If America ever needed a Mulligan, now would be the time.

I have no use for this man.

The kind and compassionate Left.

I don't have speakers at my work computer. What's he saying?

How, uh, nuanced.

Can't view the video from work :-( Is Hitchens trying to get thrown onto the bus?

If it's Hitchens, I'm betting I'm going to like it.

Will watch now.

Obama, a hack if there ever was one, is running circles around McCain.
Does Harry Reid have a wind powered car?

Sigh -- I guess that bumper sticker "**** it, McCain 08" fits.

The GOP is only human. No one should be "shot". But the price of freedom is constant vigilance, and we surely could do a better job checking our politicians' greed and effectiveness.

I still think the GOP is better than the alternatives.

re: #2 rawmuse

I have no use for this man.

The enemy of my enemy....

...is my enemy's enemy.

/neither do I

"The rage of the entitled."

He nails WAB pretty well.

If Christopher Hitchens were a novel, he'd be Withering Depths.

Sadly, I agree.

How did we end up with McCain as our candidate anyway? I seem to recall everyone but McCain at the top of the polls.

Clinton "a horrible primate."

LOL!

re: #13 chinesearithmetic

If Christopher Hitchens were a novel, he'd be Withering Depths.

Oh, very good!

How does PETA feel about that?

Hitchens on bill clinton- "A horrible primate... "

Now- that's just not fair to primates.

Who's the gap toothed hillbilly chick?

Calling GOP candidates like Thomas, Romney and Guiliani "pathetic" and "Losers" is really not justified. They are all a far cry above and beyond any of the Dems. Absent the monkey wrenching from the Dems, one of them would have been our candidate.

Hitchens sucks.

re: #8 pat

Obama, a hack if there ever was one, is running circles around McCain.
Does Harry Reid have a wind powered car?

* * *
Not true. Technically, Obama is running AWAY from McCain, refusing to meet the GOP candidate without preconditions--except for a one-time ridiculous July the Fourth offer.

Speaking of Bill Clinton, Hitchens says:

"He is what he is -- a horrible primate."

Is there a transcript for those of us w/o speakers or unable to view YouTube at work?

For those who can't watch the video; Hitchens smashes the Obamas, the Clintons, McCain in particular, and the GOP in general. He's equal-opportunity gloomy, in a way.

Hitchens is good, but the interviewers -- amateur hour. Not a good format.

re: #14 Pastorius

Sadly, I agree.

How did we end up with McCain as our candidate anyway? I seem to recall everyone but McCain at the top of the polls.

The same way the GOP ended up with Bob Dole in '96 and GWB in '00 - it was "his turn". Fairness will sink the GOP...

If the Republican party does the spade work of constantly and aggressively pursuing every falsehood and venality of the Democrats, if they get out the message of who they are running against and what the consequences of failure will be, then they can have a victory on the order of the Gingrich revolution. If they try to be to clever by half and shade the differences then they will be crushed.

"...horrible primate..." that was funny.

I am having computer issues. What in hell is he saying?

Someone throw me a bone (no pun intended)....lol

re: #24 Occasional Reader

For those who can't watch the video; Hitchens smashes the Obamas, the Clintons, McCain in particular, and the GOP in general. He's equal-opportunity gloomy, in a way.

OK, fair enough. He should smash the Dems while he's at it.

re: #25 zombie

Hitchens is good, but the interviewers -- amateur hour. Not a good format.

Yeah, the Spunky Morning Show Crew approach...

Speaking generally, I have problems with people who have absolutely nothing good to say about anyone, at any time. The creep me out.

If Christopher Hitchens was shot it would be cosmic justice if he came back as a dog......in Gaza.

re: #28 Dan G.

"...horrible primate..." that was funny.

Let's just hope it's one that will miss out on natural selection.

re: #14 Pastorius

Sadly, I agree.

How did we end up with McCain as our candidate anyway? I seem to recall everyone but McCain at the top of the polls.

Here's how - you had a bunch of candidates who ran among the worst campaigns ever envisioned. They thought that you could skip over flyover country and start with Florida (Rudy) - which proved disastrous. Or didn't have the heart in it (Fred). Or were flat out loony (Paul). Or creepy (Huckabee). Or were born Mormon (Mitt).

I know I'm simplifying things quite a bit, but while each of those other campaigns stuttered, McCain kept on building slowly, until he became the frontrunner.

re: #20 rawmuse

Calling GOP candidates like Thomas, Romney and Guiliani "pathetic" and "Losers" is really not justified. They are all a far cry above and beyond any of the Dems. Absent the monkey wrenching from the Dems, one of them would have been our candidate.

Hitchens sucks.

I disagree. As a pundit, it is his role to slam everybody.

He does not spare the Dems in the slightest..

re: #34 Sharmuta

;)

Hitchens has spent too much time writing about Thomas Jefferson and the Founders. He really expects the current crop of U.S. presidential candidates to measure up. What a naive fool! ;-)

re: #29 Tilly

I am having computer issues. What in hell is he saying?

Someone throw me a bone (no pun intended)....lol

On the particular quote that Charles leads this thread with, he's saying that the GOP put up terrible candidates, "has-beens", and in particular that McCain is too old-ish, doesn't seem aware of what's going on, is famously intemperate, etc. I agree with rawmuse that he's painting with too broad a brush. OTOH, I think I hear him yearning for the GOP to come up with stronger candidates... again, I think... which is not a bad thing.

re: #37 Dan G.

Someone had to say it. ;p

McCain pulled in Dem voters in early OPEN primaries, which are, by all evidence designed to let political parties choose their preferred opponent.

"If the GOP Were a Dog, It Should Be Shot that would make the Democrats a steaming pile of dog shit"

/fixed

re: #34 Sharmuta

Let's just hope it's one that will miss out on natural selection.

He didn't. There's Chelsea. Now were she not to have kids, then Bill Clinton would miss out on natural selection.

re: #24 Occasional Reader

For those who can't watch the video; Hitchens smashes the Obamas, the Clintons, McCain in particular, and the GOP in general. He's equal-opportunity gloomy, in a way.

A pox on all their houses, may seem a worldly position to take but it's not very constructive.

I can't watch this at work, is he just ripping away with pithy put downs? Or is he going after policy positions?

re: #36 zombie

Then you agree with his broad generalizations? I am the GOP. Should I be shot?

Shoot them? But... but... but... Real Liberals don't believe in guns! How could he say that?

/Sarc

This is dumb. Hitch must be thinking, what high school newspaper do you represent?

re: #26 CIA Reject

The same way the GOP ended up with Bob Dole in '96 and GWB in '00 - it was "his turn". Fairness will sink the GOP...

* * *
Disagree with your statement. McCain's campaign was considered collapsed last year, hardly the "next in line". Some folks wouldn't vote for the best candidate (Romney, in my opinion) but went for the folksy jokesy Southern pastor.

re: #14 Pastorius

Sadly, I agree.

How did we end up with McCain as our candidate anyway? I seem to recall everyone but McCain at the top of the polls.

The democrats chose him and the republicans chose Obama.

re: #40 Sharmuta

I was thinking about saying it... but I've got work to do and can't hang out and deal with the strawmen and red herrings of the copy and paste brigade all day.

It takes a Carter to get a Reagan. Unfortunately there are no Reagans. Pleanty of Carters - but no Reagans.

re: #45 rawmuse

Then you agree with his broad generalizations? I am the GOP. Should I be shot?

Hey, hey. He's using the "dog that should be shot" thing metaphorically, that's perfectly clear. Let's not make this into something it isn't.

re: #46 Conservative in Liberal Hands

Liberals believe in gun rights (they wrote the Constitution), leftists don't.

re: #41 rawmuse

When you take all of Hitchens'm statements as a whole, he's not saying anything much different from what a lot of people here and elsewhere are saying, i.e.:

"Amongst a crop of not-particularly good candidates, McCain is all we got."

If that really so controversial?

Hitchens also said he has never liked Obama, and hates his wife.

re: #50 Dan G.

LOL! There's always this weekend.

re: #51 FrogMarch

It takes a Carter to get a Reagan. Unfortunately there are no Reagans. Pleanty of Carters - but no Reagans.

I'd call McCain more of a Ford or a Bush I, not a Carter. He could still suprise us though.

Obama; however, out-Carters Carter.

I don't blame the republicans all the way. the left-wing media is a giant storm trooper front backed by Soros and idiots and liars - who cater to our uneducated emotionalist video game playing short attention span society.

You don't have to like Hitchens, but you do have to listen to him.

re: #53 Dan G.

I stand corrected! Unfortunately The Left has co-opted the term.

re: #14 Pastorius

Sadly, I agree.

How did we end up with McCain as our candidate anyway? I seem to recall everyone but McCain at the top of the polls.

Hunter was tacitly blacked out by a media which did not want to hear his message.

Giuliani ran The World's Most Boneheaded Campaign, giving the media--most especially the New York media, which hated him--an excuse to ignore him by staying out of the early contests, then staking his entire future on one roll of the dice and losing.

Thompson decided to play Etheldred the Unready, and then when he finally decided to lumber half-heartedly in, he turned around quickly and lumbered wholeheartedly out.

Ron Paul was/is crackers.

Huckabee? Leaving aside that the media played up his religion to spook as many people as possible, he came off as a modern-day Hugh Herbert. And we've done the Arkansas governor thing, thank you.

Romney struck the same LDS shoals that his father did when he tried to run--the more so because the media really wanted to scare both the secular voters and the non-LDS Christians to undermine him. The religious talk drowned out most of what he had to say.

re: #30 Honorary Yooper

OK, fair enough. He should smash the Dems while he's at it.

Again, maybe I'm being too optimistic here, but; I get the sensation that he really thinks the Dems are simply beyond repair, which is why he doesn't bother saying much about them. (BIG CAVEAT HERE: This is an edited series of clips, he may well have talked for hours about the Democratic Party for all we know.) But to me he's sounding more like a frustrated Republican (though I think he'd deny it) than a leftist moonbat.

re: #35 lawhawk

They thought that you could skip over flyover country and start with Florida (Rudy) - which proved disastrous.

May be it's not so much the candidates as the process.

Giuliani may be exactly what the country needs, if what he did in NYC is proof, but because under no circumstance- because of one or two social issues- can he appeal to who controls in Iowa and such, he stands no chance of bringing the nation his needed talents.

The problems with Romney were
1) Hillary syndrome. He thought he could coast to victory.
2) His peers really dislike him for some reason, more than they did the nut-case Paul, and they communicated that to the audience more effectively than they made debating points against each other. It wasn't his religion. Hell in this year as a counterpoint to Islam Mormonism might have been a plus. The democrats were putting out red herring attacks on his faith because they were afraid of him. He was not my choice but I did see how he got derailed.

BBL. Got to buy ammo.

re: #36 zombie
"As a pundit, it is his role to slam everybody." Well, ok, that's one definition of a "pundit", but as for rawmuse's comment in #20 "Calling GOP candidates like Thomas, Romney and Guiliani "pathetic" and "Losers" is really not justified." I have to agree with rawmuse.

Maybe Hitch just doesn't do these sort of morning interview show formats very well.

re: #55 Sharmuta

I'm polishing up my fallacy/bullshit detector... What's more, I'm going to find some educational material to post as spin-offs to clean up some of the disinformation that has been spewed here.

re: #59 Conservative in Liberal Hands

They co-opt a lot of things- some of which we should really take back. The rest should be utterly rejected.

I love reading Hitchens: his content is provocative, style unmatched and quips entertaining. We could use a few more iconoclasts like Hitchens. And yes, I disagree with him often, but with trepidation.

re: #45 rawmuse

Then you agree with his broad generalizations? I am the GOP. Should I be shot?

I don't necessarily agree with everything he said, but it's not especially out-of-line, nor surprising.

McCain is boring, and has practically no charisma.

I'll do everything in my power to get him elected, but I'm not going to fool myself that he's Mr. Thrilling.

So, yes, the GOP has somewhat blown it. Sure, Hitchens resorted to hyperbole, but that's a pundit's job.

re: #41 rawmuse

McCain pulled in Dem voters in early OPEN primaries, which are, by all evidence designed to let political parties choose their preferred opponent.

Yes. The weakest candidate from each party was chosen.

re: #52 Occasional Reader

Hey, hey. He's using the "dog that should be shot" thing metaphorically, that's perfectly clear. Let's not make this into something it isn't.

Obviously right.

And for what it's worth, I think he has a real point. I know that when McCain ended up the nominee, it certainly wasn't the happiest day of my life.

re: #14 Pastorius

Because the libs did to us what we tried to do to them with operation chaos. The msm pushed the "oh no, he's a Mormon" crap with Romney, they belittled and blamed Rudy (although he could have done better himself), Thompson never got out of the gate (I want my money back :)).

And, the GOP lost their back bone a long time ago. If they had any gumption, Scooter Libby would never have been persecuted. Karl Rove would be lauded and honored as he deserves instead of have been tossed under W's bus. Granted W's bus is much shorter then bambi's, but they all have them.

Honestly, I'm surprised Luap Nor didn't win the republican nomination, the way the msm tried to stack the election.

re: #66 Dan G.

Awesome- I look forward to see it.

re: #48 alegrias

* * *
Disagree with your statement. McCain's campaign was considered collapsed last year, hardly the "next in line". Some folks wouldn't vote for the best candidate (Romney, in my opinion) but went for the folksy jokesy Southern pastor.

I see your point, but it's been my observation in recent elections that the "financial conservative" and "social conservative" wings of the GOP tend to beat the sh*t out of each other in the early going so that at the end, when they need a candidate, the only one available is the old hack (or the old hack's son in the case of GWB).

re: #65 realwest

Maybe Hitch just doesn't do these sort of morning interview show formats very well.

I would do TERRIBLY if interviewed on a morning show. "WOULD YOU ALL QUIT BEING SO F*****G PERKY! IT'S 6 AM! WHAT THE F**K IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!"

re: #64 rawmuse

BBL. Got to buy ammo.

The Latin conjugation of "love of liberty": ammo, amass, aim it.

re: #38 quickjustice

Hitchens has spent too much time writing about Thomas Jefferson and the Founders. He really expects the current crop of U.S. presidential candidates to measure up. What a naive fool! ;-)

The Founding Fathers didn't have a press that was more interested in scandal than substance.

re: #62 opinionated

I agree. I loved Giuliani but he was unelectable. Too many ex wives, mistresses and one of his best buddies is a pedophile priest (allegedly). He never would have made it.

I pretty much agree with him overall.

re: #59 Conservative in Liberal Hands

They did, with help. I believe (would need to very with him though) that Rush used the term to malign left-leaning liberals... meaning those who believe in freedom, but tended towards socialism. The adjective "left-leaning" was meant to subdivide those who considered themselves liberals. However, people treat it as though left-leaning was meant to define (not divide) liberals... At any rate, the word is too good to allow it to be lost (liberal = free) so I'll be mentioning this quite frequently.

re: #69 zombie OK, please disregard my comment #65.

re: #27 lifeofthemind

If the Republican party does the spade work of constantly and aggressively pursuing every falsehood and venality of the Democrats, if they get out the message of who they are running against and what the consequences of failure will be, then they can have a victory on the order of the Gingrich revolution. If they try to be to clever by half and shade the differences then they will be crushed.

* * *
Plenty of Democrats and Americans apparently want America to fail, under a lame leader, thinking the "world" will like us when we're down, but under a "likeable" charismatic.

re: #77 Kosh's Shadow

The Founding Fathers didn't have a press that was more interested in scandal than substance.

Actually, they did. You should read some of the slanders against John Adams from somes of the early newspapers regarding his presidency.

re: #67 Sharmuta

Amen! I abhor that the language is consistently shaped to the Left's advantage. Probably due to the preponderance of their pervasive influence in theater, art and poetry.

re: #58 Jonn Lilyea

You don't have to like Hitchens, but you do have to listen to him.

No thanks. F**k him. They should have asked him who he thinks he is going to vote for, that would be revealing.

re: #69 zombie

I don't necessarily agree with everything he said, but it's not especially out-of-line, nor surprising.

McCain is boring, and has practically no charisma.

I'll do everything in my power to get him elected, but I'm not going to fool myself that he's Mr. Thrilling.

So, yes, the GOP has somewhat blown it. Sure, Hitchens resorted to hyperbole, but that's a pundit's job.

McCain, more than other candidates and potential candidates, has the potential of winning precisely because he's got that silly maverick reputation and appeals to Independents. Republican ID has been declining over the past few elections so it is imperative that the GOP chooses candidates with broader appeal. McCain fits this profile.

Granted, he's not Mr. Thrilling.

If you could manipulate world-historical events by choosing the presidential candidate -- but not the voter's will -- what "winner" would you have chosen?

re: #69 zombie

Sure, Hitchens resorted to hyperbole, but that's a pundit's job.

"Hyperboling for Columnists?"

re: #85 VegasRick

No thanks. F**k him. They should have asked him who he thinks he is going to vote for, that would be revealing.

Is he even a US citizen?

If he is: I can't imagine he'd vote for Obama in a million years.

re: #35 lawhawk

Here's how - you had a bunch of candidates who ran among the worst campaigns ever envisioned. They thought that you could skip over flyover country and start with Florida (Rudy) - which proved disastrous. Or didn't have the heart in it (Fred). Or were flat out loony (Paul). Or creepy (Huckabee). Or were born Mormon (Mitt).

I know I'm simplifying things quite a bit, but while each of those other campaigns stuttered, McCain kept on building slowly, until he became the frontrunner.

* * *
Mormons serve our country honorably, faithfully & well in all capacities, and there is STILL no religious test to be president of the USA.

re: #75 Occasional Reader Even more so if you were suffering from a hangover! Egads, I could NEVER do a morning show interview!

re: #88 zombie

He is

re: #88 zombie

Is he even a US citizen?

If he is: I can't imagine he'd vote for Obama in a million years.

He should say that.

re: #75 Occasional Reader

I would do TERRIBLY if interviewed on a morning show. "WOULD YOU ALL QUIT BEING SO F*****G PERKY! IT'S 6 AM! WHAT THE F**K IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!"

I knew I loved you for some reason.

re: #83 Honorary Yooper

Actually, they did. You should read some of the slanders against John Adams from somes of the early newspapers regarding his presidency.

Indeed- he was quite glad to leave Washington.

re: #88 zombie

Is he even a US citizen?

Yep.

Hitchens became a United States citizen on the steps of the Jefferson Memorial, on his fifty-eighth birthday, April 13, 2007.

re: #89 alegrias

You're absolutely correct that there isn't a religious test, but that doesn't mean that people aren't prejudiced or biased or racist, etc. I do think some of that played a role in Mitt's failure to win the nomination.

I voted for McCain, my first Republican vote, in New York, although the nomination was a done deal. One of my heroes in journalism was Lars-Erik Nelson of the New York Daily News, who died during the Florida recount in the shocking manner of Tim Russert. McCain had a friendly relationship with Nelson, who turned out to be among the last of the "Herald Tribune Republicans" (Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, John Lindsay). I had voted for Gore, but was as indifferent in 2000 as many Republicans are about McCain. Even if Obama wins, I won't be as melancholy as I was when I learned that Nelson had died. McCain's not ideal, like ... me, i guess. But he's my man in 2008.

re: #89 alegrias

* * *
Mormons serve our country honorably, faithfully & well in all capacities, and there is STILL no religious test to be president of the USA.

That was one of the reasons for the First Amendment's Establishment clause. In England at the time, one had to be a member of the Church of England to attend university or be elected to Parliament. The government controlled the church hierarchy and vice versa--bishops sat in the House of Lords.

re: #86 hermeneutics

If you could manipulate world-historical events by choosing the presidential candidate -- but not the voter's will -- what "winner" would you have chosen?

I'm actually not familiar enough with the pool of potential national politicians to even begin to choose one. It could be that McCain's all we conceivably could have gotten. But that doesn't stop us from peering into the black bag and saying, "Is that all you got in there?"

re: #71 Charles

Obviously right.

And for what it's worth, I think he has a real point. I know that when McCain ended up the nominee, it certainly wasn't the happiest day of my life.

That's about how it happened, McCain ended up the nominee.

But at least it didn't end up being Huckabee.

re: #87 buzzsawmonkey

"Hyperboling for Columnists?"

Bzzzzzt.

Deduct 3 pun points.

I don't disagree with Hitch's characterization of this year's GOP but I would rather vote for a sick dog than for Obama.

Why? Several Supreme Court justices are likely to be retiring in the next few years. What will an Obama-appointed court do the First and Second Amendments, among many other things? Americans will be living with the consequences of this election for the next 100 years at the very least.

I don't like this negative, "anybody but..." approach to electoral politics either, but that is the hand we have been dealt and future generations will either curse us or thank us for how we play it.

re: #99 zombie

I'm actually not familiar enough with the pool of potential national politicians to even begin to choose one. It could be that McCain's all we conceivably could have gotten. But that doesn't stop us from peering into the black bag and saying, "Is that all you got in there?"

Fair enough.

re: #89 alegrias

* * *
Mormons serve our country honorably, faithfully & well in all capacities, and there is STILL no religious test to be president of the USA.

Absolutely true, but their is an unfortunate and undeserved bias against Mormons by enough people in the GOP (who also vote) to make a difference.

It is not fair, but it is also true.

Plus, the media went out of it's way to help that bias along.

re: #93 MandyManners

We may be onto something here. Start our own network morning show, on which we gaze blearily at the camera and slurp down coffee, while mumbling the news and yawning frequently. Watch as we sweep the Nielsens.

re: #97 chinesearithmetic

I voted for McCain, my first Republican vote, in New York, although the nomination was a done deal. One of my heroes in journalism was Lars-Erik Nelson of the New York Daily News, who died during the Florida recount in the shocking manner of Tim Russert. McCain had a friendly relationship with Nelson, who turned out to be among the last of the "Herald Tribune Republicans" (Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, John Lindsay). I had voted for Gore, but was as indifferent in 2000 as many Republicans are about McCain. Even if Obama wins, I won't be as melancholy as I was when I learned that Nelson had died. McCain's not ideal, like ... me, i guess. But he's my man in 2008.

Ahhhh, I loved Lars' writing too. And you're right -- he was the last of a long line of high-minded political reporters.

re: #100 Ringo the Gringo

Thank goodness for that. I do not know if I could have brought myself to vote for him. Of all the GOP candidates, in my opinion, he was the worst (rp not counted). To me he seemed a cross between Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. ICK!

S

re: #78 Killgore Trout

I agree. I loved Giuliani but he was unelectable. Too many ex wives, mistresses and one of his best buddies is a pedophile priest (allegedly). He never would have made it.

Things are getting worse by the day and in what will cause historians to scratch their heads in disbelief, our fate is in an electoral process that may result in a guy with far Leftist views and absolutely no experience or real achievements becoming our leader at the most crucial time.

The process will doom us.

re: #83 Honorary Yooper

Actually, they did. You should read some of the slanders against John Adams from somes of the early newspapers regarding his presidency.

The dvd set about John Adams shows that quite nicely.

Unfortunately it it's the nadir campaign.

"Wright is a tin can attached to Obama's tail"

ROFLMAO

You do the best with what you have. What I know is Obama will be a disaster and he needs to be prevented from getting to the Oval office if at all possible. McCain is a decent man who cares for the country. He also realizes that we are in a fight with despicable vermin that can not and should not be appeased. Obama is none of that.

Fred Thompson was my favorite.

I received my Thompson '08 bumpersticker in the mail the day he dropped out of the race.

re: #111 Ojoe

"Wright is a tin can attached to Obama's tail"

ROFLMAO

Now watch as they accuse Hitchens of racism for "insinuating that Obama has a tail" or some such thing.

re: #63 lifeofthemind

The problems with Romney were
1) Hillary syndrome. He thought he could coast to victory.
2) His peers really dislike him for some reason, more than they did the nut-case Paul, and they communicated that to the audience more effectively than they made debating points against each other. It wasn't his religion. Hell in this year as a counterpoint to Islam Mormonism might have been a plus. The democrats were putting out red herring attacks on his faith because they were afraid of him. He was not my choice but I did see how he got derailed.

* * *
I blame lazy voters. Romney wants to WIN THE WAR, is an ex-governor, successful in private ventures, US Olympic event execution, & government, charismatic, hard-working, relatively young, media-savvy...

What, GOP wanted a "savior"? GOP voters blew it expecting to be pandered to individually, regionally, religiously, whatever. GOP voters didn't think strategically about who could win the long race against the eventual Dem candidate.

re: #111 Ojoe

"Wright is a tin can attached to Obama's tail"

ROFLMAO

Good one, huh?

OT: Hey, Ojoe -- I need a book recommendation from you on site selection for solar/passive solar building. I don't want to make a mistake. Any ideas?

Christopher Hitchens is the type of intellectual who really THINKS and uses his brain to the fullest. I like him although I have found myself disagreeing with him on some unimportant issues.