The dog and the wolf
Last night was the Hitchens/Galloway debate, of which I had posted the opening round. Of course, each side will claim they “won”.
I wasn’t able to get there on time, but watched on line. The image quality wasn’t all that good and the people looked tiny, so my impressions are based only how they sounded. In a way, it was nice to be sitting comfortably at home instead of at a crowded auditorium where the organizers were definitely disorganized. The debate was scheduled to start at 7, but by 7:30 they were still trying to get their act together, fiddling around with the podium wiring and hadn’t even finished seating people.
Once the debate started, Galloway’s idea of debating was that of a (small) barking dog that wants his walkies. This debate marks the start of what Mary appropriatelly calls his “buy me a new Mercedes tour”. Galloway, worked up to a lather from the get-go, managed to call Dick Cheney a crazed fundamentalist (maybe Galloway knows about a branch of born-again holly rolling Methodists that has so far remained hidden from the public?), “the UK & the USA are the biggest 2 rouge states in the world”, and if “we rid the world of GWB & ABlair once and for all” all would be well, especially if one “rids the world” of Halliburton in the process. Then there was that fatal
By their unending support of the Jews, the U.S. brought on 9/11*
On the other side there’s the wolf: Hitchens, a master debater if there ever was one, approached the task with perfect debating technique, opening with a stance that he posed to the audience, and closing with a final salvo on Galloway’s Oil-For-Food connections. In between, his voice was steady and calm. Galloway attempted to call Hitchens a drunk and pointed to Hitchens’s love of whisky (I prefer to think Hitchens is a single-malt kind of guy), but that obviously was NOT a good idea since Hitchens was as clear-minded, alert, and razor-sharp as anyone possibly be. Even Hitchens’s diction was better than Galloway’s, who sounded at times like he couldn’t make up his mind between Ireland or Scotland. I’m not sure if Galloway intended to (or even cared), but Galloway’s own description of Hitchens’s bona fides as a socialist impressed me greatly. Hitchens is my idea of a true liberal, i.e., someone who appraises the existing situation from a long-term point of view of equal rights for all.
My only regrets are that I wasn’t there to get the leaflets or have Hitchens sign a book or two for me, and that I didn’t get to meet the other bloggers in attendance.
TigerHawk, however, was there in person. He’s got all the details of The Grapple in The Apple.
Jacques Chirac: a man so corrupt he’s willing to pay for the pleasure of selling himself
(see also above remark*, which I did catch last evening but wasn’t able to write down at the time)
Update Don’t miss Mary’s Notes from the Hitchens/Galloway debate