[2006alum]

I'm not going to fall into the same trap as poisoned the CEB and Thunderdome. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't believe in Manichaean politics, one side good and the other evil. All it leads to is whataboutism, which gets you nowhere.

I find your invocation of whataboutism rather on the nose considering the discussion of who's responsible for Congressional gridlock began when you attempted to shift the blame from Trump to Congress:

The US was not embarrassed at all by SARS. I think both of the last two Administrations - Trump and Obama - had a confidence in the CDC that was unwarranted.

The better question is where was Congress in all this? The real Constitutional crisis we face is the total paralysis of Congress, now in its third decade.

A definition of whataboutism: 

Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.

Over and over, in thread after thread, those uncomfortable with criticisms of this administration have sought to point fingers elsewhere at targets presumed to be sympathetic to those criticizing the administration: at Democrats, at Blue state governors like Whitmer, at China, at experts, and so on. So accusations of whataboutism read, to me, like gaslighting of the highest order.

When many of us have fretted about the failure to take the virus seriously, some have responded by criticizing the lockdowns as economic suicide. I (and others) have repeatedly asked those who criticize the lockdowns as "committing economic suicide" to provide a coherent alternative approach. Silence.

Some have asked why it's offensive to call it the "China virus" or to discriminate against Asian Americans. I (and others) have asked those who want to call it the Wuhan/China virus what they think doing so contributes to the conversation, or why they think it's a useful strategy to imply it should be acceptable to avoid people of a certain ethnicity when the virus is utterly race-blind. Silence.

Some feel that the federal government should not be criticized and that we need to all unite together. I (and others) have then noted that Trump thrives on disunity and picking petty fights with anyone who dares to criticize or refute him, so such unity will be relatively impossible without a change of tone and rhetoric at the top. Silence.

Whataboutism indeed.

[2006alum]

I'm not going to fall into the same trap as poisoned the CEB and Thunderdome. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't believe in Manichaean politics, one side good and the other evil. All it leads to is whataboutism, which gets you nowhere.

I find your invocation of whataboutism rather on the nose considering the discussion of who's responsible for Congressional gridlock began when you attempted to shift the blame from Trump to Congress:

The US was not embarrassed at all by SARS. I think both of the last two Administrations - Trump and Obama - had a confidence in the CDC that was unwarranted.

The better question is where was Congress in all this? The real Constitutional crisis we face is the total paralysis of Congress, now in its third decade.

A definition of whataboutism: 

Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.

Over and over, in thread after thread, those uncomfortable with criticisms of this administration have sought to point fingers elsewhere at targets presumed to be sympathetic to those criticizing the administration: at Democrats, at Blue state governors like Whitmer, at China, at experts, and so on. So accusations of whataboutism read, to me, like gaslighting of the highest order.

When many of us have fretted about the failure to take the virus seriously, some have responded by criticizing the lockdowns as economic suicide. I (and others) have repeatedly asked those who criticize the lockdowns as "committing economic suicide" to provide a coherent alternative approach. Silence.

Some have asked why it's offensive to call it the "China virus" or to discriminate against Asian Americans. I (and others) have asked those who want to call it the Wuhan/China virus what they think doing so contributes to the conversation, or why they think it's a useful strategy to imply it should be acceptable to avoid people of a certain ethnicity when the virus is utterly race-blind. Silence.

Some feel that the federal government should not be criticized and that we need to all unite together. I (and others) have then noted that Trump thrives on disunity and picking petty fights with anyone who dares to criticize or refute him, so such unity will be relatively impossible without a change of tone and rhetoric at the top. Silence.

Whataboutism indeed.