Look, you made an “observation” based on something you wanted to be true, and very limited data. You got called on it, gently at first.

I don’t recall any “teaching of rhetoric” that insists nobody point out the holes in your argument.

Two of the matters which used to acquired in an education, rather than simple technical training, are logic and rhetoric.

And the most elemental teaching of rhetoric is sticking to one point at a time. You noticed I mentioned Republican deceit and deception. I didn’ t mention political deception and deceit. If you want to talk about Democratic deception and deceit you are free to do that in your own thread.

As far as my examination of my own preconceptions I have listed on these boards the many matters I have examined and changed my mind on. The honesty of the US government is one, the altruism of the same is another, Vietnam is another, MIA/POWs, Israel/Palestine, trustworthiness of police, are the first to come to mind. There are more.

It’s a different world and country than I was taught. Then I couldn’t have handled what I know now, and as difficult as it’s been to realize how duplicitious my government is, it’s true. Not to be trusted.

Many people find it too hard to challenge those early teachings, too anxiety producing, too disconcerting, and never do it. Governments all over the world count on that.

Apparently I’ve got to use larger print.

Most of the Democrats in that state are not listing their party blatantly on their websites, either. I looked. You obviously didn’t, despite me pointing this out yesterday.

Is it “deceit and deception” when Democrats do it?

You make a lot of noise about discarding old “childish” ideas and learning new ones, but you rarely examine your own preconceptions, and nobody else can pry them loose with a crowbar.

One candidate for Congress is shown saying he was a Tea Party member before the Tea Party, and now runs an ad saying what is needed is bipartisan, across the aisle cooperation to solve problems.

It’s going to be a long, long campaign, longer even than Republican noses will be.

The organization of data is very good in many cases. It’s also a good starting point to pick up links to original sources.

As an exercise, click on various Democratic Congressional candidates on that site and see how prominent the word “Democrat” is on the initial pages.

It took me twenty seconds to find this information.