I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
Wait what? The heritage foundation medical plan isn't the basis for Obamacare?
No it wasn't. But you've been fed that line of bullshit and you repeat it like the good little parrot you are.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
Sadly that's not the dumbest thing he did on this thread. Comparing BuzzFeed to heritage foundation isn't the dumbest thing either.
Lots of stupidity Bob.
No more stupid than you comparing Vox to Daily Caller.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
Before you shit posted it twice, did you even read it? He says no it's not the basis for Obamacare. Then goes on to explain how it is the basis for Obamacare. Then discusses why his position has evolved.
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
Before you shit posted it twice, did you even read it? He says no it's not the basis for Obamacare. Then goes on to explain how it is the basis for Obamacare. Then discusses why his position has evolved.
Fuck you are stupid.
No one reads anything you post. You've burned that bridge.
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
Before you shit posted it twice, did you even read it? He says no it's not the basis for Obamacare. Then goes on to explain how it is the basis for Obamacare. Then discusses why his position has evolved.
Fuck you are stupid.
Quite everyone the parrot is talking. And even if the Heritage Foundation did come up with Obamacare so what? It was a shitty plan and Heritage isn't the final voice on what is or what isn't Conservative policy.
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
You care. And we all see it and know it. It’s obvious. You found a place you desperately want to be a part of, but keep tripping up. This why people say you need to PM IrishDawg. It would help you from continual embarrassment.
But sure, I just know your next post will be about how much you don’t care.
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
Said the computer geek!
this may have been an effective insult about 4 decades ago when you were young, but it's not now. if anything it just makes you look like an idiot.
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
I know you care
You can't stay away
And you get offended like a little bitch
it's kind of fun to see how long you guys will go back and forth with someone whose only interest here is insulting you over and over
remember that one time shepherd smith said something not nice about trump? check mate lib
Remember that one time @MariotaTheGawd brought something interesting here?
Me neither
when was the last time you brought something interesting anywhere? 1993?
I know you are but what am I?
old
Whoosh
He’s been in a whooshicane sense his first post. Hasn’t dialed this place in.
you think fitting in with trash like you is something i care about. i don't. i'm not sure why this is so hard for a super genius like you to comprehend but here we are
Said the computer geek!
this may have been an effective insult about 4 decades ago when you were young, but it's not now. if anything it just makes you look like an idiot.
It’s not an insult. He is mocking you. Surprised you dont know the difference.
Comments
“Race, your assertion that Cohen lied is incorrect because _______________ (fill in the blank).
I realize its much easier to say “talking points memo”! As a dumb ass with no argument would do.
https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/dont-blame-heritage-obamacare-mandate
Take your pick
https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/commentary/dont-blame-heritage-obamacare-mandate
Kind of like his GND "defense"
Fuck you are stupid.
You can't stay away
And you get offended like a little bitch
But sure, I just know your next post will be about how much you don’t care.