Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

While none of the three candidates typically mention rivals by name, Obama invokes his most directly. His new speech is centered around a methodical accounting of the strongest arguments his opponents have to offer, which Obama then analyzes to expose the weaknesses in their logic.

"You can't at once argue that you're the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it," Obama says, loosely translating some of Clinton's campaign statements. "You can't fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America."

He read versions of these lines late Friday night at a high-school gym in Muscatine slowly, making them sound like riddles, and his audience chuckled as he went along.

In his speeches, Obama also seeks to refute the charge made by Edwards that he is "not angry or confrontational enough."

"By acknowledging the strengths in the other guy's argument, you're saying, 'I'm willing to look at all sides of an issue fairly,' " Meyer said, in analyzing Obama's comments. "That allows you to establish your character with the audience."

In devoting a large share of his time at the podium to directly challenging opponents' assertions, Obama seems to acknowledge that there is a particular urgency to the mission of persuading the undecided voters he identifies as his targets at the outset of his campaign events.

I feel like Obama makes the strongest argument here. Step one of evaluating someone's beliefs and stances is not "is it right" (Edwards) or "is it safe" (Clinton) but DOES IT MAKE SENSE. Start at the very beginning. If it doesn't even make sense in the first place, the other arguments are automatically utterly irrelevant.

So yeah. Big surprise. The Lincoln-Douglas debater supports the candidate most attached to logic and reason. My bias is huge and awesome to behold.

Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

While none of the three candidates typically mention rivals by name, Obama invokes his most directly. His new speech is centered around a methodical accounting of the strongest arguments his opponents have to offer, which Obama then analyzes to expose the weaknesses in their logic.

"You can't at once argue that you're the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it," Obama says, loosely translating some of Clinton's campaign statements. "You can't fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America."

He read versions of these lines late Friday night at a high-school gym in Muscatine slowly, making them sound like riddles, and his audience chuckled as he went along.

In his speeches, Obama also seeks to refute the charge made by Edwards that he is "not angry or confrontational enough."

"By acknowledging the strengths in the other guy's argument, you're saying, 'I'm willing to look at all sides of an issue fairly,' " Meyer said, in analyzing Obama's comments. "That allows you to establish your character with the audience."

In devoting a large share of his time at the podium to directly challenging opponents' assertions, Obama seems to acknowledge that there is a particular urgency to the mission of persuading the undecided voters he identifies as his targets at the outset of his campaign events.

I feel like Obama makes the strongest argument here. Step one of evaluating someone's beliefs and stances is not "is it right" (Edwards) or "is it safe" (Clinton) but DOES IT MAKE SENSE. Start at the very beginning. If it doesn't even make sense in the first place, the other arguments are automatically utterly irrelevant.

So yeah. Big surprise. The Lincoln-Douglas debater supports the candidate most attached to logic and reason. My bias is huge and awesome to behold.

Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

Rhetorical tools reflect 3 Democrats' legal talents

While none of the three candidates typically mention rivals by name, Obama invokes his most directly. His new speech is centered around a methodical accounting of the strongest arguments his opponents have to offer, which Obama then analyzes to expose the weaknesses in their logic.

"You can't at once argue that you're the master of a broken system in Washington and offer yourself as the person to change it," Obama says, loosely translating some of Clinton's campaign statements. "You can't fall in line behind the conventional thinking on issues as profound as war and offer yourself as the leader who is best prepared to chart a new and better course for America."

He read versions of these lines late Friday night at a high-school gym in Muscatine slowly, making them sound like riddles, and his audience chuckled as he went along.

In his speeches, Obama also seeks to refute the charge made by Edwards that he is "not angry or confrontational enough."

"By acknowledging the strengths in the other guy's argument, you're saying, 'I'm willing to look at all sides of an issue fairly,' " Meyer said, in analyzing Obama's comments. "That allows you to establish your character with the audience."

In devoting a large share of his time at the podium to directly challenging opponents' assertions, Obama seems to acknowledge that there is a particular urgency to the mission of persuading the undecided voters he identifies as his targets at the outset of his campaign events.

I feel like Obama makes the strongest argument here. Step one of evaluating someone's beliefs and stances is not "is it right" (Edwards) or "is it safe" (Clinton) but DOES IT MAKE SENSE. Start at the very beginning. If it doesn't even make sense in the first place, the other arguments are automatically utterly irrelevant.

So yeah. Big surprise. The Lincoln-Douglas debater supports the candidate most attached to logic and reason. My bias is huge and awesome to behold.

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism (by Diana Butler Bass)

Now that the people of Iowa have chosen Republican Mike Huckabee and Democrat Barack Obama as their nominees for president, pundits will spend much of the next few days (until New Hampshire at least) analyzing the results. Many will note religion as an important factor—especially as evangelicals turned out largely for Huckabee.

But evangelicals are not the only religion story from Iowa. Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama represent something much more profound in American politics and religion. With Huckabee as a Southern Baptist and Obama as a member of the United Church of Christ, the two men symbolize the poles of Protestantism, the divided soul of America's majority religion.

Good to see that the left is attempting to break the conservative monopoly on religion. This was one of the notable things about this election from the start: the left is getting religion involved.

Enter no conflict against fanatics unless you can defuse them. Oppose a religion with another religion only if your proofs (miracles) are irrefutable or if you can mesh in a way that the fanatics accept you as god-inspired.
--Missionaria Protectiva, Primary Teaching

I think Obama's got a good shot at defusing the fanatics we're dealing with these days. Edwards has changed his tune drastically in the last few years building up to this election, and I think that the people he's trying to pander to right now are going to realize that's all he's doing. They need more than that from a candidate, and Edwards is so clearly insincere that hopefully his target constituency will realize it. Hillary's the same deal.

Unlike many folk, I'm not really all that worried about Huckabee getting the Iowa top spot. If I were going to pick a candidate who was most clearly insane and unelectable, that's the one I'd choose. I mean, heck. This is why people cross party lines to vote in each other's primaries: to get people like Huckabee the nomination because he'll be easier to tear down later.

This is particularly true if he's facing up against someone like Obama. A real bona fide fringe whacko only has a couple of things working in his favor. One is a clear monopoly on Good Godfearing American Protestantism. If he's up against Obama (who according to this article represents an equally old and powerful strain of American Protestantism), Obama will have this weapon at his disposal as well. That's how you defuse fanatics.

Without being able to invoke the status of "Only Good Christian Candidate," Huckabee will have to fall back on sense. He'll have to prove somehow that what he wants will work better than what Obama wants. The real question at that point becomes "work better for WHAT?"

Well, Huckabee seems to be in the crowd actively working toward the Rapture. What this means for the rest of us is that Huckabee wants to end the world as we know it. Repeat that so that you know you're really absorbing it. End the world. I don't want that to be the goal of my next President. In fact, I'd be happier with anybody who didn't want to end the world. Rapturists are not concerned with making this world a better place. Got it?

So how does Obama answer the question "better for what?" Better for women's quality of life. Better for racial/ethnic minorities' quality of life. Better for religious minorities' quality of life. Check his voting record; I posted it here, and see for yourself. Looks a hell of a lot better than "end the world ASAP," doesn't it?

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism (by Diana Butler Bass)

Now that the people of Iowa have chosen Republican Mike Huckabee and Democrat Barack Obama as their nominees for president, pundits will spend much of the next few days (until New Hampshire at least) analyzing the results. Many will note religion as an important factor—especially as evangelicals turned out largely for Huckabee.

But evangelicals are not the only religion story from Iowa. Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama represent something much more profound in American politics and religion. With Huckabee as a Southern Baptist and Obama as a member of the United Church of Christ, the two men symbolize the poles of Protestantism, the divided soul of America's majority religion.

Good to see that the left is attempting to break the conservative monopoly on religion. This was one of the notable things about this election from the start: the left is getting religion involved.

Enter no conflict against fanatics unless you can defuse them. Oppose a religion with another religion only if your proofs (miracles) are irrefutable or if you can mesh in a way that the fanatics accept you as god-inspired.
--Missionaria Protectiva, Primary Teaching

I think Obama's got a good shot at defusing the fanatics we're dealing with these days. Edwards has changed his tune drastically in the last few years building up to this election, and I think that the people he's trying to pander to right now are going to realize that's all he's doing. They need more than that from a candidate, and Edwards is so clearly insincere that hopefully his target constituency will realize it. Hillary's the same deal.

Unlike many folk, I'm not really all that worried about Huckabee getting the Iowa top spot. If I were going to pick a candidate who was most clearly insane and unelectable, that's the one I'd choose. I mean, heck. This is why people cross party lines to vote in each other's primaries: to get people like Huckabee the nomination because he'll be easier to tear down later.

This is particularly true if he's facing up against someone like Obama. A real bona fide fringe whacko only has a couple of things working in his favor. One is a clear monopoly on Good Godfearing American Protestantism. If he's up against Obama (who according to this article represents an equally old and powerful strain of American Protestantism), Obama will have this weapon at his disposal as well. That's how you defuse fanatics.

Without being able to invoke the status of "Only Good Christian Candidate," Huckabee will have to fall back on sense. He'll have to prove somehow that what he wants will work better than what Obama wants. The real question at that point becomes "work better for WHAT?"

Well, Huckabee seems to be in the crowd actively working toward the Rapture. What this means for the rest of us is that Huckabee wants to end the world as we know it. Repeat that so that you know you're really absorbing it. End the world. I don't want that to be the goal of my next President. In fact, I'd be happier with anybody who didn't want to end the world. Rapturists are not concerned with making this world a better place. Got it?

So how does Obama answer the question "better for what?" Better for women's quality of life. Better for racial/ethnic minorities' quality of life. Better for religious minorities' quality of life. Check his voting record; I posted it here, and see for yourself. Looks a hell of a lot better than "end the world ASAP," doesn't it?

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism

Iowa and the Poles of Protestantism (by Diana Butler Bass)

Now that the people of Iowa have chosen Republican Mike Huckabee and Democrat Barack Obama as their nominees for president, pundits will spend much of the next few days (until New Hampshire at least) analyzing the results. Many will note religion as an important factor—especially as evangelicals turned out largely for Huckabee.

But evangelicals are not the only religion story from Iowa. Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama represent something much more profound in American politics and religion. With Huckabee as a Southern Baptist and Obama as a member of the United Church of Christ, the two men symbolize the poles of Protestantism, the divided soul of America's majority religion.

Good to see that the left is attempting to break the conservative monopoly on religion. This was one of the notable things about this election from the start: the left is getting religion involved.

Enter no conflict against fanatics unless you can defuse them. Oppose a religion with another religion only if your proofs (miracles) are irrefutable or if you can mesh in a way that the fanatics accept you as god-inspired.
--Missionaria Protectiva, Primary Teaching

I think Obama's got a good shot at defusing the fanatics we're dealing with these days. Edwards has changed his tune drastically in the last few years building up to this election, and I think that the people he's trying to pander to right now are going to realize that's all he's doing. They need more than that from a candidate, and Edwards is so clearly insincere that hopefully his target constituency will realize it. Hillary's the same deal.

Unlike many folk, I'm not really all that worried about Huckabee getting the Iowa top spot. If I were going to pick a candidate who was most clearly insane and unelectable, that's the one I'd choose. I mean, heck. This is why people cross party lines to vote in each other's primaries: to get people like Huckabee the nomination because he'll be easier to tear down later.

This is particularly true if he's facing up against someone like Obama. A real bona fide fringe whacko only has a couple of things working in his favor. One is a clear monopoly on Good Godfearing American Protestantism. If he's up against Obama (who according to this article represents an equally old and powerful strain of American Protestantism), Obama will have this weapon at his disposal as well. That's how you defuse fanatics.

Without being able to invoke the status of "Only Good Christian Candidate," Huckabee will have to fall back on sense. He'll have to prove somehow that what he wants will work better than what Obama wants. The real question at that point becomes "work better for WHAT?"

Well, Huckabee seems to be in the crowd actively working toward the Rapture. What this means for the rest of us is that Huckabee wants to end the world as we know it. Repeat that so that you know you're really absorbing it. End the world. I don't want that to be the goal of my next President. In fact, I'd be happier with anybody who didn't want to end the world. Rapturists are not concerned with making this world a better place. Got it?

So how does Obama answer the question "better for what?" Better for women's quality of life. Better for racial/ethnic minorities' quality of life. Better for religious minorities' quality of life. Check his voting record; I posted it here, and see for yourself. Looks a hell of a lot better than "end the world ASAP," doesn't it?

This entry brought to you by the letter S!

Reposted from matrexius because it fully expresses the horror I was venting to flameraven about earlier.

My grandmother was going on today about how Obama is a Muslim (he's a member of the United Church of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination), and how people on the talk radio shows were going on and on about how America isn't ready for a Muslim president.

First of all, as I pointed out, he's not a Muslim. That shouldn't matter, anyway - I'd happily vote for a Muslim if I liked his or her policies and had confidence in his or her track record, and perhaps a Muslim president wouldn't be so head-in-sphincter with respect to the Middle East.

Second, she even mentioned that people were bringing up the "Obama is one letter from Osama!" stuff on those talk programs, which just blows my fucking mind.

The sheer magnitude of the ignorance is breathtaking. A few talking heads someplace mention that he's a Muslim because he attended a madrassa for a few years when he was a kid, and now his alleged Islamic faith (which, again, shouldn't matter) is going to continue to be a talking point amongst the ill-informed, which is a hell of a lot of people. And who gives a crap if you can swap the "b" in his name for an "s" and get the first name of a terrorist? That these things are even brought up in public discourse is exceedingly distressing to me.

Something else, too - I was very much in the dark about politics during the '04 presidential election, but I've recently learned that the infamous "Dean Scream", which was just Howard Dean making kind of a funny "yeah!" after the '04 Iowa caucus, was spun and replayed over and over and basically killed his campaign. A little yell completely altered the political landscape of the most powerful country in the world, and led to the re-election of one of the worst presidents ever. America, please - get well soon. REALLY soon.

This entry brought to you by the letter S!

Reposted from matrexius because it fully expresses the horror I was venting to flameraven about earlier.

My grandmother was going on today about how Obama is a Muslim (he's a member of the United Church of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination), and how people on the talk radio shows were going on and on about how America isn't ready for a Muslim president.

First of all, as I pointed out, he's not a Muslim. That shouldn't matter, anyway - I'd happily vote for a Muslim if I liked his or her policies and had confidence in his or her track record, and perhaps a Muslim president wouldn't be so head-in-sphincter with respect to the Middle East.

Second, she even mentioned that people were bringing up the "Obama is one letter from Osama!" stuff on those talk programs, which just blows my fucking mind.

The sheer magnitude of the ignorance is breathtaking. A few talking heads someplace mention that he's a Muslim because he attended a madrassa for a few years when he was a kid, and now his alleged Islamic faith (which, again, shouldn't matter) is going to continue to be a talking point amongst the ill-informed, which is a hell of a lot of people. And who gives a crap if you can swap the "b" in his name for an "s" and get the first name of a terrorist? That these things are even brought up in public discourse is exceedingly distressing to me.

Something else, too - I was very much in the dark about politics during the '04 presidential election, but I've recently learned that the infamous "Dean Scream", which was just Howard Dean making kind of a funny "yeah!" after the '04 Iowa caucus, was spun and replayed over and over and basically killed his campaign. A little yell completely altered the political landscape of the most powerful country in the world, and led to the re-election of one of the worst presidents ever. America, please - get well soon. REALLY soon.

This entry brought to you by the letter S!

Reposted from matrexius because it fully expresses the horror I was venting to flameraven about earlier.

My grandmother was going on today about how Obama is a Muslim (he's a member of the United Church of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination), and how people on the talk radio shows were going on and on about how America isn't ready for a Muslim president.

First of all, as I pointed out, he's not a Muslim. That shouldn't matter, anyway - I'd happily vote for a Muslim if I liked his or her policies and had confidence in his or her track record, and perhaps a Muslim president wouldn't be so head-in-sphincter with respect to the Middle East.

Second, she even mentioned that people were bringing up the "Obama is one letter from Osama!" stuff on those talk programs, which just blows my fucking mind.

The sheer magnitude of the ignorance is breathtaking. A few talking heads someplace mention that he's a Muslim because he attended a madrassa for a few years when he was a kid, and now his alleged Islamic faith (which, again, shouldn't matter) is going to continue to be a talking point amongst the ill-informed, which is a hell of a lot of people. And who gives a crap if you can swap the "b" in his name for an "s" and get the first name of a terrorist? That these things are even brought up in public discourse is exceedingly distressing to me.

Something else, too - I was very much in the dark about politics during the '04 presidential election, but I've recently learned that the infamous "Dean Scream", which was just Howard Dean making kind of a funny "yeah!" after the '04 Iowa caucus, was spun and replayed over and over and basically killed his campaign. A little yell completely altered the political landscape of the most powerful country in the world, and led to the re-election of one of the worst presidents ever. America, please - get well soon. REALLY soon.