A couple days ago, I came across the latest Slate article by Christopher Hitchens. Much to my surprise, the title was, “Vote Obama…” and immediately thought this was some sort of sarcastic joke. But no, it is indeed true, Hitchens actually is supporting a Democrat this time around. This endorsement probably has very little value to most people, but if there is one person someone should want on their side, it is Christopher Hitchens.
Hitchens is the master of scathing attacks, and he holds nothing back when talking about John McCain and Sarah Palin.
Last week’s so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience.
Another…
I haven’t felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot’s running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America’s most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn’t qualify him then and it doesn’t qualify McCain now.
On Palin…
It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party’s right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama’s position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.
On the Republicans…
It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.
And he saves the best line for the last paragraph…
With McCain, the “experience” is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke.
Tags: 2008 election, 2008 presidential election, barack obama, christopher hitchens, endorsements, hitchens, joe biden, john mccain, obama, presidential election, sarah palin
It has come to my attention (thanks to an article in Slate by Hitchens), that John McCain actually stated something praiseworthy, and one must never become too one sided, so in effort to highlight the similarities between my rivals, I present this blog to you.
Now, I am hardly a McCain supporter, in fact I probably only agree with him on a handful of issues (if that). However, on May 15th, John McCain made a largely unknown, and now rarely discussed proposal in a speech discussing the future of American political discourse. McCain actually came out in support of the British style of questioning (grilling) the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, usually to address criticisms and recent policy changes. If my history is correct, this is the first Republican in American history to ever publicly support the British method of “Question time.”
During the Civil War, a similar proposal was made to Abraham Lincoln. The request was to come to Capitol Hill and face intense questioning due to his suspending of Habeus Corpus, but, no deal. Walter Mondale actually supported this notion, but he turned out to be a lame duck nominee. Bill Clinton actually attempted to propose this idea but his “people” shot it down immediately and convinced him otherwise. Now I doubt that McCain would even attempt to actually see such a proposal through, but that is beside the point. The question is larger than any one politician, but rather a question that could be the solution in possibly creating transparency in government, a frequently stated goal of the likely next President, Barack Obama.
Imagine, watching the constant barrage of unedited, unadulterated, straight questions to Alberto Gonzalez. Instead of relying on subpoena’s and waiting weeks to get some answers out of him, on which he can rehearse prior to…the ability to completely expose his incompetency and the fraudulent members of our government. Imagine the chance to grill George Bush on his offenses against the constitution, international law, and even common sense. Since Richard Nixon’s presidency every single President has shown a gross distaste for law, and a growing desire to concentrate more power in the executive office. This of course must be stopped.
Currently, we have about 81 percent of America who disagrees with Bush, yet, ask yourself, how many times has he actually been really questioned publicly? How many times do we get the chance to put the tough questions to Mr. Bush? How many times has he been forced to listen to the greivences of 81 percent of America who disagrees with him? Could Bush even last in such an interrogation? I would assume he wouldn’t make it past 5 minutes with the kind of questioning that faces the British prime minister and other elected and appointed officials within the British parliament and government. The House of Commons is truly the standard for which we should measure a proper and effective government style. Of course it isn’t perfect, but its much closer to perfection and efficiency than the current US Congress. Corruption will always exist, but that isn’t a good argument against the attempt to end it. We will probably never end corruption, but as long as we keep fighting the “good fight,” we will be heading towards the ideals on which this great country was built on - the Enlightenment based US Constitution.
Tags: america, british, england, hitchens, mccain, parliament, president, questiontime
Subscribe in a reader