I agree with the need for seeking truth and questioning BS, but why be so selective when (not?) doing so?
Perspective. Out of dozens of legit arguments against Trump, I keep seeing this same De Blasio video in response. It's cherry-picked AND not about Trump..its a red herring.
Reminds me of Trump's 20K lies (I lost track of what the current number is).
Right wingers would say "but you can keep your doctor" in response to all 20K. Just like the De Blasio video response.
You do see the false equivalence there? 100 vs 1 failure, out of 150. Both "fail", and yet we can use our brains to determine that 100 failures is far, far, far worse than 1.
It's like reputation. It matters.
so yes, if I see one failure among a hundred, that later was indeed walked back, I will not post it as a response to 100 other real accusations and claim the "both sides" false equivalency.
You can look up how many people were indicted and charged in presidential administrations too, for example. Both sides have criminals.
Democrats have like 2-3 over years. Republicans some much bigger number..80+ (you can look up specifics I'm just making the broad point). You know...proportions matter. Reputation matters.
indeed, the stellar employee with a great reputation blunders, I call them into the office, ensure they found the root cause of the problem and fixed it, and took responsibility, and I don't make a big deal of it...why not? Reputation..how they handled the error, etc.
but if a consistently troubled employee makes another in a long line of errors, and gets defensive about it...they will be dealt with more harshly.
Why the different treatment ttwtt? Same reason.