Posted on 11/02/2008 8:28:01 PM PST by Lorianne
Dear Christopher,
I was dismayed and profoundly disappointed -- and, on reflection, felt betrayed -- when I heard that you endorsed Barack Obama for president of the United States.
For the 20-plus years I have known you, you have been nothing but generous towards me, and I am very fond of you and grateful for your friendship. Our main points of convergence have been my native Iraq, journalism, atheism and our roots in the Left. Your early detection of the nature of Saddam's fascist rule and your principled and stalwart advocacy for the liberation of Iraq - among many other views and insights, clearly and elegantly expressed -- have drawn me to you and deepened my admiration and respect.
It is over Iraq, Christopher, that I feel betrayed by you. Mr. Obama, in particular -- and the Democrats and news media in general -- have campaigned for the past several years on Iraq as a dirty word; the essence of the Democrats' and the media's specious (and thinly veiled) argument has been, "Afghanistan, good; Iraq, bad."
As I know you fully comprehend, deposing Saddam -- and liberating Iraq -- was the sine qua non of our response to 9/11 -- and that Iraq is far more important than Afghanistan; and Saddam, more important than bin Laden. (I'm amused -- and bemused -- by the oft-repeated call for a near-total shift of emphasis to Afghanistan and/or Pakistan -- if not a complete shift -- and by the prevalent belief that capturing or killing bin Laden is the primary goal in the war that 9/11 launched, and that doing so would end our troubles with Arab fascism - the actual source of the terrorism we face, rather than Islam/Muslims.)
In fact, as you well remember, in the days and weeks after 9/11, the question of the day was whether to topple Saddam, first, or the Taliban; indeed, on the afternoon of 9/11 -- several hours after the attacks -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told aides, "Look at Iraq." Meanwhile, the man you're supporting responded to the attacks, that same day, by calling for us to resolve our differences through the courts
He is blinded by his hatred.
Hitchens remains a Socialist fool.
Hitchens is a fool in more ways than one.
He’s a liberal who kinda/sorta got the war on terror. He’s over, now.
Hitchens still has a broom up his arse. That’ll do it.
Hitchens, like most leftists, is drawn to the left by a belief that earthly paradise can be built through socialism. Socialism is based on ideas that can never work in a world populated by actual human beings.
People who choose to believe in the impossible need a scapegoat when the dream fails. Religion is Hitchens’ choice. If he didn’t have someone to blame he’d have to give up on utopia.
“He is blinded by his hatred.”
Indeed, he is. Whether he likes it or not, I will pray for him.
As an English teacher, I must say that I enjoy listening to his speeches and reading his columns. Although I disagree with his opinions, I do find his command of the English language to be inspiring.
Socialism is Hitchens’ religion.
And this is true of Marxists generally. The functions of the Deity have been assigned to “History” with a capital “H”. There is an unreasoning faith that ineluctable dialectical forces are supposed to result in a classless society. And when they don’t do what they are supposed to do, the vanguard has to help them along with a little revolution.
It is a blind faith in philosophically postulated principles that are completely contrary to everything that has been learned of human nature in historical experience.
This is why Marxists are so ignorant of, and dismissive of, basic economic principles. Economics studies what choices people free to choose will make in reality. To a Marxist like Hitchens, that is beside the point.
Hitchens, in his mind, made a marriage of convenience with those who love freedom in order to fight Islamic fascism.
But when a crypto-commie proto-tyrant like Obama comes along, he throws reason to the wind and goes back to following his heart.
Allegra and Neverdem, this is a good and satisfying read. I think you will enjoy it.
I think Hitchens became lonely after being excluded from left-wing dinner parties for these past years.
When one puts their faith in slovenly drunks rather than the Lord they are inevitably disappointed.
Every Iraqi I know (and that's quite a few) is dead-set against Obama.
A good dressing down from another lefty atheist, LOL! Thanks
Christopher Hitchens doesn’t like religion yet he is endorsing Obama who sat in a racist and hate filled church for over 20 years.
Hitchens was all over the airwaves advocating for the Iraq War, wearing a Kurdish flag pin, saying it was a moral imperative that we kill Saddam and liberate the Kurds, saying that Islamic terrorism is the number one issue in the world.
So he supports Obama, a man who would not have supported the surge and if he was the President, he would have pulled out of Iraq years ago.
Didn’t HItchens change from liberal to a Bush supporter in 2000, hmmm, wonder why he is suddenly an Obama fan, perhaps he wants to be in the good graces of what he thinks will be an Obama presidency.
On a side note it is great that the Kurds were liberated but that was not the main reason we fought the Iraq War.
Hitchens is a great writer and he will always present a unique opinion but something doesn’t smell right in this endorsement.
Isn’t it interesting that one of the things Christopher and other atheists hate about Christians is their supposed hate. And then Christopher spews it toward a Christian.
Sad really...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.