dragonfire8974
Scout
so i had a debate with my friend over the reform of course because he told me that the medtronic corporation was laying off their whole r&d department because of the taxes levied on them. whether or not i do or do not think they are smart, this was an out and out lie. the medtronic press release directly stated on march 16th (or thereabouts) that they would not lay off any employee because of the new taxes.
my point follows. does the modern state of political ideals really come to this? fabricating lies to illustrate a point? the whole premise of the argument was a lie and, whether intentional or not, has marginalized him. I don't understand what the purpose of such a lie would be. especially since it was so easily rebuffed with a simple google search, why is it that in the modern state of political debate such falsehoods are accepted?
really that's it. i don't wanna reference specific examples because there's no point for partisan debates left vs right vs center vs crazy because it doesn't make any progress. but why is it that such a lie is acceptable in a political debate? is it willful ignorance? attempting to interpret data to fit one's own views? is it an intentional deception hoping that no one will investigate the claim to make a point that doesn't exist in an attempt to pick apart something one perceives as flawed but cannot conceive of a proper way to convey that idea? or is it just sensationalism, like when i was a kid and another kid told me about a thunder shark that was as tall as the hotel we were next to, and then i started telling other people about it because i wanted to sound pretentious?
rant done... sorry for the poison. it just gets on my nerves how modern discourse is not based in fact or logic
my point follows. does the modern state of political ideals really come to this? fabricating lies to illustrate a point? the whole premise of the argument was a lie and, whether intentional or not, has marginalized him. I don't understand what the purpose of such a lie would be. especially since it was so easily rebuffed with a simple google search, why is it that in the modern state of political debate such falsehoods are accepted?
really that's it. i don't wanna reference specific examples because there's no point for partisan debates left vs right vs center vs crazy because it doesn't make any progress. but why is it that such a lie is acceptable in a political debate? is it willful ignorance? attempting to interpret data to fit one's own views? is it an intentional deception hoping that no one will investigate the claim to make a point that doesn't exist in an attempt to pick apart something one perceives as flawed but cannot conceive of a proper way to convey that idea? or is it just sensationalism, like when i was a kid and another kid told me about a thunder shark that was as tall as the hotel we were next to, and then i started telling other people about it because i wanted to sound pretentious?
rant done... sorry for the poison. it just gets on my nerves how modern discourse is not based in fact or logic
and here you are responding against what mike posted...I thought you would..and you did.... 
