How to Disagree

I just read a great article that details disagreement that actually elevates a discussion’s participants far better than I have ever done. This is why I’m not a fan of rhetorical battle which on the DH scale is approximately DH3.5. It’s pretty and can convince those dazzled by eloquence or volume, but it’s not really substantive. Sophistry is what it is. And we are all guilty of it from time to time. That’s human.

For example, we cannot argue about matters of faith for reasons best given by example.

P1: The Bible is the Word of God.
P2: No it isn't.
--or--
P1: I know God.
P2: So do I.

The second statements should be completely true for P2 who contradicts P1, but without evidence to back P2 up she/he hasn’t made a convincing argument for either one’s veracity. That’s why I try to be very picky about how and why I argue things about faith, the Bible, politics, etc. Evidence requires substance and empirical observation. I can make a convincing argument based on evidence that the Bible doesn’t refer to itself at least the Bible. That’s cut and dry like saying that John begins with “In the beginning, was the Word.”

What’s more interesting, is that I can make a convincing argument that the Bible and the Word of God are not the same things provided I define them well. Based on those definitions which are real empirical things, I can construct an argument that differentiates them. That is a subtle but very important difference from proving the statement: “The Bible is not the Word of God.” A faith assertion that is not subject to rational argument. Faith is not argued; it is confessed.

Michelle Singletary – Debt Addicts Get A Dose of Reality

Michelle Singletary – Debt Addicts Get A Dose of Reality – washingtonpost.com:

“But many of the individuals who are overloaded with debt need to take responsibility for their bad choices, too. Take credit card debt, for example. Certainly there has been a tremendous push — for decades — by financial institutions to get people to view credit cards as indispensable.
And consumers gladly went along, with no complaint, using other people’s money until life’s hardships — a job loss, illness or divorce — got in the way and they could no longer pay today for what they long since had purchased.”

(Via The Washington Post.)

A quick, but fair, look at why debtors clearly have to share responsibility in the current economic crisis.

The Center Cannot Hold

Huff TV: Roy Sekoff with Dan Abrams, Lanny Davis and Marc Lamont Hill on Clinton’s Statements on Bosnia and Rev. Wright – Media on The Huffington Post:

(Via The Huffington Post.)

If Hillary misspoke, how can you misspeak in a book? How do you misspeak repeatedly? I don’t think I’d ever forget, misremember being shot at, ever.
My problem isn’t that she did the ol’ resumé puff up. After all, she is trying to sell herself to us voters by the very definition of political candidate. I expect puffery and I’ll even tolerate a small fish story here and there. But this is about substantiating her central claim to in her own words, “crossing the commander-in-chief threshold.” She has repeatedly belittled Obama on this score. My take: you live by the sword, you die by the sword. Her experience warrants scrutiny and if it is found lacking, whether because of lies, misspeaking, or faulty memory, it’s still lacking.

Where’s the Devil?

University of Chicago: Obama was a ‘professor’:

“The [Clinton] campaign also sent out a press release quoting a 2004 Chicago Sun-Times column that stated of Obama’s professor claim: ‘Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama’s primary campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter.’
But in a statement, the university said its senior lecturers are considered professors.”

(Via CNN Political Ticker.)

Yes Hillary, details do in fact matter.

Colmes makes a Wright

Colmes speaks to a mixed-race couple about Rev. Wright and the media smear of Obama.

Taking back the Party


What happens when the little guy gets a voice in politics. Wow. For the first time in my adult life I’m proud of my country! 😉
UPDATE:

Crazy!

msnbc.com video: Obama on the economy

msnbc.com video: Obama on the economy:

(Via MSNBC.com.)

Wages and incomes for middle class America have been flat for far longer than Obama intimated. In real dollar terms, they’ve been stagnant for decades where the top earners’ incomes shares of national income have quintupled. So in terms of basic fairness and even sound long term economics, you’ve got to pay the piper. Rich folk: do you want to be pigs who get fat or hogs who get slaughtered?

Obama Casts Wide Blame for Financial Crisis and Proposes Homeowner Aid – New York Times

Obama Casts Wide Blame for Financial Crisis and Proposes Homeowner Aid – New York Times:

“‘Instead of establishing a 21st-century regulatory framework, we simply dismantled the old one,’ he said, ‘aided by a legal but corrupt bargain in which campaign money all too often shaped policy and watered down oversight.’”

(Via The NY Times.)

I’m always for keeping things balanced. One thing he can’t say without losing his bid is that a 21 century framework has to be structured so that debtors shoulder some responsibility. While I’m sure many were hoodwinked and bamboozled, many others simply got greedy and gorged on cheap debt. They have to be taken to the shed as well. Let’s hope Barack leads in an effort to setup such a system.

Tapes’ Destruction Hovers Over Detainee Cases – New York Times

Tapes’ Destruction Hovers Over Detainee Cases – New York Times:

“‘They thought they were saving themselves from legal scrutiny, as well as possible danger from Al Qaeda if the tapes became public,’ said Frederick P. Hitz, a former C.I.A. officer and the agency’s inspector general from 1990 to 1998, speaking of agency officials who favored eliminating the tapes. ‘Unknowingly, perhaps, they may have created even more problems for themselves.’”

(Via The NY Times.)

You don’t beat the lawless by becoming like them.

Obama Rewriting Rules for Raising Campaign Money Online – washingtonpost.com

Obama Rewriting Rules for Raising Campaign Money Online – washingtonpost.com:

“When Christen Braun decided it was time to learn more about the presidential candidates, the 28-year-old high school teacher from suburban Pittsburgh turned to Google — right where Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign was waiting for her.
Her search triggered an ad for Obama’s Web site, which prompted Braun, a Republican, to sign up for the Democratic senator’s e-mail list — and then to make her first political contribution, for $25.”

(Via The Washington Post.)

How Obama’s campaign treats us like adults and wins us over, unlike some we could mention! 😉