I really don’t consider myself partisan – but I do consider myself very anti-Democrat, for many reasons. If that helps any. That wouldn’t have been true forty years ago. But today Democrats have embraced many issues with which I vehemently disagree – socialist tendencies, no allowance for restrictions on abortion whatsoever, displays of weakness towards enemies, and a total disregard for the rule of law.

I think the first step to “elevate discourse” is to be straightforward and honest. But Obama has specifically changed (or is that “nuanced”?) so many of his positions. He can’t credibly have any claim on moderate abortion issues. He can’t credibly say that he didn’t claim that he would want top-level diplomacy without preconditions with Iran, etc.

And when it comes to his personal history – whether it be Columbia University, Ayers, Wright, Rezko, Phleger, etc., etc., he has make excuse after excuse.

I’m actually not a big fan of McCain’s politics. But he is consistently in the center of the political spectrum, and he doesn’t have to make excuses about his record or his affiliations. I have three main reasons I’m voting for him – (1) He has committed to appointing judges who understand the rule of law, rather than, as Obama indicated last night, would rule subjectively based on an understand of what common people go through. (2) He has a far better understanding of foreign issues and won’t screw that up. And (3) he won’t lead America further into socialism, as Obama definitely would.

Whatever you think of the media, there is no doubt that they, like the education establishment, are heavily liberal-leaning. Call it perception if you like, but any independent analysis shows serious bias.

You might be very surprised at the things that I think would really alter the nature of politics in this country. I’m mulling over how I’m going to post about them. But suffice it to say for now that it’s extreme enough that Washington, DC would never, ever instigate it.

I’d like to rescind my comment on you being “in the tank.” I’ve grown more and more uncomfortable with persons cutting off others’ arguments with accusing them of being “in the tank” with the persons they’re defending. So I ask your forgiveness. That was a shallow method of approaching my discomfort with your blogging recently.

After all, the question seems to me to be less about who we support and more about how reasonable and critical we can be about the bigger picture.

And that, precisely, is why I was critical of your posts. I don’t deny that interviews are edited to spin someone’s comments, but it’s also true that Palin did say what she said, and we have to deal with that. I just find the claim of definite bias in what you and other conservatives call the “Mainstream Media” (as if they’re all one unified voice) to be perception-becoming-reality in your minds.

Either way, is the answer to perceived bias a swing to the opposite pole with definite bias, or is the more wise course of action a reasonable consideration of positions, arguments, and interviews that is able to acknowledgment the wisdom that both sides can portray? That’s probably the question I consider most in our very partisan, very childish nation. How can we elevate discourse rather than picking one of the partisan poles and shunning alternative perspectives?

I’m becoming somewhat distrusting of the MSM interviews of Palin lately. For instance, in the Charlie Gibson interview, there were intervening discussions that reflected very positively on Palin that were edited out. The extended portions were on the website. ALL interviews are edited, unless they are live. And with how slanted the MSM coverage of the election has been (even well before Palin was introduced), it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they are trying to influence public perception of her to match their own opinion of her (which was formed well before she gave them interviews). She speaks very colloquially, and if they edit it to keep those comments and leave out any clarifying discussion, then she comes across as an idiot.

The gaffes I noticed of Biden’s in the debate I noted. I watched the entire debate, and I didn’t note any similar levels of gaffes from Palin.

Don’t get me wrong, it seems as though she certainly needs a lot of coaching to do this well, and I think that when an interview she’s in goes outside her comfort zone, she loses it a bit. I think part of that would be true with any governor thrust onto the national stage so quickly, though. I’m trying to remember the last time a governor was picked as a VP choice.

If I’m in any tank right now, it’s in the tank that tries to point out things about Obama/Biden that don’t get covered in the MSM. If McCain or Palin says something stupid, you can bet that it’ll be front page news. The other way around simply doesn’t happen. The only other tank I’d be in is the one that recognizes the way liberal politicians (both Democrats and the Republicans that act like Democrats) have a tendency to change their positions on issues and rely on the economic ignorance of voters to stay in power. If there’s any major theme to what I post about politics, it’d probably be that – along with whatever I happen to feel like pointing out.

Now if Huckabee had been the nominee, I would have been in the tank. Definitely. Part of me is secretly wanting Obama to win and screw things up so badly (a la Carter) that we get a phenomenal president next time (a la Reagan). But is it worth having to endure 4 years of Obama/Reid/Pelosi?

You’re not “in the tank” for McCain/Palin, are you?

One of the marks of a critical observer is a willingness to examine the successes/failures of both sides; and there was plenty to go around with both Biden and Palin this time.

That was a big Biden gaffe with the Article I comment. One interesting element of this discussion is that Palin has proven through a variety of other sources to be unprepared in knowledge and wisdom to serve in the role of VP. I painfully shifted in my chair multiple times as I viewed the Katie Couric interview. Yeah, so Biden screwed up; but is he, now, more equipped to lead as VP than Palin? I’m not sure there’s much disagreement there across the nation.

And it would have been helpful for your case against Biden if you had used a non-partisan “fact-check” group instead of McCain’s website; view factcheck.org or politifact.com for more objective analysis and “fact-checking.”

Honestly, Derek, you come off as foaming-at-the-mouth with your political posts here; it’s really not becoming of you at all, and it hurts your integrity I think.

You’ve displayed more than a few times in the past in our conversations a much greater capacity to go deeper into issues. I’ve come to expect more from you.