Observe Carefully the Way Liberals Talk

[protectionist]

Since liberals, especially media and Democrat politicians, have their own assumptions (which aren’t always the same as conservatives), one should be careful to not accept all the premises. Liberals often talk fast, and ramble on in discussions, stating things as fact, which are highly debateable.

Also, they often use words that don’t accurately describe what they’re talking about. One example is on today’s broadcast of PBS NewsHour, where Judy Woodruff asked the British Defense Sect. about how to deal with “extremism”

By the words leading up to this, it was clear that they were talking about ISLAMIC JIHAD (AKA Radical Muslim terrorism). But heaven forbid that a liberal would ever risk offending a demographic group, by calling them by their name. Apparently, Obama may be out of office, but his goofiness still prevails. It really would help if liberals would encompass reality in their speech, instead of dancing around it.

In another example in the same show, , David Brooks of the New York Times, mentioned >> “the issue of Russian meddling” (as he put it). Mmmm. Excuse me. “Meddling” ? I don’t think so. There hasn’t been a single iota of evidence that there has been any “meddling” in the 2016 election, as they were discussing, so no David, I don’t think you get to call it an “issue” (when there flat out, IS NO ISSUE). Just because some organized group of people decide they’re going to shout and stamp their feet, that doesn’t mean you have an issue. Liberals speak of “Russian meddling” as if it were a forgone conclusion.

They also speak of discrimination as if this was 1955, when actually racial discrimination, since 1961, has largely been against white people in affirmative action. They also speak of gun-free zones as if these were protecting people, despite repeated examples of exactly the opposite of that.

When liberals talk, Americans (including other liberals) should always be on guard to say >> “Wait a minute! You can’t say that.”

 

[S.J.]

They are artful liars, yes.

 

[Moonglow]

Oh please, what a load, , nothing those halo wearing GOP righties would ever consider...

 

[TheDude]

Take a peak at Yahoo news for example. They consistently use story titles with a word that doesn't fit. The word is intended to incite hatred and division. At a glance, here are a few from their current front page. This is all fake news as well.

Unable to shove his way into prime position, Trump was left on the outside looking in for his first G20 group photo..........................This one is a beauty. He didn't try and shove anyone and was content where he was standing.


Donald Trump 'behaving like a dictator by leaving underqualified socialite daughter to fill in for him at G20' .........................Yikes

China and Russia are totally playing Trump together.

 

[Slade3200]

Since liberals, especially media and Democrat politicians, have their own assumptions (which aren’t always the same as conservatives), one should be careful to not accept all the premises. Liberals often talk fast, and ramble on in discussions, stating things as fact, which are highly debateable.

Also, they often use words that don’t accurately describe what they’re talking about. One example is on today’s broadcast of PBS NewsHour, where Judy Woodruff asked the British Defense Sect. about how to deal with “extremism”

By the words leading up to this, it was clear that they were talking about ISLAMIC JIHAD (AKA Radical Muslim terrorism). But heaven forbid that a liberal would ever risk offending a demographic group, by calling them by their name. Apparently, Obama may be out of office, but his goofiness still prevails. It really would help if liberals would encompass reality in their speech, instead of dancing around it.

In another example in the same show, , David Brooks of the New York Times, mentioned >> “the issue of Russian meddling” (as he put it). Mmmm. Excuse me. “Meddling” ? I don’t think so. There hasn’t been a single iota of evidence that there has been any “meddling” in the 2016 election, as they were discussing, so no David, I don’t think you get to call it an “issue” (when there flat out, IS NO ISSUE). Just because some organized group of people decide they’re going to shout and stamp their feet, that doesn’t mean you have an issue. Liberals speak of “Russian meddling” as if it were a forgone conclusion.

They also speak of discrimination as if this was 1955, when actually racial discrimination, since 1961, has largely been against white people in affirmative action. They also speak of gun-free zones as if these were protecting people, despite repeated examples of exactly the opposite of that.

When liberals talk, Americans (including other liberals) should always be on guard to say >> “Wait a minute! You can’t say that.”

Hate to break this to you but conservatives do the same thing... it's called partisanship and both sides are riddled with dishonest spin. Both sides also have honest actors. Would be great if our public would reward honesty instead of feeding the drama queens

 

[S.J.]

Since liberals, especially media and Democrat politicians, have their own assumptions (which aren’t always the same as conservatives), one should be careful to not accept all the premises. Liberals often talk fast, and ramble on in discussions, stating things as fact, which are highly debateable.

Also, they often use words that don’t accurately describe what they’re talking about. One example is on today’s broadcast of PBS NewsHour, where Judy Woodruff asked the British Defense Sect. about how to deal with “extremism”

By the words leading up to this, it was clear that they were talking about ISLAMIC JIHAD (AKA Radical Muslim terrorism). But heaven forbid that a liberal would ever risk offending a demographic group, by calling them by their name. Apparently, Obama may be out of office, but his goofiness still prevails. It really would help if liberals would encompass reality in their speech, instead of dancing around it.

In another example in the same show, , David Brooks of the New York Times, mentioned >> “the issue of Russian meddling” (as he put it). Mmmm. Excuse me. “Meddling” ? I don’t think so. There hasn’t been a single iota of evidence that there has been any “meddling” in the 2016 election, as they were discussing, so no David, I don’t think you get to call it an “issue” (when there flat out, IS NO ISSUE). Just because some organized group of people decide they’re going to shout and stamp their feet, that doesn’t mean you have an issue. Liberals speak of “Russian meddling” as if it were a forgone conclusion.

They also speak of discrimination as if this was 1955, when actually racial discrimination, since 1961, has largely been against white people in affirmative action. They also speak of gun-free zones as if these were protecting people, despite repeated examples of exactly the opposite of that.

When liberals talk, Americans (including other liberals) should always be on guard to say >> “Wait a minute! You can’t say that.”

Hate to break this to you but conservatives do the same thing... it's called partisanship and both sides are riddled with dishonest spin. Both sides also have honest actors. Would be great if our public would reward honesty instead of feeding the drama queens

Can you give us an example of conservatives doing that?

 

[ColonelAngus]

They are artful liars, yes.

I find them transparent as hell.

Just stick to irrefutable facts and one can absolutely destroy a liberal spouting off about the Alt-right and Trump pissing on Russian whores.

 

[protectionist]

Can you give us an example of conservatives doing that?

They sure don't call jihadists >> "extremists" ...........or call a jihad massacre >. "workplace violence"

 

[Slade3200]

Since liberals, especially media and Democrat politicians, have their own assumptions (which aren’t always the same as conservatives), one should be careful to not accept all the premises. Liberals often talk fast, and ramble on in discussions, stating things as fact, which are highly debateable.

Also, they often use words that don’t accurately describe what they’re talking about. One example is on today’s broadcast of PBS NewsHour, where Judy Woodruff asked the British Defense Sect. about how to deal with “extremism”

By the words leading up to this, it was clear that they were talking about ISLAMIC JIHAD (AKA Radical Muslim terrorism). But heaven forbid that a liberal would ever risk offending a demographic group, by calling them by their name. Apparently, Obama may be out of office, but his goofiness still prevails. It really would help if liberals would encompass reality in their speech, instead of dancing around it.

In another example in the same show, , David Brooks of the New York Times, mentioned >> “the issue of Russian meddling” (as he put it). Mmmm. Excuse me. “Meddling” ? I don’t think so. There hasn’t been a single iota of evidence that there has been any “meddling” in the 2016 election, as they were discussing, so no David, I don’t think you get to call it an “issue” (when there flat out, IS NO ISSUE). Just because some organized group of people decide they’re going to shout and stamp their feet, that doesn’t mean you have an issue. Liberals speak of “Russian meddling” as if it were a forgone conclusion.

They also speak of discrimination as if this was 1955, when actually racial discrimination, since 1961, has largely been against white people in affirmative action. They also speak of gun-free zones as if these were protecting people, despite repeated examples of exactly the opposite of that.

When liberals talk, Americans (including other liberals) should always be on guard to say >> “Wait a minute! You can’t say that.”

Hate to break this to you but conservatives do the same thing... it's called partisanship and both sides are riddled with dishonest spin. Both sides also have honest actors. Would be great if our public would reward honesty instead of feeding the drama queens

Can you give us an example of conservatives doing that?

I watch Fox News and listen to conservative radio programs like Levins show all the time and I hear so much of the same dishonest spin coming from that side. Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you. Can you not recognize that it's going on? I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.
Or just listen to how the Republicans dodge and spin the health care debates..

The partisans are always spinning and extreme garbage is always being slung from both sides

 

[Slade3200]

Can you give us an example of conservatives doing that?

They sure don't call jihadists >> "extremists" ...........or call a jihad massacre >. "workplace violence"

Jihadists are absolutely extremists... what are you talking about?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Can you give us an example of conservatives doing that?

They sure don't call jihadists >> "extremists" ...........or call a jihad massacre >. "workplace violence"

"Manmade disaster" is a good one.

It's called a fucking terrorist attack, you pussies.

 

[protectionist]

I watch Fox News and listen to conservative radio programs like Levins show all the time and I hear so much of the same dishonest spin coming from that side. Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you. Can you not recognize that it's going on? I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

The partisans are always spinning and extreme garbage is always being slung from both sides

You call Seth Rich a conspiracy ? Jeeez. You don't know that the Clintons have killed over 50 people ? click this link and really read through it - I dare ya.

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

 

[protectionist]

Jihadists are absolutely extremists... what are you talking about?

To call them extremists is minimizing. It is covering up who they are. people who wash their cars every day are "extremists" Get it ?

I'm off the computer -Bye.

 

[S.J.]

Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you.

If it's as common as you say, you shouldn't have to do much digging.

I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

Ok, go ahead.

Or just listen to how the Republicans dodge and spin the health care debates..

Example?

 

[Slade3200]

I watch Fox News and listen to conservative radio programs like Levins show all the time and I hear so much of the same dishonest spin coming from that side. Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you. Can you not recognize that it's going on? I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

The partisans are always spinning and extreme garbage is always being slung from both sides

You call Seth Rich a conspiracy ? Jeeez. You don't know that the Clintons have killed over 50 people ? click this link and really read through it - I dare ya.

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

I rest my case

 

[Slade3200]

Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you.

If it's as common as you say, you shouldn't have to do much digging.

I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

Ok, go ahead.

Or just listen to how the Republicans dodge and spin the health care debates..

Example?

Here is one from the campaign


Here are a few whoopers from our leader:


Here are a few examples of Fox getting debunked on their spin



We could also make a similar list from the Left. Point is, it happens on both s sides. Don't know why you can't acknowledge that. Do you really think Right wing shit doesn't stink?

 

[S.J.]

Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you.

If it's as common as you say, you shouldn't have to do much digging.

I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

Ok, go ahead.

Or just listen to how the Republicans dodge and spin the health care debates..

Example?

Here is one from the campaign


Here are a few whoopers from our leader:


Here are a few examples of Fox getting debunked on their spin



We could also make a similar list from the Left. Point is, it happens on both s sides. Don't know why you can't acknowledge that. Do you really think Right wing shit doesn't stink?

Politicians change their stances, embellish, and yes, lie. That's not really contested, and it's not what we're talking about here so your first two videos are more of a distraction than anything else. The third one does not debunk anything, it's nothing more than guests giving opposing opinions. The Dude gave us concrete examples in post #4. Give us the conservative equivalent of them please.

 

[Doc1]

They are artful liars, yes.

So are Righties.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since liberals, especially media and Democrat politicians, have their own assumptions (which aren’t always the same as conservatives), one should be careful to not accept all the premises. Liberals often talk fast, and ramble on in discussions, stating things as fact, which are highly debateable.

Also, they often use words that don’t accurately describe what they’re talking about. One example is on today’s broadcast of PBS NewsHour, where Judy Woodruff asked the British Defense Sect. about how to deal with “extremism”

By the words leading up to this, it was clear that they were talking about ISLAMIC JIHAD (AKA Radical Muslim terrorism). But heaven forbid that a liberal would ever risk offending a demographic group, by calling them by their name. Apparently, Obama may be out of office, but his goofiness still prevails. It really would help if liberals would encompass reality in their speech, instead of dancing around it.

In another example in the same show, , David Brooks of the New York Times, mentioned >> “the issue of Russian meddling” (as he put it). Mmmm. Excuse me. “Meddling” ? I don’t think so. There hasn’t been a single iota of evidence that there has been any “meddling” in the 2016 election, as they were discussing, so no David, I don’t think you get to call it an “issue” (when there flat out, IS NO ISSUE). Just because some organized group of people decide they’re going to shout and stamp their feet, that doesn’t mean you have an issue. Liberals speak of “Russian meddling” as if it were a forgone conclusion.

They also speak of discrimination as if this was 1955, when actually racial discrimination, since 1961, has largely been against white people in affirmative action. They also speak of gun-free zones as if these were protecting people, despite repeated examples of exactly the opposite of that.

When liberals talk, Americans (including other liberals) should always be on guard to say >> “Wait a minute! You can’t say that.”

Your post proves you're mentally ill.

 

[Slade3200]

Do I really need to dig through old tape to find examples for you.

If it's as common as you say, you shouldn't have to do much digging.

I can use some obvious examples with the birthed attacks on obama to the Seth Rich conspiracy.

Ok, go ahead.

Or just listen to how the Republicans dodge and spin the health care debates..

Example?

Here is one from the campaign


Here are a few whoopers from our leader:


Here are a few examples of Fox getting debunked on their spin



We could also make a similar list from the Left. Point is, it happens on both s sides. Don't know why you can't acknowledge that. Do you really think Right wing shit doesn't stink?

Politicians change their stances, embellish, and yes, lie. That's not really contested, and it's not what we're talking about here so your first two videos are more of a distraction than anything else. The third one does not debunk anything, it's nothing more than guests giving opposing opinions. The Dude gave us concrete examples in post #4. Give us the conservative equivalent of them please.

Oh, thats all you want? All i have to do is go to Breitbart... easy:

'The solution to online 'harassment' is simple: Women should log off'

A article in July argued that women are "screwing up the internet for men by invading every space we have online and ruining it with attention-seeking and a needy, demanding, touchy-feely form of modern feminism."

'Bill Kristol: Republican spoiler, renegade Jew'

A post in May described a "third party effort to block Trump's path to the White House" that Breitbart claimed was orchestrated by the prominent conservative and Trump critic Bill Kristol. The headline is one of the site's most infamous, and was featured this fall in a Democratic political ad.

'Trannies whine about hilarious Bruce Jenner billboard'

A December 2015 article criticized a campaign to take down a billboard mocking Caitlyn Jenner after she went public with her transition last year. "Transsexuals have forced a company in New Zealand to take down a billboard poking fun at Bruce Jenner and his man-parts," the article said.

'Birth control makes women unattractive and crazy'

A December 2015 article made a case against birth control and concluded, "We need the kids if we're to breed enough to keep the Muslim invaders at bay." The article was one of many blasted by critics of Breitbart.

'Suck it up buttercups: Dangerous Faggot Tour returns to colleges in September'

An article in July touted tour dates for a show headlined by Breitbart tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos, a prolific Breitbart writer who was banned from Twitter this summer for violating rules against abuse.

'Hoist it high and proud: The Confederate flag proclaims a glorious heritage'

An article published in July 2015, weeks after a mass shooting at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina, slammed critics of the Confederate flag, a symbol embraced by the gunman. "Those who initiated identity politics are attempting to obliterate the Southern identity," the author of the Breitbart piece wrote. "Every tree, every rooftop, every picket fence, every telegraph pole in the South should be festooned with the Confederate battle flag."

' "Would you rather your child had feminism or cancer?" '

A February post on the website included a video created by the Michigan Review, a University of Michigan publication, to promote a debate on campus featuring Yiannopoulos. The publication asked participants the question.

'Gay rights have made us dumber, it's time to get back in the closet'

A June 2015 article by Yiannopoulos, who is openly gay, argued in favor of "forcing gays back into the closet." "I find it depressing that my fellow fags have stopped breeding," Yiannopoulos wrote.

'Science proves it: Fat-shaming works'

A July article argued that overweight people should be shamed into losing weight. "A 20-year-old has their entire life ahead of them, and those are the people we should focus on shaming into shape," the article said.

"There's no hiring bias against women in tech, they just suck at interviews"