What I liked about Hitchens was that he seemed genuinely to understand the Christianity he rejected (in this respect much unlike Richard Dawkins, whose straw-man army, I guarantee, will not be missed by Christians). I do not remember the exact time or quote, but I remember Hitchens debating some liberal Christian or another. The Christian was hem-hawing on the question of the Resurrection and Hitchens interrupted with something like this: "With all due respect, the physical Resurrection of Christ is absolutely essential to Christianity; without it, you have close to nothing." Hitchens was right; the Christian was wrong, and good for Hitchens for calling it.

I posted this once before, I promise this will be the last time: on the old sitcom "Cheers", the waitress Carla said to one of the bar's patrons, "You're British, aren't you." Pleased, he said "Why yes - how did you know?". She answered "Because you sound smart even when you're saying stupid things."

Your "least enthusiastic" obituary is just further evidence of your "least religious" standing. What happens to people after death is very important to religious people (most at least). Therefore, religious people will dwell more on the subject, trying to find meaning, trying to put it in context.

I liked Hitchens because of his unflinching criticism of fellow lefties like Michelle Obama:

External Link 

About her senior thesis:

"To describe it as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be "read" at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn't written in any known language."

That's great, only a fellow lefty it seems has the courage to say that, just like black conservatives are the only ones to use plantation analogy re: their fellow blacks on the liberal side.

“One of the reasons that you were immune to Hitchensolatry, I think, is that you are English and are therefore not susceptible to the American tendency to believe that anyone who speaks fluently with an Oxbridge accent must be right.”

But, John, I find you to be a blithering idiot.

Okay, not true, but you did leave yourself open to that jab.

We didn't want to take your orders, we never said you Brits weren't cool.

I think you're selling Hitch, and Brits generally, a bit short, though. First, most of us know Hitchens from his writing, where an accent is easier to miss. Granted, when Hitch was wrong he'd make you want to throw the magazine across the room, but when he was right, he was devastating in a way which was a joy to read or listen to.

There is something British politics teaches which American politics does not: how to skewer your foe in a way which is both effective and entertaining. Check YouTube for the take down of the EU ("Belgium is not even a real country"), or recall Thatcher's (?) of Haseltine ("...there to be walked all over just the same").

There's also something of the Prodigal Son effect at work when an famous apostate suddenly talks sense on a whole category of subjects (Islamofacism and Terror).

The accent helps, don't get me wrong, but there's a good deal more at work when Americans fall to pieces at the dulcet tones of the British.

Or NAZIs

To be fair to that type of American, they're not classist or snobbish specifically regarding the posh accent as you suggest, Derb. We're / they're pro-English chauvinist in that we reflexively view ANY English accent as a mark of culture, intellegence, and good breeding. I remember reading in Michael Caine's autobiography his amusement and bemusement that he, a rough talking working class actor whose English appeal was based on that, was seen in America as a debonaire, high class aristo. Most Americans couldn't tell the difference between Caine's mode of speech and Ronald Colman's.

I'd seek out and read/listen to JD no matter where he was.