Peter asks about the tenor of the campaigns and digs into the difference, yet again, between constrained and unconstrained visions. The central test is how you react to someone who you disagree with. Sowell says that the unconstrained/liberal person might say the world is a complex place, but then is shocked and appalled if someone comes to a different conclusion about the same set of facts than they do. The constrained/conservative person will chalk up disagreements as a normal part of the policymaking process.
This reminds me of Fred Barnes' article in the latest issue of the Weekly Standard. In it, he covers Sarah Palin and the differences between her proponents and critics. One major difference he sees is that Palin-detractors are likely to never have met her. Since they disagree with her positions, they revile her personally.
Just adding to the depressing nature of today's segment and the character bashing Barnes discusses, I'll add Victor Davis Hanson's National Review article from today that declares the death of journalism. In it he chronicles the mainstream media's total embrace of Barack Obama and abandonment of their task to investigate stories and inform the public. The media, in VDH's estimation, suffers from the unconstrained vision that Sowell laments. They are incredibly hostile towards McCain and Palin because they stand in the way of obvious progress.
In closing, I'll leave you with a few choice quotes from today's segment.
For those with the unconstrained vision, what they believe seems so obviously true that if you are standing in the way of it, either you must be incredibly stupid, utterly uninformed or simply dishonest.
Sometimes people will get very clever and say “it is just as well to let these guys get in there and just run themselves, then we will win on the back lash.” People said that when Hitler was arising in Germany and many of those people who said that died in the concentration camps.
