A defense of Christopher Columbus

From Tommy de Seno for Fox News.  I know.  But why do we assume he must be some partisan hack, while those who pull all sorts of figures out of the air and quote sources without reference or background are automatically correct?  Because post-modernity, that's why.  We're far less interested in truth than we are being awesome and advancing agendas.  Truth be told, I have no problem condemning Columbus for some of his actions against the native population.  Just as I have no problem condemning Thomas More for his actions against Protestants.  Nor do I just use 'oh well, different time' as a blanket excuse.  Nor do I pardon the natives who slaughtered Columbus's men because, well, different culture.  But I don't simply condemn them.  Nor do I accept whatever latest 'proof' happens to scratch my vindictive itch.  Right now, based on what we know versues listening to people 500 years with axes to grind, Columbus was like so many of us: a product of his time, a flawed human being, and someone who did amazing things all at the same time.  More proof than the same ones trying to convince me that a million were killed during the Inquisition or that we're approaching a hundred million dead in Iraq is going to be required.