| | | I created a premise that republicans can't accept facts. I laid out a logical argument to prove that case (the lie about Obama being born in Kenya) and I can do it on issue after issue. Republicans don't do facts.They do baseless opinion.
This was your "premise" that I challenged:
From the studies, I've seen once a republican learns he's wrong he'll accept the truth for a short time and then revert back to his previous belief system within weeks. Their negative reinforcements are so strong they can't stay informed for any length of time. Your "logical argument" in response consisted of five paragraphs of further bald assertions. Not a single one of them even addresses a republican, let alone a critical mass of republicans, learning he was wrong and/or reverting after having done so. If you didn't even address your claim, then you could not have proven it. Message 31325154
Now you've ignored that and moved on to the claim that "republicans can't accept facts." In support you offer the "lie about Obama being born in Kenya." That many/most republicans cannot or will not accept that Obama was born in the US is, indeed, recognizable as a fact. Yeah, finally a pony!
To reasonably prove your assertion, though, you would need to demonstrate that no republican can accept any fact, which would be impossible to do. Making allowances for the informality of this venue and the hyperbole that surrounds us, you could probably get away with demonstrating that most republicans don't accept most facts. What you have demonstrated is that most republicans don't accept one fact. That's way short.
Their "news shows" were highly rated "opinion shows" on foxnews...which is not news. They reinforce these opinions by listening to hate radio which has more opinions and more lies.
And this adds what? It doesn't support your fact-acceptance claim or your learn-the-truth claim. It's just background information about the conditions under which some republicans gather information and it doesn't differentiate those conditions from the conditions under which others gather information.
Put another way, republicans are unfit to be any position of leadership in the country - not in religion, politics, the military, business or any other position where trust is necessary.
Putting what another way? I don't see that statement as a rewording of any point previously made. In any event, it does not support either your fact-acceptance claim or your learn-the-truth claim so it's irrelevant.
This isn't an opinion. It's a fact.
And your antecedent for "this" is what? Doesn't matter. Because all your assertions are unsubstantiated opinion, not fact.
Including your opinion that any of it is fact. Perhaps you could offer "a logical argument" for your assertion that your assertions are, in fact, fact... |
|
