July 6, 2004

On the other hand, My Pet Goat is a whole lot funnier when you're smashed

Wonkette's reaction was also our first one:

"The NYDN peeks at Christopher Hitchens's Vanity Fair column and finds the Johnny Walker enthusiast looking on the bright side: 'That Bush did not surrender to the need for a colossal bourbon on Sept. 11 stands, I think to his credit.' Right. So let's go to the official Bush presidency scoreboard. Pros: Did not get stinking drunk on 9/11. Cons: Started a war that has yet to be proven necessary."

But then we read that quote again and stumbled over "I think." I think?! If there was ever a sentiment that really did not need a qualifier, isn't this it? Or is Hitchens just covering his ass, allowing himself wiggle room to continue blindly endorsing the Bush even if Michael Moore digs up footage of him drinking that bourbon.

Posted by Daniel Radosh


Daniel- Is he using that "I think" to qualify his statement, or is he just using it to set him apart from others? Maybe I'm charitable, but it looks to me as if that could be interpreted as "I think (though others may not)..." as opposed to "I think (though it may not be so)..."

Just a guess- whaddya think?

Also- I don't think even Moore could dig up footage like that. But I bet he *could* get footage of a certain very special DUI check, if encounters like that are videotaped. I've seen "cops" once or twice. I suspect they are, now. But were they, then?

Post a comment

Powered by
Movable Type 3.2