Hitchens in 1976, as a cautious admirer of Baath Party tyranny:

The Kurds now have a very attenuated version of autonomy, and former members of the Barzani armed forces are being moved to the South. At least, however, Iraq constitutionally recognises that she is a partly Kurdish state, which is more than Iran or Turkey do. Further tests for the regime lie ahead. The quarrel with Syria, which involves differences over Ba’athist ideology as well as a dispute over Syrian damming of the Euphrates river, has now extended to the Lebanon, where Syrian troops have attacked newspapers and buildings controlled by Iraqi-sympathising Palestinians. Relations with Iran are still far from cordial. In response to requests for criticism in the party press, some demands were raised for a constituent assembly, and other complaints voiced about the tightness of the regime. All these remain to be acted on, and as the situation grows more complicated Saddam Hussain will rise more clearly to the top. Make a note of the name. Iraq has been strengthened internally by the construction of a ‘strategic pipeline’ which connects the Gulf to the northern fields for the first time. She has been strengthened externally by her support for revolutionary causes and by the resources she can deploy. It may not be electrification plus Soviet power, but the combination of oil and ‘Arab socialism’ is hardly less powerful.

Fascinating.

I agree with E.J. Dionne that on some level I’m “rooting for [Senator David] Vitter [R-LA] to survive because I so want to return to a time when we — that ‘we’ includes the media — chose to pay little attention to the extracurricular sexual activities of our politicians.” I don’t, however, think we should “grant Vitter our collective absolution and move on.” Among other things, while Vitter seems to have something to apologize about to his wife, there’s really nothing prostitution-related “we” need to collectively forgive Vitter for. I don’t feel wronged by Vitter having purchased the services of one or more prostitutes, so it would be silly to forgive him.

Nor do I feel wronged by Vitter’s hypocrisy since, at the end of the day, as far as sins go hypocrisy is pretty weak tea. What I do feel wronged by is Vitter’s wrongheaded views about public policy whose wrongheadedness is demonstrated by the sympathy decent people have for Vitter’s situation. I mean, who among us thinks that what the world needs is for the state to do a more vigorous job of harassing David Vitter into conforming his sex life to traditional norms? The answer, it turns out, is . . . David Vitter; except that maybe it turns out that Vitter thinks there should be a David Vitter Exception to his general views on the matter. Either way, Vitter is wrong. And if Vitter wants forgiveness he should come by it honestly and bring his views in line with the way he would want, personally, to be treated.

During a press conference yesterday after President Bush’s briefing on Iraq progress, ABC’s Jake Tapper pressed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to speculate on post-withdrawal from Iraq.

Even though Reid responded and explained that the U.S. should withdraw because Iraqis feel more insecure right now, Tapper refused to back down. Later that night, he produced a segment for ABC’s World News Tonight attacking Reid. Watch it:

Tapper then wrote a piece for ABC News entitled “Benchmarks and Bickering: Where Are Dems on Iraqi Security?,” stuffed with right-wing rhetoric. He alleged that Reid “refused to discuss whether the United States had a moral obligation to secure the country for Iraqis or even answer questions as to whether withdrawing troops would make the country safer for the tens of millions of Iraqis.”

In fact, as the ABC segment showed, Reid did answer the question, telling Tapper: “It is clear that the Iraqi people don’t want us there. It is clear that there is now a state of chaos in Iraq, and it is up to the Iraqi people to make themselves safe.”

Nevertheless, the Washington Times picked up on the exchange today and reinforced Tapper’s attacks in an editorial titled “They Still Have No Plan“:

Mr. Reid’s response to this very reasonable question was to dodge here, dodge there. … What they [war critics] lack is any compelling rationale for the precipice over which they seek to push Iraq. Congress, do not turn a bloody and difficult stalemate in Iraq into an even bloodier, still more dangerous strategic catastrophe.

These talking points have been refuted time and again. Numerous military and diplomatic analysts argue that withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq would in fact “prevent Iraq’s multiple sectarian conflicts from spreading beyond its borders and gives Iraq and its neighbors the right incentive to help resolve Iraq’s internal conflicts.”