Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Elections or: How I Learned to Parody Movie Titles

Today is a day of great national import. Today we shall discover the "will of the people", who will perhaps grant the new Republican congressional majority a sweeping mandate to utterly overturn every action President Obama has taken, or instead will send a stern warning to all of congress that they'd better get their act together else they'll find themselves unemployed and reviled, or maybe will meekly allow the Democratic congress another chance to prove themselves, hoping that they will contritely do as the country desires.

What a load of crap.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

The American Temptation


I've gone back and forth on Dinesh D'Souza -- sometimes I like him,  other times I don't.

I vaguely remember seeing him on The Daily Show years back. He was  unassuming -- a little Indian guy with glasses, a soft voice, and calmly conservative (contrasted against Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck). I can't remember why he was on the show, but he  was laid back and funny. I found him pretty charismatic. He also  seemed to be the next poster child for Republicans: educated, conservative,  intellectual, Christian and...well...not old and white.

A few years passed and I watched him debate Christianity at Oregon State. The question in the debate was "Is Christianity Good for  the World." D'Souza was everything I remember: articulate, laid-back, poignant, intelligent. He presented Christianity from a unique viewpoint – his family was converted to Christianity by “The Portuguese Inquisition”, as he said it. He discovered that Christianity literally came to his family “at the point of a bayonet.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Why I Hate Political Partisanship

There is a core belief at work in Erik's criticism of bipartisanship: he seems to think that being partisan means advocating for your constituency. This fallacy colors the entirety of his arguments, and leads him to a multitude of incorrect conclusions. Bipartisanship does not mean, nor imply, that people with opposing political views will decide to compromise their beliefs for political expediency. Rather, the intention is to achieve progress that is in the best interest of the country.

Why I Love Political Partisanship

I mostly use CNN and Newsweek as my sources for the happenings of Washington D.C. One repeating message coming from many commentators is the growing partisanship of all the politicians on both sides of the aisle – how disagreements in the chamber are turning personal. And the subsequent analysis is that government is becoming paralyzed because those Republicans and Democrats just refuse to cooperate.

On the surface, this may sound scary, perhaps even signaling a growing apprehension between people on the Left with people on the Right. Political discourse over dinner may prove awkward, but it doesn't prevent the dishes from getting cleaned. So people apply the same logic to Washington D.C., attempt to identify government as worse now than it was fifteen years ago, and conclude that things are bad because, gosh darnit, those politicians just can’t get along!

I agree with everything asserted above, except that partisanship is actually a good thing for America. Here are five reasons why: