Ever see writer Christopher Hitchens on television? He always looks like he's sweating out the booze from the night before. Maybe he's drinking so much because he's one of those pundits who went "all in" on Bush.
Anyway, this comes from www.wonkette.com.
"The New York Daily News peeks at Christopher Hitchens's Vanity Fair column and finds the Johnnie Walker enthusiast looking on the bright side: "That Bush did not surrender to the need for a colossal bourbon on Sept. 11 stands, I think to his credit." Right. So let's go to the official Bush presidency scoreboard. Pros: Did not get stinking drunk on 9/11. Cons: Started a war that has yet to be proven necessary. Could you send that Johnnie Walker over our way now?"
Good point. I've always wondered why people go so nuts about Bush's leadership after 9/11. What did he do that Clinton, Gore, Kerry, or Bush the Elder wouldn't have done? So basically, it's because he didn't break down crying? Or because he didn't start drinking again?
I don't get it.