Hitchens: Chirac a "rat"

Christopher Hitchens

Going to Paris this Spring, Christopher? Ouch.

With no insult to the French as a whole, Hitchens has a point. Chirac is an asshole. Even by political standards he’s a deceitful little shit.

The man is in a league of his own when he’s minded to do a ‘job’ on someone; Chirac and France now but Clinton recently and, of course, his memorable treatment of Kissinger as the indictable war criminal also stand out, for me.

Here’s how he started today’s piece in the Daily Mirror (scroll down):

THE sneer on the face of Dominique de Villepin, the French foreign minister, never quite disappeared during Colin Powell’s 90 minutes of solemn oration yesterday.

  • spoken as only an Englishman could ! :smiley:
    I’m not sure how, but I both admire and revile the man, at once.

Whoh. That beats the hell out of “C.E.S.M.” by a long shot!

Yikes.

Chirac is a corrupt asshole, noone questions that. Hitchens just aint that much better.

I nominate that “However” for most abrubt segue to outright ass ripping I’ve seen in a long time. To lead with

and yet to end with such a flourish. It brought tears to my eyes.

I just wish he wouldn’t mince his words so much.

This is the start of a ‘job’ on GW Bush from Sep 11 2002:
There is a fashion among people who have become understandably bored with repeating the obvious about the enemy, to change the subject and to talk about the shortcomings of Bush instead. I can sympathise with this in a way: I have never met anybody, even among the dimmest of my students, who wouldn’t in some ways be better qualified to be president of the United States. But it’s here exactly that his fascination lies.

… one can sense he’s warming to his theme.
Going to look for that first-class assassination of Clinton from last year’s (New) Labour Party Conference, it’s nothing less than art.

Nope, no complaints about this one.

Hitchens has turned into a parody over the past couple of years. He’s become the master of the ad hominem, because calling people names is easier than actually dealing with their ideas.

And it seems to work, Everyone gets so impressed by his name-calling ability that they fail to notice that most of what he says is absolute crap.

I can’t find the article (from 3rd October 2002). This is an extract, or rather Sweeney Todd sharpening his blade:

“Since I had the pleasure of watching Clinton in office every day for eight years, I hope to be excused if I was not impressed by seeing him again. How it all came back to me - the tongue ruthlessly roving the cheek; the lip-biting to indicate sincerity; the husky voice; the abject self-deprecation; the incurable habit of speaking for 20 minutes longer than he should. Most amusing, though, was how he made his own foreign policy sound more statesmanlike and judicious than it had ever been.”

  • almost poetry !

Without disputing crap percentages, I think he makes a pretty good case that Chiraq is not acting out of some moral commitment to pacifism. YMMV.

Hey, you won’t get much argument from me about the commitment, moral or otherwise, of Chirac, or any other politician for that matter. But it’s also a matter of what one chooses to emphasize and what one chooses to ignore, and Hitchens has been doing nothing but beating the war drum for the past year and a half, and has been directing unwarranted personal attacks against anyone and everyone who disagrees with him in the slightest.

If he gets any more belligerent and narrow-minded, they’ll be offering him a permanent slot on FOX.

That would be fantastic. Have him debate Noam Chomsky every night. Let’s get ready to rummmbbblllleee!

I have no particular beef with Chiraq myself. I just thought, rantwise, Hitchens is world class.

Or Chirac, either one of them. Chiraque really pisses me off. Don’t get me started on Sherac.

We have GOT to get Christopher Hitchens on the SDMB. Can you imagine how fun the Pit will be:

speaking of Chirac, I thought the WSJ had an interesting bit: Last week or maybe the week before Chirac had made the statement that “war always ends in failure”. The WSJ wondered if he said that in French or German because if it were French, then he refuted himself.

Didn’t Hitchens regularly get his panties in a wad over Mother Teresa?

I adore HItchen’s unmatched skill for invective, but sometimes I wonder if there’s anyone he actually likes and considers both competent and not evil.

I would like to hear a Christopher Hitchens-Dennis Miller rant-off. Not sure who would win that one.

Hitchens was on Dennis Miller Live and Miller was in complete shock and awe of Hitchens. Hithcens ranted about Mother Teresa and Bill Clinton (the show was on when Clinton was still in office.) Miller said “Jesus, Christopher, let me know what it feels like to be gang-audited.”

Obviously, I must find a tape of that…