You know, the problem with all you political hacks

…is that you don’t read enough Christopher Hitchens. To my mind he is a polemicist without peer. He is clear-headed, intelligent, witty, a pleasure to read, and right about virtually everything he deigns to cast his eye upon.

Vietnam? Why the analogy doesn’t hold water

In front of your nose: Yes, Saddam did have terrorist connections

In enemy territory? An interview with Christopher Hitchens

Tariq Ali vs. Christopher Hitchens

And if that’s not enough (how could it be?), there is a website set up by a fan dedicated to linking to his scribbles.

The Christopher Hitchens Web

Allow me to add my vote to yours, porcelainprincess. I haven’t read enough of him to be able to comment on whether he is right about everything he casts his eye upon (that would be high praise indeed), but I’ve found his articles to be an enjoyable change of pace, especially in terms of writing style.

Have you read his recent piece for The Nation? … s=hitchens

That guy’s full of crap. He panders to his audience. He constructs an argument based on a hypothetical opponent’s argument that he also has constructed.

Hitchens still writes for Vanity Fair, right? I don

Hitchens is a good analytical columnist.

Hitchens has alienated himself from his former friends on the left through his support of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and continues to alienate people on the right by his skewering of Kissinger and Mother Theresa and religion in general. I think you need to add a “doesn’t” in front of “panders” in your proclamation. Oh, and kindly drop the “s” for grammatical correctness.

If I thought you actually knew what you were talking about I’d address your accusation that he uses strawman arguments, but clearly you don’t, and as such I won’t waste your time or mine.