You don't write good code or make compelling arguments by taking extreme points of view. Everything has flaws (and by the way, so does hardware; those bugs can mess up "good" code very nicely).
It's your chosen subset of features and available techniques that decides whether or not you are a good programmer who can be trusted to build something important in an efficient and maintainable way.
Parts of these rants sound like project managers who can never figure out when to blame themselves, too. If your code was butchered because someone misused a programming language then you didn't assign the right programmer to the task or you didn't set expectations properly (or heck, maybe you just didn't pay enough). It's never as simple as "this language sucks".
Really I think this guy comes off as being just as biased as Torvalds. He basically states upfront that if you have "The opinion that C is a much better language than C++" then you're obviously wrong. Then he accuses those people of prejudice!
It's your chosen subset of features and available techniques that decides whether or not you are a good programmer who can be trusted to build something important in an efficient and maintainable way.
Parts of these rants sound like project managers who can never figure out when to blame themselves, too. If your code was butchered because someone misused a programming language then you didn't assign the right programmer to the task or you didn't set expectations properly (or heck, maybe you just didn't pay enough). It's never as simple as "this language sucks".