I don't think anyone in the world understood "anybody" to include toddlers.
-
-
Replying to @_mike_schilling @samwilkinson and
OK. How about the 8 million residents of NYC? How far do you want to defend an obviously false statement just because it supports your point of view?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @samwilkinson and
Yes, that was a serious exaggeration.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @_mike_schilling @J_RtheWriter and
Gospel truth compared to anything that comes out of Trump's mouth, of course. And this is the irritating part. It's like when a Washington Post story gets called a lie for getting some details wrong, when the Washington Times gets a pass for complete BS, because we expect that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @_mike_schilling @samwilkinson and
How about we just call false false regardless of who’s saying it and make our political arguments to one another in true and accurate statements?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @samwilkinson and
No statement is completely true of accurate. We'd have to agree to do the same level of nitpicking on statements we do and don't disagree with. Which is a great ideal.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @_mike_schilling @samwilkinson and
If you want to equivocate to make Obama’s statement look better, that’s fine. I still believe in true and false. At least the lower-case versions
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @samwilkinson and
So a story that's accurate except that it calls Lindsey Graham a senator from Georgia is false, period, end of story?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_mike_schilling @samwilkinson and
Here’s one way that helps me judge what’s true and what’s false: when things are true you tend to not have to search far and wide for off-topic examples to make those things appear true
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @samwilkinson and
Ah, I see. I'm not justifying Obama at this moment. We agreed he exaggerated. I'm trying to find neutral principles we can agree on going forward.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
OK, I can agree with that. My principles: there are facts that exist separate from the underlying accuracy of a statement. You can get the facts wrong and still have a point. But you should still try to get the facts right and admit when you’ve gotten them wrong. It may matter
-
-
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @samwilkinson and
Hard to disagree with any of that.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.