12-01-2011, 03:51 PM
I don't think your response was too harsh, but nor does it explain what you mean, other than simple disagreement.
I don't agree with Douthat, mostly because the myths he wants to dispel can't be dispelled nor proven. So complaining that they are myths in the first place is kinda pointless, if you see what I mean.
I'm OK with an "incomplete" presidency as being the label given, because that's what it literally was.
More broadly, any "side" will cling understandably, if not justifiably cling to, myths whenever one of their own is taken down unfairly. That alone can indeed make a "myth" in fact reality, again if you see what I mean. It's not completely unrelated to the notion of the function of martyrdom.
I don't agree with Douthat, mostly because the myths he wants to dispel can't be dispelled nor proven. So complaining that they are myths in the first place is kinda pointless, if you see what I mean.
I'm OK with an "incomplete" presidency as being the label given, because that's what it literally was.
More broadly, any "side" will cling understandably, if not justifiably cling to, myths whenever one of their own is taken down unfairly. That alone can indeed make a "myth" in fact reality, again if you see what I mean. It's not completely unrelated to the notion of the function of martyrdom.