Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Christopher Hitchens has endorsed Barack Obama and has some blistering words for McCain and particularly for his choice of Palin as VP. Long excerpt below the fold:
The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: "What does he take me for?" Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her--her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations--were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party's right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama's position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.
I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.
That's gonna leave a mark.
Politics
Comments
I don't think Hitchens will leave a mark at all. Given his public stance on secularism his arguments are given the same weight as any purported athiest regardless of the quality of their arguments, he's an athiest, therefore we shouldn't even consider his argument.
A good example is George Soros. The right has been extremely effective at labeling him as a far-left athiest that even when he makes a unique and very compelling practical and non-ideological argument, e.g., foreign policy with authoritarian states, optimal strategies for financial structures in a global marketplace, you will not see the right engage in his arguments, they instead dismiss him out of hand.
Posted by: Michael Heath | October 16, 2008 9:59 AM
I don't think Hitchens will leave a mark at all.
Not on the Republican base, no. It might sway a few more independents and undecideds though, specifically the ones, like Hitchens, who are conservative in nature but annoyed by Palin and what she represents.
Posted by: schism | October 16, 2008 10:27 AM
"That's gonna leave a mark" was not a prediction that anyone would be convinced by what was said. Like Michael, I doubt that will happen. It was a sarcastic reference to how blunt the statement was about McCain and Palin.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | October 16, 2008 11:53 AM
Hitchen's isn't the only one. John McCain qualified for early voting and has already cast his vote... for Barak Obama. Don't believe me? Here's a CNN video of McCain admitting he did just that.
Posted by: Abby Normal | October 16, 2008 12:22 PM
Good thing for Obama he can pick up votes from tools like Hitchens since there never was any such thing as "the surrender faction".
Posted by: uncle noel | October 16, 2008 12:32 PM
I love Hitch. I wanna be just like him when I grow up.
Posted by: JStein | October 16, 2008 12:59 PM
From my conversations with Republicans, the Palin pick does not bother them at all. It's a sly "wink-wink" behind the backs of the "idiot rednecks" who will vote McCain because of her; clearly they don't care about any of her credentials because they know she'll be nothing but a puppet. If McCain is elected the appropriate behind-the-scenes heavyweights will continue to enforce their right wing agenda. Frankly, it makes me sick.
Posted by: mishcake | October 16, 2008 1:59 PM
Mishcake:
From my conversations with Republicans (mostly close family in the South), the Palin pick does not only not bother them but excites them. Palin represents - and I quote - "a new Reagan Revolution" and has ensured that these people will come to the polls on election day in force, when before they were uninterested in McCain because of his perceived lack of conservative "cred." Now they have someone who, for a month and a half, has made these people, whose entire worldview is built around the idea that they are a persecuted minority, feel like their day is come. They treat Palin like she is the presidential candidate (talking about the glorious days to come "when Palin is in office") and more or less ignore McCain or give him great credit for nominating her. So, if her nomination is in fact a sly trick to get the "idiot rednecks" to vote for McCain, it looks like it is working well (even while her nomination made it impossible for a moderate, secular swing voter like me to vote for him).
Posted by: Hrafn | October 16, 2008 3:32 PM
You know it's all gone pear shaped when jingoistic, cheerleadering, tools like Hitchens turn away from you.
Posted by: tincture | October 16, 2008 9:35 PM
Reading Thomas Frank, as long as you aren't distracted from his message by the style he chooses to write with, sheds much light on why it is many Republican voters can still stand behind Palin, despite anything which they have said in the past which may seem to disqualify her. I'm not sure if it is necessarily a genuine feeling of sameness as it is an accostumedness to being handed victory when the Party asks them to accept the absurd. Remember, the Republican party faithful, the ones who aren't going to vote Dem, ever, for any reason, think about party loyalty in the same way that Stalin did.
Posted by: Julian | October 16, 2008 11:30 PM
Hey JStein...you mean you want to be a drunk? Hahahahaha.
And Hitch is so funny, he banged the drum for the Iraq war for so long he realizes he might be in trouble so now he is "backing Obama" when it looks like its in the bag.
What a leech.
Posted by: Karen | October 17, 2008 7:30 AM
Hey all, be sure to swear your soul and your allegiance to the almighty Obama, savior of the world!
http://media.www.smithsophian.com/media/storage/paper587/news/2008/09/18/Opinions/i.Will.Follow.Him.Obama.As.My.Personal.Jesus-3440311.shtml?reffeature=recentlycommentedstoriestab
LOL.
Posted by: mroberts | October 17, 2008 10:02 AM
Here's some good insight into Obama's "tax cut" for 95% of working Americans. Of course, what Obama doesn't mention (nor McCain for some weird reason) is that the bottom 40% of workers don't even pay taxes, so there really is no way to "cut" their taxes:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html
Posted by: mroberts | October 17, 2008 12:08 PM
Uh, I'm in the bottom 40% when calculated by average income, and I'm pretty sure I'm in the bottom 40% by median income too. I don't get everything I pay in back in my refund. And I pay pretty heavy taxes to support Social Security, as does my employer.
Posted by: Bacopa | October 18, 2008 9:11 PM