"Forfeiting a both-houses Republican victory, rational conservatives ignored or excused the most hateful kind of populist claptrap (e.g., the fetid weirdness of Glenn Beck’s 9/12 Project). The poison they’ve helped disseminate will still be in the American bloodstream when the country needs it least."
Read More (Vanity Fair)
112 comments:
Nice of Hitchens to come out of the hills and shoot the wounded after the battle is over.
I resolve to use the phrase "fetid weirdness" in normal conversation today. Wonderful article.
I resolve to use the phrase "fetid weirdness" in normal conversation today.
More ether!
Yes! Phew! Good article!
wonderfully written article. great stuff!
Shoot the wounded? You're a fucking idiot, FGFM. Can't you even manage the humblest cliche? The Tea Partiers won, you fool. Hitchens is taking on the tea partiers. The "wounded" in this scenario are democrats. He doesn't even mention them. You are a stupid man. And please spare us your boasts about success on standardized tests. Your daily outpout says much more about your brainpower. It's a sad story.
And yes, I misspelled "output". So you can spare us the "sic" too. The neologism "outpout" isn't all bad though, especially as it applies to your garbage.
FGFM is in a bit of a pickle here. You see, he has much and long chastised Hitchens for his refusal to criticise the Tea Party or its goons, and implied that he takes money from the Republican Party to churn out supportive copy (that's his conspiracy Theory anyway).
Of course Hitchens has, and often, criticised them but FGFM, incorrigible fool that he is, can't say "I agree with what Hitchens says, and I was incorrect to suppose he thought otherwise".
Instead, we get his new wack-job Theory that, well, it's still rather too inchoate and incoherent for me to surmise efficiently. But shadowy figures and intrigue will. necessarily, feature prominently. I'll wait a little longer until he has fully forged it in that paranoid smithy of his. And then we can all laugh together.
FGFM, of course, is much smarter than all of use.
Step 1) Ctrl-c
Step 2) Ctrl-v
Step 3) Indeed.
That genius FGFM was demanding answers to calculus questions yesterday. Now it's his turn: what on earth did you mean when you trotted out "shoot the wounded" in response to Hitchens' article? Explain yourself, please.
"Your daily outpout says much more about your brainpower"
Ha ha Yes!
I think FGFM is having an almighty outpout about the fact that Hitchens destroyed his theory again.
Hitchens never goes after REpublicans!- He says
Er...Mitt Romney?
"'CEpt Mitt Romney! What the Cappleman about the other REpublicans?"
Er...John McCain?
"'CEpt him What the CAppleman about the Tea Partiers? Don't patronize Palin!"
Yeah, he slated her many times.
"Shut up yuo half-caste bastard? What about Glenn Beck? He NEVER goes after Glenn Beck?"
He has now?
"What about before the election?"
He did in Slate!
"What the CAppleman!"
Indeed!
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
Hitchens is taking on the tea partiers.
Well after the election, of course.
And yes, I misspelled "output". So you can spare us the "sic" too. The neologism "outpout" isn't all bad though, especially as it applies to your garbage.
Angry Decent.
Explain yourself, please.
Decent demands answers!
I think FGFM is having an almighty outpout about the fact that Hitchens destroyed his theory again.
Decent declares victory!
"Decent declares victory!"
Indeed!
But what about the wounded he's shooting? Who are they? Are you saying the tea partiers are wounded? You must be. Otherwise, you literally make no sense.
Of course, you could man up, admit that you just typed in the first cliche that came into your head without giving it much thought at all. Happens all the time to people much better, but I doubt much worse, than you.
"Well after the election, of course."
Cos there'll never be another, right?
Now the Tea Parties are safely ensconced in the Congress forever, Hitchens campaigns against them?
Dat your theory?
That genius FGFM was demanding answers to calculus questions yesterday.
A logic question, actually. "The calculus" has little to do with prepositional calculus which is what they call boolean algebra in the philosophy department.
But what about the wounded he's shooting? Who are they? Are you saying the tea partiers are wounded? You must be. Otherwise, you literally make no sense.
Literal Decent. Are you autistic or something?
Dat your theory?
Would you care to explain your theory about how I'm supposed to be like George Babbitt?
How about the English department? Ever wander over there? "Shoot the wounded". It's a cliche. You used it to comment on Hitchens' article. You seem to be trying to say that the tea partiers were wounded by the election, and Hitchens by attacking them is showing cowardice. Problem for you is, the tea partiers won the election and seem stronger than ever. The only wounded in the election were democrats, who Hitchens doesn't much talk about (other than to say that Obama, contra tea party fantasy, is "moderate"). Call it logical incogherence on your part, or mangling the English language, on your part. I don't care which. But it's one of them, you maleducated doofus.
How about the English department? Ever wander over there?
Yeah, and they taught me to put two spaces after a full stop.
Problem for you is, the tea partiers won the election and seem stronger than ever.
No, they did not. The GOP took the House and the Democrats held the Senate. Several of the prominent teabaggers lost.
Call it logical incogherence [sic] on your part, or mangling the English language
Well played.
FGFM, old boy, stop digging.
Great article! I can manage to listen to Rush without much annoyance, picking out bits and pieces and discarding others. I can't listen to much more than 30 seconds of Beck's teary eyed never ending triangulation that America was founded on Christian values. Some of my friends tried early on get me to go to Tea Party rallies, "Come on you're a patriot," knowing I'm a political skeptic of the Left kind of Liberal, typically hawkish, free-market Atheist. I sort of wanted to go but I know these folks, even though my friends in question are moderates and centrist Neocons. By and large the folks at these rallies are white Christian identity, non-interventionist (unless it's missionary work). This is not a good company to pretend to be friendly with when I know that just about the only thing we'll have in common is criticism of Obama, and at the high price of the creepy feeling that laughter and rage are interchangeable if not exponential and often irrational (sometimes not) when it comes to the President, and that they have such a disdain for any marriage of the ideas of 'Liberalism' and 'good public/foreign policy.' Everything must roll back to the ahistoric; Christian values. Ugh, save it or Sunday school.
A (debatable) stylistic correction, a spelling correction, and an equivocation. Strong diversion.
The tea party's in the ascendancy, moron. Bt that's beside the point. The point is, you wrote that Hitchens in his article "shoot(s) the wounded". Who are the wounded? Tea partiers are the only people he attacked and they're not wounded, shit for brains. Democrats are wounded, but Hitchens hardly mentioned them. Just admit it. You didn't know what you were talking about when you used that wretched cliche. The only surprise will be your honesty.
save if **for Sunday school
The tea party's in the ascendancy, moron.
Is that why their Senate candidates lost in AK, CO, VT, and NV?
Tea partiers are the only people he attacked and they're not wounded, shit for brains.
The neocons no longer need their "useful idiots" now that the election is over and they turned out to be a liability rather than an asset.
You didn't know what you were talking about when you used that wretched cliche.
If the teabaggers are so powerful, can you tell me the last time a Senate seat was won by a write-in candidate?
I can manage to listen to Rush without much annoyance, picking out bits and pieces and discarding others.
Liberalism in action!
So, you maintain that tea partiers were wounded in the 2010 congressional elections because they did not win every single one of the races they contested.
Furthermore, you're saying Hitchens, by attacking tea partiers when they are down, is simulataneously showing cowardice and banging the neoconservative drum.
Are you a maleducated doofus, or do you have shit for brains? Truly a decent false dilemma.
To anyone: Does FGFM have an actual job? I mean I know he's over at Hitchens Watch, but what does he actually *do*? What's his back story? I'm honestly curious: his obsession seems almost pathological in nature...I really hope he gets his life together and stops with the crazy, anyway.
When he is not cyber-stalking teenage girls, bragging about his genius online, manicuring his YouTube channel, or telling people to fuck off on twitter, he contends that he works for a small but highly competent firm. He is an Internet financier.
Are you a maleducated doofus, or do you have shit for brains? Truly a decent false dilemma.
So, if the teabaggers are so powerful, can you tell me the last time a Senate seat was won by a write-in candidate?
To anyone: Does FGFM have an actual job?
I have a great job in finance and probably make more money than you do.
My dad is bigger than your dad.
He is an Internet financier.
I'm not a financier, but I do work in finance. Care to tell me how one might calculate the risk in a portfolio composed of positions in multiple currencies that would be more accurate than simply summing the quantities after converting into the local currency?
My dad is bigger than your dad.
I would imagine you have some rather in-depth knowledge of that fact.
this FBDSM fellow is crazy as fuck.
"My dad is bigger than your dad."
He's almost certainly less racist than his anyway!
Why the write-in candidate diversion? What do you hope it can do for your argument? Joe Miller, and other tea partiers, lost an election. Lots of other tea partiers won their election, and tea partiers have become a powerful force within the GOP, which will soon control one house of Congress and is just shy of a majority in the other. A remarkable development, which Hitchens is very wary of. He's worried about the tea party's objective success, and warns against it. Yet you persist in claiming that by attacking the tea party Hitchens "shoot(s) the wounded." Your argument simply does not make sense. Pointing to the fact that one or another election did not got the tea party's way does not cancel out the tea party's objective success in 2010. Why you insist that less than 100% victory for the tea party equals being "wounded" is an absolute mystery. Your near perfect ignorance is a useful explanation.
OK, I am the anonymous that asked about FGFM...I just went to his youtube channel and that guy is scary. Really. By which I mean: I am a grown woman and I am actually physically scared of him.
Talk about fetid weirdness. Sheez.
He's also quite antisemitic, I hasten to add. The guy does not much care for Jews.
By which I mean: I am a grown woman and I am actually physically scared of him.
And I know where you live!
He's also quite antisemitic, I hasten to add. The guy does not much care for Jews.
Some of my best friends are Jews and I rejoice in their company. On the other hand, Christopher Hitchens was friends with David Irving.
Why the write-in candidate diversion?
Because it shows how weak the teabaggers are in general elections.
Pointing to the fact that one or another election did not got the tea party's way does not cancel out the tea party's objective success in 2010.
The teabaggers cost the GOP the Senate. There is absolutely no doubt that the GOP would have picked up 3 more seats if they had run mainstream candidates in NV and CO along with Mike Castle in VT.
Bwahahaha!
OK. But so what? Does that mean the tea party is wounded? That as a result of the 2010 election it isn't a powerful force w/in the GOP, and therefore the United States? And does it mean that Hitchens, in his VF column, "shot" them? I'm trying to keep you on point here, but you seem determined to obfuscate.
We can end this by simply agreeing that your original "shoot the wounded" cliche was ill-chosen. Then you can get back to figuring out how neo-con shill Hitch is only pretending to hang the tea party out to dry so his cabal can invade Iran. Or whatever your paranoid theory is.
We can end this by simply agreeing that your original "shoot the wounded" cliche was ill-chosen.
Nuts.
You're right? Why give up on stupid? It's brought you this far.
You're right. Why give up on stupid? It's brought you this far.
Decent echo.
Snoring bore.
Hitchian whore.
FGFM is borrrrrrrrrrringgggggggggg.
He criticized Hitchens for over-using the North Korea/celestial dictatorship line, if you can believe it.
He criticized Hitchens for over-using the North Korea/celestial dictatorship line, if you can believe it.
Wrong again, that was Mark G.
Hitchian? Hitchensian, surely!! Stick to the math, genius!
Right. My mistake. You're aware of and content with your chronic dullness and repetition. Charmless, witless, and obnoxious. And happy to be so too!
FGFM...what's with all the bathtub/meat cooking videos? Could you be more creepy and awkward? If you have Asperger's (which would fit with the maths ability) that's one thing...barring that explanation, you're a loser who should spend some time looking for a (non-imaginary!) girlfriend. In fact, Asperger's wouldn't explain the bathtub...so I'm endorsing the loser theory wholeheartedly.
Hitchian? Hitchensian, surely!!
Another example of Shavian wit.
FGFM...what's with all the bathtub/meat cooking videos? Could you be more creepy and awkward? If you have Asperger's (which would fit with the maths ability) that's one thing...barring that explanation, you're a loser who should spend some time looking for a (non-imaginary!) girlfriend. In fact, Asperger's wouldn't explain the bathtub...so I'm endorsing the loser theory wholeheartedly.
Concern troll acts concerned.
You're aware of and content with your chronic dullness and repetition.
Concern troll acts concerned.
That's not concern, friend.
Stalker acts stalkerish.
I predict the future: tonight FGFM will make another infinitely depressing "Cooking for One" video, eat in front of CNN, and retire to his nest of dirty rags, to grimly masturbate, alone.
Decent prediction!
I predict the future: tonight FGFM will make another infinitely depressing "Cooking for One" video, eat in front of CNN, and retire to his nest of dirty rags, to grimly masturbate, alone.
I prefer MSNBC.
FGFM is still borrrrrrrringggggggggg.
Indeed.
Bravo Mr. Hitchens! I've been playing with the Beckites over at The Blaze (I've developed a dry skin problem from all the showering I've had to do afterward) in a futile attempt to break the spell Beck has over their tiny minds. Beck is a fear mongering, delusional rabble rouser who is doing his best to foment civil war and preach fire and brimstone to his gullible listeners. Just this week he proclaimed that "the arm of god will be felt by all of us in our generation." I am thrilled to see Hitch is on the case. Mr. Hitchens has focused a laser-like spotlight on the delusional Glenn Beck and I am thankful for it.
I still think Hitchens is more or less an anti-totalitarian kind of liberal who believes in the ugly institutions of democracy. What is FGFM's problem with him?
I, too, think the self-proclaimed left (e.g., anarchists, peace-niks, et.al.) is kind of reactionary and comically ends up supporting fascism more often than not these days. I think (ahem, too) that there is an inherent totalitarian nature to modern 'radical' [ersatz] leftists and they exhibit a certain lack of free-thinking (what would Chomksy do?) and thus just end up opposing anything the State does if it happens to being wearing ACUs when it does it.
Look, I've got a Che Guevara tattoo folks (and yes, I'm still proud of it-- grumble grumble) -- but I think most so-called American/European radicals and leftists are really just Stalinists with cool T-shirts.
Like: Citizen Radio (those kids are Stalinist retards fo sho).
Anyway, maybe FGFM can help a nigga out and tell me why he hate the Hitch...
Why does he keep saying decent?
Look, I've got a Che Guevara tattoo folks
Decent!
Anyway, maybe FGFM can help a nigga out and tell me why he hate the Hitch...
Decent Negro dialect.
Somebody give this dickhead a degree in stating the obvious.
Somebody give this dickhead a degree in stating the obvious.
If you go sporting tattoos of Che Guevara, you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow.
The walrus was Paul.
Indeed.
Somebody give this dickhead a degree in stating the obvious.
Just like Che Guevara and Christopher Hitchens, I went to uni!
Well, FGFM, I guess I should not have attempted to be serious with you. Lesson learned.
I was not trying to 'make it with you' anyway, I was trying to establish my leftist bona fides with a certain self-deprecating humor -- and to show a critique of the Left from the Left - as I believe Hitchens does. I guess I thought you might appreciate that and have some serious thing to say about it.
But you merely wanted to show your ass (again). I'm sure your very proud of yourself.
"your (sic) very..."
hahahahahah I'm so clever and witty and --oh wait maybe I should respond sincerely to his earnest inquiry --
oh fuck that I'm too cool for skool (sic) to do any of that!
I was not trying to 'make it with you' anyway, I was trying to establish my leftist bona fides with a certain self-deprecating humor -- and to show a critique of the Left from the Left - as I believe Hitchens does. I guess I thought you might appreciate that and have some serious thing to say about it.
Sorry, but you exposed yourself as an Kammite assclown.
I'm sure your [sic] very proud of yourself.
Indeed.
And Kamm exposed you as linking to and quoting overtly antisemitic sources. I find the guy deeply unpleasant, but he had you bang to rights on that one, bigot!
And Kamm exposed you as linking to and quoting overtly antisemitic sources. I find the guy deeply unpleasant, but he had you bang to rights on that one, bigot!
Decent declares victory!
"And Kamm exposed you as linking to and quoting overtly antisemitic sources"
Oliver Kamm reads Hitcehns Watch?
Read Hitchens Watch briefly. He challenged them on their antisemitism and just got a flury of "Decents!" and other such nonsense in return. He then left.
You learned from the master!
Oliver Kamm's Methodology - The "Nazi" Attack: A Case Study in Deception
So, from top to bottom, Oliver's entire "Nazi" thing in reference to me is
nothing but a string of bald-faced lies all of Oliver's own invention, based
on still more of his own lies, based on his own misrepresentations and wild
extrapolations..........based on a "kernel of truth".
At the end of this web, and purely of his own invention, Oliver claims that
it's "on record" that "Dougherty in another thread expresses his belief that
Nazism is a perfectly benign creed."
This "belief" of mine (sic), as well as all those other "pro-Nazi" sypathies
of mine (sic) expressed above by, and invented by, Oliver Kamm and
attributed to me are to be found in this sentence of mine:
-----"In what sense was anything that he posted "pro-Nazi" Oliver?"-----
Bingo! There it is! My rabid pro-Nazism is exposed for all to see!
Total and complete lie, top to bottom. Hopefully this post will help those
who attempt to engage Kamm in the future to understand what's going on when
they are suddenly confronted with the "fact" that they are some kind of
Nazi, and that they hold beliefs that they do not hold, and have said things
that they have never said.
Welcome to the land of Oliver Kamm's methodology my fellow participants of
a.f.n.c.
Shooting fish in a barrel. Old hat. Anyone could've written this article, and many can and have done it much better.
"Shoot the wounded"..."fish in a barrel".."old hat"...
Do they require devotion to cliche at Hitchenswatch? Or is it just a coincidence that people who show irrational hatred for Hitchens can't manage an original thought?
True. That contribution by Mark G consists entirely of cliches. He has achieved negative perfection. Remarkable.
Shooting fish in a barrel. Old hat. Anyone could've written this article, and many can and have done it much better.
Pop Quiz time!
Who wrote:
" Hitchens enjoyed practicing his French with the staff, communicating our requests, as it were, in their native tongue. I find the firebrand provocateur Christopher Hitchens, in reality, to be an unusually polite, generous and rather sensitive man."
No Googling, now!
I think we're really starting to see the manifesto of the Hitchens Watch. Even if the great man writes something that they cannot disagree with or that they cannot take issue with it must be denigrated as something that "anyone" could write. This is coming from "Mark G" who can't write anything without looking ludircous.
Jesus. You guys are rabid. Especially you HJ. Maybe you should try to calm down a bit? Seriously.
Noting the riot above, I used the cliches on purpose. Thought you'd get it...shoulda known better.
It doesn't bother me, by the way, that you quote my stuff from over 6 years ago when I was still under Hitch's spell like you. Others have tried this trick against me in the past as well. I like it. At least I now admit I was dead wrong about the guy.
"I was still under Hitch's spell"
Decent man-crush!
"Jesus. You guys are rabid. Especially you HJ."
Not sure what your problem is, Mark. Do you find my remarks too nasty or something? There are some quotes form you about sticking people in electric chairs for supporting a war or sticking metal pipes up Hitchens ass. Not to mention your Decent-staliking of people you don't like!
I don't write on your demented site that everything you write is wrong or obvious or anything like that. It is YOU who makes a special effort to read and criticize everything that Hitchens has ever written and you don't criticize his work because of any difference of opinion you have of his articles but purely because HE wrote it!
Dim rides again.
Why would you use cliches on purpose? Solidarity w/ FGFM? Or were you joining in the fun, making sport of ol' shit for brains? Have you abandoned FGFM like you abandoned Hitchens? Are you no longer under FGFM's spell?
No difference of opinion? Didn't you see my latest? http://christopherhitchenswatch.blogspot.com/2010/12/hitchens-lame-ass-attempt-to-pile-on.html
Did that one come before or after you gleefully applauded FGFM (your latest mentor)'s internet detective work? You know, the pics of Hitchens daughter. If afterwards, don't be surprised no one's seen it. The "post a Hitch chick pic" stunt moved your horrible project from weird to depraved. Go yell on a street corner. More people are likely to pay attention. That site of yours is dead.
What the Cappleman!
Guess no one is visiting Hitchens Watch anymore (probably because the proprietors banned most commenters), so the FGFMs and Mark Gs now have to come here to make themselves heard. At any rate, isn't it time FGFM updated Pat Condell Watch? Such a wonderful site, that.
It's so crowded that no one goes there anymore.
What the Capplehitch!
Yeesh … Now He Tells Us!
Bottle-scarred veteran of the Sending-Other-People-Off-To-Die-In-Wars Wars Christopher Hitchens has apparently stumbled off his barstool and wandered outside for a smoke (‘kazzle-frazzle Liberal anti-smoking law fascists mumble-grumble …’) and lo and behold! There’s a bunch of total fucking nutters gaining real political power in this country!
To put in language you can understand: go take a long walk off a short pier, you talentless bore. And take your goofy sidekick Mark G with you.
No difference of opinion? Didn't you see my latest?
Hitchens, "lame ass" attempt to "pile on"! Not exactly Faulkner, is it?
What do we learn about your opinons? Hitchens is old, Hitchens is reactionary, Hithcnes is against free speech. I hate Hitchens! Why do I read Hitchens? Blah blah blah...
And what do we read form Hidari? That Hitchens' opposition to WikiLeaks is proof that Hitchens is racist? Eh? Come again?
Well, Hitchens only disagrees when "brown people" try to suppress freedom of speech like when the Ayatollah did it. Hmmmm...?
Do we gather from this that Hidair has no problem with the fatwa? Or in fact that he has to support it lest anyone think he's racist? Eh? Weird! Nevermind that Salman Rushdie was the potential victim of the fatwa. No, he doesn't count! Why not? He was a Cambridge student? Eh? What? This sounds like FGFM explaining his theory that Hitchens is a Republican.
Who would want to write like Faulkner? Anyway, you're obviously too stupid to learn anything...
"Anyway, you're obviously too stupid to learn anything..."
I doubt there's anything you could teach me. Not the same thing as being incapable of learning anything.
"It's so crowded that no one goes there anymore."
Nah, that should be "Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded"
Semi-colon alert.
Mad Decent.
I think FGFM imagines this "decent" schtick to be more irritating and clever than it actually is. I'm not at all sure he realises how tediously unimaginative and boring it makes him. Maybe he does, and just doesn't care, which is distinctly depressing.
I think FGFM imagines this "decent" schtick to be more irritating and clever than it actually is. I'm not at all sure he realises how tediously unimaginative and boring it makes him. Maybe he does, and just doesn't care, which is distinctly depressing.
Decent declares something!
Go play in traffic, shit-for-brains.
My office is overly warm today, if it makes you feel any better.
And you're a very good driver. Yes, we know.
And you're a very good driver. Yes, we know.
I'm an excellent driver.
Post a Comment