Brokeback, the Sequel: The Savage-Sullivan bareback Dandrew tour continues at (not making this up) Whiskey Dick Mountain. (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/290459_i93730.html)

What is wrong with Hitch in this clip? He looks like a zombie being controlled by outside forces, or maybe he is just oversloshed.

Actually, upon consideration, I think he may have finally realized that "his side" over the last few years is utterly devoid of value. He seems to be on autopilot, and I worry for his safety.

I'd be sloshed if I were Hitch.
"This isn't an election any more; it's an intervention." Fuck yeah.

Andrew was redeeming - just put it out there - it is way past time

thanks to both - I think Kerry is giving some people a little spine - we have been too passive

I dislike the left's putting down of christipher Hitchens. He is a bit of an asshole, but to pidgenhole him as some sort of unhinged conservitive does our side a great disservice.

Christipher Hitchenson is one of the better political journalists today. However, he is unsuited to the nature of cable and network televisions. While the other speaker served mearly as a talking head for the left, Hitchenson's points had substantive points, and were definately highly critical, but took more then the 30 seconds of sound biting alloud in such shows.

Hithenson's most controversial remark in that was from a liberal's prospective is the generals comment, when he says that the generals can not be absolved completely. He is exactly right, the generals have been complicit in the war, to the same extent of congress.

While I don't agree with Hitchenson On every thing, and certianly am put off by his aragance people should pay a bit more attention to his content, which tends to be extremely sharp and intelegent even if you don't believe it.

one minor clarifications, bubbles. sullivan is a libertarian conservative.

What's annoying is that people keep talking about the president at all. Sure, he can walk, and he can talk. He's got a nice cut of the jib. But he's not making the decisions. Let's talk about the people that are the real players here: Cheney, his old Nixonian pal Rumsfeld, Rove, and the coterie that support consolidating executive power. Bush is a placeholder. A catcher of flak. A decoy.

I can't tell the difference between Britsh and Drunk. Are either of them Brits?

I don't understand why anyone give Sullivan any fucking credit anymore. He was wrong going into Iraq, and then claims that he's smart for having realized that Iraq was wrong. What a fucking tool. What about all the democrats/progressives/liberals who were smart enough to realize going into Iraq was wrong in the first place? Ohhh, no Sullivan is the smart one...he's also the most "wronged" because he believe in bush in the first place. Now he sees the light...suuuuuure.... he's the one who is *most* hurt out of it.

Whatta fuckin tool. Jackass.

I disagree, Andrew. Liberals and progressives have to be the rational, mature ones here and show that we're willing to allow people to change their minds. The problem with the Bush Cabal is that they never allow anyone to change their mind about anything. They see it as a weakness. It's not. It's a strength. People who once supported the president or the war and now do vocally not are EXTREMELY important to advancing our side of these issues. The answer is not to adopt the same, "you're either with us or you're against us" mentality that dominates the right. The country is rightly sick to death of it.

I'd like to point out that there is another Andrew who posted #10 on the board, and while I don't completely disagree with the comment, he is not me.

Tone, that's complete and total bullshit. Andrew Sullivan called you, me and every liberal who lived on the coast a trator. And said that we'd form a 5th collumn and fight on Osama's side because we're decadant. But, Andrew @ 10, the reason Dan Savage likes him so much is because Sully's abject terror that clouds a rational mind into supporting a bullshit war paralleled his.

All I know is that it was nice to hear well-spoken opinions for once instead of just talking points. They both answered actual questions posed to them. That makes them my favorite people of this election cycle.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15519404/
Kieth Olbermans on fire agin. His newest tirade about the Administration
cuts like a knife. Get him on the Daily show quick John Stewart.

Hitchens has been intensely annoying to me for some time, but the reason I feel actual contempt for him is the way he reacts to disagreement. He's a frigging BABY about it - pouts and sulks and gets all bitchy and whiny. If he's married, I pity the hell out of his partner - he must be an awful person to have an argument with.

Some of his past writings have indeed been erudite, well-thought-out, sometimes even amusing, even when I thought he had utter craniorectal inversion based on the premise of his arguments. But in person, if anyone has the temerity to disagree with him, or god forbid, laugh at him, he's just a big whiny baby - really repulsive.