************
***************************************
Joe at Jo-Joe Politico gives it to that sad excuse for a comedian, Dave Letterman. He also throws in some good Obama jokes, you know, the kind of thing that Letterman lacks the guts and ingenuity to do. He has a good post that shows a continuing ability to be surprised at the MSM’s willingness to do or say any stupid or embarrassing thing in service of Obama. The Light of Chicago’s chattel in the MSM act like he has some special relationship with the beaches of Normandy because one of his uncles was there (with such illogic one could suppose him to be 50% Muslim). Joe also has a post about the national debt. The comments thread gets interesting in spite of running way off topic. Joe’s comment threads are often enlightening and entertaining.
I was looking at insert clever s.logan here and I noticed that Suzanna has 2.4 times as many followers on the Google widget as my site does. I immediately realized that she is at least 2.4 times as attractive as I am (though I think her writing is seldom more than 1.7 to 1.93 times as good as mine). Any attempt I might make to explain her post titled ‘A Very Nice Set of Tatas’ would not be helpful. But if you’re a fan of the Beaver and Eddie Haskell you’ll like it. There’s a funny clip of Bob Hope. And then Suzanna writes in praise of venturing out of your comfort zone. I have mixed feelings about this. I went to a lot of trouble to make it so comfortable. But there is no joy of discovery in my comfort zone. It is only outside of my comfort zone that I will ever again say, “OMG I never imagined the world could be this beautiful.” When I was as young as Suzanna I spent much more time on the outside.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Victor Davis Hanson and Christopher Hitchens Discuss World War II
Fine program that explores the moral and strategic choices of WWII and the lead up to it. It also examines the wisdom of the US involvement in Yugoslavia in the '90s as well as the invasion of Iraq.
Labels:
Hitchens,
Iraq War,
Victor Davis Hanson,
WWII,
Yugoslavia
Thursday, March 5, 2009
UN Assault On Freedom Of Expression: If You Hurt My Feelings I Will Behead You
Any threat to freedom of expression is a threat to democracy. Few of the UN member states care a whit for the consent of the governed.
ht/Atlas Shrugs
ht/Atlas Shrugs
Labels:
freedon of speech,
Hitchens,
religion,
United Nations
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Chris Hitchens and Eric Alter Argue Iraq
Alter thinks we should not be in Iraq because (1)France and Germany disapprove and (2) our army really belongs in Rwanda and the Sudan.
Alter says we fought alone in Iraq. There have been English, Italian, Spanish, Polish and other forces fighting along with Americans in Iraq. By alone does he just mean that France and Germany were not there? Or is this like when Obama says he strength came from small donors. But most of his donors gave thousands but he likes the cachet that comes from the repetition of 'small donors.'
Monday, August 11, 2008
Hitchens on Iraq
Below are a couple of excerpts from a piece by Christopher Hitchens in Slate on 8-11-08. It's title is Iraq's Budget Surplus Scandal . . .. subtitle Why Do We Have Such A Hard Time Hearing Good News from Iraq.
Yes indeed, Iraq should pay for its own reconstruction. But, just before we all join hands on this obvious proposition, may we take a moment to apologize to Paul Wolfowitz? Of all the many slanders hurled at this advocate for Iraq's liberation, probably none was more gleefully bandied about than his congressional testimony that Iraq's recovery from decades of war and fascism could be self-financing. Now the opponents of the intervention are yelling that Iraq ought to be opening its bulging wallet right away.
. . . . . . . .
I think we should be glad that the luridly sadistic and aggressive Saddam Hussein regime is no longer in power to be the beneficiary of the rise in oil prices and thus able to share its wealth with the terrorists, crooks, and demagogues on its secret payroll. I think we should also be glad that its private ownership of Iraq's armed forces, and its control over a party monopoly called the Baath, has been irrecoverably smashed. Iraq's resources are no longer at the disposal of an aggressive, parasitic oligarchy. Its retrained and re-equipped army is being deployed, not in wars of invasion against its neighbors and genocide against its inhabitants, but in cleanup campaigns against al-Qaida and the Mahdi Army. An improvement. A distinct improvement.
It is in no spirit of revenge that I remind you that, as little as a year ago, the whole of smart liberal opinion believed that the dissolution of Baathism and militarism had been a mistake, that Iraq itself was a bottomless pit of wasted dollars and pointless casualties, and that the only option was to withdraw as fast as possible and let the inevitable civil war burn itself out. To the left of that liberal consensus, people of the caliber and quality of Michael Moore were describing the nihilist "insurgents" as the moral equivalent of the Minutemen, and to the right of the same consensus, people like Pat Buchanan were hinting that we had been cheated into the whole enterprise by a certain minority whose collective name began with the letter J.
. . . . I still reel when I remember how many supposedly responsible people advocated surrendering Iraq without a fight.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
So, yes, major combat operations appear to be over, and to that extent one can belatedly say, "Mission accomplished." If there is any Iraqi nostalgia for the old party and the old army, it is remarkably well-concealed. Iraq no longer plays deceptive games with weapons of mass destruction or plays host to international terrorist groups. It is no longer subject to sanctions that punish its people and enrich its rulers. Its religious and ethnic minorities—together a majority—are no longer treated like disposable trash. Its most bitter internal argument is about the timing of the next provincial and national elections. Surely it is those who opposed every step of this emancipation, rather than those who advocated it, who should be asked to explain and justify themselves.
Yes indeed, Iraq should pay for its own reconstruction. But, just before we all join hands on this obvious proposition, may we take a moment to apologize to Paul Wolfowitz? Of all the many slanders hurled at this advocate for Iraq's liberation, probably none was more gleefully bandied about than his congressional testimony that Iraq's recovery from decades of war and fascism could be self-financing. Now the opponents of the intervention are yelling that Iraq ought to be opening its bulging wallet right away.
. . . . . . . .
I think we should be glad that the luridly sadistic and aggressive Saddam Hussein regime is no longer in power to be the beneficiary of the rise in oil prices and thus able to share its wealth with the terrorists, crooks, and demagogues on its secret payroll. I think we should also be glad that its private ownership of Iraq's armed forces, and its control over a party monopoly called the Baath, has been irrecoverably smashed. Iraq's resources are no longer at the disposal of an aggressive, parasitic oligarchy. Its retrained and re-equipped army is being deployed, not in wars of invasion against its neighbors and genocide against its inhabitants, but in cleanup campaigns against al-Qaida and the Mahdi Army. An improvement. A distinct improvement.
It is in no spirit of revenge that I remind you that, as little as a year ago, the whole of smart liberal opinion believed that the dissolution of Baathism and militarism had been a mistake, that Iraq itself was a bottomless pit of wasted dollars and pointless casualties, and that the only option was to withdraw as fast as possible and let the inevitable civil war burn itself out. To the left of that liberal consensus, people of the caliber and quality of Michael Moore were describing the nihilist "insurgents" as the moral equivalent of the Minutemen, and to the right of the same consensus, people like Pat Buchanan were hinting that we had been cheated into the whole enterprise by a certain minority whose collective name began with the letter J.
. . . . I still reel when I remember how many supposedly responsible people advocated surrendering Iraq without a fight.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
So, yes, major combat operations appear to be over, and to that extent one can belatedly say, "Mission accomplished." If there is any Iraqi nostalgia for the old party and the old army, it is remarkably well-concealed. Iraq no longer plays deceptive games with weapons of mass destruction or plays host to international terrorist groups. It is no longer subject to sanctions that punish its people and enrich its rulers. Its religious and ethnic minorities—together a majority—are no longer treated like disposable trash. Its most bitter internal argument is about the timing of the next provincial and national elections. Surely it is those who opposed every step of this emancipation, rather than those who advocated it, who should be asked to explain and justify themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)