July 22, 2010

Penetrating Insight

The core issue of L'affaire Sherrod is that no one, anywhere along the way, from Andrew Breitbart to the NAACP to Tom Vilsack, used any kind of critical thinking skills.

3 comments:

Ken said...

Doesn't that observation presume that Breitbart was acting in good faith?

Seems to me that an equally plausible, if not more plausible, explanation is that he was acting with excellent critical thinking skills, believing correctly that he could bully a spineless administration and dupe a moronic media.

承蘋承蘋 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Transplanted Lawyer said...

Ken, your explanation violates TL's doctrine of the back-handedly charitable presumption: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.