CL flickr

Visit our You Shoot page.

Hitchens to Carter: Shut. Up.

Tuesday, May 22nd, 2007

When it comes to just about everything, author, commentator, essayist and general curmudgeon Christopher Hitchens is about as subtle as an enema. Hitchens was in Atlanta recently pushing his new (and typically unsubtly titled) book, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. (Previous titles include The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice, and No One Left to Lie To: The Values of the Worst Family.) So it should come as no surprise to anyone who follows Hitchens to read his hyperbolic screed in Slate against former President Jimmy Carter after Carter’s recent criticism of President George W. Bush’s so-called foreign-policy decisions.
Here’s but a taste:

“[Carter’s] combination of naivete and cynicism — from open-mouthed shock at Leonid Brezhnev’s occupation of Afghanistan to underhanded support for Saddam in his unsleeping campaign of megalomania — had terrible consequences that are with us still. It’s hardly an exaggeration to say that every administration since has had to deal with the chaotic legacy of Carter’s mind-boggling cowardice and incompetence.

I come and go on Carter, who seems to hold the alternate (and rather dubious) titles of bad president and best ex-president ever depending on who you talk to — although many agree that both titles probably apply. His Nobel Peace Prize is certainly well-earned. But Hitchens, through all his bluster, does make a cogent point about Carter as historical revisionist. At his worst, Carter often seems to right his dubious record as president, with some of his interviews carrying a subtle “I told you so” quality about them. At his best, he’s a hell of an ambassador of goodwill, an elections observer and home-builder. I’ll leave it to others to decide what his ultimate record of achievement will be, and continue to be entertained by Christopher Hitchens’ general anger at the world.
What do you think?

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln …

Friday, April 27th, 2007

The White House and its allies have been claiming that the so-called surge is reducing violence in Baghdad.

Apparently, that’s a load of crap.

According to a McClatchy Newspapers report published yesterday, the touted drop in violence is just a White House accounting trick:

Car bombs and other explosive devices have killed thousands of Iraqis in the last three years, but the administration doesn’t include them in the casualty counts it has been citing as evidence that the surge of additional U.S. forces is defusing tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

Other than the bombings, the violence is down!

Nifty!

James Denselow of the U.K. think tank Chatham House sums it up thusly:

Since the administration keeps saying that failure is not an option, they are redefining success in a way that suits them.