Mike,
All of your points are valid. I happen to love links-style courses and greatly look forward to every British Open Championship. I basically side with those who view the four majors as distinct yet equally important examinations of the pro golfer's skill. I also agree that the winner's score is irrelevant with regard to measuring a major's worth.
I also agree with you that a shorter course can produce a top-notch winner (like Duval or Woods) if that course employs certain elements of design. For example, Southern Hills was more about doglegs that took the driver out the player's hands. Lytham seemed a lot about very punitive bunkers that made deep rough look like a walk in the park.
That said, I stand behind my conviction that Bethpage Black more than adequately tested multiple facets of the pro game, including driving, putting, course management, and the use of every club in the bag. There are also many holes at the Black that test decision making, such as numbers 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, and 13.
The Black was compromised, IMO, by the deluge of rain that occurred not only during the tournament, but also one week before (when the NYC area received at least an inch of rain overnight). If the course had played faster and the greens were firmer, I believe the course would have emphasized even more strategy. Unfortunately, over the weekend the softened Black was an exhibition of the aerial assault game. It's one thing to see these guys hit their approaches on TV, it's another to see in person how they seem to make the 200 yd approach fall out of the sky at a right angle before it hits the green. I can't envision any course -- no matter its setup and pretournament conditioning -- protecting itself from such skill.