<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dignity promotion, and Obama&#8217;s foreign policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/</link>
	<description>progressive politics from Madison, Wisconsin</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101744</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101744</guid>
		<description>Ok  I have 2 questions first why are we supposed to treat murderers and thugs with dignity and respect? All they understand is force.

2nd what exactly are OBama's political Ideas? All I've ever heard or seen from him is that Government is the solution for everything.  I'm sure you know what Ideaology that is S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-I-M.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok  I have 2 questions first why are we supposed to treat murderers and thugs with dignity and respect? All they understand is force.</p>
<p>2nd what exactly are OBama&#8217;s political Ideas? All I&#8217;ve ever heard or seen from him is that Government is the solution for everything.  I&#8217;m sure you know what Ideaology that is S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-I-M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101728</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101728</guid>
		<description>Patrick, thanks for the comments. 

I, too, think "dignity promotion" is an inapt phrase, chosen only for its contrast with "democracy promotion". The sense is more "treat people with dignity", than "grant them dignity". Do unto others, love your neighbor as yourself, etc.

On foreign policy, there are definite "rules" about what candidates can and can't say ("all options on the table", "don't want to talk about hypotheticals"), and while they are there for mostly good reasons (you don't want a candidate essentially pledging American honor to act in a particular way based on extemporaneous rhetoric or white papers cooked up by graduate students volunteering on the campaign). I think Obama has gone much further than most candidates in talking about his reasoning, how he'll approach crises, what he sees as important, etc. (McCain has done this, too). A key excerpt from the article:

&lt;blockquote&gt;He was attacked from the left and the right for saying three things that should not have been controversial: that if he had actionable intelligence on the whereabouts of al-Qaeda's leadership in Pakistan but no cooperation from the Pakistani government, he would take out the jihadists; that he wouldn't use nuclear weapons on terrorist training camps; and that he would be willing to meet with leaders of rogue states in his first year as president. "No one [of Obama's critics] had thought through the policy because that was the quote-unquote naÃ¯ve and weak position, so they said it was a bad position to take," recalls Ben Rhodes, the adviser who writes Obama's foreign-policy speeches. "And it was a seminal moment, because Obama himself said, 'No, I'm right about this!'"

Instead of backing down, Obama asked his foreign-policy team to double down&lt;/blockquote&gt;

As a larger point, I think the meme that Obama is about substanceless "hope" is unsupported by the facts. He's written (himself, not a ghost-writer) two books, one of which is almost exclusively about political ideas. His campaign is stuffed with position papers and policy proposals on every imaginable topic (he is a Democrat, after all). "Hope" and re-engagement with the political system is a framework around which he's advancing these arguments, but it's not the argument itself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Patrick, thanks for the comments. </p>
<p>I, too, think &#8220;dignity promotion&#8221; is an inapt phrase, chosen only for its contrast with &#8220;democracy promotion&#8221;. The sense is more &#8220;treat people with dignity&#8221;, than &#8220;grant them dignity&#8221;. Do unto others, love your neighbor as yourself, etc.</p>
<p>On foreign policy, there are definite &#8220;rules&#8221; about what candidates can and can&#8217;t say (&#8221;all options on the table&#8221;, &#8220;don&#8217;t want to talk about hypotheticals&#8221;), and while they are there for mostly good reasons (you don&#8217;t want a candidate essentially pledging American honor to act in a particular way based on extemporaneous rhetoric or white papers cooked up by graduate students volunteering on the campaign). I think Obama has gone much further than most candidates in talking about his reasoning, how he&#8217;ll approach crises, what he sees as important, etc. (McCain has done this, too). A key excerpt from the article:</p>
<blockquote><p>He was attacked from the left and the right for saying three things that should not have been controversial: that if he had actionable intelligence on the whereabouts of al-Qaeda&#8217;s leadership in Pakistan but no cooperation from the Pakistani government, he would take out the jihadists; that he wouldn&#8217;t use nuclear weapons on terrorist training camps; and that he would be willing to meet with leaders of rogue states in his first year as president. &#8220;No one [of Obama's critics] had thought through the policy because that was the quote-unquote naÃ¯ve and weak position, so they said it was a bad position to take,&#8221; recalls Ben Rhodes, the adviser who writes Obama&#8217;s foreign-policy speeches. &#8220;And it was a seminal moment, because Obama himself said, &#8216;No, I&#8217;m right about this!&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p>Instead of backing down, Obama asked his foreign-policy team to double down</p></blockquote>
<p>As a larger point, I think the meme that Obama is about substanceless &#8220;hope&#8221; is unsupported by the facts. He&#8217;s written (himself, not a ghost-writer) two books, one of which is almost exclusively about political ideas. His campaign is stuffed with position papers and policy proposals on every imaginable topic (he is a Democrat, after all). &#8220;Hope&#8221; and re-engagement with the political system is a framework around which he&#8217;s advancing these arguments, but it&#8217;s not the argument itself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101727</link>
		<dc:creator>patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badgerblues.org/2008/03/26/dignity-promotion-and-obamas-foreign-policy/#comment-101727</guid>
		<description>The candidate's position still seems very unclear to me. I like his promise to exterminate alqeada, but this seems like one of those mandatory statements all must make. I don't see anything to suggest he'd actually do much aside from "retreat" from Iraq. Further, how can one promote dignity? Dignity can only originate from within one's self, or I suppose, one's country. How is it different to say "have our democracy, you need it." or "here, have your dignity, we'll grant it." Are not both equally condescending? 

My goal isn't to be snarky here, but rather to request that the candidate move on from a discussion of "Hope" and crap like that to "here's exactly what I'd do." I'm sure you'll have already read MC Cain's speech on foriegn policy. Since obama has given no such speech that I've heard, how are we to compare?

Finally, doesn't it make you nervous that we are hearing about obama's team? What the heck is up with that? Let a man apeak for himself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The candidate&#8217;s position still seems very unclear to me. I like his promise to exterminate alqeada, but this seems like one of those mandatory statements all must make. I don&#8217;t see anything to suggest he&#8217;d actually do much aside from &#8220;retreat&#8221; from Iraq. Further, how can one promote dignity? Dignity can only originate from within one&#8217;s self, or I suppose, one&#8217;s country. How is it different to say &#8220;have our democracy, you need it.&#8221; or &#8220;here, have your dignity, we&#8217;ll grant it.&#8221; Are not both equally condescending? </p>
<p>My goal isn&#8217;t to be snarky here, but rather to request that the candidate move on from a discussion of &#8220;Hope&#8221; and crap like that to &#8220;here&#8217;s exactly what I&#8217;d do.&#8221; I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;ll have already read MC Cain&#8217;s speech on foriegn policy. Since obama has given no such speech that I&#8217;ve heard, how are we to compare?</p>
<p>Finally, doesn&#8217;t it make you nervous that we are hearing about obama&#8217;s team? What the heck is up with that? Let a man apeak for himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
