Christopher Hitchens on Hardball with Chris Matthews

[Shotmaker91]

You are a cyber mom. 

[Spoonface370]

RIP Hitch.

[bandz90]

Who is he quoting at 3:45?

[chiefashley56]

"Cleaning of the barn?" Bush will burn, whatever your afterlife beliefs. And no, I never thought Bush was someone I would entertain the idea of sharing a beer with. A war criminal abroad and at home; Katrina ring a bell?

[uscjd2004]

So much win at 3:15.

[streetswell]

"Ignorant and proud of it" - a legacy that lives on, unfortunately.

[JamalDOA]

Chris Matthews voted for George W. Bush, not Al Gore.

[YOYOdaMOOSE]

@JamalDOA

he voted for nader.......

[JamalDOA]

@YOYOdaMOOSE No, in 2000 Matthews voted for Bush. He says it himself.

[synchronium24]

@JamalDOA Not sure who matthews voted for (i believe he voted for bush). i know for a fact hitchens voted for nader.

[bandz90]

@synchronium24 Hitchens was not an American citizen in 2000. He didn't vote for anybody.

[synchronium24]

@bandz90 I believe you're right. But I did find this quote in the "political endorsements" section of the Hitchens Wikipedia article: " In this discussion Hitchens revealed himself as a supporter of Ralph Nader in the 2000 U.S. presidential election, who was disenchanted with the candidacy of both George W. Bush and Al Gore."

[MattyDaddy74]

@bandz90 hence, the reason synchronium used the word "supporter" and not "voter"...

[xtrmsprts]

Hitchens is wrong to censure Gore. If we had Al for president there may not have been any carnage in iraq, 9/11 (because Al would have read the intelligence briefs), breakthroughs in cancer research from encouraged stem-cell research, more watchful eye on wall street greed and anarchy preventing the Great Recession, a hastier scramble for salvaging the health of planet earth... So much good would have occurred! So I think all who traduced Al then should hang themselves in shame.

[ishmaeldaro]

Hearing Hitchens excoriate George W. Bush in 2000 makes his later defence of some of Bush's policies rather hard to swallow. Still love the man, but I wish he hadn't become such a hawk on Iraq after the September 11 attacks.

[l337pwnage]

@ishmaeldaro Unlike many on the left, Hitchens can learn.

[keereekee]

@l337pwnage

Probably you will find far more on the right unwilling to learn - just take the case of creationists, for example.

[sakdiesel86]

incurious ignorant and unintelligent and proud of it ha

[VesusSheist]

I love Hitchens, but he looks like an ass for thinking that Bush could actually run a war properly.

[mjtdawson]

3:16, well said

[BillKiernan]

I'm a fan of hitchens, but didn't he stand up for Bush's intelligence on Bill Maher? Seems to be a little flip-flopping evidenced here.

[iSAW7]

This video was recorded before he met Bush. Maybe he was just buying in to the medias propaganda at the time. His hyperbolic comments would indicate it.

[MarcoArsenault]

he had a chance of view on war and he's for the irak war

because the fatwa on his friend I think

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

@MarcoArsenault actually it was because the Kurds who were saved by Bush senior also supported Bush 43 and his solidarity with them motivated the change.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

@BillKiernan Because when you compare the real admittedly dull George Bush to the exaggerated cowboy presented in the media an honest person has to defend someone from smears.

[sirdavidhasselhoff]

no, he dissed maher for still making bush jokes, basically saying it's for retards. which it is. everyone knows bush wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed; get over it

[BillKiernan]

i'm over it, just making an observation, chill out.

[JohnAdamCulligan]

I recall him suggesting that the then-president may have had a disability and that that makes Bush IQ jokes un-PC, in addition to being hackneyed and vapid. I also recall him telling Bill Maher that his audience was no brighter than Bush - which is altogether different from defending Bush's intelligence (Both the audience members AND Bush could be dumb at the same time).

[slicingwater]

Hitchens you are not always right but generally you make alot of sense so I'll let this one slide for now. Just dont do it again.

[crisis123456789]

dont do what again?

[bookwormpaul]

it is no longer the u, s, it is now OBAMA PEOPLE REPUBLIC., IT WONT BE LONG YOU WILL HAVE TOSAY HAIL OBAMA.. JUST ASK CHIST MATHREW

[Lipo]

Let's give Obama the benefit of the doubt...for now.

[upplsuckimcool16]

@Lipo Yeah let's not... .that's how they get complacent..... Oh BTW...... told ya so.

[TheQRabbit]

@bookwormpaul A little off topic but I'm fascinated that you call yourself "bookworm" with such atrocious spelling.

[Capt777harris]

@bookwormpaul Shut up, you goddamn idiot. Go get help and STFU.

[rupertdaniels55]

@bookwormpaul just ask who?

[caspar01]

I love that Bush supporters put forward Hitchens' comments about Clinton with a "look? see! we told you!" when Hitchens is equally scathing about Bush.

[Lipo]

You're welcome.

[xhagast]

This cracks me up.

There was a Spanish politician very corrupt but who did quite a few good things at a bad time on our history and at least didn't kill anybody. One day somebody upbraided him for his shameless corruption and he coolly told the heckler"Others will come who will make me GOOD."

He was right, sadly for Spain.

Clinton was a disgrace and look who followed HIM. Right now Bill Clinton is a respected statesman with international rock star appeal. Bush elevated him so.

[unfad1ng]

@caspar01

no he is way more anti-clinton, he even voted for bush but only because he supports iraq war

[deathbotv1]

"abnormally unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate..." Hitchens had Bush pinned down perfectly. Too bad he had such a hard-on over invading Iraq

[ch0p86]

Fair enough the whole wmd  claims were a sham, but saddam was commiting genocide, crushing his own citizens freedom, 'blackmailing' the world with oil. And american government put him in power, too right they should clean up that mess....or attempt to clean up!!!!

[TheFutureUnquiet]

Abe "Adolf" Lincoln is the model potentates aspire to.

[Steadno]

3:17 he shamed bush!

[meekychuppet]

Is this an interview or the interviewer ranting at Hitchens? Let the man speak for god's sake.

[RolfSteiner0024]

Matthews is a pompous ass and now is pissed off because Olberman pwns him.

[Bradaaron87]

Good God, stop talking over him, Matthews, you idiot.

[zeldagoblin]

Seems to be a trend with American presenters...

[kbonez2]

Not just American unfortunately. Ever interviewer I see nowadays does that, whether they be American or British. Its really a shame, because it almost always happens when it seems like the interviewee is getting rolling on a really interesting point.

[chepenudo]

Public television and radio interviewers seem to do a better job.

[mjlover23]

lol! He is probably spiting on him with all his "Ps". LOL. I actually like Matthews, but that does annoy me.

[etoandmessi]

I wouldn't listen to Hitchens social views etc. But he is always spot on about religion.

[LouisPlume]

Totaly agree.

[mjlover23]

As much as I hate to admit it, you guys are right. I think its his "I know i'm right about everything" attutude that throws me off sometimes.

[teaparty111]

Hitchens is not this freethinkers spokeman; he is a frontman for his dry books. He is self important and a blowhard. He supports Muslims when they threaten people who disagree with them. What a pompous ass. Hitchens hates anyone who gets more attention than he does. He is a dry writer and his books are so boring you can use them to get to sleep. Maybe he should patent themas a new sleep aid. Forget HITCHENS--he is a joke.

[Superplatanoman]

matthews hasn't changed at all. amazing.

[HumanStrategy]

Matthews is a machine. He never gets old or dies.

[Entropy56]

Matthews was caught saying that it was his job to make sure Obama's presidency is a successful one. So much for objective journalism.

[OneBigRetard]

Er... That sounds objective to me. If the President does badly he will be called on it. That is the media's job.

If he said his job was to make Obama popular. That is different.

[Entropy56]

Look it up on YouTube. He was immediately rebuked by his own colleagues.

[OneBigRetard]

How about you explaining your accusation rather than saying 'look it up'.

[bwhite53]

Hitchens is a singular intellectual: fair-minded. cogent, and unhampered by ideology.

Matthews, all he does is get tingles up his leg over Obama.

[Xone7]

You cant blame him (Matthews), can you?

[bwhite53]

Well I would hope a member of the media would at least feign an aura of objectivity. I know that is asking way too much in this day and age. The tingle up his leg over anyone was just too much--he should have been fired.

[Xone7]

I sincerely understand your frustration.

[kbonez2]

I basically lump all the cable networks in together, and define none of them as news outlets, merely as machines of a political ideology. MSNBC will present you with a very leftist slant, and Fox will make up for it by slanting it heavily to the right. I have no real problem with either because I know thats what they do, so they can be biased because I'm expecting it. Unfortunately people watch Olberman or O'Reilly and think they're getting balanced journalism.

[CharismaticRecluse]

The difference would be clear if you weren't so glib. Fox news tells lies, MSNBC's COMMENTATORS not news coverage, tends to be more liberal. But fox news is the king of lies and misrepresentation, to compare the two is only something that a person who has no clue what the hell they're talking about. Yes, kbonez2, that's you. So stop talking out of your ass about something you are obviously too stupid, lazy, or ignorant to find out about. The end.

[kbonez2]

Wow, I'm too stupid or lazy to find out that fox news lies? I conceded that in my statement. Do you not understand the meaning of words? Of course fox news is bullshit, but apparently for some reason you think MSNBC isn't. Thats great, because it shows that you're too lazy to actually go fact check what they're telling you...either that or you to stupid or ignorant to figure it out. You do realize that a fox news watcher would have said they exact same thing as you did? MSNBC is biased pal.

[CharismaticRecluse]

Obviously you can't read. the COMMENTATING is biased, not the news coverage itself, there's a difference, which obviously you don't seem to have the capacity to understand. By the way thanks for essentially repeating what I said to you back to me, real clever buddy. The two aren't even close in terms of smearing, lies, promoting ridiculous ideas, hatred and bigotry. Fox news is a network for the ignorant people o this country who are broke yet still carry water for the rich. Grow up.

[kbonez2]

You're angry with me because I said exactly what you just conceded. That makes no sense. A huge amount of MSNBC's coverage is merely COMMENTATING, so a large part of their day is spent providing biased opinions, so they're not a news outlet but an opinion source. You're attacking me as if I said fox news was fine, which I didn't. Fox news is a disgrace, and is rightly derided. Where did I not say that? MSNBC's coverage is not an accurate representation of the news, get over it.

[CharismaticRecluse]

Commentating is early in the morning... and in the evenings it's commentating just like every other fucking news station. The thing is, they are somewhat biased, but you don't seem to be smart enough to understand the difference between a slightly biased news station, and a news station that is a megaphone for ignorant conservative propaganda and lies. Be in denial about it if you want, you still have no idea what your talking about, you just repeat what you hear... your fucking pathetic kid.

[kbonez2]

You're like a dog with a bone man. I don't know how else you want me to say that I think fox news is awful and does all the things that you said. You're attacking me for my original premise, which was merely that I don't watch any cable "news" because they don't give news, just opinions. You've made HUGE leaps on everything else. Its kind of hilarious, because you're attacking me despite the fact that my basic points have all been exactly what you're saying. So what is your point?

[CharismaticRecluse]

I'm a Dog with a bone.... good one. Grow the fuck up little boy. My point is, don't equate MSNBC to Fox news. While I agreed that both have a bias, one is merely a smear merchant while another simply has newscasters that lean towards the left. One lies, one does not. One insights fear, hate, racism, homophobia, xenophobia, unjust wars, and class warfare. To equate the two just shows how glib you really are. There's nothing worse than a fool with a little bit of information. That's you.

[kbonez2]

Good lord, alright, lets break this down piece by piece so that even you can understand your own flawed argument. First off, at what point did I say they were exactly the same? I never did. All I said was that MSNBC spins it to the left and fox to the right. So far, you've agreed with me on that. I never said they spun it equally, or that fox didn't use lies and propaganda. So far we've agreed on that. So at what point did I do the things you said? Have you ever heard of a "straw man"?

[CharismaticRecluse]

Seriously, I didn't think it would come to this, but I have to ask... are you fucking retarded? Saying merely "fox spins to the right, msnbc spins to the right" implies that they are the same, just for opposite sides. Are you unable to comprehend that? Jesus christ man... and no, I'm not arguing against a straw man, I'm arguing against a "man" who apparently doesn't even understand his own points, either that or you have no earthly clue how to make a valid argument. Go get an education. Please.

[kbonez2]

It is, at worst, an ambiguous statement. When you flipped out I clarified to say that I agree that fox does it much worse. There is a count limit on posts, I didn't think I'd need to go into any depth about the issue, but when I did I made it clear I agree with you about fox. So again, what is your point? That I wasn't clear enough? Well I have since been crystal clear about Fox. There was no insinuation about the degree that they spin in my original post. Study "logical arguments".

[Lipo]

I think the both of you are partisan dingbats. Take your ignorant Modern Liberalism and shove it up your ass. I'm glad George W. Bush won elections against Al Gore and John Fucking Kerry.

[CharismaticRecluse]

You must be glad, since we're in a recession. Your just another one of the stupid people that get manipulated by the right wingers to think your "tough on war" and shit. You do nothing but carry water for the rich, a group of people you have not even a prayer of becoming one of. Sad. People like you are wasting your lives supplicating. Go get on your knees and pray to lord limbaugh you dick suckin little conservative

[Lipo]

Oh, you think its the rich that are Republican? Think again! The rich, famous and educated are all mostly Modern Liberal Democrats! How is it that Global Warming would EVER have become a serious political issue but for Al Gore's advocacy on behalf of rich people? Poor people don't give a shit about global warming.

[NomadicReprobate]

As a genuine poor person, I would like to say; Nay!  I give at least three shits about global warming.

I just don't have anything else to throw at it but the shit.

[deathbotv1]

Hold whatever political views you want, but don't lie and say that Bush "won" the election against Gore.

[Lipo]

George W. Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election against Al Gore.

[deathbotv1]

Winning a presidential election does not require intervention from the Supreme Court. Unless you're a dangerous idiot who is profoundly unqualified for the job.

[Lipo]

I think you need to face up to reality. The Republic has since moved on and George W. Bush served two full terms.

[deathbotv1]

If you don't want to discuss it, don't post a video about the 2000 election and say how glad you are that Bush "won" against Al Gore.

You don't want to hear about that election fraud, but something tells me you would love to discuss ACORN.

[Lipo]

I'm glad George W. Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election against Al Gore. Al Gore conceded the election because he knew that George W. Bush won and that Al Gore lost. I realize its difficult for you to acknowledge reality. Perhaps you should have yourself a good cry.

[deathbotv1]

You get way too excited about politicians. Relax, buddy, none of them care.

[Paulmancieri67]

"Profoundly Unqualified for the Job" well put. I would add that he was a Profoundly mediocre President.

[Lipo]

Compared to John Kerry or Al Gore? I think that's a stretch. Either Gore or Kerry would have been catastrophic.

[Paulmancieri67]

Well......I am not sure about Kerry or Gore as they weren't elected. Who is to say. Bush acheived what I thought was an impossibility, he was a worse President than Clinton. Bush managed to alienate the world and the divide the country. He was as Hitchens has said unique in that he had no qualifications for the job. He was unprepared and had to rely on his Vice President to run the show.

[ManuelPagami]

@Lipo

we'll never know now.. if bush was never elected at all, then maybe what we refer to as 9/11 wouldnt have happened at all.. haha..

[tonyjones595]

No he didn't. The Supreme Court of Cunts put him in power.

[tylerMusicMan]

Christopher Hitchens keeps getting labeled as one side or the other, but he's one of the most independent thinkers I've ever seen. I met him and talked to him for a while after a lecture he gave, and I told him how I try not to sell my soul to either party, and he said that's "about the best way to go in this wonderful system". For some reason people think you have to love Bush if you're for the Iraq War, which doesn't make sense. Oh well. GO HITCHENS!

[somberlight]

imo all of it springs from the general idea of "Guilt by association". in modern american journalism, its enough to doom everyone and everything at all times and circumstances. for example, if you're reb., you're considered to be pro-bush, thus pro-everything he does, including christian and/or idiot. its a shame that sort of stupid brainfart is allowed.

[iArsalan]

I agree with you. I disagree with him on some issues and I agree with him on others, because he doesn't tow any party line. But he can be extremely dogmatic at times.

[OneBigRetard]

Like when. What is the dogma he adheres to?

[iArsalan]

Examples can be found in the sweeping generalizations he makes of religions, which are just as bigoted and narrow as the views of the ideologues he criticizes. Many of the views, for which he is at once applauded and attacked, are profoundly reactionary, such as his views on the Iraq war and the Clinton presidency.

However, I respect the fact that he has the conviction to go against the grain and I feel his commentary is entirely necessary. But it must be viewed in the context of his bias.

[HumanStrategy]

"Many of the views, for which he is at once applauded and attacked, are profoundly reactionary, such as his views on the Iraq war and the Clinton presidency."

Yes, as it should be. Reactionary is another word for 'against popular accepted opinion'.

"..his bias."

Everyone has bias, this goes without saying. How then are we to judge such a man?

[iArsalan]

I never use words in their colloquial sense always in their true meaning. To be reactionary is to have knee-jerk reactions to events without sober reflection and planning. That's precisely my criticism of him and of our society as a whole. In any fight the easiest opponent is the reactionary, they're the most predictable.

Furthermore, everyone has bias and that is why I said that his statements must be viewed in that context as with anyone's statements.

Stop worshiping this man.

[HumanStrategy]

"I never use words in their colloquial sense always in their true meaning. To be reactionary is to have knee-jerk reactions to events without sober reflection and planning."

You don't understand very well. "True" meaning of words do not exists. You must be new.

"Stop worshiping this man."

Men are not to be worshiped. Ideas are to be credited with respect. You must be new, yet again^^

[iArsalan]

'"True" meanings of words do not exists.' I must be speaking to a sophist which means the extent of your conversation has all the form and presence of intellect but no substance.

"Matthews is a machine. He never gets old or dies." That's called worship. I worship no man and no man speaks for me, I speak for myself. I criticize and call to task even the dearest of my heroes.

You're right, am new and proudly so. Because those that know don't tell and those that tell, don't know.

[HumanStrategy]

""Matthews is a machine. He never gets old or dies." That's called worship."

HAHA You are new. This is called a joke. Have fun surfing the internets. You simply don't understand, do you? I wasn't being serious LOL

[iArsalan]

"Yes, as it should be. Reactionary is another word for 'against popular accepted opinion'."

An exchange of only 4 rounds of comments and I've defeated you. Like I said, reactionaries are the easiest opponents to defeat. No forethought, no emotional control, and they never stop to consider that perhaps they are wrong; always arguing from the platform that they are always right and everyone else is wrong.

Just another ideologue.

Wise men shouldn't argue with fools so I'll waste no more time.

[HumanStrategy]

"An exchange of only 4 rounds of comments and I've defeated you."

You simply never understood what I was saying. Are you really this naive about internet conversations? If you are so wise, why argue with me if you find me so foolish; are you 12 years old?

Obvious troll is obvious /sage/

[magbast9]

This clip was unusually entertaining, abonormally witty, amazingly insightful, fanTASTically relevant, and extraordinally funny.

[PatriotMcCain]

Chris Matthews when he still had some sense of professionalism and integrity... today journalists are unhinged liberal-socialist militants... it's unbearable!

[sarahnewt]

just wish Matthews would stop talking over him

[rboltt]

The description Hitchens makes at 3:12-3:28, which is priceless by the way, is it of George W. Bush or Sarah Palin?

[Farrul123]

This is from year 2000 -.-

[rboltt]

Yes, I know. But it is also a perfect description of Miss Alaska.

[josephdrew87]

The old Hitch sure did change his op on Bush now didn't he. Compare his debasing of Bush heer to his praise of Bush' intelligence and flipped off the anti-Bush audience on Bill Maher recently. As a fan, his views on Clinton and Bush are the one thing I will never believe Hitchens on.

[SelfImmolator]

I don't think Hitch changed his mind about Bush that much. I bet you could still get him to echo that fantastic and apt description of Dubya today.

But he does react aggressively to the grossly exaggerated anti-Bush sentiment and world-view, as well as the pacifism and moral relativism that tends to come with it.

[eirefrance]

It is interesting that he so virulently hates Clinton for his corruption, but is quiet as a mouse concerning Bush's corruption.

[Saighu]

yep, i saw that video on bill maher. i think he changed his mind because he totally believes in the iraq war.

[TheStig000]

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure he still thinks Bush is a total moron.

[bluemonday2020]

That traitor Joe loserman

[DuctTapeMyFace]

Never fails to raise a smile off me, that man.

[angrysoba]

At the beginning of the clip is that Jeremiah Wright walking behind Bill Clinton?

Just wondering...

[Prytanus]

I thought it looked a bit like him too.

I've heard that Wright was very involved in the Democratic Party under Clinton, and that Clinton had met him.

So, it's possible. We just need some facial recognition software now...

[eirefrance]

No way.

[strungout7777]

Man, Hitchens has such an articulate and pointed description of W. Can't get enough of Hitchens. I could sit in an auditorium and listen to him make an argument for what type of toilet paper people should use.

[kmardes]

haha, well said.. i agree. and look at what percentage of our population make even the slightest effort to educate themselves about the world, or, imagine, speak english properly. 'i seen you yesterday' etc

[Bastardozer]

yes but he deliberately avoids these obvious criticisms just because he believes bush has been the most stalwart in taking on religious fanatics. what a differeance a 9/11 and two wars makes...

when everyone else tears into our president he is, as ever, the contrarian. yet he knows the truth.

[jp2007ms]

Love Christopher, tells it like it is. Initially I was pissed he was saying all that about Gore, then he started about Bush, which shows he doesn't care about sides, he'll attack you if he thinks you're wrong.