Meaning I could switch the names around, replace War with Social Just and tweak the details at the end and this post would be just as true?

Yes, absolutely.

Now, some conservatives would say that the -justice suffix is just a codeword for Marxism and is not a goal to fight for in the first place [1]. But then, the MoveOn sorts would say the same things about the Long War. So: yes, you are right.

[1] http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=302137342405551

Meaning I could switch the names around, replace War with Social Just and tweak the details at the end and this post would be just as true?

Thank you for your comment.

We shouldn’t expect to convince each other that the other is right. As someone wise once said, the word “reality” has no meaning unless it is in quotes. We see the same facts through different realities.

If you really believe this, you should leave.

I want to know where I am wrong. Pretending that you live in another reality than me — and that somehow that protects your views from criticism — are not part of that.

Much of the paragraph beginning “In my view” is name-calling, and so is not substantive.

On [1]: You leave two critical issues like healthcare and energy policy

Obama’s advantage on healthcare is negated by McCain’s advantage on energy policy, so the analysis stands.

A test of limited scope is of limited value.

Trivially true.

All te tests and models are simplifications of reality. The poiont is not that they are simplified, but rather they are valid. If we’re going to elect a President based on something other than an emotional reaction, it’s what we are left with.

I believe your interpretation misses the fact that he is speaking openly about prejudice as a fact of life in America. He’s not putting down his grandmother, he’s standing behind her as saying she’s no less American than he is, but that this is a discourse that must take place in the open to help this country move beyond it.

Obama’s construction equated his grandmother to Rev. Wright.

So the extent he distanced himself from Rev. Wright’s views, he distanced himself from his grandmother’s views.

You can’t be politically correct about it and I applaud him for being brave on the subject.

I’m not sure what this compound statement means. Certainly, Obama didn’t go beyond the same nonsense we’ve heard for 30 years.

Of course, I’m coming from the perspective of giving him the benefit of the doubt and I don’t expect you to do the same.

I know you have faith in Obama. A lot of Obama supporters do. It’s an easy way to respond to criticism (“give him the benefit of the doubt”), because it escapes the bonds of reason and fact.

Your paragraph beginning “Of course” is gotcha politics, and is sustantively empty [1].

Of course, if you wish to have a substantive discussion of how errors in language production (and its sources, including a lack of comprehension) can effect international dialogue, the Undivided Jerusalem fiasco [2] is a good place to start.

In either case, I appreciate the forum for intellectual discussion.

Thank you. Let’s keep it that way.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/06/17/gotcha-politics.html
[2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/07/17/barack-obama-and-the-surge.html#comment-103831

The key difference is you seem to be hellbent on proving that Obama is a poor candidate when I’m still trying to understand what makes McCain a good candidate in the first place. With each of them there are pros and cons, and I try to evaluate the situation from the perspective of:
a) what the power structure will look like in executive and legislative branches come 2009
b) how far the ideological needle has moved to the right
c) what the big issues of tomorrow will be and whose position I agree with more.

In my view (and remember, I’m a registered Republican), we’ve moved too far right. Too neocon, too Christian, too hawkish, too far towards the wealthy, too far for big oil, etc. In light of the fact that Congress is still going to be fairly split and only leaning left, you will see the kind of paralysis we see today whereby a Bush veto threat repeatedly stalls legislation. IMHO, we need to move more towards the middle and so we need a Dem pres to accomplish this.

To address your specific references:
On [1]: You leave two critical issues like healthcare and energy policy that easily trump a lot of the other issues you have there. A test of limited scope is of limited value.
On [2]: I believe your interpretation misses the fact that he is speaking openly about prejudice as a fact of life in America. He’s not putting down his grandmother, he’s standing behind her as saying she’s no less American than he is, but that this is a discourse that must take place in the open to help this country move beyond it. You can’t be politically correct about it and I applaud him for being brave on the subject. Of course, I’m coming from the perspective of giving him the benefit of the doubt and I don’t expect you to do the same.

Of course, I’ll equally give the superior Commander-In-Chief McCain (sarcasm intended) a pass for repeatedly confusing Shia and Sunni because what’s more important is that he was brave enough to support the surge at a time when it was unpopular. However, I also give the Dems credit for at least trying to send a message to the Iraqi gov’t that we don’t plan on funding this war forever so get your act together.

In either case, I appreciate the forum for intellectual discussion. It sure beats the CNN comments where all you hear are “McSame” and “Obama Hussein” soundbites that make you cringe.

Defend or retract your assertion.

Roman,

Tell me one friggin’ thing McCain stands for?

Here’s 5. [1]

Regarding “ending wars,” do you believe that Obama will begin pulling troops out of Afghanistan soon?

Regarding “bridging racial divides,” I don’t see how Obma’s history of racially divisive and inflammatory rhetoric [2] does this.

He still hasn’t apologized for the “3/19″ comments on race, for example.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/04/06/why-i-support-john-mccain.html
[2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/03/19/obamas-awful-speech-on-race.html

Obama isn’t perfect, but at least he stands for something – ending wars, bridging racial divides, health care, etc. Tell me one friggin’ thing McCain stands for? I’ve been following this campaign every day for too many months and I can’t tell you a thing he stands for… other than, of course, being a Republican. Okay…maybe fiscal discipline, but he’d do it at the expense of veterans and children, so he’s a categorically heartless old man.

I’d never tell another fellow American what they should think, but when you guys still find a way to support the Republicans in light of the disastrous failures of the past eight years, you have only yourselves to blame if they get re-elected and we continue on the track of failed policies.

I’ve considered the role of Marxist Leftists in an Obama administration [1].

Fortunately, I don’t think he is very principled [2].

Paul,

Thank you for your comments.

This blog generally requires contributors to support claims they make, or else withdraw them. You’re new here, and you’re very welcome, but keep this in mind in the future.

Smitten,

While the humor of the film was generally juvenile and derivative, Harol and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay did a great job sending up the “I’m offended!” excuse.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/05/27/william-ayers-actually-dangerous.html
[2] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/07/02/power-seeking-among-other-things.html

Using such a card, if the Right dances to the left’s tune, forces the right to cede the moral high ground by expressing “apologies,” etc. This way, the Cultural Marxist gains ideological supremacy.