from today's altercation by eric alterman (the last sentence or so will ring a familiar lament around these parts. 'what the hell' indeed.)...

It took me by surprise, I must say ...

If you missed Bill Moyers' appearance on Charlie Rose, you can find it here.

And if you missed Christopher Hitchens' descent in the kind of neoconservative, McCarthyite thuggery that we would not even expect from, say, Bill Kristol, take a look at this piece from the apparently unedited Slate magazine.

Hitchens brings up Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Malcolm X, Tawana Brawley, and Stokely Carmichael, all by way of seeking to discredit Barack Obama with an attack on, believe it or not, Michelle Obama's undergraduate college thesis. He does not actually quote from the thesis, not that it would matter. It's hard to believe he's serious, much less sober. The first time I met Christopher, in the summer of 1982, we spent an afternoon getting drunk in a Dupont Circle bar during which he said a great many silly and, to my young ears, shocking things, which I imagine he would not wish to hear repeated today. Hitchens was already 33 by then, but nevertheless remained under the illusion of a brand of Marxism he has since denounced -- along with virtually everyone who remains wedded to the views to which he committed most of his life's work. The idea that the views of a college-aged Michelle Obama are somehow relevant to her husband's qualification for presidency is McCarthyism of the most disreputable order.

We all know what Christopher's problem is, and for reasons of sentimentality, many of us in the fraternity of his ex-friendships are likely to continue to forgive him. He's been through a great deal I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies, and no less sadly, has wasted more talent than most of us will ever have. But what the hell is going on at Slate? Are there no editors there who care enough to save him from publishing such a pathetic performance?

Are you telling me that there is a magazine attached to this site?

Who knew?

. . . Slate's importance to the world. The world really doesn't cry out for a Newsweek editor. Why a Slate editor?

Yer right. How did I miss it?

The world is crying out!

when in a previous article Christopher Hitchens accused Hillary Clinton of participating in genocide in his even more rabid hatred of the Clintons? Compared to how Hitchens feels about them, his 'gentle' criticism of Obama and his wife amounted to a gentle and heartfelt offer of marriage.

Yeah, this whole, "Slate needs an editorial staff that actually bothers to edit" was hashed out by the regular members of the Politics board when this happened and primarily with myself leading the issue.

What gets me is that the question [any question and any issue] to certain pseudo-intellectuals is not real and cannot actually exist until someone inside an official publication or attached to a commercial venue mentions the problem. Then and only then does it actually exist.

Part of this grotesque nomination process has occurred along its current lines because enough people in 'positions of responsibility' refused to risk their professional necks pointing out the obvious, that in turn the 'obvious' doesn't get seen by people LIKE YOU that are compelled to let official people do all their thinking for them.

Yeah this is a rant. The ability to arrive at reasonable conclusions form ongoing events and patterns is not something that only a handful of high placed elites can do. One should not be so intellectually or emotionally stunted that waiting for the word from on high is the only acceptable option.

Bah! It's not as if you have a clue as to what I am talking about here [call it a rant as that will make you psychologically comfortable]. Sometimes it is just compelling to point out the truth to people that will-not-think for themselves . . . even though it is a pointless exercise.

Suffice it to say that, yes; the issue was raised and hashed out well before the Huffington Report journalist casually mentioned it in passing. The conclusion was [oh wait do you WANT to hear the conclusion even if it doesn't come from someone official and therefore important?]

No, come to think of it, you undoubtedly do not want to know what the final opinion was among Politics board posters. It's not REAL unless it comes from the keyboard of someone that, in turn, is REAL by your elite standards. So the conclusion? Go fish for it.