Wanna-B-Fanboy

I think this makes sense to people who don't dismiss anything that doesn't fit their narrative or people who's rational thought is not hijack by thier personal confirmation bias.

Agreed.

Ouch.

I agree. EO brought up some solid facts and a very striking argument (hats off to EO). The LAwsuit comment was very valid as was the NHS fact. Nice to see someone provide facts instead of feelings and "I do/don't see, therefore it can/can't be true" rhetoric.

DOn't, just don't- there is no reasoning with that. You did excellent in supporting your argument, just leave it at that. Some people just don't understand or really care about facts. You did well- leave it at that, otherwise you will be touching crazy.

Eternal Optimist has provided considerably more facts than you have. He has also taken the time to painstakingly explain the difference of gender pay discrimination, which is illegal, and the wage gap. Just because you refuse to listen to them doesn't make him wrong.

Agreed, I was impressed with Augustine's short appearance.

Well done.

So it begins- the begining of the end. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/opinion/mueller-report-trump-democrats-barr.html

I don't know what I am watching... but man- that is some pretty funny stuff.

Maybe you should google it or else you look like this guy.

You don't know what it is yet you are calling going there disgusting? either you do or you don't know what a white nationalist is... you can't have it both ways. Wow... this kinda sums up your view on politics. Ignore the 20% rise in actual hate crimes and focus on the 0.2% hoaxes. Cuz hoaxes are where the problem lies... C'mon- you gotta be trolling at this point.

That is actually a great idea.

this looks like a trap... i'm not going to touch this one... Oh **** this.... Is it cuz he is not a 'merican? Cuz he looks like a 16 yr old boy? Cuz' he is a lightweight compared to his predecessor?

I thought the thread needed a little levity. 😁

I don't think anyone is scared of anything posted in this thread. Well. maybe one. indicated through psychological projection. Not true- not every "contrary opinion is dismissed as alt-right. Statements that smack of white supremacy, use language of the alt-right and supports ideals popular with the alt-right movement- those are immediately dismissed as "alt-right". No one is labeled immediately, there is always a lengthy and consistent history behind that label- I have never seen any pop-in, make a quick comment and be labeled immediately, ( riderfans are the lone exception). WHat you are peddling here is untrue. This is a **** statement- no one here is told to dismiss all information as "crap" and "garbage": they usually come to these conclusions on their own, through experience, research and sometimes interactions. I dismiss fox as a very right slanted, opinion riddled talking heads trying to blur the lines of real journalism and right wing propaganda- because I have watched it, I have done the research and I came to these conclusions on my own, not because AOC told me rupert Murdoch is evil... I have no idea what you are trying to convey here with this statement and this tweet.... it's like you are making a statement and then completely undermining that statement....

So let me get this straight... you berate me for fact checking and source checking articles people throw at me. Then you proceed to berate people who fall for the fake news media all the time and being fooled a HUNDRED times! How does one even reconcile that thought process? then you parrot trump's coined phrases of the altleft and sad/ Do you even know you are using trumpisms? or are you just well-indoctrinated into the alt-right speak?

If there was a "national outrage" over the dubious incident, it was limited to gullible left-wing journalists, celebrities, politicians, and activists. The "narrative" only seemed "cut-and-dry" to people who were looking at the case through lenses clouded by their anti-Trump bias. It seemed made up to those of us who noticed that Smollett's allegations were outlandish, implausible, and riddled with inconsistencies from the get-go. Yet even as his story started falling apart (which happened almost immediately), the national media clung to their precious narrative. There's been much commentary in the past few days about the MSM's lack of critical thinking skills in covering not only the Jussie Smollett "hate crime" fairy tale, but a number of other bogus stories as well. Over the years, the MSM has fallen for hundreds of hate crime hoaxes, reporting on them as if they were confirmed facts, rather than mere allegations. By the time the story is proven to be a hoax, the media has already moved on to the next manufactured outrage. This phenomenon has only increased since the election of President Trump. Yet people still expressed shock and surprise when it became obvious that Smollett had staged his own hate crime. But fake hate crimes aren't the only type of bogus story the MSM routinely falls for. In the past two years the national media has also rushed to embrace the phony Steele dossier, a multitude of fake Deep State leaks on the Trump/Russia probe that turned out to be spectacularly wrong, the outlandish Kavanaugh smears, and the Covington smears. PJ Media's own Roger Simon called the media's propensity for believing the unbelievable "magical thinking." Another possible explanation for the media's gullibility would be confirmation bias, which is defined as "the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses." The overwhelmingly liberal media tend to embrace stories that confirm their own biases and ignore those that don't. https://pjmedia.com/trending/why-does-the-msm-keep-falling-for-obvious-hoaxes/ This is just sad.. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pj-media/

I don't even know why I bother responding to your posts... you clearly don't reciprocate the time and effort.

Whaaat? fair and balanced though.... fair and balanced.

Yeah- they are hit pieces. How are they all right? The first video where the IRS chairman corrects her about one aspect- the dark money. That is simply an difference in semantics. and the fact that was the only thing he took umbrage with.... well as another poster pointed out.... if 9 in 10 things said are correct- the cons latch on to that 1 single point and claim VICTORY! while ignoring the rest of the 90% which is factual... cherry picking at it's finest. There is no doublespeak or newspeak here. Truth is alive and well. Well... we'll see. she is gold for trumps base- but vilifying her in such a "scream at the camera" way does nothing to expand the GOP base.... it merely alienates the demographics they are trying to expand: the young, the educated, women and people of colour. That is a SOLID plan- buncha dumdums (the GOP not you KBF). Of course there is going to be push back.... it is a party. Comprised of a lot of different people. Everyone trying to make their point and angle for more spotlight for their constituents... yeah- that's politics. It's normal. It's expected. As for bringing out knives and all that jazz... that's quite a bit of hyperbole and has no real basis here. equating trump to Ilhan Omar is a false equivalent... if only trump was like Omar- things would be better. ??? what? I don't understand.... this your new battle cry?

Actually- it was. 😁

She's awesome- even these hit-pieces miss their mark. If that is the best they can do, she's golden. I love the way she makes the alt-right, lose their collective ****. How she deals with these people is awesome too- smacks em down: she is Micheal Garret to their Sam Heron

Who said that about Chavez? What does that have to do with Warren? You honestly think 'merica is going to be like Venezuela and people are going to eat cats? Holy Hyperbole Batman... Ok- you really didn't make a clear point here, so I am going to assume you meant that if Warren is elected, 'mericans are going to be eating cats? With a Great deal of certainty- I say that you are wrong. Why on Earth does 17to85 have to live in the states to make that claim? Do you live in the states? Even if you do... that only affects your immediate location- you would still have to rely on the same means that 17to85 uses to make his comments. You have made countless cockamamie references to "them, "they" and "the people" why does your referencing them hold more validity than 17to85's? Why are you bringing in religion into what 17to85 said?

You know- if she can just get past the whole Aboriginal claim she might be the Democratic party's nominee for POTUS. Considering the amount of **** that trump was able to shrug off, that one single issue should not be the reason she doesn't make it.... https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/19/politics/elizabeth-warren-wonky-professor/index.html I would love it if she became POTUS- she genuinely has the low and middle class's interests at heart. She has an incredible ability to convey complex concepts into a simpler more concise idea.