Yea, I got your explanation a few times last month or so. They are a bit threadbare, as you put it. How about a few criticisms of McCain and Clinton ? What problems do you have with McCain and Clinton ? I think we have a pretty good idea of your criticism of Obama. It's getting to be repetitive , and as I said to you before, not very convincing. It certainly doesn't justify banging on Obama almost exclusively with nary a word about McCain, Clinton, Clinton, Bush , Truman, anybody else. The focus on Obama has long been in obsession territory.
What's your explanation for only banging on O and not the others, other than hatred? obsession?
...........
Before this most recent post -- which was really much more about you than about Sen. Obama -- my last statement on this topic hit the list on March 26. Several weeks ago. Hardly an obsession.
To be honest, at this point I'm much more interested in the Large Hadron Collider than the ups and downs of the Obama argument.
As for criticizing McCain, Clinton etc...
I don't think anyone here believes Clinton or McCain to be the least bit progressive; there may be some lurker who buys Sen. Clinton's on again, off again claim to being the fulfillment of feminist ideals but no one amongst the chattiest members is fooled.
Sen. Obama, on the other hand, is considered by many to be very progressive, either accidentally (for ex., by inspiring white people to vote for a black man, thereby creating an inherently progressive condition) or consciously, as the leader of a new style movement.
The articles, etc. that Doug posts challenge this view and are obviously meant to have an effect upon the Senator's left supporters. The Senator himself (who, it is understood, is a Democrat and therefore a fairly standard issue manager of the status quo) is not the actual target.
So, no, I don't see any hatred or obsession in play.
re: the Foucault quote...
C'mon now, you know that I'm not describing Doug as being at war with Obama.
.d.