[sonick]

Originally Posted by underscore

It was a genuine question, but it's pretty telling that you and JD can never actually answer a question about what the Cons will actually do. Just "hurr durr libruls bad" every time.

Originally Posted by whitev70r

^ in a sense, I can see how it is valid to critique the present gov't and not have real solutions for the problem as it is quite complex and need multi-level approach to something eg. repeat offender in the criminal system (legal, police, courts, mental health support, corrections, rehab, etc.) .

The problem with criticizing and critiquing is that it implies a level of critical thinking (it's in the word itself), which as pointed out by underscore is not happening.

Critical thinking involves seeing the perspective of the side you are criticizing, understanding the thought process tradeoffs being made in their decisions, and then criticizing the actions of decisions.

You complain about a situation. You criticize the actions and decisions that led to the situation.

Children aren't criticizing their parents when they won't let them have candy before dinner. They are are complaining.

Criticizing the parents would mean the child is engaging in critical thought to understand the tradeoff the parents, that giving the child candy would spoil their dinner, and then stating a case why that is the wrong decision.

What Honda and JD are doing are complaining, not criticizing.