He will be sorely missed... too young, way too young.

The best appreciation was from his friend Amis some months ago. The site of publication reports that it's no longer available.

At this moment, you can find it here.

I hate that reason is thought of as lower than "feelings".

A man that proved that just because you "feel" God is true doesn't make it so.

Great man.

Well-done video clip, Amy. Thanks for posting it.

RIP. I didn't always agree with him, but loved his clarity and wit.

We all saw this day coming, sadly. I made a point of reading his autobiography before he died. I didn't agree with most of his politics, but he was an articulate (if occasionally longwinded) spokesman for atheism and reason. I'll miss his work.

In the bowels of Hell, a beloved man howls with delight.

The best tribute to him are those who didn't agree with him but will still miss him. I can't think of anyone who will take his place, so our world seems diminished.

Wow, a tremendous loss. A truly fearless man.

The world has lost a great voice. No one was quite so swift and deadly with the rhetorical knife. RIP, Hitch.

I've waited a lifetime for the Buckley boy to write something great, and and feared this was it.

(Cold! Cold!)

And HAD feared....

They say Hitches' first-draft prose was golden in every way except punctuation.

Lotta good video clips out there this morning…

…But one clip in particular will always be my favorite, for two reasons:

First, I was there, which is gives that extra kiss of Hollywood glamor and bogus poignancy. Y'know, Hitch gave us moments like this this all the time... Pop culture takes elegant literature out for a date on Saturday night, and they both get run over by a freight train. But I was there at the crosswalk when it happened, man....

Second, there will be times –especially in this century– when we say intemperate things to people, because they're pissing us off. We might be tempted to feel bad about hurting their feelings.

At the LA Times book fair, Hitchens reminded us, in the style of the Blues Brothers, that the use of excessive force "has been authorized".

He never let larger principle get in the way ofhaving fun.

Hitchens is eulogized in American Thinker.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/christopher_hitchens_is_dead_damnit.html

How can a conservative commentator and an orthodox Catholic like me possibly admire Christopher Hitchens?

He hated the Pope, smeared Mother Teresa viciously. He even published a book four years ago defending his militant atheism called God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.

I believe Hitchens' good deeds -- and if Hitchens was right, the only thing left of him now are his deeds -- more than compensated for his militant atheism and his occasional bad manners. Usually he was bitingly funny, even coruscating. Sometimes he was a good deal more than that.

"I hate that reason is thought of as lower than "feelings"."

Not lower. But as equally as important as reason.

If our parents did not "feel" anything, none of us would be here.

You cannot ignore the "feeling", which religion is able to deliver to the most of believers. The "feeling" that Jesus loves you no matter what brings enormous comfort to the believers although, we both know that is all bullshit.

Hitchens badly missed the fact that we, humans, invest in stock market, choose spouses and pray to God all based on "feelings".

Only when we do those things badly.

While I don't actually know who James G. Wiles is, by this piece I'd assume him to be a stuffy little indoor prick.

Why would you name a website "American Thinker", anyway?

Why would you name a website "American Thinker", anyway?

Perhaps "American Guesser" was taken.

Hitchens badly missed the fact that we, humans, invest in stock market, choose spouses and pray to God all based on "feelings".

chang, people who invest in the stock market based on "feelings" are often known as "broke."

> Perhaps "American Guesser" was taken.

A quick look at the domain name registry shows that "Pompous Snotballs" was available. They're beggin' for mockery....

This one's got some garlic... They were not tight bros.

"chang, people who invest in the stock market based on "feelings" are often known as "broke.""

I don't think so.

When, Facebook founders were drinking beer and eating ramen noodle for lunch in a rented CA house, there were a couple of less known money mangers, who "felt" that these kids might be onto something. At that time, Facebook did not generate a single cent of revenue. But they "felt" the potential of Facebook and they will not be "broke" when Facebook goes to public.

None of the well known Wall Street money managers were interested in financing Facebook at the beginning because they did not "feel" the potential.

Well in defense of Hitchens the Pope is contemptale and Mother Teresa was an ideological whore and a fraud who raised money under the auspices of helping the sick and dying most of who stayed just as sick providing perfect photo ops on why you should have kept donnating even more money.

Irony of Ironies, she has, according to the catholic church acctually healed more people after her death then in all the years before it

...there were a couple of less known money mangers, who "felt" that these kids might be onto something. At that time, Facebook did not generate a single cent of revenue. But they "felt" the potential of Facebook and they will not be "broke" when Facebook goes to public.

Riiight. They "felt" the potential.

They didn't do any analysis of user volume, growth rates, reach and frequency, and calculate potential future ad revenue.

They just "felt" it and coughed up the funding. 'cause that's what people investing millions of dollars do, they just "feel" things.

You are beginning to sense, as I do, that the many of the difficulties with people in these blog comments are something greater than language problems.

When, Facebook founders were drinking beer and eating ramen noodle for lunch in a rented CA house, there were a couple of less known money mangers, who "felt" that these kids might be onto something. At that time, Facebook did not generate a single cent of revenue. But they "felt" the potential of Facebook and they will not be "broke" when Facebook goes to public.

And FB is still not generating the expected amount of money. And apparently they are losing popularity just like MySpace.

He always seemed more interested in rhetoric and ideology over morality. One of the loudest public cheerleaders of the Iraq war, his belligerent attitude made me reconsider my own views on the rare occasion I accidentally agreed with him.

But I will give him posthumous props for changing his opinion on water-boarding as torture after undergoing it for a VF article.

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/17/when_hitch_was_wrong/

> He always seemed more interested in rhetoric
> and ideology over morality.

The great thing about these fabulous new "personal" computers is that the "spell-check" software can save you a lot of time if you're the kind of person who always forgets how many D's go in

LUDICROUS.

Once again, Crid has bested me through cunning use of typography. Well played, sir.

Smug, unironic, literalist infantilism of your magnitude doesn't tickle forth arguments about morality and ideology. Go read Salon... FEEL its power... Close your little mind and weep yourself to sleep about the cruelties of a world that doesn't care.

"They didn't do any analysis of user volume, growth rates, reach and frequency, and calculate potential future ad revenue."

When you do that without the last five years financial statements, we call that financial version of faith.

Just like Jesus promised heaven without showing any hard evidence, the Facebook kids promised money without the last five years financial statements. It was all about the "potential".

You feel the "potential" without seeing, touching, hearing and smelling.

"They just "felt" it and coughed up the funding. 'cause that's what people investing millions of dollars do, they just "feel" things."

Exactly. But on the second thought, you are wrong again. Not millions but billions.

Do you remember internet bubble under Clinton and housing bubble under Bush?

Billions of money was invested in the stock markets without seeing any evidence and without using "reason",i.e., housing price will keep going up and up and up..... and it will never go down man!!!

The market was all about the feeling.

You're fourteen years old, aren't you?

We all agree! Chang should be encouraged to trust his feelings! We want him to follow his impulses and emotions in all times and in all contexts, especially investment.

...And then let us know how how it works out.

chang, you're using the housing bubble, which left the international economy in shambles, as a defense of using a feelings-based investment strategy?

I'd debate you, but you're your own harshest rebuttal.

When you do that without the last five years financial statements, we call that financial version of faith.

You use whatever available metrics and market data you have ... user rates, growth of user volume, penetration of computers into the target market, usage rates of similar or competing entities (e.g., Google or Yahoo ad revenue), growth rate of online activities (gaming, chat rooms, shopping, etc.), and other measures that can help you determine the potential for a social network.

You don't base the investment of millions (much less billions) on feelings. You crunch some numbers.

It was all about the "potential".

And that potential was measured how? Don't say "feelings."

And that potential was measured, chang. 'cause you don't want to pour $20 million into a company with only $10 million in potential.