|
Re: Objectively intelligent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I read the article you cited. Here's the TL;DR for anyone interested:
"I think Cotton's article should not have been given a platform at the Times. We should have people who share my sensibilities limit what gets on the Oped page."
It's just another asshole with an inflated sense of self-enlightenment, and entitlement, declaring himself a brahmin who ought to have editorial powers over the public square. The article offered no insight. I should have gone with "I want my 3 minutes back" rather than treat it seriously.
|
You are more interesting when you're not a moron. (And thank you for confirming that you hadn't read it when you first responded, like Bennet not having read Cotton's op-ed when the NYT was sanctimoniously telling people how important it is to be exposed to other views.)
__________________
的t was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
Threaded Mode