This message was self-deleted by its author

[Deep13]

102. What a load of crap.

Hitch was a writer expressing his views. He made his case based on information available to civilians. He was by no means the most influential person expressing that opinion. And he had no authority to make it happen. On the other hand, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle could have stopped the authorization before it happened. Hitch was motivated the horrible cruelty of the Hussein regime. Just as he had not authority over if the government went to war, he also had no say over how the war was conducted. Most of its advocates, Bill Clinton for example, expected the military to be in and out in a month. Hitch certainly did not intend the US government to repeat the crimes of the Hussein era by embezzling a fortune or committing acts of torture.

I think what the political left, such as it is, really dislikes about Hitch is that he refused to play by their rules. Like many people, he was repelled by its moral relativism and unwillingness to take a stand against evil if even the SUGGESTION of racism or colonial mentality can be made. I did not always agree with him. I found his criticism of Michael Moore to be pretty weak tea. Likewise, I remain puzzled at how he could find Bill Clinton so "loathsome" while giving people like Paul Wolfowitz a free pass. Further, Hitchens never bought into ecumenical bullshit and specifically rejected the idea that all religious beliefs are equally valid except to assert that they are all equally invalid. That rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Ultimately Hitchens wrote from his own perspective and was unapologetic when he slaughtered sacred cows of the left or the right. While urging an invasion of Iraq, he also castigated Bush for his ties to Evangelical religion. He characterized Obama as overrated (a charitable characterization as it turns out) but still urged people to vote for him since the alternative was so grossly unacceptable. Whatever "damage" Hitch did, it has to be weighed against the great good he did by politicizing an alternative to a life subservient to religious belief. Others were writing on the same topic of course, but Hitch's literary mind and command of linguistic expression made his arguments particularly persuasive.