A simple observation about a pattern of political reactions here

[Tom Rinaldo]

When we learn something that gives us fair rreason to believe that a person or organization that we generally disagree with is considering doing something awful, we react stronly to try to avert it.
We mobilize, we shout, we write letters and blogs and make lots of phone calls to get our points across. And if that awful thing then fails to materialize we take our fair share of credit for having stopped it in its tracks.

When we learn something that gives us fair rreason to believe that a person or organization that we generally agree with is considering doing something awful, we also react stronly to try to avert it.
We mobilize, we shout, we write letters and blogs and make lots of phone calls to get our points across. And if that awful thing then fails to materialize... The people here who reacted strongly to avert that threat become subject to ridicule along the lines of: "You obviously don't understand 5 dimensional chess, there never was a threat".

Just saying.

[Eddie Haskell]

1. Your point?

Seems to me that your 5 dimensional chess might have one dimension that considers the public's reaction. Silence means we don't get to play the game.

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. A worthy hypothesis.

It's probably always best to stay open minded about these things. It's possible that generally good guys could consider doing something foolish or dangerous, and it possibly just 5 dimensional chess that is going on over our heads. Sometimes it's not easy to totally rule either one out.

I like your point though that 5 dimensional chess could anticipate certain public outcries and factor them into the strategy. I don't mind playing the role of reacting strongly against bad ideas to further brilliant chess moves if in fact that is what is happening. I just don't think it fair or reasonable to ask me to be silent about bad ideas, regardless of what is going on.

[Cal33]

2. I think you have a point there. We shouldn't be ridiculing others to begin with.

And here's an opportunity for those who are being ridiculed to learn how to ignore it. After all,
is there anybody alive who has never made a mistake?

[drm604]

3. I would suggest that terms like "5 dimensional chess" are strawmen

and that the only people who use the term are those denying such chess.

I have never seen someone supporting Obama by claiming that he is playing "5 dimensional chess" (or 3 dimensional, or 11 dimensional, or whatever).

Whatever someone's position on this, can we please not misrepresent the positions of other Democrats that we disagree with? That's a Republican tactic and we're better than that.

Enough with the "chess" nonsense already.

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. Enough with the "chess nonsense". We have concensus! n/t

[JoePhilly]

6. Most of those who use the chess meme ...

whether pro Obama or anti-Obama, usually go on to prove they don't understand anything about chess.