tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2665903892026632068.post4197785310849259433..comments2023-05-19T01:09:14.373-07:00Comments on Dennis Loo: A Commentary on Andrew Sullivan's Endorsement of ObamaDennis Loohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00967782105200012586noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2665903892026632068.post-6113094996125802922008-03-03T20:12:00.000-08:002008-03-03T20:12:00.000-08:00What's important to consider in evaluating someone...What's important to consider in evaluating someone's opinion is, more than anything, whether a) the evidence supports their conclusions or not and b) whether or not their approach to the question is reasonable or not. It's possible, in other words, to take someone who's not even reliable and still arrive at useful conclusions based on a critical appraisal of their contention(s). Bush himself is an example of this. He lies as easily as people breathe. But we can determine what he's actually saying by measuring what we know against what he says. Of course, if someone is reliable and accurate than it makes things easier, but nonetheless, I don't think it's a good practice to argue ad hominem. <BR/><BR/>As for whether Sullivan's someone to take seriously or not: the core points that he makes about the almost indistinguishable differences between the major candidates' positions are verifiably true both by examining their policy papers and on past experience with the two major parties. So I DO take this point seriously.<BR/><BR/>As for my saying that Obama is more dangerous: Please consider the point both I make in comparing him to Wilson Goode and MOVE and Sullivan's point about his face. Obama doing exactly the same things in essence as Bush would be much more credible to many people precisely for these reasons. <BR/><BR/>What you have to look at are the actual policy parameters given the nature of imperialist empire. The fact that the US is an imperialist superpower, the only one at this point, is far, far more important than the individual personalities and predilections of the candidates. <BR/><BR/>The fact that Obama POSITIONS himself to the left of Hillary and John is in itself not germane. That's the actual major virtue of the Sullivan piece - that he reveals this.<BR/><BR/>You can't judge things by their cover. You have to look at the interior content.Dennis Loohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00967782105200012586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2665903892026632068.post-81849374767898716562008-03-03T18:26:00.000-08:002008-03-03T18:26:00.000-08:00It is a big mistake to take anything Sullivan says...It is a big mistake to take anything Sullivan says seriously. He doesn't think clearly, and his opinions are largely random. Sullivan is neither a positive or a negative indicator of whether a particular position is worthwhile.<BR/><BR/>As for Obama being more dangerous than Bush, that is getting rather silly. A centrist Democrat is better than conservative Republicans like Hillary McCain and John Clinton. Even they are a bit better than Bush, though not much.libhomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05537213558568338561noreply@blogger.com