Replies

Thanks, Miss Marple, for the advice against fractious debate and the call for unity. Lately there has been a tendency to take a "deductive" approach to rating candidates. Let me explain.

Candidate A says: "I believe we should (whatever issue is under consideration)".

Those opposed to that relative position immediately start the chants of "Not qualified" or "Not Conservative enough" and threaten to sit out the election rather than "compromise their principles". I say chant because they typically repeat (and embellish) their charges at every opportunity. Soon you have a guy with an indelible stain (usually undeserved) fighting this baggage instead of his opponents.

What we should be doing (IMHO) is doing inductive advocacy. Giving positive attributions where deserved with the final candidate meeting the most of our desires.

I started to write a critique of Allen's performance on Meet the Depressed which took a line somewhere between onyx and KyleM (Yes, I saw the same MTP too!). Your call for caution caused me to stop and rethink my criticism. My original assessment was to "damn with faint praise" Allen by referring to the interview as a talk with "Dumb and Dumber". I realize that this is unfair. I see that Allen is getting better at his talking points, but the thing that frustrated me no end was his "Senatorial" approach to debate. You know what I'm referring to - that phony "My esteemed colleague" crap. Too many times he gave away the contest to that dip-Shiite biden by falling on this old habit. One time he did it by giving credit to biden, and then tried to correct himself (Note to Allen: You can't unring a bell, and you can't take it back once said!).

IMO Allen let timmy hang him up on the abortion issue. This will come back to haunt him until he enumerates exactly his position (I believe that this is the sticking point that KyleM was saying). He could have avoided it by being more clear in his expression of his position. He set the premise by saying that "Times have changed since RvW was imposed". He could have easily deflected timmy (when timmy pressed on the "Will you overturn RvW?" by saying (in addition to the constitutionally correct "It's a States Rights issue") by saying "Perhaps it's time to revisit it". Obviously he is trying to straddle some sort of line, so this would be a compromise position of sorts, but at least it would have been more assertive than fumbling for an answer to little lord timmy.

Please understand that, right now, I consider Allen to be my personal front-runner for the presidential nod. My point is that:

1. It's still too early make our final choice
2. It's an evolving contest on very uneven ground.
3. It would be a foolish mistake to damage a good candidate by trashing him prematurely.
4. This rant is not against any particular FReeper, just against what I see as an unfortunate predilection to take assessments or criticisms and project them too far.

Back to lurk-mode ;'}

George Allen did what he could for this period of time in the Abortion issue. Soon the issue will be a minor one when 4D Ultrasound's are very inexpensive and the norm, and the lies that the Pro aborts have pushed for years have been proved to be just that a bunch of LIES. We do not do ourselves any favors on this issue by unrealistic demands, and offensive rhetoric. we are in the 11th Hour and the pro abort position is ready for the lethal injection at Midnight, and the overheated demands that even a woman that is raped should not be allowed to have an abortion at any time is like calling the Governor and getting a pardon for the Pro Aborts. We are winning on this issue and very close to what we want, and some are too overzealous and one issue to realize it. They are coming very close to blowing it totally.