DescentBB

One of the things I often found intolerable about the extremist opposition to Obama was the essential attitude of 'if he is for it, we will oppose it", and the lies, exaggerations or hysterical over-reactions that came with that attitude. So, to be fair, and I'm revisiting here, I've been railing today at the anti-Trump camp after returning this afternoon from errands. I note some hysteria in some circles about a story with headlines such as "Trump silences EPA, etc". Now, if one reads the story, that isn't quite what is happening, at least for more than a week or so, pretty much SOP in this day and age of multiple communication platforms. Thus, I sort of cut and pasted the following and dropped it into a few FB threads:

ummm, if you read the whole story, it seems to be for a week or so, until they set their priorities to be reflected and communicated. If so, that is precisely NO different than most organizations would operate in this day of electronic platforms. Were they to silence those outlets permanently, it would be another matter entirely. Our side HAS to START being the adults in the room, and if we start overreacting or jumping the gun on everything, or opposing every act(thinking TPP here) merely because Trump supported it, we risk losing credibility and become everything we decried around Obama. Just sayin'

Human nature... Just sayin'

Well, either one side is intentionally spreading FUD just to incite reactions from the other side, or there is a very large dose of incompetence flowing from the office of our president. Neither explanation is charitable.

We just watched the election of a man that continuously declares outright falsehoods. I'd hate to think what might happen if we risked losing credibility.

Vander wrote:We just watched the election of a man that continuously declares outright falsehoods. I'd hate to think what might happen if we risked losing credibility.

yup, my point, precisely. Credibility, restraint ought to be hallmarks of the resistance.

I'm afraid I was being sarcastic. I suppose my point is that credibility isn't worth as much when your opponent has completely forsaken it and still won.

I disagree. Maintaining integrity is the contrast that has to be maintained to fight back. When your facts check out, it is tough to dispute them without lying further, and eventually that becomes overwhelmingly blatant.

callmeslick wrote:Maintaining integrity is the contrast that has to be maintained to fight back.

I would say maintaining more integrity than the other side is what needs to be maintained. And they're setting a low bar. Just to clarify, I'm not saying we need to go around declaring falsehoods. I'm just saying that being strictly accurate isn't worth what it used to be.

When your facts check out, it is tough to dispute them without lying further, and eventually that becomes overwhelmingly blatant.

We're well past "lying further" and being "overwhelmingly blatant" about it. Waiting around for Trump to implode hasn't worked for anyone. Not the rest of the GOP clown car, not Clinton. What on earth makes you think fighting the good fight will work now? Our supposed compunction for accuracy is being exploited. While we're disputing the blatant falsehood of the day or haranguing ourselves to be more accurate, how many horrible policies will quietly fly under the radar because attention is not limitless?

Washington Post wrote:If a significant portion of Trump supporters are willing to champion obvious fabrications, challenging fabrications with facts will be difficult.

link

I'm a little scattershot in my thinking on this, as I'm still trying to wrap my head around the complete clusterfuck the next couple years will be.

Vander wrote:I would say maintaining more integrity than the other side is what needs to be maintained.

there's a low threshold, as you note. And being the side that demands a return to actual accuracy within human limits should be a valid goal. Oh, and I'm totally with you on the sense that I cannot believe this is happening to the nation I grew up in, and which my families roots exist in. I can almost hear my first ancestor to this land spinning in his grave. This is not the sort of place his parents sent him off to in the hope of welcoming and tolerance of different religions..