Just to reiterate my problem with Obama via another link.
Note that I am not at all inclined to wax Miltonic in an ad hominem way about it, like I did with Kerry.
That's because Obama's conclusions are perfectly valid deductions from certain premises. I think those premises are wrong, but I would not claim that they are self-evidently wrong. I can see how someone brought up with those premises, even an intelligent someone, could muddle along without cottoning on to the fact that they were wrong.
Kerry, the blackguard, claimed publicly to share similar premises to mine. From such premises no sane person can validly deduce 'pro-choice' conclusions.
7 comments:
cI insist that it is the electoral process which needs some reform. Voting needs to become compulsory, preferential voting also, like in Australia. Like you said in a previous comment, Australia needs to claim the far North-Eastern States :)
Just to repeat myself further, I still believe the leader of the US to be a mere figurehead. The party makes most policy initiatives, the military limits discretionary decisions by the president also. What is left is part statesman, part rubber stamp of party policy, and part a general focus of attention for the Government. The political system (roles of senate, college vote system, optional voting) conspire to reward vague politicking and playing the audience during campaigns for presidency.
Hrrm, not sure how much I agree there - stated that broadly, *any* Western leader qualifies as a figurehead. Of course the president is beholden to the legislative, military and political structures that underpin government, but an effective one works with those bodies in order to implement the policies he or she thinks best. And of course all kinds of negotiations, debates and shenanigans happen behind closed doors in order to make things happen - not all of them conducted by or even on direct behalf of the president - but that doesn't remotely make it a position of powerlessness.
Even with my pathological disdain for the presidency of GWB must concede the man some considerable powers of influence and persuasion.
(This is straying away from the topic of Clam's actual post, about which I want to make a considered response. I haven't had the mental space to actually consider it, however).
You really ought to visit Klause Rohde' Blog more often. He is not afraid to speak his mind and enter into dialogue against conflicting views.
http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/
He respects Noam Chomsky. Therefore he has lost the good of the intellect.
I tried to get Klaus to tell us how he independently arrived at Chomsky's ideas, which I thought was a promising line of discussion. But he has eschewed the personal and stuck to sticking up predictable slabs of text from the anti-american 'leftist' breviary.
And, one month and one day without an update? You are betraying your God-given duty to blog!
Yes, I am on a bit of a sabbatical with blogging. I have no excuses and must beg forgiveness from the higher powers :)
As far as KR goes, even if it is 'leftist breviary', it still sharpens my thoughts and gives me a feel for what others are thinking without having the thought to put it in writing.
Post a Comment