or Powell's or me• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show
•
"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket
•
"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming
July 09, 2007
A Visionary
What now-prominent political pundit wrote this in 1976?
An Arab country with the second largest proven oil reserves, a fierce revolutionary ideology, a large and recently-blooded army, and a leadership composed almost entirely of men in their thirties is obviously a force to be reckoned with. Iraq, which has this dynamic combination and much else besides, has not until recently been very much regarded as a power. But...its political voice is being heard more and more....And it has a leader — Saddam Hussain — who has sprung from being an underground revolutionary gunman to perhaps the first visionary Arab statesman since Nasser.
Answer here.
Now that this has come to light, I can't wait to see the scorn and vitriol that Christopher Hitchens will pour upon this appalling Saddam-lover.
Posted at July 9, 2007 11:45 AM | TrackBackThat's why dear old Chris is on the God/Atheism gig now. For the first time in his long and storied career, no one will be able to prove him wrong.
Posted by: Bob Ewing at July 9, 2007 03:50 PMJust shows ya, SOMEBODY loved Saddam, ONCE.
Posted by: Mike Meyer at July 9, 2007 08:08 PMAnother "relic" of the Cold War come back to bite us. Typical.
Posted by: at July 10, 2007 08:42 AMI find it very interesting he was still considered a "secular socialist" back then...considering most progressives do have somewhat socialist inclinations...
Posted by: En Ming Hee at July 10, 2007 11:39 PMEMH, he was still angling for support from the Soviets (and relying on Soviet propaganda memes for popular support) at that point. He didn't settle down with the US until later.
> the first visionary Arab statesman since Nasser
Is an interesting perspective... Good ol' torture 'em Nasser with his CIA training and radicalising of Islamists (during the 50s and 60s, mind). Has Hitchens always been a patsy? I got the impression he started off OK, then freaked out on 9/11. Perhaps that's too charitable.
Interesting. This seems to confirm what I have always suspected about Hitchens- that he is essentially a person in search of a powerful ruler.
Hitchens is like a strange case to me. I guess among other things, he shows that being for or against Authoritarian rulers is not a matter of intelligence or education. He is quite smart and very educated, yet it seems to make no difference to his soul, which apparently just yearns for a strong ruler.
Somtimes progressives, or people against Bush, make statements about how all the people who are for Bush are 'stupid', or 'unhip', or 'uneducated trash'. These statements, while they may make the people who say them feel good about themselves, are not true in my view. Being progressive, or against Authoritarian rule, has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, or education, or hipness. It has to do with some quality of personality.
Furthermore, if you say stuff like that, you are ignoring all the uneducated, poor, unhip non-geniuses who feel the exact same way as you do. And also the very educated, smart people like Hitchens who just love Bush and the Authoritarian ruler.
Posted by: atheist at July 11, 2007 06:47 AMIt is the nature of Man, to follow.
Posted by: Mike Meyer at July 11, 2007 11:14 AMThat's true, Mike. But I think that some of us take it to a whole new level.
Posted by: atheist at July 11, 2007 07:18 PMi agree, it's the nature of man to follow.
Posted by: sam at July 11, 2007 08:00 PM
