Quote:
rb wrote, "The questioner asked about death panels, and Ryan said "THose aren't the words I'd use..but it's the Independent Payment Advisory Board" Translating to plain English he said, well i don't call it that, but the death panel is the IPAB. He didn't say the IPAB was a "death panel" or that "death panels" are a fiction, which is the truth. He said they ARE something, which is a plain old fashioned lie."
Go back to your previous sentence; "Those aren't the words I'd use". Ryan distanced himself from the term "death panels" which is what Hartman suggested Ryan said. I must have missed the part where Ryan said that he defined the IPAD as a death panel. Either Ryan said that on or off tape or Hartman is the liar.
Quote:
That wasn't "Hartman's proof," it was Hartman's rebuttal. Then again, you have shown time and time again that rules of evidence are not your strong suit. It is up to the person who claims something exists, in this case a reduction in violence due to open carry laws, to prove it.
Hartman made the claim. Hartman has the obligation to defend his statement with something a little more meaty than substituting that it was pretty much impossible to prove for statistics showing that it is. You are confusing beliefs for statistics.