I know what you said. I was extrapolating to the rational conclusion of your upside down reality logic. You claimed that Blah's statement was biased because he did not take into account your point of view. That is rubbish. Either he is right, or you are right (you are not right). Reality doesn't care about whether your feelings are taken into account.
No, you were projecting your own biases in exactly the same way he was. Absolutely NOTHING that I said could IN ANY WAY be interpreted the way you are. It's entirely out of your own mind.
I said that Blah's statement was biased because he based it upon subjective points, assuming they were decided facts instead of contended theories (which is what they are). I showed that his warrants were NOT universally accepted, thereby answering his initial question in the negative.
His question wasn't 'is government inefficient', it was 'does everyone agree that government is inefficient for these reasons'. If even one person's point of view (on even a single part of his claim) differs then the answer to his question is negative. I showed that MANY differ on ALL of his points, thereby adding support to that stance. I then pointed out where and why he failed in his presumption.
Because you misinterpreted the initial question (and Blah based his presumption upon false warrants) your statement about him or I being right is a false dichotomy.
Not sure why you're even bringing this up, but reality (as you invoke) does not exist meaningfully beyond the individual ability to perceive it. Which is to say, while it may exist it is unknowable beyond individual perception and underlying bias, and therefore invoking it is moot.