Quote:
Originally posted by Captain
I will take this position more seriously when I see a higher standard of debate on the Republican side.
As I said, a debate between Murtha and McCain would strike me as informative, interesting, and likely to be very productive. I cannot think of anyone else in the administration, in Congress, or on the national stage who is engaging in a productive debate.
And if it is sad that Dean is doing this bumper-sticker debate thing, it is far sadder that Bush and Cheney, in their esteemed positions, are doing the same. Doesn't anyone see that the childish yelling backing and forth demeans the Presidency far more than the August Office of Chief Hack occupied by Dean?
|
Shit, Capt... you assume debate still exists as a form of learning and communication of ideas?
You're wrong there, brother. Debate only exists where both sides are open to consideration of others' positions. I haven't seen that since the 80s.
What we have now is shouting matches between unswayable dilletante advocates. To consider anything an opponent offers is conceding defeat.
I think this willful ignorance is why nothing gets done anymore. It's impossible to make any progress where both sides ignore the the holes in their positions and argue from positions of almost divine irrefutable truth. Paralysis. Terminal gridlock, relieved only when one side walks away from the table.
They say we can blame Karl Rove for this, but I don't think he's the Goebbels of this revolution of the infallible advocates. I think its our short attention spans and intellectual laziness. We don't have time to actually understand half what we say, but we know we want what we want and we want to win. So we bark garbage back and forth.
This loss of intelligence is what elevates fools like Dean and DeLay to positions of power. Where there is no truth, and no process for reaching understanding, the unthinking advocate will always be king.
