ldsfaqs wrote:From what I recall the actual "ad" was accurate. What wasn't accurate was when Romney said "all" in describing the China move.
Bottom line, is only "two" Jeep models are going to be produced in the U.S. and one model the "Rodeo" is going to now be produced in China. Either way you cut it, it wasn't the lie of the year. Yes, a misrepresentation that doesn't appear to have been intentional, but still the ultimate point and truth which is jobs being moved to China is still true.
And yes, this issue is no different than Mormons and Anti-Mormons. Mormons can make a mistake sometimes on an issue or two. But Anti-Mormons lie about everything about the other side. Likewise, Liberals do the same to Conservatives. I see it over and over.
When you persist in creating an alternate reality, there is absolutely no point to try and reason with you. Aside from that, I posted mainly to share a quote I happened upon from another individual who was frustrated by the inability of his opponent to recognize not only was he wrong in his points, which the poster in question recognized due to his background training, but also by the inability of the opponent to recognize his inadequacy in regards to the entire topic:
If you insist, then I am happy enough to indulge you in your little fantasy and confess that I cannot "refute" your claims. Does that give you a little thrill? Have you won? If it does give you a thrill, then you really are a hopeless case, and you are certainly no philosopher. I also cannot refute the claims, such as they are, of the lonely souls I meet on the streets of Montreal promoting the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche, Sun Myung Moon, or Rabbi Schneerson. This does not mean that these are good ideas. Indeed it is often the case that the weaker a claim is, the harder it is to engage it substantively: one cannot get a foothold in shared background assumptions, and communication proves impossible. This is why I cannot "refute" your project. I could pick it apart critically, bit by bit (I could, for example, point out that, whatever reality is, it is certainly not, as you claim, a "criterion" of anything), but that would be a commitment that I would only be willing to make to someone who has proven willing to enter into dialog with me. And you do not seem ready to do this.
If on the other hand you find that a victory like this lacks dignity, then, again, I repeat my advice: go learn from some people who have managed to say some profound and insightful things, and get back to me in a decade or so.
http://3quarksdaily.blogs.com/3quarksda ... inor_.html