PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on October 04, 2019, 01:52:49 PM
-
(https://i0.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta14.jpg?w=400)
(https://i0.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta17.jpg?w=499)
(https://i2.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta19.jpg?w=600)
(https://i2.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta23.jpg?w=600)
(https://i1.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta26.jpeg?w=473)
(https://i2.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta9.jpg?w=500)
(https://i0.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/greta12.png?w=600)
-
What an entitled, lying brat. The Soros, Bloomberg (and other Globalists) backed programmed 16 year old (soon to be 17, but made to look 10). She says we've stolen her childhood, but her drama queen ANTIFA backing parents, and rich far left, globalist backers have done that. I feel sorry for her. She is being used, will get rich over this, but will never be a happy, adjusted person.
-
She ... will never be a happy, adjusted person.
You mean, a typical progressive.
-
Let’s see...
Entitled... check
Rich parents, given virtually every advantage... check
Has no earthly idea wha5 she is talking about... check
Big mouth, little brain... check
Thinks everyone EVERYWHERE owes her something... check
Full of shit... check
Used by fucking progressives to punish the rest of us... check
All she needs is to come out a s a lesbian and she will check all the boxes.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
Sorry when people SCOLD me and are angered at me for just living my life, I'm going to push back. Yes, her Fascist actor, Antifa Parents are to blame, as are her handlers and elite, rich backers, including Soros, and Bloomberg. The same people that want to disarm the law abiding only.
She, like Severn Suzuki before her, will get rich from all of this. It is her lifelong, lucrative career, based on LIES. A brainwashed ACTRESS, 17 year old girl (in Jan, 2020) they make up to look like she's Ten Years Old with pigtails.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
She’s still all those things Number7 and the others are saying. Sure she might mature and change her mind. Doesn’t change what she is today. Do you want us to not call her out on it just because she’s young? She’s wrong and she is siding with evil. The young especially should be called out when they’re being stupid and evil. For the very reason because they’re still young and potentially salvageable.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
Do you recognize a con job when you see one?
Here's Greta's bio page https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10361418/
Yep, young Miss Greta is an actress, from a family where her mother is an actress and her father is an actor.
This whole hoax was carefully choreographed and scripted, using a young actress with mental disabilities.
-
She’s still all those things Number7 and the others are saying. Sure she might mature and change her mind. Doesn’t change what she is today. Do you want us to not call her out on it just because she’s young? She’s wrong and she is siding with evil. The young especially should be called out when they’re being stupid and evil. For the very reason because they’re still young and potentially salvageable.
Sure, call her out for being wrong. Denounce the people who are using her, expose them for what they are. But implying she's in it for the money and is embarking on a "lifelong, lucrative career" as a progressive activist is IMO way over the top and as baseless as her claims that we need to get to zero carbon in 12 years (or is it 10?) or the world will end.
-
Sure, call her out for being wrong. Denounce the people who are using her, expose them for what they are. But implying she's in it for the money and is embarking on a "lifelong, lucrative career" as a progressive activist is IMO way over the top and as baseless as her claims that we need to get to zero carbon in 12 years (or is it 10?) or the world will end.
George Soros backed. You missed that part.
Also, her mom and dad are actors and so is Greta. And you don't think this stunt is not for her personal gain?
-
Most people see Pipi Longstocking for what she is. A scam artist promoting a scam, reading from a SCRIPT. Yes, this is partially financially motivated by her and her parents. The rich elitists using her should be ashamed, and her parents should be as well. However, they are committed Far Leftists, steeped in the financial rewards of their destructive behavior.
No, I give her absolutely NO CREDIBILITY, nor respect. She represents the enemy.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
Azure, will she claim any responsibility for the massive rise in climate-change mental health problems and suicides due to the doomsday scenarios that she and others are projecting? I recall reading about a UK study on this phenomena.
Same with 28 year old AOC. This immature bartender, within her first three weeks as a Congressman, said that the world will be ending in 12 years. In turn, grown men and women on the left began using that rhetoric as well, of course with the intent of alarming and frightening our youth, some of whom may tragically take their lives because of it.
Being 16 and irresponsible is almost universal. But being 16 and fomenting global panic is quite another. Shame on her and yes, her parents and handlers.
-
Don;t forget the complicit media having a big hand in the presentation. Nah, there's no bias....
(https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/abc_ht_trayvon_martin_george_zimmerman_2_jt_120318_wmain.jpg)
-
Yes, and George Zimmerman is white while Beto is Hispanic.
-
Wow. C'mon folks, she's a 16 year old girl. I blame the adults in her life. And actually, from the interview PBS Newshour did with her a couple of weeks ago, my impression is she's pretty intelligent. I could just as easily predict that one day soon she'll learn enough about the subject to realize there's no basis for catastrophic thinking here. In any case, she's too young to know yet what direction her life is going to take her.
Too bad the lefties NEVER offer the same kindness towards those they choose to lie about, like the high school boys set up by the lying ass democrats and their lying ass fake veteran, supposed indian... So fuck your need to insist that everyone BUT liberals behave to a standard you set for the rest of us.
When did any member of the educational cabal of the left demand that liberals apologize for lying about trayvon martin? or Richard Jewell, or Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh... or the thousands
It is always a double standard with you people.
-
Sure, call her out for being wrong. Denounce the people who are using her, expose them for what they are. But implying she's in it for the money and is embarking on a "lifelong, lucrative career" as a progressive activist is IMO way over the top and as baseless as her claims that we need to get to zero carbon in 12 years (or is it 10?) or the world will end.
I will grant you this; none of us can read the minds of others and know for certain what their motives are. No I can't say that she is in it only for the money and doesn't actually believe what she says. But from your post I didn't gather that's the only thing you had a problem with.
-
It is sad what these people have done to this kid.
-
It is sad what these people have done to this kid.
Yeah... getting rich off of whoring out your kids is such a patheric way for liberals to conduct themselves...
I guess its better than them murdering their children.
-
Yeah... getting rich off of whoring out your kids is such a patheric way for liberals to conduct themselves...
I guess its better than them murdering their children.
To eat?
-
To eat?
Mmmmmm....baby back ribs
-
The Beatles knew this all along. What were they thinking?
-
Let’s see, I want to know more about gun crime. I’ll ask David Hogg!
Let’s see, I want to know more about climate change. I’ll ask Greta Thunberg!
Because child activists always have the best information.
-
Let’s see, I want to know more about gun crime. I’ll ask David Hogg!
Let’s see, I want to know more about climate change. I’ll ask Greta Thunberg!
Because child activists always have the best information.
hmmmm, leads to all sorts of people who would be the antithesis of certain causes.
Ask Brian Williams about journalistic integrity
Ask President Trump about twitter diplomacy
Ask Bill Clinton about marriage fidelity
....
(but don't list any posters here because we wouldn't want to cause them to think they are being victimized)
-
hmmmm, leads to all sorts of people who would be the antithesis of certain causes.
Ask Brian Williams about journalistic integrity
Ask President Trump about twitter diplomacy
Ask Bill Clinton about marriage fidelity
....
(but don't list any posters here because we wouldn't want to cause them to think they are being victimized)
Ask Hillary about how to win an election.
Ask Adam Schiff to tell the truth.
-
There are two things that I don't understand about this young lady.
1. Why some people in the media and on the left think she and her stunt are the greatest thing since sliced bread or even all that relevant.
2. Why some people on the right are obsessed with demeaning her and appear to think she is evil incarnate.
She's just a kid that I neither respect nor care to disrespect. What's the big deal?
-
1) My take is that she’s just their latest tool to bludgeon people into voting for Democrats because they’re the ones who really understand that we’re doomed if we don’t do something. Not that we’re doomed, and not that the Democrats actually can change the climate, but scaring people is their path to power.
2) Just as a segment of the left thinks President Trump is evil, a segment of the right thinks people who participate in the deception described in 1) above are evil.
Personally, I think anyone who tries to extort money and gain power (as Dems with carbon credits and fear mongering) or who threatens our freedoms, our Constitution and in fact civilization in general (as Dems with their overregulating, attempts to abolish the EC, and blatant anti-Americanism and suppression of religious freedom) is evil. I’m pretty tolerant, but there is a limit.
I mean, would you want people like this to be deciding who has power?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=88_BHuSGPZE#
-
Anyone who promotes forced economic collectivism is evil, period.
-
hmmmm, leads to all sorts of people who would be the antithesis of certain causes.
Ask Brian Williams about journalistic integrity
Ask President Trump about twitter diplomacy
Ask Bill Clinton about marriage fidelity
....
(but don't list any posters here because we wouldn't want to cause them to think they are being victimized)
I see what you did!
-
There are two things that I don't understand about this young lady.
1. Why some people in the media and on the left think she and her stunt are the greatest thing since sliced bread or even all that relevant.
2. Why some people on the right are obsessed with demeaning her and appear to think she is evil incarnate.
She's just a kid that I neither respect nor care to disrespect. What's the big deal?
If your 16-year old kid lectured you and said “how dare you!”, what would you do?
-
There are two things that I don't understand about this young lady.
1. Why some people in the media and on the left think she and her stunt are the greatest thing since sliced bread or even all that relevant.
2. Why some people on the right are obsessed with demeaning her and appear to think she is evil incarnate.
She's just a kid that I neither respect nor care to disrespect. What's the big deal?
I guess we should all be good little lemmings, believer no all the bulls hit, taking all the hits and allowing utter assholes to define every detail about our lives for us.
Liberalism is all bullshit and no cow.
-
If your 16-year old kid lectured you and said “how dare you!”, what would you do?
He would be living under the house. I say that with the understanding that my wife may kill him before I can put him under our house.
-
George Soros backed. You missed that part.
Also, her mom and dad are actors and so is Greta. And you don't think this stunt is not for her personal gain?
On what basis do you link her to Soros?
Yes, her parents are actors. (Actually, I think I read that her mom is an opera singer.) So what?
-
I will grant you this; none of us can read the minds of others and know for certain what their motives are. No I can't say that she is in it only for the money and doesn't actually believe what she says. But from your post I didn't gather that's the only thing you had a problem with.
I think you may have read more into my post than was intended. I wasn't saying that she shouldn't be criticized because she's just a child. I've said more than once that I don't believe in pampering and catering to the snowflake sensibilities of college students, and Greta is very close to that age now. I have no respect for her pronouncements and don't disagree with calling her out for them. But from what I saw of her in that interview, my read of her is that she sincerely believes the bullshit she is preaching. I think those calling her a con artist are way wide of the mark.
My motto is always, never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence or stupidity. Or in this case, blind belief in an unproven hypothesis by an idealistic, obsessed kid.
-
I'm not sure which would be worse, Greta believing the nonsense she spews or Greta being a con artist.
-
I'm not sure which would be worse, Greta believing the nonsense she spews or Greta being a con artist.
She may believe it, but the speeches are obvious acting jobs. Looks down, reads the script, then changes her face to angry and outraged to repeat the words she just read. All packaged by professional activist handlers including this one, Luisa Marie-Neubauer. The attractive one with the wool ski cap in the photo.
Yes Azure, Soros is one of her backers along the Bill and Melissa Gates. Globalists all.
Thunberg soon also got her own coach – a well-known climate activist from Germany by the name Luisa-Marie Neubauer (pictured). What is the likelihood of a young girl who starts a school strike outside the Swedish parliament, getting schoolchildren from all over the world to join her cause and fight against climate change? And how often do 16-year-olds have their own coaches?
Luisa-Marie Neubauer, who has been captured on a numerous images and videos together with Greta when the two direct climate change protests all over the world, belongs to the organisation called ”ONE” foundation.
It has several well-known wealthy financiers, including Bono as well as Bill and Melissa Gates. An even more striking name is that of the multi-billionaire oligarch George Soros, notorious for his currency speculation and maybe even more prominent as the father of the global, radical, and left-liberal lobby and activist network “Open Society”, supporting thousands of NGOs.
https://www.europereloaded.com/george-soros-is-backing-climate-activist-greta-thunberg/
-
I think you may have read more into my post than was intended. I wasn't saying that she shouldn't be criticized because she's just a child. I've said more than once that I don't believe in pampering and catering to the snowflake sensibilities of college students, and Greta is very close to that age now. I have no respect for her pronouncements and don't disagree with calling her out for them. But from what I saw of her in that interview, my read of her is that she sincerely believes the bullshit she is preaching. I think those calling her a con artist are way wide of the mark.
My motto is always, never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence or stupidity. Or in this case, blind belief in an unproven hypothesis by an idealistic, obsessed kid.
Ahh, Occam’s razor. Gotcha.
-
On what basis do you link her to Soros?
It's called "research". Spend a bit of time reading the background of people such as this teenager and find the facts.
-
It's called "research". Spend a bit of time reading the background of people such as this teenager and find the facts.
When facts disagree with political correctness, they are often referred to as 'racist.'
-
Ask Hillary about how to win an election.
Well to be fair, Hillary did win two elections to the US Senate and she won the Democratic nomination for President (although nut job Bernie was her only competitor).
And although she lost the more important electoral vote count which we use to pick POTUS, she did win the popular vote by 2.8 million votes.
So I'd say she does have some knowledge and experience in winning elections as well as obviously losing them.
Disclaimer & clarification: I am not a fan of Hillary and I did not vote for her. I'm just trying to point out what I believe was an unfair assertion that she does not know how to win elections.
-
Well, knowing how to win and actually winning are quite different things. HRC in her arrogance completely ignored the Rust Belt, against the advice of Bill and her campaign strategists, probably because her health was so compromised that she limited all her public appearances and traveling, noticeably underperforming overall compared to Donald Trump.
Her Senate elections were of course won in a blue state that she handpicked to scurry over to and live in and run in, so yes, high strategy there!
As for her presidential nomination, breathing and walking were pretty much all that were required evidently. It was Her Turn, and we’ll see the same with Warren.
-
Yes, and George Zimmerman is white while Beto is Hispanic.
Certainly you realize that one can be both white and Hispanic. They are not mutually exclusive.
-
Certainly you realize that one can be both white and Hispanic. They are not mutually exclusive.
Of course. But which part the media calls attention to depends on the desired narrative. For example, that Beto O’Rourke is Irish and has not a drop of Hispanic blood is, I think, undisputed. The “Beto” emphasis is designed to rake in Hispanic votes.
I just looked it up. It’s a childhood nickname.
-
Well to be fair, Hillary did win two elections to the US Senate and she won the Democratic nomination for President (although nut job Bernie was her only competitor).
The Primary was rigged by the DNC so Hillary would win. It was not a true "election".
And although she lost the more important electoral vote count which we use to pick POTUS, she did win the popular vote by 2.8 million votes.
Which is absolutely meaningless in a Presidential election as States elect Presidents, not the People. So to bring it up is little more than trying to make Hillary look better than she actually is.
So I'd say she does have some knowledge and experience in winning elections as well as obviously losing them.
She won one true election in a State and district where that seat ALWAYS goes to the Democrat.
Disclaimer & clarification: I am not a fan of Hillary and I did not vote for her. I'm just trying to point out what I believe was an unfair assertion that she does not know how to win elections.
I don't think winning one election in a solidly Democrat district shows that anyone "knows how to win elections".
-
Unless John John Kennedy’s very convenient and unexplained plan crash, hilary wouldn’t have won the NY Senate race but convenient, inexplicably convenient deaths do follow the clinton crime syndicate.
Without the party rigging the primaries and inventing super delagTes just for her, she would lost the primaries to Bernie the commie.
-
Of course. But which part the media calls attention to depends on the desired narrative. For example, that Beto O’Rourke is Irish and has not a drop of Hispanic blood is, I think, undisputed. The “Beto” emphasis is designed to rake in Hispanic votes.
I just looked it up. It’s a childhood nickname.
In past I have heard some people criticizing him for using that nickname and I have been curious about it but had never researched it until just now based upon you doing so. As you wrote, it is a childhood nickname. It was given to him as an infant according to Wiki (yeah, I know, not always accurate).
Apparently he has gone by it throughout his entire life. So unless he has planned on running for office since he first soiled a diaper, I really doubt if there is any political element to using it. It is a nickname that stuck and he stuck with it. I know some adults who decided to shrug off childhood nicknames and some who didn't. I think it's just a personal choice.
To me there is no nefarious intent on the part of O'Rourke to keep using the name. Now, do I think it may benefit him with some Hispanic voters? Yes. Absolutely. But that's just luck, not a plot. To my knowledge he has never claimed to have a drop of Hispanic blood. That sort of stupid disingenuous behavior is a trait of another current candidate.
Besides O'Rourke is not the only politician to use a nickname. Nor the only Texan. There is "Ted" Rafael Edward Cruz. Yes, I know that Ted is a somewhat common nickname for Edward but supposedly he first started using that name in junior high school to fit in. Still I would not ascribe any political intent to him doing so. Besides just like O'Rourke, Cruz can't run away from the heritage that his last name portrays. That contrary to their nicknames, they are probably something at least a bit different. And then there was Ronald Reagan, who was called Dutch because his father thought that has a child he looked like a fat little Dutchman. Nothing to do with any Dutch heritage, not that it matters.
So whether someone is using a nickname given to them as a kid for whatever reason, I see nothing wrong with it. So if you're called Jack, Dick, Jerry, Jimmy, Bill, W, Barry, or some other variation of your name or a nickname given for other reasons, there is no reason to have to defend it or change it just because others might want to make political hay.
-
Well to be fair, Hillary did win two elections to the US Senate and she won the Democratic nomination for President (although nut job Bernie was her only competitor).
And although she lost the more important electoral vote count which we use to pick POTUS, she did win the popular vote by 2.8 million votes.
So I'd say she does have some knowledge and experience in winning elections as well as obviously losing them.
Disclaimer & clarification: I am not a fan of Hillary and I did not vote for her. I'm just trying to point out what I believe was an unfair assertion that she does not know how to win elections.
Hillary won the senate seat by running (carpetbagging) in a heavy democrat state. No skill needed, just have a famous political husband who was still popular.
Her nomination? She only got that because she rigged the primaries with “super delegates.” Had the super delegate not been a factor, Bernie would have been the nominee.
Popular Vote: No where in the constitution do we elect a president on popular vote. It’s meaningless in our republic. Trump ran his campaign based on winning the EC, which is how elections are run and won. Hillary ran what’s been considered one of the worst presidential campaigns in modern history. Her strategy? “Run the clock out”. IOW’s, she was so confident she would win, there was no need to campaign, only wait till Election Day.
And don’t forget, 2008. BHO ended her presidential campaign.
So I stand by my assertion Hillary can’t run an actual election unless it’s rigged to her favor.
-
Of course. But which part the media calls attention to depends on the desired narrative. For example, that Beto O’Rourke is Irish and has not a drop of Hispanic blood is, I think, undisputed. The “Beto” emphasis is designed to rake in Hispanic votes.
I just looked it up. It’s a childhood nickname.
It’s a childhood nickname he never used, except to pander for votes.
-
I don't think winning one election in a solidly Democrat district shows that anyone "knows how to win elections".
Two things very wrong with that amusing statement.
1. She won the seat twice.
2. It was the US Senate which is a statewide election and not dependent on any single district such as a House seat is.
-
Two things very wrong with that amusing statement.
1. She won the seat twice.
2. It was the US Senate which is a statewide election and not dependent on any single district such as a House seat is.
Both senate seats in NY have been democrat held for 40+ years.
-
Two things very wrong with that amusing statement.
1. She won the seat twice.
2. It was the US Senate which is a statewide election and not dependent on any single district such as a House seat is.
It was a typo on my part, but thanks for pointing that out. So, two elections, one as an incumbent in a solidly Democrat state when Bill still had huge political clout. Again, not impressed, but obviously neither are you because you said you don't like her.
-
Unless John John Kennedy’s very convenient and unexplained plan crash, ...
What's unexplained? Flying in the haze over water soon after sunset is a great way to screw the pooch.
-
What's unexplained? Flying in the haze over water soon after sunset is a great way to screw the pooch.
Yep. His ego killed him, but the timing was strange, as I think he was going to get into politics. "George" magazine was failing, and he needed his next gig. I admit to having conspiracy theory thoughts about it now and again. It was "fishy". No pun intended.
See that little switch right there JFK Jr? It's called an autopilot. Maybe engage it before you lean down to switch tanks?
-
On what basis do you link her to Soros?
Yes, her parents are actors. (Actually, I think I read that her mom is an opera singer.) So what?
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia3/ciencia_climatechange147.htm
-
It was a typo on my part, but thanks for pointing that out. So, two elections, one as an incumbent in a solidly Democrat state when Bill still had huge political clout. Again, not impressed, but obviously neither are you because you said you don't like her.
Why do people claim typo when they make a mistake of fact or post something that is just false in nature? To me a typo means typographical error, i.e. a fat finger that resulted in a misspelling, typing the wrong word (their vs they're), punctuation errors, etc.
But yes, I do not like her and she is not real impressive especially when you consider what she lost to. Still, I only think it is fair to be accurate and truthful when we desire to critique those with whom we disagree.
-
Both senate seats in NY have been democrat held for 40+ years.
Only 20 years. Al D'Amato, the last Republican Senator from NY left office in 1999.
-
Why do people claim typo when they make a mistake of fact or post something that is just false in nature? To me a typo means typographical error, i.e. a fat finger that resulted in a misspelling, typing the wrong word (their vs they're), punctuation errors, etc.
Are you calling me a liar? Call it whatever you want typo, brain fart, whatever. I know the difference between the Senate and the House. Why are you making it an issue?
But yes, I do not like her and she is not real impressive especially when you consider what she lost to. Still, I only think it is fair to be accurate and truthful when we desire to critique those with whom we disagree.
She lost to the only person that could have possibly beaten her. A non politician who happens to be doing a great job as President.
-
What's unexplained? Flying in the haze over water soon after sunset is a great way to screw the pooch.
Yep....
And ONLY two days after the media started talking about him running for his father’s old seat.
-
Why do people claim typo when they make a mistake of fact or post something that is just false in nature? To me a typo means typographical error, i.e. a fat finger that resulted in a misspelling, typing the wrong word (their vs they're), punctuation errors, etc.
But yes, I do not like her and she is not real impressive especially when you consider what she lost to. Still, I only think it is fair to be accurate and truthful when we desire to critique those with whom we disagree.
So far, it’s been fair and accurate the description of just how lousy of a campaigner Hillary is.
She and Bill moved to NY for???...... Oh yea, she needed to run for public office and needed a state that would elect her. Notice she and Bubba didn’t move back to Arkansas. There’s no way Arkansas would have elected her.
BHO trounced her first presidential bid. Remember her and Bill’s bitterness? Her second bid was rife with campaign rigging, and she deliberately ran a crap campaign with the attitude she couldn’t loose.
Finally, the American people spoke (via the constitution) in 2016 and elected an outsider who wants to fix what people like the Clintons broke.
-
Only 20 years. Al D'Amato, the last Republican Senator from NY left office in 1999.
Correct. My iPhone blocked out the right column.
-
Are you calling me a liar? Call it whatever you want typo, brain fart, whatever. I know the difference between the Senate and the House. Why are you making it an issue?
She lost to the only person that could have possibly beaten her. A non politician who happens to be doing a great job as President.
Not calling you a liar... I'll go with brain fart. And I'll take you at your word that you know the difference between the two chambers though your post did not illustrate that fact. All I had to go on when I read your post was what you wrote, which was incorrect. I cannot read one's true knowledge into a misstatement. But I do see too many people on online forums blaming their mistakes and misstatements on typos or auto correct when in fact, that isn't what it was. It is a real frequent occurrence on POA.
As to Trump being the only person who could have beaten her, I disagree. I think a few if not all of the GOP primary contestants could have beaten her as well and done so by winning not only the electoral vote but the popular as well. Hillary was the worst candidate that I have seen run for POTUS in my life. Trump was a not so distant second.
What makes you think he is doing a great job as president? I just don't see it.
-
How’s your investment portfolio been doing since 2017?
-
Not calling you a liar... I'll go with brain fart. And I'll take you at your word that you know the difference between the two chambers though your post did not illustrate that fact. All I had to go on when I read your post was what you wrote, which was incorrect. I cannot read one's true knowledge into a misstatement. But I do see too many people on online forums blaming their mistakes and misstatements on typos or auto correct when in fact, that isn't what it was. It is a real frequent occurrence on POA.
This isn't POA, and I guess you don't know much about me like some others do here.
As to Trump being the only person who could have beaten her, I disagree. I think a few if not all of the GOP primary contestants could have beaten her as well and done so by winning not only the electoral vote but the popular as well. Hillary was the worst candidate that I have seen run for POTUS in my life. Trump was a not so distant second.
I voted for Cruz in the Primary, but no way he would have beaten Hillary, and neither would have Bush, Mario, or any of the other Establishment Republicans.
What makes you think he is doing a great job as president? I just don't see it.
Historically low unemployment even for Blacks and Hispanics
Good economy, average 2.8% GDP growth so far (Obama's was 1.6%)
Good stock markets
Good housing markets
Fewer unnecessary regulations
They are building the wall and attempting to reduce the illegal alien invasion
Better Trade Deals with foreign countries
Consumer confidence is way up
Energy and gasoline prices are Low, and the U.S. is now the world's #1 Oil Producer
-
Yep....
And ONLY two days after the media started talking about him running for his father’s old seat.
Seriously? Another silly conspiracy theory that has been consistently debunked. Also, while there were a few weak rumors at the time that Junior might be interested in the NY Senate seat but none to my knowledge of his father's old seat in Massachusetts. Where do you get this nonsense?
-
What makes you think he is doing a great job as president? I just don't see it.
Gonna have to stop watching CNN & MSNBC.
-
This isn't POA, and I guess you don't know much about me like some others do here.
I voted for Cruz in the Primary, but no way he would have beaten Hillary, and neither would have Bush, Mario, or any of the other Establishment Republicans.
Historically low unemployment even for Blacks and Hispanics
Good economy, average 2.8% GDP growth so far (Obama's was 1.6%)
Good stock markets
Good housing markets
Fewer unnecessary regulations
They are building the wall and attempting to reduce the illegal alien invasion
Better Trade Deals with foreign countries
Consumer confidence is way up
Energy and gasoline prices are Low, and the U.S. is now the world's #1 Oil Producer
- More people working than in the history of the country
- 1M+ jobs without folks to fill them.
- Increase in wages
- Historical numbers being pulled out of the low income bracket
- Number of abortions going down
- Coal industry coming back
- Mexico deploying 27k troops to the border
- Steel industry coming back
-
Gonna have to stop watching CNN & MSNBC.
I got trapped waiting one day at an airport, and the only channel playing was CNN. After over an hour if I didn’t know better, I was told the country is in horrible condition, people were hurt over the tax cuts, Trump was on the verge of being a dictator, we have multiple genders (not 2), and of course Racist! Racist! Racist!
-
I got trapped waiting one day at an airport, and the only channel playing was CNN. After over an hour if I didn’t know better, I was told the country is in horrible condition, people were hurt over the tax cuts, Trump was on the verge of being a dictator, we have multiple genders (not 2), and of course Racist! Racist! Racist!
The vast majority of the Media is no longer the referee. They are the opposing team. CNN, NBC, MSNBC (Comcast), CBS, ABC PBS, NYT, Washpo…….and the rest.....all on the Democrat Gilligan's Island.
-
The vast majority of the Media is no longer the referee. They are the opposing team. CNN, NBC, MSNBC (Comcast), CBS, ABC PBS, NYT, Washpo…….and the rest.....all on the Democrat Gilligan's Island.
Drudge use to have a great website. No more, now it’s just an aggregate site for liberal outlets.
-
Drudge use to have a great website. No more, now it’s just an aggregate site for liberal outlets.
I've noticed that. I used to have it as my start up page when I opened my browser, but no more.
-
Things are just terrible...
-
I've noticed that. I used to have it as my start up page when I opened my browser, but no more.
Drudge is in the business of getting clicks.
-
FOX has moved farther left, but personally I think that is a good thing. I think they are now more "balanced" than they used to be. I used to call them "Fair and Balancing" because their heavy right lean helped offset some of the MSM hard left lean.
I say that is a good thing, but the fact that everyone else is far left and fox has moved left is scary.
-
Drudge is in the business of getting clicks.
Yep.
-
FOX has moved farther left, but personally I think that is a good thing. I think they are now more "balanced" than they used to be. I used to call them "Fair and Balancing" because their heavy right lean helped offset some of the MSM hard left lean.
I say that is a good thing, but the fact that everyone else is far left and fox has moved left is scary.
With the exception of Tucker and Ingraham, Fox is unwatchable now.
Plus, they put that fuckwad Paul Ryan on their board.
-
With the exception of Tucker and Ingraham, Fox is unwatchable now.
I do find myself switching them off more often now when they start getting all swept up in the liberal crap. It's a shame. But even at their worst, they are still not as bad as CNN, MSNBC or most of the print media, like AP, WAPO, NYT, HuffPo etc.
-
Drudge is in the business of getting clicks.
Yes, they sold out. Oh well.
-
I do find myself switching them off more often now when they start getting all swept up in the liberal crap. It's a shame. But even at their worst, they are still not as bad as CNN, MSNBC or most of the print media, like AP, WAPO, NYT, HuffPo etc.
True.
I’ve been enjoying NewsMax TV for television news. I get it on Pluto on the Firestick. (Free)
-
With the exception of Tucker and Ingraham, Fox is unwatchable now.
Plus, they put that fuckwad Paul Ryan on their board.
I agree, though I rarely watch Ingraham. Tucker is the only Fox show I watch.
-
Seriously? Another silly conspiracy theory that has been consistently debunked. Also, while there were a few weak rumors at the time that Junior might be interested in the NY Senate seat but none to my knowledge of his father's old seat in Massachusetts. Where do you get this nonsense?
You know something?
I always thought of JFK as having served as a senator from NY,.
Don’t know why, but I looked it up and stand corrected.
-
Things are just terrible...
Anybody can see how awful the economy has withered under President Trump....
-
It's called "research". Spend a bit of time reading the background of people such as this teenager and find the facts.
A typically patronizing reply that misses the point of my question. I've seen the claim made before. I was just wondering what YOUR source was, because the ones I've seen are not reliable. For example, there's a famous picture of her, purportedly with Soros that's obviously photoshopped, and according to Politifact, was actually a picture of her with Al Gore.
Whether it's true or not, obviously someone is financing travels like her recent trans-Atlantic boat voyage, and it's likely to be left-wing activists of some stripe. That doesn't mean they control her, doesn't mean they prepare scripts for her to read or recite. My impression is she's an intelligent, articulate true believer; that's exactly why she's such a good spokesperson for their causes.
-
Ahh, Occam’s razor. Gotcha.
Close, Hanlon's. ;) (A sort of corollary to Occam's, I'll admit.)
-
A typically patronizing reply that misses the point of my question. I've seen the claim made before. I was just wondering what YOUR source was, because the ones I've seen are not reliable. For example, there's a famous picture of her, purportedly with Soros that's obviously photoshopped, and according to Politifact, was actually a picture of her with Al Gore.
Whether it's true or not, obviously someone is financing travels like her recent trans-Atlantic boat voyage, and it's likely to be left-wing activists of some stripe. That doesn't mean they control her, doesn't mean they prepare scripts for her to read or recite. My impression is she's an intelligent, articulate true believer; that's exactly why she's such a good spokesperson for their causes.
When I see something suspicious, I dig down to find out the truth behind it. In today's world, this is not difficult.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/surprise-the-official-escort-for-16-year-old-global-warming-expert-greta-thunberg-is-a-leftist-hack-funded-by-george-soros/
http://muchow.dk/ttrttc/?p=6086
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3781109/posts
https://www.europereloaded.com/george-soros-is-backing-climate-activist-greta-thunberg/
BTW, it took me less than one minute to find the articles.
-
Whether it's true or not, obviously someone is financing travels like her recent trans-Atlantic boat voyage, and it's likely to be left-wing activists of some stripe. That doesn't mean they control her, ....
I presume you can understand why people can suspect that the financial backer would extert influence.
-
I presume you can understand why people can suspect that the financial backer would extert influence.
It is obvious to all but the committed, Far Left Climate Alarmist that she is just a paid shill for the Globalists pushing this income and wealth redistribution SCAM. An actor MADE UP to look like a little girl when she's actually almost 17 years old, with pigtails and scowling expressions.
-
When I see something suspicious, I dig down to find out the truth behind it. In today's world, this is not difficult.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/surprise-the-official-escort-for-16-year-old-global-warming-expert-greta-thunberg-is-a-leftist-hack-funded-by-george-soros/
http://muchow.dk/ttrttc/?p=6086
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3781109/posts
https://www.europereloaded.com/george-soros-is-backing-climate-activist-greta-thunberg/
BTW, it took me less than one minute to find the articles.
And this is exactly what I mean... other than (perhaps) muchow.dk which I've never heard of, they're all highly partisan sites that push propaganda rather than facts. Hardly what I would call reliable.
Again... not that it matters. I have no doubt that some leftist groups are paying for some of her activities, most 16 year old girls wouldn't have access to all that money. Her parents could possibly be sponsoring some of it, but likely not all. So maybe Soros is involved, maybe he isn't.
Once again... so what? No proof she is delivering any message but her own.
-
I presume you can understand why people can suspect that the financial backer would extert influence.
Suspect? Of course. But suspecting something and claiming it as fact are two different things. From what I've read of her story, she learned about the climate "crisis" either on her own, or at school, and became obsessed with the issue, won over her parents and then decided to take her message to a wider audience. She seems to be a true believer. Doesn't sound like someone who would need to be under someone's control. Absent solid evidence, I relegate claims that she is controlled by sinister forces to the tinfoil hat / conspiracy theory bin.
-
And this is exactly what I mean... other than (perhaps) muchow.dk which I've never heard of, they're all highly partisan sites that push propaganda rather than facts. Hardly what I would call reliable.
And you constantly push left leaning sites as your sources, sites that have been proven to misrepresent facts to drive a narrative.
BTW, Gateway Pundit has a remarkable record of being correct on their stories, not that facts would matter to you.
Again... not that it matters. I have no doubt that some leftist groups are paying for some of her activities, most 16 year old girls wouldn't have access to all that money. Her parents could possibly be sponsoring some of it, but likely not all. So maybe Soros is involved, maybe he isn't.
Once again... so what? No proof she is delivering any message but her own.
Are you seriously that naive?
-
Suspect? Of course. But suspecting something and claiming it as fact are two different things. From what I've read of her story, she learned about the climate "crisis" either on her own, or at school, and became obsessed with the issue, won over her parents and then decided to take her message to a wider audience. She seems to be a true believer. Doesn't sound like someone who would need to be under someone's control. Absent solid evidence, I relegate claims that she is controlled by sinister forces to the tinfoil hat / conspiracy theory bin.
Question: Are you aware that this teenager has Asperger's and is also OCD?
What happens when someone takes a child with these mental conditions and starts feeding them endless stories about "climate crisis"?
Would you say someone using a mentally challenged child to push an agenda is wrong?
-
Suspect? Of course. But suspecting something and claiming it as fact are two different things. From what I've read of her story, she learned about the climate "crisis" either on her own, or at school, and became obsessed with the issue, won over her parents and then decided to take her message to a wider audience. She seems to be a true believer. Doesn't sound like someone who would need to be under someone's control. Absent solid evidence, I relegate claims that she is controlled by sinister forces to the tinfoil hat / conspiracy theory bin.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha......
-
And this is exactly what I mean... other than (perhaps) muchow.dk which I've never heard of, they're all highly partisan sites that push propaganda rather than facts. Hardly what I would call reliable.
Again... not that it matters. I have no doubt that some leftist groups are paying for some of her activities, most 16 year old girls wouldn't have access to all that money. Her parents could possibly be sponsoring some of it, but likely not all. So maybe Soros is involved, maybe he isn't.
Once again... so what? No proof she is delivering any message but her own.
I think you're ignoring the facts, and the reality, and deluding yourself. Yes, I am sure she believes the script she reads, but she is being used by backers that want to push more taxes, and more income and wealth redistribution on a worldwide scale. Using the NARCOTIC of giving people's lives meanings in that they can actually "save the planet". How ridiculous.
-
I think you're ignoring the facts, and the reality, and deluding yourself. Yes, I am sure she believes the script she reads, but she is being used by backers that want to push more taxes, and more income and wealth redistribution on a worldwide scale. Using the NARCOTIC of giving people's lives meanings in that they can actually "save the planet". How ridiculous.
Just imagine the uproar if a conservative took a mentally challenged teenager and put him on a stage to talk about Making America Great!
The outrage, the cries of "child abuse!"..................
-
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/this-greta-thunberg-thing-is-child-abuse
The case of Thunberg is even more egregious. She began suffering from depression as a child, by her own admission, in part because she learned about climate change at age 8. She was later diagnosed with autism and obsessive compulsive disorder and gradually became despondent as she obsessed over her fear of climate change. She developed mutism and an eating disorder so severe that she once went two months without food, and she stopped going to school. Her only sibling, a sister named Beata, also suffers from Asperger's and OCD, as well as ADHD.
Now tell me, does it seem healthy to place a child with this many mental illnesses under the spotlight of public scrutiny, with a sole focus on the very phenomenon and associated alarmism that triggered her in the first place?
If you're a fading opera starlet married into a family of fame, and your only two children are having exceptional trouble even attending school, then I suppose you can secure a bit more fame by milking your child's clinically diagnosed obsession. But given that Greta's mental struggles and triggers actually led her to the brink of death, the whole thing smacks of child abuse.
Conservatives shouldn't mock her. They should worry for her. Social media has made it too easy to prop up children as moral authorities — even children especially predisposed to crack under the pressure.
-
Would you say someone using a mentally challenged child to push an agenda is wrong?
Absolutely!!
-
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosas/2019/10/07/climate-change-protester-chained-to-car-cries-because-his-kids-are-very-frightened-of-their-future-n2554307
-
And this is exactly what I mean... other than (perhaps) muchow.dk which I've never heard of, they're all highly partisan sites that push propaganda rather than facts. Hardly what I would call reliable.
Again... not that it matters. I have no doubt that some leftist groups are paying for some of her activities, most 16 year old girls wouldn't have access to all that money. Her parents could possibly be sponsoring some of it, but likely not all. So maybe Soros is involved, maybe he isn't.
Once again... so what? No proof she is delivering any message but her own.
Can you name a real, unbiased investigative journalist? I don’t think they exist anymore, unless you are looking for dirt on a political opponent weeks before an election, in which case they are all investigators, but certainly not unbiased.
My point is if the MSM chooses not to investigate something, that doesn’t mean that “something” doesn’t exist. Media bias is more hideous with the media deciding what the WON’T cover than in how they cover known events.
So if things may exist but you aren’t hearing it from ABCCBSNBCCNNMSNBC, should you just presume it’s a non issue?
No. You look for alternative sites. Your presumption that these lesser known sites are just propaganda pushing sites and are not “reliable” demonstrates your own bias. I’m not saying some aren’t that, on both sides of the spectrum. But it is intellectually dishonest to lump them all into that category.
It appears your criteria for what is “reliable” depends upon confirmation by the MSM. Sorry, but that will rarely happen, because they don’t want it to happen.
Those of us that have to search alternative sites for information aren’t lemmings willing to latch on to the latest conspiracy theory. We may shockingly be as smart as you when it comes to politics and world affairs. Shocking, I know. It would be good for you to not be so quick to discount the alternative media. Sometimes that’s all we have.
-
^^^^^
Wanted to like it more than once.
-
And this is exactly what I mean... other than (perhaps) muchow.dk which I've never heard of, they're all highly partisan sites that push propaganda rather than facts. Hardly what I would call reliable.
Again... not that it matters. I have no doubt that some leftist groups are paying for some of her activities, most 16 year old girls wouldn't have access to all that money. Her parents could possibly be sponsoring some of it, but likely not all. So maybe Soros is involved, maybe he isn't.
Once again... so what? No proof she is delivering any message but her own.
I hate to keep pointing these things out to you, especially since you claim to be a university professor, but your arguments are simple bullshit, intended to play let’s pretend with the facts and damn all reality.
Inventing reality works in the cocoon of academia because you insulate yourself into a place where everyone is expected (made) to agree, or keep your damn mouth shut. In the real world facts take presidency over emotional bullshit, and utter nonsense, like your pathetically shallow conclusions above.
-
And you constantly push left leaning sites as your sources, sites that have been proven to misrepresent facts to drive a narrative.
I tend to cite sources with an established reputation for getting at least the facts straight, not fringe sources on either the left or the right. It's true that most of those sources are now rather left-leaning (National Review excepted). That's unfortunate, but I'd still prefer them over "alternative" sites for hard facts.
BTW, Gateway Pundit has a remarkable record of being correct on their stories, not that facts would matter to you.
Seriously? Gateway Pundit? Even Wikipedia names them as a source of "false stories and conspiracy theories". No thanks, that is specifically the type of site whose "facts" I wouldn't trust for a second.
-
Question: Are you aware that this teenager has Asperger's and is also OCD?
What happens when someone takes a child with these mental conditions and starts feeding them endless stories about "climate crisis"?
Would you say someone using a mentally challenged child to push an agenda is wrong?
This is a whole other issue, and one on which I'm generally in agreement. It IS child abuse to use her to push an agenda. The flip side of that is that Asperger's children tend to be remarkably focused and intelligent, and that's another reason I tend to read her as a true believer who is following her own script... which unfortunately overlaps with that of people with a somewhat different agenda.
-
I think you're ignoring the facts, and the reality, and deluding yourself. Yes, I am sure she believes the script she reads, but she is being used by backers that want to push more taxes, and more income and wealth redistribution on a worldwide scale. Using the NARCOTIC of giving people's lives meanings in that they can actually "save the planet". How ridiculous.
No, I'm not deluding myself, I'm quite aware that she is ALSO being used, or at least supported, by people with a socialist agenda. Why would you think I don't see this? I've said before that the findings of climate science have been appropriated by people pushing social and technological changes that would seriously damage the world economy, especially if implemented on the timescale the "crisis" meme says is needed. Many of Thunberg's supporters clearly fall into that camp. That's a separate issue from whether her words and actions are controlled or significantly influenced by those people.
-
She learned the script from those same people with the AGENDA. Now she believes it is Gospel, I'm sure. However, the script they give her to read is carefully crafted, as is her image, and handling.
-
Of course she truly believes it. AND she’s being manipulated by adults. Teens are extremely easy to lead around by the nose, aside from when they’re in the rebellious phase. But the rebellious phase can happen anywhere from 11 to 23 or later, may only last a short while, or may only be confined to their parents or only to one or two issues. Just pack their head full of extremist ideology and hint that they’re doing something heroic and you’ve got a dedicated minion. It’s why late teens are the best military recruits.
I don’t understand why y’all are arguing about this.
-
azure WANTS to believe the propaganda, because it feels comfortable to her inside the cocoon she inhabits. Leftists HATE having their opinions (often simply fantasies) disturbed the in facts, which is why facts are often described as racist by them.
-
Perhaps we need more Boyan Slats in the world....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyan_Slat
I wonder if Mr. Soros would consider bankrolling his project.
-
azure WANTS to believe the propaganda, because it feels comfortable to her inside the cocoon she inhabits. Leftists HATE having their opinions (often simply fantasies) disturbed the in facts, which is why facts are often described as racist by them.
I’m not convinced azure is a leftist. Steingar is, but not azure. The problem with both of them is they listen to MSM. It’s extremely hard to avoid full tilt left bias in your information that way. I really really really really wish azure and Steingar would both go MSM cold turkey for a month. Do not even have it on in the background while you’re brushing your teeth. Don’t even listen to fox except for Tucker Carlson and Hannity. Put talk radio on in the car. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and give all this a good month. Understand they’re right biased and that will drive you nuts but do it. Only if you finally grasp their side of the story (not agree with it but just understand it) will you be able to step out and above it all and see the big picture.
You must understand: mainstream media is completely in the pocket of the left. The opposing viewpoint is NOT “alternative” or “extreme right wing”. It’s 50% of the country! But the outlets for it are very narrow. Stop buying the lie that they are “too far right” for you to consume. It is not possible to see reality unless you consume and understand the conservative/libertarian/pro-Trump point of view and you have to steep yourself in it for a while. There’s just too much there. Too many documented facts and we can tell you don’t know them from your posts.
For example have you listened to the testimony of the prosecutor Biden fired over his son’s investigation? The man states outright he was fired because he was investigating Biden’s son, but mainstream media and left wing “fact” checking claim there was no connection there. Have you seen the tape of Biden bragging that he threatened to withhold $1billion from Ukraine if they didn’t fire the prosecutor?
Corrupt as hell. And Trump has not a right, but a duty to ask Ukraine to help investigate such corruption, by international agreement! Ergo Trump did NOTHING wrong in his conversation with the president of Ukraine (have you heard what the president of the Ukraine has said about the conversation?) And this is what the Dems are crying “impeach!” over.
It goes way beyond that, Ukraine is involved in the 2016 election. In reality it was Hillary, not Trump, that was helped by the Russians and Ukraine and Trump (rightly) wants to get to the bottom of it. The Ukrainians are offering to give us evidence of it all and the Dems are blocking it and twisting it around to appear Trump is initiating an attack on a potential 2020 opponent. It’s nothing of the kind, Trump is rightly trying to defend his own legitimate win and defend against an ongoing soft coup.
You’re never going to hear that on MSM. You are going to hear out of context snippets and outright lies, such as the Adam Schiff’s “parody” of the phone conversation.
You cannot hope to pull back and have anything resembling a realistic perspective if you don’t dive into the “alternative” and get the full picture as they see it. Yes they are biased right and I don’t agree with everything they say and they too lie and misrepresent, but on a far far far smaller scale than the MSM.
-
This rise of the climate children thing has a remarkable parallel with Hitler Youth. Indoctrinated from an early age in the Nazi mindset, then thrown into the defense of Berlin with nothing but their faith. Fanatically driven, and slaughtered. The climate Nazis are doing the same thing with today's youth, and will have the same result when the climate change hysteria comes crashing down as a wealth transfer fraud.
-
This rise of the climate children thing has a remarkable parallel with Hitler Youth. Indoctrinated from an early age in the Nazi mindset, then thrown into the defense of Berlin with nothing but their faith. Fanatically driven, and slaughtered. The climate Nazis are doing the same thing with today's youth, and will have the same result when the climate change hysteria comes crashing down as a wealth transfer fraud.
It's not just climate that reminds me of the rise of the Nazi party.
-
Of course she truly believes it. AND she’s being manipulated by adults. Teens are extremely easy to lead around by the nose, aside from when they’re in the rebellious phase. But the rebellious phase can happen anywhere from 11 to 23 or later, may only last a short while, or may only be confined to their parents or only to one or two issues. Just pack their head full of extremist ideology and hint that they’re doing something heroic and you’ve got a dedicated minion. It’s why late teens are the best military recruits.
I don’t understand why y’all are arguing about this.
Yep, that is pretty much my position. The only qualifier being that being autism spectrum, I suspect she is less susceptible to influence from adults than most teenagers would be.
And this started because I challenged Lucifer for proof that Soros was backing her financially. Mainly to see what sites he would cite. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if he, or Greenpeace, or some other leftist eco-lunatic organization was giving her the money to travel the world preaching her message. The assertion just smacked of conspiracy theory nonsense to me, so I wanted to see if there were any hard facts to back it up.
-
I’m not convinced azure is a leftist. Steingar is, but not azure. The problem with both of them is they listen to MSM.
It is no accident hat both mikey and azure are products of the communist educational cabal, and can't find the truth because the lies 'feel' so good to them.
I recall a conversation with our daughter about the 'crisis' requiring that the USA replace our republic with socialism. When I showed her documented proof of the failuers of socialism in every nation where it was installed, she go that brain dead look on her face, that reminded me of her brainwashing, and said, 'That's just because the RIGHT people haven't tried it yet."
When mikey trolls, he is doing so NOT on his own intellectual discoveries, because he has none. He is repeating the lies of the faculty lounge left and their devotion to communism, along with the destruction of America.
When azure makes arguments using her 'sources' she's responding to the subtle brainwashing of her profession and colleagues, along with the desire to 'go along to get along,' at the expense of facts and truth.
-
I tend to cite sources with an established reputation for getting at least the facts straight, not fringe sources on either the left or the right. It's true that most of those sources are now rather left-leaning (National Review excepted). That's unfortunate, but I'd still prefer them over "alternative" sites for hard facts.
Seriously? Gateway Pundit? Even Wikipedia names them as a source of "false stories and conspiracy theories". No thanks, that is specifically the type of site whose "facts" I wouldn't trust for a second.
Wikipedia is one of the lousiest sites out there. They have a reputation for progressive leaning narratives. Don’t believe it? Go look up Hunter Biden and look at the narrative there. In fact, go look at how they treat individuals from either side and look at how the narrative speaks.
The only one you’re fooling here is yourself.
-
Yep, that is pretty much my position. The only qualifier being that being autism spectrum, I suspect she is less susceptible to influence from adults than most teenagers would be.
And this started because I challenged Lucifer for proof that Soros was backing her financially. Mainly to see what sites he would cite. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if he, or Greenpeace, or some other leftist eco-lunatic organization was giving her the money to travel the world preaching her message. The assertion just smacked of conspiracy theory nonsense to me, so I wanted to see if there were any hard facts to back it up.
I presented the facts, but you wouldn’t accept them. I showed the name of the foundation along with the listed contributors. But since it didn’t come from one of your selected sources, it’s not to be believed. Of course, wonder why the liberal media chooses to ignore this? Oh, wait, it doesn’t fit the narrative.
BTW, your assertions smack of someone who is naive and chooses to live in a protective bubble.
-
Azure, what do feel are non-biased news sources?
-
Azure, what do feel are non-biased news sources?
Yes, I’d sure like to know if there are any. Liberals in my life keep thrusting articles in Newsweek and mainstream claims at me, saying Hunter Biden and in fact the whole Biden family is as squeaky clean and loving as the Waltons.
I can only hope and pray that the disconnect between that fantasy and what the Biden’s really have been doing can be broken.
And that there are enough credible sources to help do the job.
-
Here’s an example of how the msm and big tech work together to steer a narrative.
Take the photo shopped picture of Greta. Yep, someone did it, and it was disproven early on. But every liberal/progressive msm outlet jumped in and ran the story. (Remember “sharpygate”)
Big tech takes this and the first several pages of the search are on the photo shopped picture. After 2 or 3 pages most people stop searching. However, for those who are seeking the truth, one must keep refining the search and digging.
The MSM and progressive hate the smaller conservative sites that attempt to present facts. They are deemed “conspiratorial” and brandished as not to be listened too. Yep most times these smaller sites have been proven to be correct.
And I have to laugh when a liberal tries to throw doubt on a news source by using another site that has been recognized to steer narratives based upon ideology.
-
Yes, I’d sure like to know if there are any. Liberals in my life keep thrusting articles in Newsweek and mainstream claims at me, saying Hunter Biden and in fact the whole Biden family is as squeaky clean and loving as the Waltons.
I can only hope and pray that the disconnect between that fantasy and what the Biden’s really have been doing can be broken.
And that there are enough credible sources to help do the job.
Read Wikipedia and Hunter Biden looks downright respectable.
-
I presented the facts, but you wouldn’t accept them. I showed the name of the foundation along with the listed contributors. But since it didn’t come from one of your selected sources, it’s not to be believed. Of course, wonder why the liberal media chooses to ignore this? Oh, wait, it doesn’t fit the narrative.
A lot of stories are OMITTED by the mainstream media (which is 98% of the media) if they don't fit the narrative, and the Democrat agenda. So if you do find the story on a "alternative" source it is immediately demonized by Leftists as "Right Wing Extremism". The story can be proven to be true, with reliable sources, but it is still disregarded. I'm not necessarily talking about Azure.
If I see a story in an alternative source I will look for a mainstream source to reference so I don't hear that noise from people. Sometimes I can't find it, but if I do it is often spun so far to the Left it is unrecognizable.
-
Seriously? Gateway Pundit? Even Wikipedia
ROFL. Wikipedia is one of the most biased, left-leaning sites available.
-
ROFL. Wikipedia is one of the most biased, left-leaning sites available.
Can we all agree to take the word of BBC on this subject? It’s come to light the extent to which China is manipulating Wikipedia:
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49921173
-
It is no accident hat both mikey and azure are products of the communist educational cabal, and can't find the truth because the lies 'feel' so good to them.
I recall a conversation with our daughter about the 'crisis' requiring that the USA replace our republic with socialism. When I showed her documented proof of the failuers of socialism in every nation where it was installed, she go that brain dead look on her face, that reminded me of her brainwashing, and said, 'That's just because the RIGHT people haven't tried it yet."
When mikey trolls, he is doing so NOT on his own intellectual discoveries, because he has none. He is repeating the lies of the faculty lounge left and their devotion to communism, along with the destruction of America.
When azure makes arguments using her 'sources' she's responding to the subtle brainwashing of her profession and colleagues, along with the desire to 'go along to get along,' at the expense of facts and truth.
Not just products, but that's still their current environment. Rush Limbaugh just had a caller who said he voted Democrat all his life until Trump. He voted for Trump and he said he caught absolute hell in the faculty lounge because he supports Trump.
Universities are now 90% liberal if Haidt is right, and in terms of human group behavior, that's past the point where a minority is no longer tolerated and is in fact actively persecuted. Given this is the environment Steingar and azure must function in every day, they both deserve credit for even being on this forum.
-
Not just products, but that's still their current environment. Rush Limbaugh just had a caller who said he voted Democrat all his life until Trump. He voted for Trump and he said he caught absolute hell in the faculty lounge because he supports Trump.
Universities are now 90% liberal if Haidt is right, and in terms of human group behavior, that's past the point where a minority is no longer tolerated and is in fact actively persecuted. Given this is the environment Steingar and azure must function in every day, they both deserve credit for even being on this forum.
They’re more than welcome here. But we don’t have to accept the liberal mantra or make special considerations either.
-
When azure makes arguments using her 'sources' she's responding to the subtle brainwashing of her profession and colleagues, along with the desire to 'go along to get along,' at the expense of facts and truth.
LOL!!! I can't even remember the last time I discussed politics with anyone at work. Go along to get along? Yeah, right, that's why I use global warming as a vehicle to talk to my astronomy students about uncertainty in science. There are people in my college who will certainly try to put the fear of God in me if (when) they find out - I don't have tenure.
You're pretty far off the mark on that one. Sure, everyone has biases. One of my main ones is to be very skeptical of conspiracy theories. I don't care which side pushes them, I have a high bar to give them any credibility.
-
Azure, what do feel are non-biased news sources?
I don't know of any. But bias is not the only problem, and not the one that bothers me most about sites that push conspiracy theories. I'm more concerned about stuff reported as facts that are outright lies.
It may well be that mainstream news organizations like NPR selectively ignore important stories because they don't fit the narrative they want to present. And that is something I worry about. If the people are not getting an accurate picture of what is happening in the world from news companies with a long reputation for accuracy to protect, then we are truly fucked as a nation that is supposed to be governed by the people. If you believe that is what is happening then it makes sense that you would turn to alternative sources for the truth, but consider this: how do you know these alternative sources are feeding you the truth? How do you know what they're giving you isn't just alternative lies? Why would you trust Gateway Pundit, to name one source, over WSJ or WaPo?
-
how do you know these alternative sources are feeding you the truth? How do you know what they're giving you isn't just alternative lies? Why would you trust Gateway Pundit, to name one source, over WSJ or WaPo?
You know it's true when the MSM refuses to acknowledge or report it. If they lie, the MSM is all over it claiming fake news and blaming it on Trump.
-
You know it's true when the MSM refuses to acknowledge or report it. If they lie, the MSM is all over it claiming fake news and blaming it on Trump.
Example: Joe Biden's video where he brags about withholding $1 Billion from Ukraine unless they fire the prosecutor who's investigating his son. It's there, on video, a sitting VP using taxpayer funds to shake down a country to stop investigating his son.
MSM ignores it.
-
Example: Joe Biden's video where he brags about withholding $1 Billion from Ukraine unless they fire the prosecutor who's investigating his son. It's there, on video, a sitting VP using taxpayer funds to shake down a country to stop investigating his son.
MSM ignores it.
Azure, did you see that video discussed above on any of the stations or sites that you frequent? If so, how was it presented or commented upon?
-
I don't know of any. But bias is not the only problem, and not the one that bothers me most about sites that push conspiracy theories. I'm more concerned about stuff reported as facts that are outright lies.
It may well be that mainstream news organizations like NPR selectively ignore important stories because they don't fit the narrative they want to present. And that is something I worry about. If the people are not getting an accurate picture of what is happening in the world from news companies with a long reputation for accuracy to protect, then we are truly fucked as a nation that is supposed to be governed by the people. If you believe that is what is happening then it makes sense that you would turn to alternative sources for the truth, but consider this: how do you know these alternative sources are feeding you the truth? How do you know what they're giving you isn't just alternative lies? Why would you trust Gateway Pundit, to name one source, over WSJ or WaPo?
Selectively ignoring stories is as bad as the outright lie.
-
Selectively ignoring stories is as bad as the outright lie.
C'mon now...........this has already been explained..... ::)
See, they don't ignore these, it's simply they don't have the space to put the story....Or if they run the story, they simply don't have the space to put all the details.... ???
You guys and your conspiracy stories!!
-
C'mon now...........this has already been explained..... ::)
See, they don't ignore these, it's simply they don't have the space to put the story....Or if they run the story, they simply don't have the space to put all the details.... ???
You guys and your conspiracy stories!!
ah, thanks for explaining it to me. I see clearly now.
-
C'mon now...........this has already been explained..... ::)
See, they don't ignore these, it's simply they don't have the space to put the story....Or if they run the story, they simply don't have the space to put all the details.... ???
You guys and your conspiracy stories!!
Well, you have to understand, it takes a lot of space to cover EVERYTHING negative about trump. It started almost on day 1 when every MSM outlet ran huge stories about how Trump got a bigger portion of ice cream than everyone else, and ONLY Trump got thousand Island dressing while everyone else had to eat French dressing. That was really important for us to know and set the tone for everything else.
I always thought if he had released his tax returns early, he would have been accused of bragging.
And then there is Syria. If he had sent more troops over there, libs would have had a hissy fit. But as it happened, they had to have a hissy fit about him pulling troops out. All those hissy fits take a lot of time and space to elaborate on.
-
Well, you have to understand, it takes a lot of space to cover EVERYTHING negative about trump. It started almost on day 1 when every MSM outlet ran huge stories about how Trump got a bigger portion of ice cream than everyone else, and ONLY Trump got thousand Island dressing while everyone else had to eat French dressing. That was really important for us to know and set the tone for everything else.
I always thought if he had released his tax returns early, he would have been accused of bragging.
And then there is Syria. If he had sent more troops over there, libs would have had a hissy fit. But as it happened, they had to have a hissy fit about him pulling troops out. All those hissy fits take a lot of time and space to elaborate on.
He had RUSSIAN dressing......Breaking News!
-
My local paper is libbie and I can hardly stand to read it. The headlines blare slanted untruths that hint at malfeasance by POTUS but the article itself weasels around facts entirely by suggesting what COULD be happening as if it IS what is happening.
So I go over to WalkAway and comfort myself with the hundreds of former Democrats signing on there every week. I just hope it becomes millions.
https://m.facebook.com/groups/1945356878817544?view=permalink&id=2778419118844645&refid=18&_ft_=qid.6745645185594721040%3Amf_story_key.2778419118844645%3Agroup_id.1945356878817544%3Atop_level_post_id.2778419118844645%3Atl_objid.2778419118844645%3Acontent_owner_id_new.100003952462404%3Asrc.22%3Aphoto_id.1591998650941868%3Astory_location.6%3Astory_attachment_style.photo%3Afilter.GroupStoriesByActivityEntQuery&__tn__=%2As%2As-R
-
He had RUSSIAN dressing......Breaking News!
Post of the Day on Pilot Spin!
-
When the CNN and MSNBC pussies were distracted wailing about having w many diet cokes the President did, or didn’t drink at some dinner, I found myself laughing so hard that I ended up choking and my poor wife thought I was having a seizure.
The snowflake, self unaware, leftists ate up all the lies, spun lies, and damned lies with such an appetite that the guy on MSNBC who looks just like the kid from the Wonder Years, named Madcow, or Maddow, or something like it, thought he was a star, wrote a book and almost 800 people bought it.
-
My local paper is libbie and I can hardly stand to read it. The headlines blare slanted untruths that hint at malfeasance by POTUS but the article itself weasels around facts entirely by suggesting what COULD be happening as if it IS what is happening.
All the local print Media is Leftist as are the local TV "news" broadcasts, even the local Fox affiliates. No sources, nor substance, but innuendo they present as FACT. Also the national "news" from the networks, and cable channels are all leftist, except for a few shows on Fox News, and OANN.
The weak minded believe all of them because they WANT to believe them as it reinforces their twisted view of the world and the United States which for some reason believe it is CHIC to hate.
-
I don't know of any. But bias is not the only problem, and not the one that bothers me most about sites that push conspiracy theories. I'm more concerned about stuff reported as facts that are outright lies.
It may well be that mainstream news organizations like NPR selectively ignore important stories because they don't fit the narrative they want to present. And that is something I worry about. If the people are not getting an accurate picture of what is happening in the world from news companies with a long reputation for accuracy to protect, then we are truly fucked as a nation that is supposed to be governed by the people. If you believe that is what is happening then it makes sense that you would turn to alternative sources for the truth, but consider this: how do you know these alternative sources are feeding you the truth? How do you know what they're giving you isn't just alternative lies? Why would you trust Gateway Pundit, to name one source, over WSJ or WaPo?
DING DING DING DING DING!!! You nailed it. That is exactly what is going on. They no longer care about their reputation for accuracy. They're willing to sacrifice it for the "cause" of destroying what they think is evil (Trump, and the common man who voted for him.)
Now I see your mindset clear as day and where you are at because it's so familiar, it is exactly where I have been for the past nine years on the subject of long term care insurance. Complete confusion in an ocean of information and little way to discern reality amidst it all. For years and years I have been trying to "see" that right thing to do with this matter. What policy to buy, what type policy is best, whether or not we need any at all. Deep confusion and mistrust of every source was what I was dealing with.
Advisors who swore traditional policies were best, and called hybrids "snakes". Other advisors who said the exact reverse, that hybrids are the way to go because traditional insurers have proven themselves untrustworthy. I'm talking about qualified advisors with excellent reputations painting complete opposing realities!
Finally, just this month, there was "crystalization" of the patterns. It's like in the ocean you're seeing all kinds of separate floating pieces of stuff, all unconnected and random. This would be all the various "facts" you learn about Long Term Care insurance, I mean, about Trump and politics. Then one day, all at once, it's like a switch is flipped and a very bright light comes on and for the first time you can see just under the surface, all the lines connecting all these seemingly unrelated things!!!!
That is crystalization. When suddenly you're not seeing randomly floating items, but a solid structure underlying it all. A structure that explains all of it, what's true, what's not true and why, and what is partly true under some circumstances: You need a huge deep understanding of the whole picture to grasp that last one. I have finally seen it! I now know the answer! I now know exactly what policy to buy and how to address long term care planning for my husband and myself. I see the landscape underlying the whole damn business and what drives all the many different outwardly manifestations that were once so confusing.
You're not there yet with political reality. You're floundering with all these bits of info with no idea what's real and what's not and who is right and who is wrong. How does one get to the epiphany moment? By immersing yourself in it. Studying every bit of it. Completely immersing yourself in both sides. I suspect you've already been completely immersed in one side (MSM anti-Trump) so you've done half the work. But now you need to immerse yourself in the other side.
You: But the alternative sources could be lies.
YES. And if you immerse yourself in it you will eventually have the equivalent of a PhD and will know all the ins and outs and lies and truths. I'm there now with long term care insurance. I got there by consuming every bit of information I could from all points of view. For a long time I avoided it. Full of anxiety I said the same thing, "I can't listen to that agent, I can't trust he's telling the truth, he is just trying to earn a commission". It's TRUE, they do have self interest and want to sell the policy. NEVERTHELESS the only way to solve the total puzzle was to listen to them, learn everything about it, and finally, know enough to judge for myself.
You must do both sides: I could never make the right call for our LTC policy if I had only studied the traditional type, or just the hybrid type. (Like the political right vs left, LTC policies are roughly divided between traditional and hybrid). I had to learn all about both.
-
He had RUSSIAN dressing......Breaking News!
Also heard he tore the labels off his mattress. :o
-
Elizabeth Warren....
1/1024 Indian ::)
Fired from her teaching job for being pregnant......School system offered her a contract for the next year ::)
She and her husband eloped.....apparently you publish wedding announcement when you elope ::)
-
Also heard he tore the labels off his mattress. :o
And stole a few towels.
-
You're not there yet with political reality. You're floundering with all these bits of info with no idea what's real and what's not and who is right and who is wrong. How does one get to the epiphany moment? By immersing yourself in it. Studying every bit of it. Completely immersing yourself in both sides. I suspect you've already been completely immersed in one side (MSM anti-Trump) so you've done half the work. But now you need to immerse yourself in the other side.
You: But the alternative sources could be lies.
YES. And if you immerse yourself in it you will eventually have the equivalent of a PhD and will know all the ins and outs and lies and truths.
Some of us have been doing this all along, only to be scoffed at. Take the Russia Hoax. I know that I, and probably yourself and others have read thousands of documents. Many of these documents have been either ignored by the MSM or written off as nonsense by them. Yet they are actual legit documents that show the inner workings of what can only be described as a coup. Greg Jarrett wrote a book that was much written like a legal brief with references and footnotes to back up everything he was writing. One poster here scoffed that "Greg Jarrett had an agenda" and that book was just conspiracy (paraphrasing).
Others such as John Soloman have written extensively and as always produced documents to back his assertions. So has Sara Carter, but remember, the MSM scoff at them and label them "conspiracy" in order to discredit them.
Gateway Pundit. Yep, sometimes over the top tabloid style reporting. But the amazing part is their accuracy on facts. Another highly accurate site is the Daily Caller (which Wikipedia slams as a white supremacist leaning site).
Any site that tries to report accurate facts will be attacked by the progressives and the MSM because it goes against the narrative. Part of steering the narrative is to prevent other sides of the story, especially if they contain the truth.
-
Also heard he tore the labels off his mattress. :o
Child’s play against Rubio double dipping tortilla chips in salsa at a party. Kavanaugh-esque if you ask me.
*Nods sagely*
-
And stole a few towels.
I understand he wore white after Labor Day.
-
Some of us have been doing this all along, only to be scoffed at. Take the Russia Hoax. I know that I, and probably yourself and others have read thousands of documents. Many of these documents have been either ignored by the MSM or written off as nonsense by them. Yet they are actual legit documents that show the inner workings of what can only be described as a coup. Greg Jarrett wrote a book that was much written like a legal brief with references and footnotes to back up everything he was writing. One poster here scoffed that "Greg Jarrett had an agenda" and that book was just conspiracy (paraphrasing).
Others such as John Soloman have written extensively and as always produced documents to back his assertions. So has Sara Carter, but remember, the MSM scoff at them and label them "conspiracy" in order to discredit them.
Gateway Pundit. Yep, sometimes over the top tabloid style reporting. But the amazing part is their accuracy on facts. Another highly accurate site is the Daily Caller (which Wikipedia slams as a white supremacist leaning site).
Any site that tries to report accurate facts will be attacked by the progressives and the MSM because it goes against the narrative. Part of steering the narrative is to prevent other sides of the story, especially if they contain the truth.
^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^
-
Azure, did you see that video discussed above on any of the stations or sites that you frequent? If so, how was it presented or commented upon?
Well, according to Hillary, while being interviewed by "PBS News Hour" (you know, those fair and balanced folks) there's no evidence Biden did anything wrong. Even the host, Judy Woodruff could see nothing wrong with what Biden did. And of course, no mention of the Biden tape where he admits wrong doing.
"Former Vice President Joe Biden clearly a part of this. His name came up during [the Trump-Zelensky] call. Whether he did or didn’t do anything wrong — and there’s no proof that he did — President Trump keeps bringing that up, is there an optical problem for Joe Biden because he son was in a position to be making a lot of money from a company that was in a foreign country?" host Judy Woodruff asked.
"You know, Judy, this is the goal of the Trump strategy: It is to raise questions. There is no evidence that either one of them did anything wrong. Could there be a question of judgment about his son? Well, that’s fair game," Clinton replied. "But there is absolutely no evidence, and there will not be any evidence, that Joe Biden did anything wrong. Enough with these wild unfounded conspiracy theories. Using the help of foreign governments to interfere in our election and to undermine people who have been in the public eye for a long time and I hope the American people reject this, as they should."
But remember, we've been told news sources like townhall.com are unreliable, not to be trusted, and PBS is a "moderate news source".
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/10/09/hillarys-hot-take-theres-no-evidence-the-bidens-did-anything-wrong-n2554475
-
The only for true blue democrats (communists) to function in their delusional state is to simply ignore reality, deny the truth, even when their corrupt, communist, candidate admits it on TV.
Liberalism is a mental condition that requires utter devotion to the lies. One must have brutal conformity to the party line, no matter how often it changes, and must accept all the hypocrisy as the cost of protecting people from democracy.
If that means staring at senile Joe and refusing to understand that he was admitting to committing a felony, and proud of it, it's because academic liberals are always willing to put lies before reality.
-
... that means staring at senile Joe and refusing to understand that he was admitting to committing a felony, and proud of it, it's because academic liberals are always willing to put lies before reality.
no no no. They aren't lying.... because it's not a lie if there is no intent to deceive. And the liberals wouldn't be intending to deceive, would they?
-
no no no. They aren't lying.... because it's not a lie if there is no intent to deceive. And the liberals wouldn't be intending to deceive, would they?
They’re just looking out for our well-being, and of course, they are protecting the constitution!
-
Azure, did you see that video discussed above on any of the stations or sites that you frequent? If so, how was it presented or commented upon?
YES. PBS Newshour showed it. I don't remember that they commented about it specifically. It was shown as background information, I believe, to a story about the investigation into corruption inside Ukraine.
That said, PBS consistently says that allegations against Biden of improper activity viz. Ukraine have been "thoroughly debunked". I'm not certain how, or whether they even tried to, square those two facts.
Me, I'm keeping an open mind on the whole matter.
-
YES. PBS Newshour showed it. I don't remember that they commented about it specifically. It was shown as background information, I believe, to a story about the investigation into corruption inside Ukraine.
That said, PBS consistently says that allegations against Biden of improper activity viz. Ukraine have been "thoroughly debunked". I'm not certain how, or whether they even tried to, square those two facts.
Me, I'm keeping an open mind on the whole matter.
How can PBS claim Biden's improper activity with his Son, and Ukraine has been "thoroughly debunked" when Biden clearly and PUBLICLY said he had NO KNOWLEDGE of his son's business dealings with Ukraine? Then a picture surfaces with Biden, his son, and the very Ukrainians he did "business" with when Joe Biden was V.P.
It reminds me when the Climate Alarmist say the debate is over, and the science is settled. Meaning, we don't want to talk about it anymore for fear you will see behind the curtain and reveal what we are HIDING.
You can keep an open mind all you want, but it seems like you're just ignoring the obvious. At some point it just looks like you're mentally justifying your bias.
-
Weird looking URL but it points to an appropriate Mutts comic strip:
https://safr.kingfeatures.com/api/img.php?e=gif&s=c&file=TXV0dHMvMjAxOS8xMC9NdXR0cy4yMDE5MTAxMV8xNTM2LmdpZg==
-
Weird looking URL but it points to an appropriate Mutts comic strip:
https://safr.kingfeatures.com/api/img.php?e=gif&s=c&file=TXV0dHMvMjAxOS8xMC9NdXR0cy4yMDE5MTAxMV8xNTM2LmdpZg==
not all differences are positive.
(btw - "appropriate"? not so much, perhaps "applicable" would be more accurate)
-
How can PBS claim Biden's improper activity with his Son, and Ukraine has been "thoroughly debunked" when Biden clearly and privately said he had NO KNOWLEDGE of his son's business dealings with Ukraine? Then a picture surfaces with Biden, his son, and the very Ukrainians he did "business" with when Joe Biden was V.P.
It reminds me when the Climate Alarmist say the debate is over, and the science is settled. Meaning, we don't want to talk about it anymore for fear you will see behind the curtain and reveal what we are HIDING.
You can keep an open mind all you want, but it seems like you're just ignoring the obvious. At some point it just looks like you're mentally justifying your bias.
So now we know that Joe Biden took $900,000 from Burisma. But Joe said he didn't know anything about his son's business dealings.
Oh, and the "whistleblower" hoax? Seems that CIA agent turned whistleblower use to work for Joe Biden, and even made a trip(s) to Ukraine with Joe Biden.
Gee, didn't see that in the MSM. Oh, that's right, because it's already been determined nothing really happened. Got it!
-
...
Gee, didn't see that in the MSM. Oh, that's right, because it's already been determined nothing really happened. Got it!
AP keeps reporting the "absolutely no evidence"
so much for trusting AP.
-
AP keeps reporting the "absolutely no evidence"
so much for trusting AP.
AP and Reuters get re-printed in many newspapers, websites, and tv broadcasts across the country. They've both been very Leftist biased for a long time. However, many view them as the "Gold Standard" for reporting and "News". Total farce!
-
So now we know that Joe Biden took $900,000 from Burisma. But Joe said he didn't know anything about his son's business dealings.
Oh, and the "whistleblower" hoax? Seems that CIA agent turned whistleblower use to work for Joe Biden, and even made a trip(s) to Ukraine with Joe Biden.
Gee, didn't see that in the MSM. Oh, that's right, because it's already been determined nothing really happened. Got it!
I meant to say Biden PUBLICLY said he had no knowledge of his son's business dealings with Ukraine in my previous post. He was asked by the MEDIA and said he had no knowledge. Then, as you point out the pictures, and $900K payment comes out. Yet, people still ignore the obvious.
-
I meant to say Biden PUBLICLY said he had no knowledge of his son's business dealings with Ukraine in my previous post. He was asked by the MEDIA and said he had no knowledge. Then, as you point out the $900K payment comes out. Yet, people still ignore the obvious.
Of course. How long before the narrative flips to Trump pressured Burisma to give Joe the money to make him look bad?
BTW, news (real news) is the whistleblower doesn't want to testify before congress, he only wants to give written responses. IOW, he wants Schiff and Biden lawyers to write the responses for him.
-
BTW, news (real news) is the whistleblower doesn't want to testify before congress, he only wants to give written responses. IOW, he wants Schiff and Biden lawyers to write the responses for him.
file those responses under 813.
-
Poor Greta failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize. It went to some black guy in Ethiopia.
-
Poor Greta failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize. It went to some black guy in Ethiopia.
Obama got another one?
-
YES. PBS Newshour showed it. I don't remember that they commented about it specifically. It was shown as background information, I believe, to a story about the investigation into corruption inside Ukraine.
That said, PBS consistently says that allegations against Biden of improper activity viz. Ukraine have been "thoroughly debunked". I'm not certain how, or whether they even tried to, square those two facts.
Me, I'm keeping an open mind on the whole matter.
Interesting. Thanks for responding to this question. I’ve got to believe that PBS didn’t expound on how that story was thoroughly debunked, when Bragging Biden announced what he did on the video.
-
Obama got another one?
Did you just assume Obama’s gender when he said “some black guy in Ethiopia?”
-
Did you just assume Obama’s gender when he said “some black guy in Ethiopia?”
Just a guess on my part. I really meant Michelle. Also, Ethiopia, Kenya, whatever.
-
No bias. No bias at all.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/10/11/nbc-bans-trump-campaign-ad-on-biden-ukraine-scandal/