The errors of definitions multiply themselves according as the reckoning proceeds; and lead men into absurdities, which at last they see but cannot avoid, without reckoning anew from the beginning.

Okay, we’re up to a third topic. Tim asks whether the $300 billion that has been spent on Iraq could have been spent better in the war on terrorism, port security, homeland security, etc.

Allen kinda evaded that question, essentially falling back on the “it happened, let’s not second guess, let’s look forward’. That would be fair for him to say if he had been in the opposition, but he wasn’t. It happened because this administration and this Congress made it happen. We didn’t slip on our tea and fall into Iraq; we went in on purpose and we spent $300 billion on it, ostensibly to make this nation safer from terrorism. I want to know whether Senator Allen, who was a part of that, thinks that it was money well spent. I want to know if he is looking to spend that kind of money again over the next few years. But he didn’t want to say.

For his part, Jim Webb says there was a better way, but hasn’t said how. I don’t think I buy that. Look, I’m a very non-interventionist kind of guy. I don’t like America invading other nations. But we can’t take a punch in the nose and then curl up into a ball. If between 9/11 and now we had spent that $300 billion building walls on the Mexican and Canadian borders, and beefing up port security and airport security, we would not be safe from terrorism. I would not be comfortable with that response at all. This was Mr. Webb’s chance to convince me, and he passed on the opportunity.

My fourth topic for tonight is that Webb continually implied that George Allen and anybody else who hasn’t served in the military is ignorant on how to use the military. We heard a similar theme from the Kerry campaign in the 2004 elections. This is a point that many on the Left like to use to zing the current administration, as neither the president nor the vice president served in the United States military. In fact, the only cabinet members to have served were the Attorney General, the Secretary of Defense, and of course the Secretary for Veterans Affairs. For a presidency that will be defined by armed conflict, they run very light on personal experience.

This is, of course, irrelevant to the question of whether Jim Webb is better qualified than George Allen to be my senator. But furthermore, I think this is a very dangerous line of argument for the Democrats to keep embracing. For example, how will it play with those Democrats who run for president in 2008? Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich… none of these have military experience, to my knowledge. This point will still sit at the same level of irrelevance to me in 2008, but it still strikes me as a dangerous tune for this party.

The last topic that caught my eye from either candidate was near the end of the interview, when Jim Webb said

African Americans are the only ethnic group in this country that have suffered from deliberate discrimination and exclusion by the government over generations

I’ll be sure to let my American Indian friends know. It’s a shame that this ridiculous comment distracted me from whatever it was Webb was talking about, because I believe it was something about affirmative action being off track from its original, lawful purpose. I might have liked to have heard that, but my brain stopped short at the comment I shared above.

I’m not sure whether I will be able to catch the upcoming debate between these two, but if I do, I’ll share my thoughts here.