Politics in Everything. Or Everything in Politics. (Correlations)

I thought of you all the other night while watching the first presidential debate. McCain and Obama were arguing over some military issue or other, and McCain turned to the moderator and said, "I just don't think Senator Obama knows the difference between a strategy and a tactic!" I'm hoping that by the end of the semester, no one will be able to say about me, "Marisa doesn't know the difference between a methodology and a method!" In the meantime, could someone remind me which of these a correlation is?
I think correlations can be useful in certain situations, as long as we acknowledge the holes in the data. It's not as definitive, which is fine with me. We could say this about any type of research, though. A way of seeing is also a way of not seeing. The ways we choose to look at the world also blind us to many of its details. We're not EVER going to get the whole picture by using one type of research, and maybe not even by using several strategies. This might explain why none of us want to commit exclusively to one area of research. We recognize how limiting it will be, and yet we need to limit the focus to produce valid results. I wonder, does the choice of strategies and tactics affect the wartime reality of civilians on the ground? How will my choice of methodology relate to the experience of my participants? Maybe this doesn't apply so much to correlation....I could be thinking ahead to the section on experimental research....