Too good not to share
(x-posted to neph_politics)
Fun little piece about the Keyes-Obama debate -- yes, they went ahead and had one after all -- in The New Republic today. And wonder of wonders, it's not subscriber-only:In the Illinois Senate race, Barack Obama leads Alan Keyes by a margin so wide (over 50 points, according to one poll) that a debate between the candidates must--almost as a matter of science--help narrow the campaign. But that would be to underestimate Alan Keyes.
Most of us have used our reasoning to reach unexpected conclusions once in a while. Sometimes the results are weird--"It follows, therefore, that we should abolish bricks and live in trees!"--and we reexamine our premises or toss the thoughts altogether. Other times they may be logically valid--"Stubbing my toe hurts, and being burned at the stake hurts, so, actually, both Joan of Arc and I have experienced pain"--but so likely to give offense that we keep them to ourselves. In other words, we recognize that life among other people often requires applying the brakes. Alan Keyes, to his credit, does not. This makes him more courageous, more consistent, and more interesting than most of us. Fortunately, it also makes him unelectable.
There are some pretty good howlers in here. The writer, Tom Frank, is pretty brutally condescending to Keyes: "But to his credit, Keyes is performing an important service in this race: He is reminding us just how frightening--okay, also funny--ideological clarity and consistency can be." In his defense, though, it's pretty hard not to be. I mean, it's Alan Keyes.
--- Ajax.
Fun little piece about the Keyes-Obama debate -- yes, they went ahead and had one after all -- in The New Republic today. And wonder of wonders, it's not subscriber-only:In the Illinois Senate race, Barack Obama leads Alan Keyes by a margin so wide (over 50 points, according to one poll) that a debate between the candidates must--almost as a matter of science--help narrow the campaign. But that would be to underestimate Alan Keyes.
Most of us have used our reasoning to reach unexpected conclusions once in a while. Sometimes the results are weird--"It follows, therefore, that we should abolish bricks and live in trees!"--and we reexamine our premises or toss the thoughts altogether. Other times they may be logically valid--"Stubbing my toe hurts, and being burned at the stake hurts, so, actually, both Joan of Arc and I have experienced pain"--but so likely to give offense that we keep them to ourselves. In other words, we recognize that life among other people often requires applying the brakes. Alan Keyes, to his credit, does not. This makes him more courageous, more consistent, and more interesting than most of us. Fortunately, it also makes him unelectable.
There are some pretty good howlers in here. The writer, Tom Frank, is pretty brutally condescending to Keyes: "But to his credit, Keyes is performing an important service in this race: He is reminding us just how frightening--okay, also funny--ideological clarity and consistency can be." In his defense, though, it's pretty hard not to be. I mean, it's Alan Keyes.
--- Ajax.