Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
DODGE!Try considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!Doesn't matter what you call itYou're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
"Networks" --- which I am forced to assume means TV networks --- are not "liberal" or "conservative". What they are is "capitalist". That means they're out to make a profit, whether via politics or any other avenue, and what drives that is ratings. And what drives ratings is targeting an audience, whether that audience is interested in "liberal" politics, "conservative" politics, sports, buying shit, gawking at naked people walking around on a deserted island, fake wrestling or whatever else.
Nobody has ever made a damn dime from "being liberal" or "being conservative". They make those dimes by selling eyeballs.
False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!Doesn't matter what you call itFaux news is CNN, MSNBC, nyt, wash post, pbs, and other liberal laughingstocks. Fox is fair & balanced.
You're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
Together those two add up to 1 Strong liberal.... Pathetic. They work for fox, the conservatives on CNN and MSNBC are official GOP loudmouth a holes...False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!Doesn't matter what you call itYou're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
Leave it to a liberal to post the preposterous. Did you think the protectionist didn't know what he was talking about ?Together those two add up to 1 Strong liberal.... Pathetic. They work for fox, the conservatives on CNN and MSNBC are official GOP loudmouth a holes...False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!Doesn't matter what you call it
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
Together those two add up to 1 Strong liberal.... Pathetic. They work for fox, the conservatives on CNN and MSNBC are official GOP loudmouth a holes...False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!Doesn't matter what you call it
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
Pogo apparently has no idea what I posted 35 minutes ago.Together those two add up to 1 Strong liberal.... Pathetic. They work for fox, the conservatives on CNN and MSNBC are official GOP loudmouth a holes...False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservativesYep it's the whole world of journalists versus your bought off High School grad ex Coke head pundits and your greedy idiot billionaire Financed propaganda machine, and we are the brainwashed? Hilarious!
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
OP apparently has no idea what "role playing" is.
Doesn't matter what you call itI guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.No contradiction. Never heard of "new plantation". D's give blacks AA, allow them to riot, make excuses for them. No secret.Whoa! Whoa!. You RW crybabies are adamant in portraying the democrats as progenitors of the KKK and the lords of the
"New plantations" that keep blacks from progressing. Now you want us to believe the democrats are kissing their asses.
See how contradictory and screwed up you cretins are? Make up yer friggin mind why dontcha?Faux news is CNN, MSNBC, nyt, wash post, pbs, and other liberal laughingstocks. Fox is fair & balanced.I guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.No contradiction. Never heard of "new plantation". D's give blacks AA, allow them to riot, make excuses for them. No secret.Whoa! Whoa!. You RW crybabies are adamant in portraying the democrats as progenitors of the KKK and the lords of the
"New plantations" that keep blacks from progressing. Now you want us to believe the democrats are kissing their asses.
See how contradictory and screwed up you cretins are? Make up yer friggin mind why dontcha?
You're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Pogo apparently has no idea what I posted 35 minutes ago.Together those two add up to 1 Strong liberal.... Pathetic. They work for fox, the conservatives on CNN and MSNBC are official GOP loudmouth a holes...False! I recall seeing Hannity with Alan Colmes and Geraldo Rivera. Also saw him with other liberals, 2 to 2.At Most one liberal to four conservatives, and with O'Reilly and Sean just cannon fodder to scream at and not be able to hearTry considering the FACTS. Liberal networks have few conservatives
Fox has had MANY liberals, for years now.
Fair & BALANCED.
OP apparently has no idea what "role playing" is.
Why?
Because I believe in Truth, Justice and the American Way
Do you believe in rigging your primaries?
The Democrat primaries were not rigged. They are far fairer than the Republican primaries. In SC, Sanders only got 25% of the vote and still got 25% of the delegates. Trump got only 32% and got 100% of the delegates. 68% of SC voters in the Republican primary were disenfranchised.
DNC argues in court: We don't owe anyone a fair primary process
DNC argues in court: We don't owe anyone a fair primary process
Name one thing about the Democrat primaries that was not fair. I think it was overly generous to Sanders by giving him delegates for getting 19% in Mississippi. Name 1 state in which the DNC changed votes. The DNC was backing Clinton in 2008 and Obama still won. When Clinton got 55% of the primary to Sanders' 44%, how do you give the nomination to Sanders? Maybe if Sanders had won more primaries, he would have gotten the nomination.
I do know, because I remember watching it live, that Clinton was awarded delegates in Hawaìi literally before the voting started. They call them "superdelegates". I call it "bullshit".
But again, as I essplained to blind large-font-boi, it's a political party. They're not obliged to run primaries at all, and if they do they're not obliged to follow its results. They'll do what they want, charade or no charade.
That's part of what makes the OP's grand dichotomy fallacy so absurd.
Why?
Because I believe in Truth, Justice and the American Way
Do you believe in rigging your primaries?
The Democrat primaries were not rigged. They are far fairer than the Republican primaries. In SC, Sanders only got 25% of the vote and still got 25% of the delegates. Trump got only 32% and got 100% of the delegates. 68% of SC voters in the Republican primary were disenfranchised.
DNC argues in court: We don't owe anyone a fair primary process
DNC argues in court: We don't owe anyone a fair primary process
Number one, we're not frickin' blind up in here, no reason for nursing home type font.
Number two, this isn't news. Political parties are private organizations, not government ones. They can nominate whoever they damn well please, "primaries" being little more than bread and circus to amuse the masses and make the unwashed feel "involved". So a candy can walk in with a dominating lead out of these primaries and the party can still turn him away.
Like the Republicans did in 1912. They got beat badly, but they took their party in the direction they wanted it to go, rather than where the voters wanted it to go. And that's their prerogative, because political parties are about amassing power, not about listening to voters.
You might want to tell campaign donors that it works that way at the DNC..huh?
I mean, if the winner is predetermined what's the point in a primary anyway...make sense?
You right Wingers are nuts...11). To help the Muslim Brotherhood destroy America, abolish the Constitution, and establish an Islamic state.
Muslim Brotherhood --- --- --- isn't that a synonym for the Democratic National Committee?
Yes, silly us. That is why the Muslim Brotherhood was such a frequent visitor to Obama's White House and Muslims just seem to keep showing up everywhere, throughout the DNC, as computer experts and on Hillary's and Obama's teams in top positions. Nothing to be concerned about there.
I can't remember infrastructure ever being a campaign issue for Barry
Wow, you never heard of the ARRA? That went in immediately after O'bama got in and went online around here widening the highway like literally the next day.
So you think the only real Journalist are the Liberals. Shows your bias.Doesn't matter what you call itI guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.No contradiction. Never heard of "new plantation". D's give blacks AA, allow them to riot, make excuses for them. No secret.Faux news is CNN, MSNBC, nyt, wash post, pbs, and other liberal laughingstocks. Fox is fair & balanced.I guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.No contradiction. Never heard of "new plantation". D's give blacks AA, allow them to riot, make excuses for them. No secret.
You're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had to make numerous corrections. They are untruthful, unfair and unbalanced except for a few real journalists that exist like Chris Wallace and Shep Smith.
Are you blind? He mentioned two good conservative journalists over at Fox. Most of the crowd over there are little more than propagandists.So you think the only real Journalist are the Liberals. Shows your bias.Doesn't matter what you call itI guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.Faux news is CNN, MSNBC, nyt, wash post, pbs, and other liberal laughingstocks. Fox is fair & balanced.I guess you don't watch Faux news or listen to big tush Rush. Hmmm. That's bizarre. You must be getting your kool-aid from some other flaky source.
You're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had to make numerous corrections. They are untruthful, unfair and unbalanced except for a few real journalists that exist like Chris Wallace and Shep Smith.
Yes I do.And I suppose you have some numbers to back that up ? From a neutral/objective source ? Which includes the benefits to the foreign countries ? Which is current (2016) ?My word lad...those pittances you call remittances are nothing compared to the resources we exploit from foreign soil.Yeah. Just look at all that money they lose by no longer being able to carry out their remittances imperialism upon us.The world is terrified when Republicans are in charge
The next Democratic President is sure to get a Nobel Prize
Mexico - $24 Billion/year.
.China, India, Philippines, Guatemala, Nigeria, etc
Oh it's absolutely true Pothead. I could post the guy's name but it would identify my town. But it's not like it's a rarity. And no, it's not a "nonpartisan election" -- the man has an R after his name some years, a D in others.
You want the answer, don't you? Clearly the OP can't figure it out.
Take Arlen Specter. Please. Came up in city-level politics, as a Democrat, because that's how you get elected in a city. Then switched to Republican and got elected Senator because that's how you get elected in a state described as "Philadelphia on one end, Pittsburgh on the other end and Alabama in between". Then later switched again to Democrat when he thought that's the way the wind was blowing. Or his colleague Frank Rizzo in the same city -- ran for mayor as a Democrat, in full support of Nixon, because again that's how you get elected in a city. Ray Nagin did the same thing years later in New Orleans. Or take Richard Shelby. Or Trent Lott. Or Jesse Helms. Started life as Democrats because that's how you got elected in the South, then switched to Republican because that's where the South was shifting.
They're all the same guys. There were not three Arlen Specters. There were not two Frank Rizzos. There are not two Ray Nagins. There are not two Richard Shelbys or two Jesse Helmses or two Trent Lotts. They're all the same people taking different avenues at different times.
And in the same way there are not two guys succeeding himself as my town's sheriff. When he thinks the poitical winds favor Democrats, he's got a D after his name. When it's the other way around he wears an R. Not that there's anything particularly D or R about sheriffing (or running a city) anyway.
This is what you blanket generalization/false dichotomy wankers don't get. A political party label is just a means to an end. Nothing more. It's the horse you ride to where you're going. You ride the blue horse if it's more likely to win, you ride the red horse if it's more likely. Whatever works in that time and place. It doesn't confer some kind of "character" or "personality trait" on the bearer. It's no different that the question of whether you drive from point A to point B in a Honda or in a Toyota. You're the same person going to the same place either way. It's just a question of which vehicle is more likely to get you there. And this false dichotomy of "labels" is just there for simpletons like you and the OP who can't deal with a world of nuance where everything isn't painted red or blue, one or zero
DUH.
This is all sailing blithely over your head isn't it.
This is your fatal flaw in this fatal fallacy --- thinking that some political label imparts some kind of character to those upon whom you slap it. Then when that guy changes labels on his own --- your theory is fucked. This is the same bullshit as trying to pin the Klan on "Democrats" based on Byrd and Black, and then you get confronted with Jackson and Means and Stephenson and Brewster and Paulen and Morley and Duke.
At that point all you can do is goand run away from the fact that your fallacy fell flat on its face.
Rump used to be a Democrat. Hillary used to be a Republican. They're all the same people.
Neither of whom are Conservatives.Are you blind? He mentioned two good conservative journalists over at Fox. Most of the crowd over there are little more than propagandists.So you think the only real Journalist are the Liberals. Shows your bias.Doesn't matter what you call itFaux news is CNN, MSNBC, nyt, wash post, pbs, and other liberal laughingstocks. Fox is fair & balanced.
You're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had to make numerous corrections. They are untruthful, unfair and unbalanced except for a few real journalists that exist like Chris Wallace and Shep Smith.
Why vote Democrat in 2018?
Because America needs to admit....Damn, did we ever make a mistake
They may not be as conservative as louis Farrakhan but I'd say both are over 51% conservative.Neither of whom are Conservatives.Are you blind? He mentioned two good conservative journalists over at Fox. Most of the crowd over there are little more than propagandists.So you think the only real Journalist are the Liberals. Shows your bias.Doesn't matter what you call itYou're a bit late...we dubbed Fox News as Faux News years before the FOTs(friends of trump) tried to usurp the catchy title and use it for their own nefarious purposes.
Fox is truthful, fair, & balanced. Liberal networks aren't.
Fox has had to make numerous corrections. They are untruthful, unfair and unbalanced except for a few real journalists that exist like Chris Wallace and Shep Smith.
