Having been spoonfed DNC "talking points" since I was old enough to comprehend them has had a good end result: I've become a competent researcher, when I have the time and inclination to undertake such research.
What's funny is that, the more I research, the more I find smoke and mirrors among virtually every "statistic" thrown out by strategists on both the left and right side of the aisle. I've had to learn the meaning of words such as "average" and "median" to make a distinction between the two, and I've had to learn to see beyond political spin.
As I watch the debate rage on about WalMart, I find it interesting that the many COMPELLING points I have made about the company from INSIDE information and dissecting the information provided by opponents have gone largely unchallenged. I have profiled three local businesses that are either out of business or soon to be in our community and offered compelling reasons why they are going out of business that have positively NOTHING to do with WalMart. Again, no credible challenge from those who insist that WalMart is the devil. While I haven't yet mentioned that since the Supercenter was built in our community, sales tax revenues have INCREASED 10% over budgeted expectations, giving the community a rather welcome windfall, I doubt that my mentioning it now will have any punch with those who would rather lean on anecdotal reports from disgruntled ex employees.
Similarly, when I look at the statements of how our standard of living is declining (remember my comment about "average" vs. "median"? It comes into play here), and challenge the report based on the numbers, I again go unchallenged.
I find it interesting that the documentation and (in some cases) hard research that I have done to advance my position has gone unnoticed by all but those who lean towards my position, and that ad hominem attacks that I have purged from my blog have been defended as "free speech" and credible arguments. My numbers may be flawed, but if so, SHOW ME WHERE, using the same solid research and hard statistics that I used to advance them in the first place.
I have met a rather high standard of proof in almost all of my arguments, yet opponents will not acknowledge that fact, but will rather rely on opinions to counter my arguments. There are, of course, a few exceptions, but even those tend to disappear in the face of the numbers.
The reason I present these arguments in the first place is because they should be a topic for discussion. If I am wrong, show me factually and credibly where I am wrong. Use hard numbers and data that prove your position and disprove mine. Please. The truth is, if I AM wrong, I want to be shown WHERE.
Yes I'll argue. Yes I'll debate. Because I truly feel the numbers I'm using have merit. There are still a LOT of numbers I don't understand, so it's possible there's some factor I've overlooked. If you're going to counter the numbers, though, come with the facts. I give you as much.