A little over 3 hrs til "Game Change" starts

Do the forum rules require that someone submit a deflection post every fucking minute? Do you know that it is lame as you type it?
Yes, pointing out hypocrisy is always 'lame', to hypocrites, that is.

You are a bright nutter, so you may understand this.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not deflection if it is the START OF THE THREAD/TOPIC. When it is used as a fucking excuse, it is lame deflection.

I know you get it.
 
Sorry pal

But given that your side dismisses The New York Times as a source, you posting Breitbart propaganda is unacceptable

Yes, don't you DARE look at anything that challenges your worldview. You might discover that what you believe is, in fact, wrong.

And you simply can't have that.

Just keep bitterly clinging to the lies.

Sorry....but I already wasted 20 min out of my life watching what Hannity and Breitbart consider credible news

I am not going to waste any more of my time reading Breitbart propaganda calling others propaganda
Good strategy you have there:

LALALA.jpg
 
Anyone who posts something from a BriteBart site as a credible news source is a not only a Circus Barker of the highest order but a fool and buffoon of the Nth degree.

Some people aren't worth the time of day.
So, you can't prove that any of the lies exposed in the article are actually true, either.

I sense a trend.
 
Evidently, the American people thought otherwise
Not all of them. Just enough idiots who fell for the hopey changey bullshit.

You know, like you did.
Lilly Ledbetter law: that's a big change.
Yes. It will greatly benefit the Trial Lawyer's Association.
Affordable Health Care Act: big change.
And not a good one.
bin Laden is sleeping with the fishes: huge change.
He got something right. But I can't believe he had to sleep on the decision. What a weenie.
End of the Iraq War: huge change.
Indeed. And you can thank Bush for that, since he negotiated the timetable.

But you won't.
One out of four ain't bad, I suppose.

Dumbass.
 
Anyone who posts something from a BriteBart site as a credible news source is a not only a Circus Barker of the highest order but a fool and buffoon of the Nth degree.

Some people aren't worth the time of day.
So, you can't prove that any of the lies exposed in the article are actually true, either.

I sense a trend.

I read his link and 8 of 10 can be verified by goggle articles sources leading back to other than Fox news:eek:
 
You know, I watched the movie and actually thought that the movie did a better job of putting Sarah in a positive light than what the media did.

I also find it very interesting that a lot of right wingers on here have stated REPEATEDLY during the campaign that Obama was never properly vetted (or in some extreme cases, they say he was never vetted at all), yet McCain and his campaign failed to do the very same thing for Palin because it was a rush job, and when troopergate as well as other things came out in her past (just a week or two after announcing) they each started to blame each other for not vetting her properly.

But, that's because McCain knew Lieberman and all the others (who had been vetted already) weren't going to get him the poll numbers he needed to win. However, he was looking for something to put him over the top, and I think the only reason that McCain even considered her was because of her high approval numbers in AK, and he was hoping that by having a woman on the ticket he could get the Hillary vote.

And yeah.........Palin did give good speeches as shes pretty charismatic, and knew exactly what the base wanted to hear, so whenever she was talking at rallies, the voters got excited because they felt she connected with them.

But..........to tell the truth, any decent actor can "connect" with their audience, it's what their job is. I also found it interesting that after she screwed up the Couric interview they came up with the idea of switching subjects and turning it around to stuff she actually knew about.

Which is probably the same reason she sounded like such a one trick pony and kept repeating the same stuff over and over and over, while never actually addressing other subjects which were pertinent as well.

What did I come away from the movie with? Palin was a big fish in a little pond who thought she was ready for the big time but wasn't. The interviewers even told her that it was gonna get rough and she said she'd be okay because the politics in AK was rough as well.

She also kinda got seduced by all the attention she was paid, which is probably the reason she sank McCain's campaign in a bid to get glory for herself, which was reflected in the arguement between McCain's advisors about not letting her give a VP concession speech, she was still looking for the limelight.

Which also points a great deal to her personality and explains her Constitutional bus tour and her stint on TLC.

And yeah..........I was pretty much glued to the news during the last election cycle (habit I picked up in the Navy because the news would let me know what I could possibly expect), and the movie was pretty much fact based, compared to what I'd seen on the news.

And, I still maintain that this movie puts Palin in a more positive light than the media did during the election cycle.
 
My favorite scene was right before the GOP Convention and Sarah thanked Levi Johnson for cutting off his mullet
 
Do the forum rules require that someone submit a deflection post every fucking minute? Do you know that it is lame as you type it?
Yes, pointing out hypocrisy is always 'lame', to hypocrites, that is.

You are a bright nutter, so you may understand this.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not deflection if it is the START OF THE THREAD/TOPIC. When it is used as a fucking excuse, it is lame deflection.

I know you get it.
I understand it's hard for you to own up to your hypocrisy, but you'll survive.
 
Anyone who posts something from a BriteBart site as a credible news source is a not only a Circus Barker of the highest order but a fool and buffoon of the Nth degree.

Some people aren't worth the time of day.
So, you can't prove that any of the lies exposed in the article are actually true, either.

I sense a trend.

I read his link and 8 of 10 can be verified by goggle articles sources leading back to other than Fox news:eek:
Well, there you go.

This movie is shit. And the people who believe it's accurate are either stupid, or liars, or both.

I vote both.
 
So, you can't prove that any of the lies exposed in the article are actually true, either.

I sense a trend.

I read his link and 8 of 10 can be verified by goggle articles sources leading back to other than Fox news:eek:
Well, there you go.

This movie is shit. And the people who believe it's accurate are either stupid, or liars, or both.

I vote both.

They couldn't show it on HBO if it weren't true
 
Not all of them. Just enough idiots who fell for the hopey changey bullshit.

You know, like you did.

52% and 365 electoral votes worth of people who didn't want palin a heartbeat away from the oval office.

and most of us would do it again because palin would never have been ready for the oval office.

it's not about hopey-changey... though i know it makes rightwingers feel better to think it does... this particular hillary voter would have chewed off her own arm before she voted for someone as stupid as sarah palin just because she had two X chromosomes.

that's it... i must be a snob... i think knowledge matters.

imagine that.

:eusa_think:how do you feel about melanin levels?

52%, the new landslide......*shrugs* so the electoral college count matters now?

did i use the word landslide?

but it was sure better than baby bush's win.

thanks for playing...

not.
 
I see. You don't remember that happening either.

No.....I'm not obsessed.

You're just blocking all of it. Too painful to admit you all voted for someone who was so unqualified. Right after the Bush disaster too.

I keep saying the same about Obama supporters. They know he's not qualified.

They also know he's dishonest. Nobody can say they believe Obama 100% with a straight face.
 

Forum List

Back
Top