I admit a fair amount of ignorance on this subject, and can see the potential abuses. HOWEVER, George Will is not a trustworthy source for anything, and his gleeful attack of the most conservative Senator in Washington should cause one to consider the source.
So sure he has a point, but he is also the one from whom I long ago learned that 'the perfect is the enemy of the good.'
George fathoms himself perfect, from which he is far, and picks at and demeans anything that doesn't fit his far from perfect picture, which is his own unconsciously fabricated picture of himself - a manifestation of his ego - gross pride. Thinking so highly of his ideas, and believing anything athwart thereof to be reprehensible, he's become himself the enemy of the good.
By becoming so, he's long been simply the bad itself.
Oh, George "Fishnet stockings" Will...George "Leather teddy" Will?
George Will, like Jonah Goldberg and Bill Kristol, refuse to admit they were wrong about Trump, and by association, any and all members of his team. Pride comes before a fall, and these three, along with others who refuse to accept Trump, are becoming increasingly absurd and irrelevant, as are most of the MSM. A paradigm shift, of a political sort, needs to occur in their thinking, if they hope to rescue their careers, or in the case of regular citizenry, their sense of equilibrium. In more rustic terms, get on the Trump Train, as the only alternatives are to get run over or get left behind.
George Will is a pompous little bow-tied twit who became irrelevant on November 8 despite all his elitist bleating about the badness of Trump and everyday normal Americans who don’t know what he thinks he knows.
Day after day, week after week, year after year, he sat behind his keyboard spewing lies, in a studio running his mouth, and living his cloistered elitist like completely insulated from the rabble he seems to hate. He can try, certainly, and he’s doing that but his words are no longer effective, nor do they sway anyone save the dogs he lays with sharing the communal fleas of “journalism.”
Absolutely true. He is the most smug, elitist, condescending, arrogant, narrow-minded, know-it-all talking head there is among a "profession" chock full of such people.
I can't stand anything about him -- not his voice; not his looks; not the way he dresses; and most especially not his long-winded expositions on just about every topic.
I hate it when people say consider the source. Most often it is used to deflect from consideration of the point being raised. It is a BS argument. Sorry if that sounds overly harsh in response to you post. You just struck a pet peeve of mine.