Originally posted by rogue06
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
No Collusion!
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostBy the reaction, seems I'm the one who struck a nerve.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostMaybe we could listen to the suddenly morose and sullen Rachel Maddow.
Apparently some on the left are just now realizing what she's like. A recent article in New Republic simply describes her and her behavior as being "bonkers." Ya think?
The article observes that "The Howard Bealeization, or Glenn Beckifaction, of Rachel Maddow is a reminder that partisan paranoia has bipartisan appeal."
Oh, and it recently came to my attention that Politifact, which has the reputation of bending over backwards to defend blatant deception by liberals while spinning what conservatives say (to the point of judging what they claim they really meant rather than what they actually said), a less than sterling report card. A full 60% of her statements ranks as being at best half truths. I didn't think that they ever judged a prominent liberal this harshly.
"Rachel Maddow is the 117th most popular contemporary TV personality and the 120th most famous. Rachel Maddow is described by fans as: Intelligent, Knowledgeable, Intellectual, Smart and Honest".
https://today.yougov.com/topics/ente.../Rachel_Maddow
A fair and accurate summary I think. But then, those in the Trump/Barr mold (looking at you) wouldn't know what a "fair summary" is.
Comment
-
Last edited by rogue06; 04-08-2019, 04:01 AM.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostTypical, you don't like the message so you attack the messenger. The reality is that:
"Rachel Maddow is the 117th most popular contemporary TV personality and the 120th most famous. Rachel Maddow is described by fans as: Intelligent, Knowledgeable, Intellectual, Smart and Honest".
https://today.yougov.com/topics/ente.../Rachel_Maddow
A fair and accurate summary I think. But then, those in the Trump/Barr mold (looking at you) wouldn't know what a "fair summary" is.
And you might want to try keeping your line of reasoning in mind the next time you object to MM using Breitbart or other conservative news source.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Some interesting Tweets from the President:
trump-tweet-how-did-it-start.jpg
"How did it start?" indeed. Taking this back to the very beginning is a shrewd and perhaps necessary play. You see, Susan Rice's infamous "by the book" email that she sent to herself 15-minutes before the end of the Obama administration was more than just a "cover your behind" maneuver. We now know that despite claims by some to the contrary, Trump actually was a subject of the FBI's and later Mueller's investigation. So why the constant lies that he wasn't, told to the media and even Trump himself? Because lying about and to the subject of an investigation is in some cases mandated if an investigation is being conducted "by the book". This means that Rice's email to herself potentially gives cover to all the conspirators who can hide behind "the book" if they are ever forced to an give account for their actions.
But what if it can be shown that the conspirators knew the investigation was bogus before it even began? What if it can be shown that they deceived the courts in order to acquire surveillance warrants? What if it can be shown that they conspired with the Hillary campaign to manufacture a phony "dossier" which they then used to justify their counter intelligence operation? Well in that case, "the book" offers them no cover at all.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...piracy-effort/
Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostTypical....The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWe need the humor.
"A room must seem emptier when you're in it."Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostLooks like I hit a nerve.Last edited by RumTumTugger; 04-08-2019, 04:07 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RumTumTugger View PostJust NPC JimL falling back on his default when you don't give him something his Leftists programers coded him to respond to with their preprogramed talking points.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:15 AM
|
3 responses
50 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 04:26 PM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, 06-01-2024, 04:11 PM
|
13 responses
87 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 08:02 AM | ||
Started by seer, 06-01-2024, 03:50 PM
|
2 responses
48 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Yesterday, 06:35 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-01-2024, 05:08 AM
|
3 responses
29 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-01-2024, 06:54 AM | ||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-01-2024, 04:58 AM
|
18 responses
77 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 07:35 AM
|
Comment