Posted by
Michael on Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:36:38 PM
During a week where the Holocaust and homosexual-denying President of Iran paid a visit to an Ivy League campus in the biggest metropolis in the Western world, Christopher Hitchens oddly
used his Slate column to talk about Al Gore's non-candidacy for President:Apart from the awards, not only could Gore claim that he had been a
fairly effective senator and a reasonably competent vice president, he
could also present himself in zeitgeist terms as the candidate who was
on the right side of the two great overarching questions: the climate
crisis and the war in Mesopotamia. Should I add that, whether or not he
really won the Electoral College in 2000, he did manage to collect the
majority of the popular vote? Several people, some of them
well-informed, have been saying to me that Gore will wait until the
Nobel committee's announcement before he makes up his mind. Should he
make up his mind to run, he could alter the entire equation.
There were a few very weird moments in the column, such as this:
Sen. Clinton may have succeeded in getting people to call her "Hillary"
and to have made them feel resigned to her front-runnership, but what
kind of achievement is that? Sen. Obama cannot possibly believe, and
doesn't even act as if he believes, that he can be elected president of
the United States next year. John Edwards is a good man who is in
politics for good reasons, but there is something about his populism
that doesn't quite—what's the word?—translate.
Apparently Hitch must not have watched a good share of the Democratic debates. From what I have read of him (which is quite alot), the one thing that Hitch despises the most is religious certainty. Edwards used that card, convincingly or not, in the YouTube debate where he asserted that his opposition to same-sex marriage was founded in his religious faith. That seems like a position designed to raise the ire of Christopher Hitchens.
It might be possible that Hitchens has spent the last half a year
debating theology (or the lack thereof) so intensely that he hasn't
properly absorbed the goings on in the presidential race. I can't blame
him, one human is only so capable of paying attention to all the latest campaign news
while also writing a daily column and engaging in a book tour for a New
York Times bestseller.
The time has passed for Al Gore to run
for president. If he had the inclination to do so, he would have at
least had to have set up an Exploratory Committee by now. Fred Thompson
was considered late when he announced his candidacy in Labour Day after
months of getting his name out there and fundraising. Al Gore has
denied any intentions of higher office, and I think we should take him
at his word. If he were to run now, he wouldn't have the funds or
infrastructure for a successful campaign.