Michael Schellenberger

Rank 42 of 47

Score -120

-2

There has long been cynicism about a president's ability to shrink the federal government to make it more efficient.

This ruling proves it can be done, with no "constitutional crisis" required.

As the kids say, "You can just do things."

/END

2/22/2025, 2:17:14 AM

In reply to:

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

The caricature of government employees is that they act entitled to their jobs. Well, that's how these USAID employees behaved.

The plaintiffs claimed that losing their jobs would cause "irreparable damage." But unemployment is repairable. You can get another job.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

The plaintiffs themselves admitted when confronted, that many of their claims weren't true, including the notion that the funding freeze had prevented
USAID employees from paying their bills.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

The rhetoric employed by the media, USAID's activist labor union, and the taxpayer-funded NGO industrial complex was grossly irresponsible and constituted emotional blackmail.

At various moments, the judge scolds the plaintiffs for being misleading:

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi…

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

The claims of "emotional harm" were too "'hypothetical' to "support a finding of irreparable harm."
"Upon scrutiny" the alleged injuries "are not irreparable."
USAID had not deprived anyone of necessary security.
And USAID had an orderly plan to return people home.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

Media outlets uncritically embraced the notion that what Trump had done was unconstitutional. They uncritically accepted claims that USAID people would somehow be put in grave danger. It was all total nonsense, the evidence shows.

Michael Shellenberger

@shellenberger

329d

For weeks, the media said that, by eliminating USAID, Trump had created a "constitutional crisis" and "abandoned" vulnerable people. It was all nonsense. A federal judge today ruled that the "risk posed to USAID employees... is far more minimal than it initially appeared. "

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the efficiency of government and the implications of a court ruling on federal government operations. It suggests that a president can make the government more efficient without causing a constitutional crisis, using a colloquial expression to emphasize the point.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not directly harm others but could be seen as dismissive of concerns about government efficiency and constitutional issues.
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement lacks empathy towards those who may be affected by government downsizing, focusing instead on the efficiency argument. [-1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement does not engage in personal attacks but uses a dismissive tone towards opposing views. [-1]