From this post I would surmise that in real life you are either Chrissie Matthews or someone who has an advanced degree from the Chrissie Matthews School of Analysis.
Apart from the obscene invective, I notice that you are resorting to one of Hitchens’ favorite forms of intellectual dishonesty: attributing a strawman argument to an opponent. You know that the guffawing on FR about your claim that “Hitchens was NEVER dishonest” has nothing to do with a belief that Hitchens had an avocational interest in shoplifting at Walmart.
Your hero-worship of Hitchens is misplaced. In fact, hero-worship is never a good thing. To say that Hitchens sometimes wrote perceptively and accurately or that he sometimes swerved into the truth would be accepted by virtually everyone. To say he was “never dishonest” is ridiculous and doesn’t merit a book review or an analysis of his debates with Douglas Wilson and others.
You could have admitted to having posted in a moment of “irrational exuberance”, and no one would have thought the worse of you for it. As it is, you seem not to have learned the first law of holes: when you find yourself in a hole; stop digging.
I’m looking forward to your next post, which undoubtedly will, like your last, display the temperment of an outraged bonobo.
This is pathetic. I’ve never seen anyone run away from backing up their claims in such a silly fashion. The fact that you won’t provide evidence for your claim that Hitchens was a “dishonest man”, proves that you are a liar and a coward.