So Many Facutal Errors

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Let me break this down into a timeline.

First he said if you like your doctor you could keep him.
And he said conscience rights would be protected.

Then the ACA was enacted.

Then people weren’t able to keep their doctor, and conscience rights were not protected.

Therefore, lies.
 
Therefore, lies.
Please do not just repeat some claim, but link to precisely what was said about the conscience rights.
Please also show what aspect of the ACA, ipso fact required someone to change their doctor.
You might also catch up on the discussion of what a “lie” is and is not.
 
Last edited:

2nd paragraph down.
 
Embellishing not lying.Lots of people nflate the truth ,what I would do with my children is really a non issue .If you want to,apply that theory to politicians n general you are in for a rude awakening.Try instead to focus on how much better we are as a country now as opposed to the prior eight years when the real liar n chief was on a non stop apology tour ,blaming and denigrating our country at every turn.He as much as said we are no better n fact not even as good as other countries.
I think this is the crux of the disagreement between the sides here.

I do not think that we are better off as a country when we are run by a buffoon whose word means absolutely nothing.

I do not think we are better off as a country being run by a President who treats the other branches of government, and departments in his own executive branch, with disdain and contempt.

I do not think we are better off as a country being unpredictable and not following established diplomatic norms.

I do not think we are better off as a country being run by a President who gives his daughter power beyond her capability and in spite of nepotism laws.
 
Last edited:
Sorry you feel that way,most don’t agree with you in spite of what the media try to depict as otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Sorry you feel that way,most don’t agree with you in spite of what the media try to depict as otherwise.
Uhm, that’s not true.

The latest 538 compendium of polls show’s Trumps approval at 42.7%. That is not most people.

Now, the 52.3% of people who don’t approve of Trump, now that’s most people.
 
Last edited:
2nd paragraph down.
Thanks for this link.

It does make the same claim that you did, but with specificfity: that Obama made a pledge in 2011 to support the Weldon amendment, but broke that pledge as it support the CA law that others thought ran afoul of the Weldon amendment.
  1. You did not supply, as requested a statement from Obama making a pledge. Just an internet article making the same claim. That is not evidence of the claim.
  2. The article does not, as far as I saw in reading and finding, document the pledge so that we can see what exactly was pledged.
  3. The point is moot anyway. The Obama administration interpreted Weldon in a specific way. Others, including notably, the former Rep. Weldon disagree with that interpretation. Be that as it may, the Obama administration continued to uphold what it as the proper interpretation of Weldon, so if it had indeed pledged to uphold Weldon, its actions in support of the CA legislation did just that, form its perspective.
If you gorge on tendentious materials that spin differences of interpretations into lies, that may give you comfort for your preconceptions. But it won’t withstand scrutiny in a balanced discussion.
 
The latest 538 compendium
Data freak!
40.png
So Many Facutal Errors World News
I’m not a data freak like you.I go off of actual,conversations with real people and my own experiences You show me verifiable data that supports your premise
 
If you gorge on tendentious materials that spin differences of interpretations into lies, that may give you comfort for your preconceptions. But it won’t withstand scrutiny in a balanced discussion.
LOL the attempt at sarcasm.
I stand by my statement that Obama bald-faced lied.
EWTN radio used to play the clip of him saying that conscience rights would be protected during the opening credits of one of their news shows, either Kresta in the Afternoon or the World Over, one of those shows.

I’m a little intrigued by the fact you’re such a rabid Obama apologist. But it’s not worth my time to continue this conversation with you because you simply (by your own admission) will not believe anything you’ve decided you don’t like.

I’m out.
Peace!
 
I stand by my statement that Obama bald-faced lied.
The facts don’t agree with you.
’m a little intrigued by the fact you’re such a rabid Obama apologist.
How so? That I hold you accountable for facts? 🤣
you simply (by your own admission) will not believe anything you’ve decided you don’t like.
This statement is false, and I have not admitted to any such thing. 🤨
 
All the left has is nit picking.Its tedious for sure
Hi Jeanne, I am with you.

Of course it is important to question what the president said but then of course we need a response from the presidents office in order to have a proper discussion.

I do not know the facts here but I have questions regarding categories,

So the easiest one is to point to the ‘soon’ objection. The word ‘soon’ is subjective. It could mean 2030 or even 2050 at a stretch. This is an example of nit picking.

With regards to pay increases are we talking pay increases above inflation (i.e. real increases) or a certain type of pay increase for certain categories?

Same with ships. Are we talking about an increase in certain types of ships, in battle ready ships, are we including legacy ships etc?

I think a of the discussion with facts may depend on how you categorise things. Of course if you have Trump Derangement Syndrome you are going to categorise things so as to write a piece where you can say the President is lying. I would assume any address the President gives at such a venue is going to be proof read by military chiefs before being given.

I certainly don’t trust the Left media to give me any facts. As far as I and millions of people are concerned they have proved themselves nothing short of political cheerleaders where the word fact (like many other words) are redefined to mean whatever is politically expedient. I mean this whole Russian collusion rubbish which went on for months makes them nothing less than a laughing stock, not only to people on the conservative/libertarian side but many former Leftists jumping ship (excuse the pun),.

Again, this does not mean they are necessarily wrong in this case. But millions have reason to yawn and not trust them any more than your local taxi driver. In fact, quite a bit less actually.
 
Last edited:
I have questions regarding categories,
  1. “soon”. The actual “category” in the OP was “very soon” If 2050 is a stretch for “soon”, you might agree 2030 is a stretch for very soon.
  2. “ships” . The actual “category” in the OP was “ships.” We are not at the lowest level of ships since WWI. And we hit 355, we will not have almost a couple of hundred more ships" (Trump;s swords).
  3. “pay increases”. Increases: FY09: 3.9% FY10: 3.4% … FY17: 2.1% FY18: 2.4% . Inflation:
    (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
    Taking inflation into account exacerbates the problem.
Trump is POTUS. It is not too much to ask that he gets his facts straight in prepared speeches.
 
Thanks for the extra information, but we are still talking categories. For there to be a proper discussion then the Trump administration will have to respond to how they categorise such terms as ships and pay increases, if they think it worth their time.
 
For there to be a proper discussion
There will never be a proper discussion as long as parties are willing to indulge the notion that some possible definition can be contrived for “ship” or “pay increase” that makes these statements, false on their face, true. The massaging of “pay increase” failed, and there is not much that can be to make 72 become almost a couple of hundred.
 
Last edited:
Well I guess that is the difference between having an open mind and a closed one.
 
Well I guess that is the difference between having an open mind and a closed one.
I am not sure what your are referring to precisely, but it is not a good thing to have one mind open to falsehood.
 
………but it is not a good thing to have one mind open to falsehood.
Generally this is not so. In order to discover it is false and be able to argue against it one must first be open to listening to it.

Whether it is false or true must be discovered by the individual using their God given reason.

Thessalonians 5: 21:

One cannot know it is true or false before using their reason and one cannot use their reason until they have been open in listening to the claims.

The alternative is to believe something is false (or true) before being open to listening

This is pretty close to the definition of being stupid (or brainwashed).
 
Last edited:
Generally this is not so. In order to discover it is false and be able to ague against it one must first be open to listening to it.
Who is not listening? Trump was heard He was listened to. His statement were refuted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top