At the Midwest Blogbash, Charles Austin mentioned that he is tiring of the sameness of political arguments. How many posts about gun control (pro or con) can you read (or write) before they all sound the same and your eyes glaze over? I think if you get caught up in the partisanship, you can continue to make the same arguments over and over and not care that nothing changes – which is why partisans tend to carry on most of the arguments. Partisan politics kind of resembles a food fight between kids – its fun for some, but it turns a lot of people off and the grownups have to clean up afterward. Speaking of grownups cleaning up after the kids, (yes, this is the longest intro to a topic yet), you should check out Ken Pollack’s interview with The Atlantic (link via Jon Henke at Q and O) about WMDs and Iraq. You certainly don’t have to agree with Mr. Pollack’s conclusions, but he advances your understanding without partisan rancor. Since I dislike it when the press takes remarks out of context to drive their own agenda, I won’t excerpt him so go read the whole thing. It’s worth it.
Extreme Tracker
Arclite theme by digitalnature | powered by WordPress
#1 by Archpundit on February 12, 2004 - 2:09 pm
Quote
I like Pollack’s work a lot. A conservative friend who works on similar topics has high praise for him. I’d say what my friend does, but I don’t actually know and everytime I ask he changes the subject.
Pollack shaped my thinking on Iraq and it is one reason, while very critical of the President and his strategy in regards to Iraq, I think the issue of WMDs isn’t as easy as most partisans are pretending it to be.
#2 by Kevin Murphy on February 12, 2004 - 6:15 pm
Quote
I think the important subjects, like Iraq and WMD are worth the trouble to understand in a non-partisan way. People can disagree about how best to achieve a mutual goal or what factors are most important in a decision, but we need to honestly examine the facts so we can be honest in our judgements.