Originally Posted by Visualiza
Which is exactly part of the problem - it's framed from the POV of a defensive supporter; there isn't much, if any, impartiality present in it. In most cases, the logic applied was no better than the criticisms themselves.
I disagree, but fair enough. I thought the arguments were cogent and well presented, regardless of his opinion. Which, he was completely within his rights to express as it was an op-ed.