The_Walrus wrote:
Ezra, I know you like to think of yourself as an independent freethinker who doesn't just parrot party lines. That's commendable, but there's more to it than just saying "well, everyone has opinions". Being a freethinker means weighing up the facts for yourself and coming to developed conclusions. It means critically analysing whether someone is good, rather than just dismissing all opinions because human opinions cover every possible belief. It means substantiating your opinions with supporting evidence.
When people criticise Trump's conduct, they talk about how he has inflamed the situation with North Korea. They talk about how his refusal to respect diplomatic solutions to Iran's nuclear program (while not providing any specific reasoning as to why he's rejecting the existing deal beyond "it's terrible" and "Obama did it") reduces the possibility of a diplomatic solution with North Korea. They talk about how he insults people on Twitter. They talk about how his headline "Muslim ban" was rejected by several courts for discriminating on the grounds of religion. They talk about his failure to get his healthcare reforms through Congress, even though the Republicans control both chambers. They talk about him speaking of grabbing women's vaginas. They talk about him refusing to blame white nationalist terrorists when they kill innocent people, instead blaming violence generally, despite repeatedly criticising Obama for not saying "radical Islamic terrorism". They talk about him asking for sportspeople to be fired for protesting against racism. They talk about him lying about Muslims celebrating 9/11 in New York. They talk about him lying about easily verifiable things on a regular basis. They talk about his poor relationships with the people around him and the unusually high turnover amongst his senior advisers. They talk about him accidentally leaking classified information to Russian diplomats. They talk about his attacks on the free press and his reliance on a very narrow, unusually ideological subsection of that press. They talk about his willingness to criticise deals made with allies and alienate them in the process, including alienating the South Koreans while reliant on their support in the North Korea crisis. They talk about how he rarely or never shows any understanding of nuance, any critical thinking, or any respect for the office of president.
Sure, some people didn't like Obama, and some people didn't like Dubya. But the evidence is clear: Trump is worse than every president since Nixon, and he's only been in the job a few months.
Ignoring the evidence and just saying "well, everyone has opinions" is not impartial, and nor is it a sign of intellect. Quite the opposite.
That's an overall obviously biased view. There doesn't seem to be any original thought into it. It's the same litany I see repeated verbatim all the time. Like people reading from the same script. I remember they were insisting he is the worst president in history, before he even took office.
And how could I possibly ignore something that's being rammed down my throat all the time.
27 Sep 2017, 3:58 am
