Archive for May, 2007
When Is Discrimination – Not? Downunder, Of Course
There was an interesting article in the Globe today. The piece was titled “Gay club wins right to ban straights”, subtitled “Australian hotel owner says it will be easy to screen out undesirable heterosexuals and lesbians”.
Now, normally, I don’t read any newspaper – but I think I might start reading the Globe so I can keep track of stuff for blogging purposes. Also, my beau buys it anyway and it’s sitting right there on the coffee table all day, so it seems a shame to not at least scan the headlines. I mean, look what I found to blog about today:
“Gay club wins right to ban straights”
But the reason I had stopped reading the newspaper was because the one I subscribed to was the Ottawa Citizen and, although I managed to survive the Black years – I just couldn’t survive the Asper years. I’m sorry. There just didn’t appear to be an end in sight. And the Ottawa Citizen actually makes money, so, as a citizen AND consumer, I knew I was S.O.L. As a reader, too. Especially a reader desirous of actual news.
But there is bias, and then there is obvious bias, and then there is Canwest/Global. I had to draw the line somewhere. Sacrifices must sometimes be made. And even at that, I didn’t have to be very pro-active about it. You know – like I didn’t have to phone up some poor circulation drone and go on and on about WHY I was cancelling the newspaper. I just moved on without renewing. It was a clean break. And although I miss the Arts & Entertainment and weekly Style sections – I’d had enough of the Ottawa Citizen’s editorial board to keep my blood pressure high for a couple of years more – without reading a single one of its ridiculous opinions on anything.
Boyo, though – I’d like to read its take on “Gay club wins right to ban straights”. Talk about political correctness and reverse discrimination in one big ol’ girl backlash – eh?
Or… is it?
Well, certainly if you read the article and happen to be a woman you will notice more than the same old, same old discrimination except with a gay rights official stamp of approval on top that excludes GAY women in particular to regular old yucky pooh women.
I mean – WTF?
In other words – Australia’s Equal Opportunity Act has okayed a “hotel” (a further reading of the article reveals the pertinent – or not – fact that the “hotel” in question does NOT provide accommodation – anyway) that excludes ALL women and who really knows what percentage of men. AND, need I point out – a certain percentage of that 100% of women and… say… 50% (? – I have very high gaydar, so…) of men are VISIBLE MINORITIES!! So this Act has officially okayed discrimination against 100% of women and 50% of men and ALL visible minorities who are women and not gay men.
Gee… the Lard giveth and the Lard taketh away. To some men he giveth and then from all women he taketh away.
That’s human rights legislation? HOW, exactly – Australia?!
By the way – was the gay Aboriginal population consulted about any of this? Or is this just a gay white man’s kind of burden…
But the reason for the ban request (aside from the obvious lesbian-hating factor, of course) according to one Tom McFeely, owner of the establishment in question, “was to prevent insults and abuse directed toward gays in its bars and nightclubs”.
Yabbut, what about GAY insults and abuse directed toward gays in its bars and nightclubs? Eh? I mean, what are you trying to pretend here, Tom McFeely? That gay men never direct insults and abuse towards each other? Under the influence, even? Never? Ever?
Gasp! Are you trying to say that gay men are… like…. “special”…?
And, not to be a killjoy or anything, but – how to tell if someone’s lying or not?
Well, Tom McFeely, Dear Questioning Reader, has an answer for that puzzler:
“It is particularly easy to implement with the females because that is pretty obvious. With the heterosexual males, if they identify themselves as that at the door, or indeed we question their behaviour in the venue and they come across as being heterosexual, then we will simply ask them to leave if the behaviour is inappropriate.”
Oh. So. Wait a minute. What kind of establishment is this again? I mean, behaviour that is inappropriate in a gay hotel that doesn’t provide accommodation? Like… Say… They won’t agree to being sodomized by another man at the front door? Not to be rude or anything. I’m just asking. That WOULD pretty much be the test – wouldn’t it? And, well, not to probe too deeply, but… who’s doing the testing, Mr. McFeely?
Whatever. I’ve passed by a number of gay bars in my day and it didn’t look to me like they had a problem being overrun with lesbians and non-gay men. They didn’t even look like they had a problem being overrun with non-gay-looking men – not that you can judge a book by its cover 100% of the time. It’s just a fairly safe bet that a man who goes into a gay bar is gay. And, like, not to sound gayist, or anything – but he probably LOOKS gay, too. And if he behaves inappropriately when he goes in – well… I thought even Australia would have rules and regulations regarding that sort of thing.
Laws, even, maybe. And if not – why not? Because enacting a discriminatory law to deal with discriminatory behaviour seems rather upside down to me.
But I guess that’s why they call it “Australia” – the land downunder.
Time and Money
There are lots of things I regret not doing and a few that I do – although I no longer spend “a lot” of time torturing myself over either – and I always thought those things involved time and money, but I now realize they involved more than that.
More than time and money?! Yes, indeed.
The two main things I regret not doing are (and they actually fall in this order, for some reason known only to the Deep and Profound Gawd of Priorities):
1. Not being with my cat when she was put to sleep.
2. Not going to my grandmother’s funeral.
I know, I know. But somewhere along the way my cat and my grandmother kind of morphed into one soul, anyway, so putting my cat first isn’t really as bad as it looks.
I always thought the first was about money and the second was about time, but I was a homemaker with three toddlers for both and now I’m a working girl with three teenagers so I know it was about something else entirely.
It was about not thinking I was worth the time or the money to spend on things that would have given me peace of mind but would have taken away from the immediate needs of others. If it sounds like I feel martyred, I don’t. I feel a little (not a lot, a little) sad for me back then because I realize now I was probably depressed.
But if there’s one thing I do not regret, it’s my life and all the stages of it – including the bad times.
I guess I’m a bit of a Big “C” Catholic, at heart, because I really do feel it’s the bad times that make for a soul. And in my case, I’m one of those “born with a horseshoe up the ass” types who never knows she’s in bad times until she’s out of them. It’s my saving grace, what makes me an optimist, and why I believe so strongly in socialized medicine, welfare, subsidized housing – using the tax dollars of the functioning workers bees among us to spread around to the… well… people who weren’t born with a horseshoe up the ass and when they’re in bad times – they know it.
And there’s something about not thinking you’re worth it that keeps people, I’m sure, from experiencing the kind of success in life that most of us take for granted. For instance, I know now that, if I could, I would go back in time and pay the extra money it would have cost to be with my cat when she was put to sleep – and I would take the time away from my family to go to my grandmother’s funeral.
At the time, though, I couldn’t see that it was worth it – that I was worth it. Everything I did was calculated down to not cause a ripple of effect on others. That’s because I thought everybody else’s time and money mattered more than I did and than my peace of mind did.
Well, it didn’t. And if I’d stood up for myself, no one would have said, “No – you can’t do that.” Although I think I thought, deep down, that that’s exactly what would have happened. But really, it was just me saying, “It’s not worth it.” And by that, I really meant, “I’m not worth it.”
I can see it now. My living circumstances are so much different than they were then that I’d have to be… well… still depressed not to see it. And since I know that about myself, I can’t pretend I don’t know that about other people. And I can’t imagine trying to live in this world thinking the time and money of others is more important than me and my life.
Anyway, we often hear the expression, “We can’t just throw more money at the problem”, but I think that’s maybe all we can do. I also think it’s what we should do. Because at some point in the at-home years, our family doctor referred me to a psychologist. She felt that talking to somebody would make a big difference in helping me see my situation the way she evidently saw it – that I didn’t think I was worth the bother of life – and she turned out to be right. And because she was a doctor referring me to a psychologist, it was covered by my husband’s health insurance plan. It still cost $30/hour, but that was better than $150/hour. To say it was worth it is almost beside the point, but without her referral and our insurance coverage, there is no way that it would have happened. Not that anything earth-shattering did as a result, you understand.
It just made all the difference in the world.
And if I was running the country, I’d make sure anybody who needed it had access to such a good thing. That would be my priority.
The Public Citizen
On my way in to work today, as I walked past a small office building, I was sprayed with dirty water by someone hosing down a dumpster. My sandals and pant legs had little spray dots of black grime on them. I stopped beyond range and yelled out, “Hey! You just sprayed me!”
I was more shocked than angry – for a second or two. But the guy kept spraying and over the din of traffic and water hitting the dumpster and then the sidewalk yelled back at me – aggressively, “I didn’t see you – ALRIGHT?!”
Then I got angry, “Of course you didn’t see me. You can’t see anybody around the building. But you’re spraying dirty water out onto the sidewalk – ANYWAY!”
“I didn’t do it on purpose! Look, I don’t need this shit at 9:30 in the morning!”
“What?! I’m walking along the sidewalk on my way in to work and some guy sprays me with dirty water and says HE doesn’t need this shit at 9:30 in the morning?! Stop aiming the hose at the sidewalk!”
“Don’t tell me where I can spray on my own property, LADY!”
Anyway, he was unapologetic to the point of belligerence. I was, at that point, going to start swearing. So I walked back to the front of the building and went in to the little reception area. The receptionist was on the phone but she politely covered the receiver and inquired, “Yes?” So I told her what had just happened, ending with, “I wouldn’t be bothering you with this complaint except that the guy was rude. If he’d just apologized, I wouldn’t be here.”
“Oh my. I’m sorry that happened to you. I’ll let the managment know.”
“Well, it isn’t your fault. But thanks. And just a head’s up – I think he IS the management.”
Then her face kind of fell a bit and I said, “Sorry. Bye.”
When I got in to work, I phoned my beau and told him what had happened. We talked of revenge – Hollywood-style – but on PUBLIC property so Buddy Private would be completely at our mercy, his statement, “Don’t tell me where I can spray on my own property, LADY!” having particularly rankled since he was actually spraying his private dirt on to OUR public sidewalk. Not to mention – my private being. Then my ex called so I told him and he said, “Uh hunh” and then told me about his neighbours having their lawn sprayed and when he took our dog out for a walk, the dog’s eyes were watering and he kept blinking. “All you could smell was weed killer – all over the neighbourhood. I have a headache now. These people all get their property sprayed but you can smell it for days afterwards.”
“Don’t forget the groundwater”, I commiserated. “It all goes down into the groundwater.”
Then a co-worker walked by so I said, “I gotta go” and hung up so I could tell him all about what had just happened. PLUS about the dog and his watering eyes on account of all the pesticide spraying where my ex lives.
“Did you complain, at least?” he asked. “Yup. I told the receptionist.” “The receptionist? What’s she gonna do?” “Well, I don’t know. I just wanted to make a point of complaining and not just taking it – you know?” “Yabbut, you should have asked to speak with the management.”
“I think he probably WAS the management – the property manager, anyway. He referred to it as “his” property.”
“Phff. The sidewalk’s not his property.”
“Yeah. Well. Now I figure at least the receptionist, who was good-looking and really professional about it all will know that he’s a jerk and if he tries to get anywhere with her she can say, “Aren’t you the kind of idiot who would aim a hose out to the sidewalk while spraying a dumpster even though you can’t see around the building to know if there are pedestrians walking by being sprayed – including women just like me on their way in to work – you neanderthal pig brain?”
Anyway, I feel better now I’ve told three people. And I still get to tell my sister. She’ll love it because she, like me, lives in an apartment building downtown and is a big defender of public space rights – not actually – but, you know, like me – in a word of mouth “there was a lady in here earlier says you sprayed her with dirty water” kind of way.
Because that’s what this little incident has morphed into for me – a recognition that public property needs defending from private property owners. That’s all it is at the moment, but I expect it to expand into something more – personally, I mean. It’s not something I have spent much time thinking about, but that defence of his actions, “Don’t tell me where I can spray on my own property, LADY!” really stuck in my craw, so to speak.
I’m thinking placards, bull horns, rallies, before the tear gas, mass arrests, shootings…
Okay. I’ll tell you the undeniable “what” of the matter:
He looked like a New Conservative.
I know, I know. But what does a New Conservative look like, Sooey?
Well, Dear Reader, he looks like the kind of guy who would be spraying the grime off his private dumpster, on to the public sidewalk, using a high powered hose, with little regard for any pedestrians who might walk by on their way to work. Because if you aren’t in your private car using our public streets – you don’t matter and deserve whatever dirty water you get sprayed on you while you’re on your way to work. I’m telling you, everything about this guy was reactionary, reactionary to anything involving public rights. He was Mr. Private Property.
Well, I’ll show him and everybody and anybody who thinks like him – I’m going to become Ms. Public Property!
Who’s with me!
Coy Gore for President
There’s a YouTube clip of Al Gore being interviewed by Diane Sawyer in which she asks him three times whether or not he’s going to run for President. He answers her by referring to his book – yes, his book – about democracy or somesuch – and how the media in America hypes the news news instead of reporting the real news.
Oh. Gee. Why goodness me. Thank Gawd for Al Gore or I guess we wouldn’t know that about the MSM. Oops. Buzzword. Al Gore objects to buzzwords – which is what MSM is – a buzzword. Why goodness me all over myself. Thank Gawd for Al Gore all over again or we wouldn’t know that the mainstream media is awash in partisan politics and cannot be trusted to report what its advertisers and the current U.S. administration don’t want reported.
Anyway, if I were Diane Sawyer, I would have asked him a fourth, fifth and sixth time if he was planning to run for President. As many times as it took for him to either admit that he is, or break down and cry.
Then I would have phoned Barbara Walters and crowed, “I made Al Gore cry!” Because something tells me he’s not going to admit to anything – political – while he’s in this state of golden boy grace promoting his movie to save the planet through carbon trading emissions credits/hedge funds and his book to save democracy from the likes of the Republican party and second-rate also-rans like George W. Bush who keep getting elected by dumbassed American voters.
He kept talking about involving Americans in a conversation, but… I dunno… even Diane Sawyer wasn’t so much interested in having one as she was in getting the network scoop on his candidacy. I was kind of with her on that one, myself. And yet – I normally love yakking it up with former Vice Presidents.
But seriously, what the hell? He’s “touring” the country promoting his movie on Climate Change for which he won an Academy Award – trying to get as many people as is human(e)ly possible to see it – AND now he’s doing the Prime Time News/Talk Show circuit to talk about his new book “The Assault on Reason”. Here’s the gist, if you aren’t a Gore-a-phile and haven’t already bought it and committed it to memory with a view to re-gifting it to your favourite not-really-left-but-certainly-not-right politico next Christmas/Diwali/Ramadan/ChineseNewYear:
“In his new book, Al Gore explores why reason, logic and truth seem to play a sharply diminished role in the way America now makes important decisions and what we can do to change that.”
Hey – maybe Ralph Nader should read it! That guy could use a kickass political re-start to his campaign to start a fresh political dialogue (oops – buzzword alert!) between Americans such that would result in a renewed and invigorated democracy for all of America.
Choice – I believe is what Ralph Nader was aiming at. Maybe Al Gore covers it in his book about how politics and the media are so ridiculously dumbed down and offputting that only stupid idiot morons from political family dynasties can win presidential elections nowadays.
Or… maybe not…
Anyway, I’m sick of Al Gore, but I was sick of him when he thought he was too good, too much of a shoo-in, too “to the manor born” to allow the disgraced, yet beloved and infinitely electable, Bill Clinton campaign for him in Tennessee so that he might actually win it and subsequently the election – instead of losing to a stupid idiot moron no one thought in a million years would win a Presidential election against someone like Al Gore in the wake of such a successful Presidency – for Americans – as that of Bill Clinton.
And then do it all over again against someone like John Kerry, ferchrissakes.
In any case, the important thing is that Al Gore is treated like a bonafide documentary film-maker and political science author by the mainstream media when he is out promoting his movie and book and not dismissed as a political opportunist who is probably going to declare a run at the Presidency in the fall.
Or not. I don’t know. I don’t support the mainstream media. I don’t watch its news and I don’t read its newspapers. I get my news from alternative news sources – pay for it, too. Believe me – it’s worth it. You really do get what you pay for in this country. And since the mainstream media doesn’t spend much of its budget on gathering the actual news – it doesn’t get much actual news.
But there’s coy and then there’s, “OH SHUT UP ALREADY!!!!” Because if Al Gore is not campaigning for a run at the Presidency, then I’m not sure what he’s campaigning for – although I’m reasonably sure he’s campaigning for SOMETHING.
Look, Al Gore. There’s a catch phrase (I know, I know – you don’t like buzzwords and catch phrases) and that catch phrase is: “Democratic Deficit”. I don’t know who coined it, but it’s been around for a while. Much like the evidence that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are, well, not good. Whether or not they are heating up the planet, well, again – acid rain, smog, soil depletion, pesticide contamination, coffee and chocolate expansion leading to desertification (as opposed to dessertification – which leads to size Al Gore…), stripmining of oceans, clearcutting of forests, urban sprawl – these things, heating up the planet or not, are not good, either. And we can go way back to when before you were even a Senator to know it. I knew it when I was in grade school, as a matter of fact. As far as I know, too, my family – the whole extended clan – never made a dime from exploiting natural resources, either.
Although, they tried to farm off a barren rock in Northern Ontario… But that’s a whole ‘nother entry… Or maybe a book: “Yay! We Found a New Cold Damp Rock!” – Why One Clan Left Scotland Forever to Take Up a New Life in Canada”
Not that more books about how democracy isn’t exactly working out for Americans these days aren’t welcome to those of us who think the state of American politics is kind of, like, bad. It’s just that I’m pretty sure there are less, shall we say, self-interested parties to write them – authors who would no doubt welcome a shot at an interview, one on one, with Diane Sawyer, too.
And she wouldn’t even have to waste the interview asking them three times if they intended to run for the Presidency of the United States. She could ask them instead of their book.
I mean – again – DISINGENUOUS MUCH?! OF COURSE SHE’S GOING TO ASK YOU OVER AND OVER ABOUT YOUR ELECTORAL INTENTIONS! Jesus! What else is she going to ask you about? Your book – “An Assault on Reason”? I mean, she pointed out your main gist – which would seem to be that you believe you should have won the election that time and that if you had, America wouldn’t be in the mess that it is today. I thought she was more than fair. And you’re probably right. Although, it’s hard for someone like me who didn’t ever, at any point, support the War on Terror to see why that would be. It’s not as if Democrats stood shoulder to shoulder against the prevailing winds to stand firm against the insanity that resulted in the War in Iraq on Iraqis as a direct result of the President of the United States encountering no real opposition to his whole War on Terror declaration.
But yeah – it probably wouldn’t be in this particular mess. And maybe there’d be some real action on the environment. And probably the first course of action of an Al Gore administration would not have been to cancel funding for Planned Parenthood overseas.
Anyway, Diane Sawyer didn’t get the answer she was hoping for, but here’s my prediction: American democracy is such that Al Gore will pull the rug out from Hillary Clinton and that guy who smokes, both of whom will appear to graciously step aside, and declare his candidacy for President and then he will win – because there’s nothing more Americans like than a celebrity candidate for political office.
Or not. But if he doesn’t declare and he really is just out taking up airtime for his movie and book, then I think Hillary Clinton and that guy who smokes should team up to kick his ass.
Then maybe he could do a one-man show on Broadway about a guy who gets his ass kicked – literally – for talking too much and not really doing anything.
Hitchens the Hypocrite
I guess we’ve all seen the clip on YouTube of Christopher Hitchens waxing sillysophical about dead ol’ Jerry Falwell on Anderson Cooper’s show on CNN.
“Pbbbbbbbllllllllfffft” would have been my response to His Blowhardiness, although Anderson Cooper’s puzzled brow responses were pretty funny, too.
Because, except for the blatant hypocrisy of criticizing Jerry Falwell for being a Christian Charlatan with Double Capital C’s – without even mentioning John Ashcroft and the Case of the Covered Statue, George W. Bush and his entire Presidency, and pretty much every Republican administration in my lifetime and probably yours – I didn’t think there was much to take notice of in that interview – beyond a cheap (and… I dunno, but – boozy?) pitch for hapless viewers to buy his latest book.
Something about God not being real even though 99.9% of American Republicans think He is and – not only REAL – but an American and a Republican.
So yeah – God isn’t real, eh? What about Mother Nature, Christopher Hitchens? Is she not real, either? Father Time and his big clock in the sky? Not real, either?
…Original sin? Cain and Abel? (And how come nobody names their kid “Cain”?) The Ten Commandments as dictated by God? SATAN?! All of them, the whole cast of the Holy Bible – NOT REAL?!
Gee, then why does every American President, Congressman, and Senator PRETEND God is real, then? I mean, even Bill Clinton took to carrying around a Bible and consulting with Billy Graham (with whom President Bush Sr. sincerely and with heavy heart consulted before making HIS not-so-infamous decision to wage War against Iraq, too, you might want to know, Christopher Hitchens, you Toffee-nosed BritTwit of little Faith) – once he was facing impeachment for that blow job in the Oval Office by one Monica Lewinsky – whom he successfully managed to portray later as an Eve-like seductress. (Although fatter’n the Eve in the Holy Bible – for sure – but isn’t that just how Evil would present Herself to a good ol’ Southern Boy – “Have you ever tasted a REAL cigar, Billy?”)
Although, lest we (the Godless Left) be hypocrites ourselves, it was all most likely an elaborate optical illusion and he was probably just asking about “the weather up there” with Billy Graham while secretly strategizing with his Backroom Boys about how best to wriggle out from under the whole mess WITHOUT God even finding out about it. (And, although it might have fooled Ken Starr, I never thought for a minute he was sincere in carrying around that Holy Bible in his breast pocket all of a sudden. And the fact that the best his Backroom Boys could do was that whole not really knowing what oral sex is thang – tells us more’n we probably want to know about the state of American preparedness in an emergency, but that’s an entry for a whole ‘nother God fearing day. It’ll probably read a lot like the Right of this Country’s coverage of Conrad Black at his trial in Chicago – “Yeah. Sure. He’s a guilty sleazeball – but he’s OUR guilty sleazeball” – so you may want to skip it, come to think of it.)
Unless, of course, (and this is a possibility even a defensive Left hasn’t really explored fully) Bill Clinton wasn’t lying at all and was genuinely confused by why Ken Starr wouldn’t think oral sex really WASN’T sex. I mean – let’s face it, given the hue and cry over all matters sexual down South, I’m sure there are lots of Southern boys who would argue Homosexuality isn’t a Sin if you’re drunk. Or if your Mama doesn’t find out about it until she’s up in Heaven and God tells her what he saw you doing out in the bushes that night. And then every other night after that while your wife was home readling Bible bedime stories to your young’uns before responding to constituent complaints about the science curriculum not covering Creationism and why isn’t their State representative DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
Creationism is taught in schools for a good reason, dontcha know – God is all powerful and power is what America is all about and you don’t question Omnipotent Beings and his Spokesmen or you may find yourself not getting any. Power, that is.
But speaking of homosexuality (and my, oh my – does the Religious Right like to speak of Homosexuality…), I notice Hitchens didn’t go into that too much with Anderson Cooper (nudgenudgewinkwink). I can only guess that’s because his own views on Homosexuality are somewhat ambiguous – much like his sexuality, really, if you stop and think about it. Heheh – although his latent Homosexuality is less so… And call me detail-oriented, but I doubt Christopher Hitchens and Jerry Falwell would actually find themselves very far apart on their opinions on Feminism, either.
Am I wrong? Do I call the Great Debater out unfairly? I don’t think so, but I’m a woman, so – maybe that’s exactly what I’m doing. Foxy vixen temptress that I am. When I’m not being pathologically unfunny, I mean. Because, of course, as Rudyard Kipling so famously said, “Women can’t be funny because they give birth” – or something. He yakked a lot about things he didn’t really know anything about – like the Jungle, for instance. Not that the Jungle Book doesn’t make more sense than the Holy Bible – I’m juss sayin’. He yakked a lot and when you yak a lot, you can end up saying more stupid things – on average – than your non-yakkers. Not that they mightn’t be just as stupid as you. Which reminds me – Hitchens expanded on Kipling to add something about “dead babies being hard to make fun of – even for Homosexuals like Oscar Wilde”. Or something. I dunno. He yaks a lot, too.
Anyway, my point is that Jerry Falwell is easy – Consistency, on the other hand, is hard. And one simply cannot criticize the dead Reverend for having so much power on account of he was a Capital “C” Christian – without criticizing the current President of the United States and pretty much everything he has said and done in the past few years – as well as the fact that Jerry Falwell was only powerful because the Religious Right – which votes solidly for Bush – made him powerful. I mean, nevermind 9/11 and that whole little brain fart about Western liberals more or less causing it (and may I refer you, Dear Reader, to pretty well every Rightwing American pundit for proof that Jerry Falwell was, indeed – quite right) – Hitch missed the whole ’80s here when the Moral Majority truly ran the political show down South.
That was before he put his hand on his heart and took out American citizenship, so affected in a 180 degrees way by 9/11was he that, well, in the absence of REAL Religion, I guess he felt kneejerk Patriotism would do.
But back to the future. Really, it was as if there was a giant elephant standing right behind Hitchens during the entire interview and only he and Anderson Cooper couldn’t see it. I mean, I could see it. Could you see it? The President of the United States uses words like “evil-doers” to describe America’s enemies, FerChrissakes. He is the Commander-in-Chief of a War on Terror that identifies Islamists as those who must be defeated and Christians as those who must defeat them. He cites three “F” words that dictate all his decisions – in this order – “Faith, Family, Friends”.
He believes in the Apocalyse.
He is Jerry Falwell with actual Christian zeal, not just a huckster out for a buck. He’s a real live Zealot. And he’s also the leader of the free world. Americans made him that – twice. How on earth could Christopher Hitchens criticize Jerry Falwell without once mentioning the current U.S. administration and its War on Terror in the Middle East. – the Holy Land, as it were – and an entire political and social culture that would allow someone like George W. Bush to become President of the United States. Twice.
That’s right. He can’t mention any of that because he, himself, is mad. Quite mad. He supports the War on Terror – still. And because he is essentially on the side of George W. Bush – politically – he shies away from calling him a Nut – with a Capital “N”. It’s really beyond any point whatsoever. Which explains, I guess, Anderson Cooper’s puzzled brow. I mean, if Hitchens’ reputation didn’t precede him, there would just be a giant hook off to the side with which to haul him off the stage, I’m sure.
I mean, does “Hypocrite” with a Capital “H” even cover what he has become? Talk about asking viewers to take a spectacular leap of faith. Perhaps you should read your own book, Mr. Hitchens. I’m certainly not going to bother.