The Steady Decline of Christopher Hitchens

Posted byNatalia AntonovaPosted inAmerica, Idiots on Parade

I knew that he was going downhill for years now, but seriously,

What. The. Fuck.

Once upon a time, he was actually kind of cool, in that goofy, charming, loutish way.

Oh well.

I’m pretty sure that any negative responses to this masterpiece will elicit a smug “see-I-told-you-women-don’t-understand-how-humour-works” rant, complete with the obligatory swigs of scotch (or whatever his central nervous system runs on these days) between each syllable.

Please note that women who aren’t attractive to him and hence also subhuman are, of course, a total bloody riot.

Hardy har har, Hitchie!

Oh, and Tina Fey could totally kick his ass.

22 thoughts on “The Steady Decline of Christopher Hitchens”

  1. The man thrives on ‘controversial’ stuff and people’s responses. Ignoring him has been the best course of action for years.

  4. Actually, it’s William F. Buckley (F, as in “fucking”, not h, as in “hack”) and I don’t see how Paul Wolfowitz has anything to do with Christopher Hitchens.

    The only possible connection I can think of is that Wolfowitz is Jewish — and disliked by most liberal intellectuals*. It is a disturbingly frequent form of ad hominem attack to compare the object of your loathing to an unpopular Jew.

    Furthermore, I’d say Hitchens has much more in common with Alan Dershowitz than Mr. Wolfowitz (if you’re going to engage in subtle anti-Semitism, please get it right Mr. Rann).

    *I am a libertarian intellectual who dislikes him, but that is beside the point.

  6. “It is a disturbingly frequent form of ad hominem attack to compare the object of your loathing to an unpopular Jew. ”

    Frequent, really? I guess I’m hanging out in the wrong crowd….or, really, the right crowd.

    Anyways, I’m here: your reputation is shot 🙂

  7. Hitchens has been hanging out with Wolfowitz for a good few years now and has expressed admiration for the man. Apparently Hitchens visits senior neo-cons regularly for ‘consultations’. See recent New Yorker article on Hitchens (10/16/06 issue).

    I happen to compare someone to a Jew I don’t like means I’m anti-Semitic? That’s rather entertaining. If I compare someone I dislike to, say, James Joyce, does that mean I’m anti-Irish? Or for that matter, does comparing someone I do like to James Joyce make me pro-Irish?

    One more idiot jumping on the anti-Semitism bandwagon…

  10. I’m siding with Rann on this one. Oh god, if I compared the devil to Wolfowitz would I be hateful towards anyone BUT him at the time?

    Ridiculous.

    I’m going to go eat biscuits, yum!

  12. But what he/she said was rather idiotic, as in:

    id·i·ot·ic /ˌɪdiˈɒtɪk/ [id-ee-ot-ik]:
    […]
    2. senselessly foolish or stupid: an idiotic remark.

    It was senseless (in the straightforward meaning that it made no sense) and foolish (as in lacking forethought). Hence my choice of words.

  14. Wow — so much vitriol in so little time.

    To respond:

    I haven’t read Mr. Hitchens regularly since 2003 — my observation of the decline in the quality of his output predates that of Ms. Antonova. So I may be forgiven for missing the “Hitchie and Wolfy are friends” angle.

    However, Rann was not pointing out that working relationship or friendship. He was calling Hitchens a “Paul Wolfowitz wannabe” (as opposed to a William F. Buckley wannabe). The Buckley comparison was between two editorialists. The Wolfowitz comparison was between a cabinet official and an editorialist — irrespective of their apparent admiration for eachother, I doubt Hitchens aspires to be Wolfowitz — or vice-versa.

    The Wolfowitz comparison was a glaring non-sequitur (or moment of idiocy if I am to use Mr. Rann’s language) — and I have become very annoyed at the disproportionate number of guilt/scorning by association ploys where the associate in question has a name that ends in “witz”, “berg”, or “stein”. For example, one often hears the evils of “old-school” Jewish conservatives (such as Himmelfarb or the Kristols) dumped into the account of the neo-cons. I am sorry for jumping to conclusions — but this was yet another non-sensical comparison in which the only possible connection I could see was “witz”.

  16. I think a crazy egotistical self-obsessive megalomaniac like Hitchens probably does want to be in as powerful a position as the Big Bad Wolfy…

    William Kristol is a neo-con of the first rank, Jewish or otherwise. His views sharply influenced the early Bush (or should I say Cheney?) White House. These days, he’s busy distancing himself from Bush and covering his own ass, but that doesn’t make him less of a neo-con. His father Irving is considered one of the founders of the neo-con movement, so I don’t know where you’re getting your ideas…

    Anyway, I apologize for my choice of words, but I hate it when people jump to conclusions about me based on one or two comments, especially when racism or anti-Semitism are involved.

  17. William was always an out and out “con” — and Irving (though one of the founders of the “movement”) has increasingly distanced himself from it. William Kristol is always labeled a neo-con, but there’s a guy named Sullivan who makes remarkably similar statements and is never labeled as a neo-conservative. They should really call them jews-who-dare-to-be-conservative-and-not-blindly-follow-the-democratic-party-cons*. But that’s a little too long, I suppose.

    *I am a moderate, libertarian pragmatist whose sympathies tend more democrat than republican, yet I am continually labeled a neo-con by rich white intellectuals whenever I suggest that Israel has a right to exist or that the conflict has two sides.

  18. Indeed, Irving ran from the sinking ship of his own creation….

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think William called himself a neo-con, non? He’s also doing a runner from said ship.

    It’s not a matter of being Jewish. I’m a radical socialist-libertarian Jew with very little pragmatism in mind. Jews, like all other races/religions/cultures, span the entire spectrum of political ideology.

    I don’t care whether Kristols are Jewish (and in fact I had no idea they were until you mentioned it). To me, they are responsible for some of the greatest evils the US has undertaken in the Middle East, whether or not that was their intention. The PNAC program never succeeded because it was flawed in design and conception, not just in its execution.

    Strauss advocated outright deception of the masses ‘for the country’s benefit’. From Rumsfeld in the 70’s to, well, Rumsfeld in the recent past, that was the steady and defining string of neo-con policy. The Kristols and Wolfowitz were among that authoritarianism’s greatest advocates. Their days are waning, and we should all be thankful for that.

    Once the neo-cons are gone, some other political ideology will take over. Some of its advocates will be Jews, some won’t be. Again, it won’t matter. However, until the ruling elite of this country become far more diverse than they are now, accusations such as ‘Jews run the White House’ will continue to surface. I know those accusations are baseless, but I also acknowledge their source: lack of representation of other minorities in the corridors of power.

  19. I’m radical. And gnarly. Cowabunga dude, Turtle Power!!!!

    Sincerely,
    The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle

  20. apologies, all. that previous post was writtn by MK, not anna. My impatient inner turtle occasionally misses a few details. But that happens when one strikes pre-emptyvly I hear.

    And just to let you know, I hate crack, not the people who smoke it, regardless of race, religion or creed. Together, someday we will stop the madness. Then we’ll shut down Abercrombie. But today I need clothes. and a little ass if I can get it. Yes folks, I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum…and I’m all out of ass.

    Here’s to a Nu Kok in my life.

    Sincerely,
    MK (the radical, iggnunt, scatological and therefore biological menace. But you can call me Mrs. Janet if you’re Nasty)

    P.S. Anna, please ignore that scatological part. Momma had it cleaned up before you woke up. G-d bless that woman.

  22. I don’t think Tina Fey is very funny….

    But I think I’m damn funny. 😛

    And I tend to enjoy making guys around me laugh.

    So, yeah, whatever Hitch.

Leave a comment