Breitbart, Fox and Their Rush To Judgement

[Intense]

No. He felt superior to her so she sent him to what he considered a superior color, white lawyer.

How exactly is it racist to send him to the color lawyer he thinks is superior?
How was she to know a superior white lawyer would cheat his own kind???

Somebody gives you a jar of paste and you eat it. What are we going to do with you ?

Gee what a surprise. NOT!

You can't explain how sending the farmer to a lawyer who is the color and sex the farmer considers superior is somehow racist mistreatment, so you make personal attacks in typical CON$ervative fashion.
Thank you.

She explained that because of his race, dropped the ball by pawning him off on someone else, when had he been black, she would have done more for him. Big fail there. Spin, spin, spin, away. You keep playing with yourself like that and it's either going to fall off or you'll go blind. MLK's speech is surely lost on your kind. Race or color should have nothing to do with the matter. What is with you??? Do you hear yourself???

You don't attack??? Really??? You believe that??? Your life is mis-characterization and misrepresentation. Stop it before you make me laugh so hard I might my undies! You are funny!!!

 

[Intense]

Hey, that's your "party of personal responsibility".

I think Breitbart knows he's eaten a shit sandwich here.

Yeah, and it sure was a sign of "personal responsibility" when Obama and the USDA demanded her resignation without doing their research beforehand, eh?....Seems to be a pattern with that idiot.

This is the thing about all this. Breitbert isn't making crucial decisions that affect this great country, OBAMA IS!......And he continues to show that he makes decisions without knowing the facts. It's going to come down to Obama making one of his decisions without facts that could very well spell disaster. And no amount of spin, damage control, or beer summits will change the fact that his jumping the gun cost us dearly.

Uh....excuse me.....But Obama already did that. Dont you remember?

He marketed and won supoport for the idea of borrowing a trillion dollars so we can keep unemployment from going above 8%...

And when it hit 10% he admitted they did not kow the economy was as bad as it was.

Now, off the record...I find it hard to beleive that 100 of the top world economists that he claimed to be advising him were ALL wrong about the state of the economy.

So my guess is he ignored the advice of the economists and made a judgement call based on his ideology.

He is proving to be a very dangerous decision maker and national marketer of initiatives.

Shhhh!!!! You might wake up the people's!!! The administration would not like that. I give it 5 years, and we are going to be back to building pyramids by hand, with no heavy construction equipment allowed. We will have plenty of administers and bureaucrats to direct every step.

 

[Intense]

This Thread gets the Most Disingenuous Title of the Month award.

The People who's Rush to Judgment really meant anything were in the WH. The ones who used 3 mins of Tap, From A right wing Blog site, to RUSH into Firing a woman.

and yet the fact remains that foxnews did rush to judgement so for any of you hacks to deny that FACT just shows how dishonest you truly are.

We Report, You Decide.

 

[Intense]

No. Her own admission made her racist. Just say no to the Kool-Aid.

What part of, "and so I didn't give him the full force of what I could do" and "I sent him to one of his own Kind" do these people do not get.


Clearly the woman has changed her beliefs, but there IS NO denying she once held RACIST beliefs. If you claim other wise you either have never even watched the tape, either the whole thing or the clip, OR you are A partisan hack.

She was telling a story about how she came to realize that her past world view was wrong so she changed her ways and you morons are too busy taking her comments out of context to see the whole picture.

Just more of the usual willfully illinformed.

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

 

[edthecynic]

Somebody gives you a jar of paste and you eat it. What are we going to do with you ?

Gee what a surprise. NOT!

You can't explain how sending the farmer to a lawyer who is the color and sex the farmer considers superior is somehow racist mistreatment, so you make personal attacks in typical CON$ervative fashion.
Thank you.

She explained that because of his race, dropped the ball by pawning him off on someone else, when had he been black, she would have done more for him. Big fail there. Spin, spin, spin, away. You keep playing with yourself like that and it's either going to fall off or you'll go blind. MLK's speech is surely lost on your kind. Race or color should have nothing to do with the matter. What is with you??? Do you hear yourself???

You don't attack??? Really??? You believe that??? Your life is mis-characterization and misrepresentation. Stop it before you make me laugh so hard I might my undies! You are funny!!!

She explained the because of his ACTING SUPERIOR, not his race, she sent him to someone he would feel more comfortable with. And he obviously felt better with the white male lawyer since he was willing to pay for his help rather than get the inferior black female's help for free.

It was the white lawyer's cheating his own kind that gave her the insight that people take advantage of the POOR no matter what color the poor are.

And I notice you used the same words "your kind" that you CON$ say make her a racist. Do they make you a racist also?

 

[Rozman]

Typical left wing lies against FOX....
Fact..... The WH,Dept of Agriculture and the NAACP ALL jumped all over the story and pushed this lady out before FOX ran the video.....

But why bother with the truth when you lefties want to rag on FOX.....

 

[Intense]

Gee what a surprise. NOT!

You can't explain how sending the farmer to a lawyer who is the color and sex the farmer considers superior is somehow racist mistreatment, so you make personal attacks in typical CON$ervative fashion.
Thank you.

She explained that because of his race, dropped the ball by pawning him off on someone else, when had he been black, she would have done more for him. Big fail there. Spin, spin, spin, away. You keep playing with yourself like that and it's either going to fall off or you'll go blind. MLK's speech is surely lost on your kind. Race or color should have nothing to do with the matter. What is with you??? Do you hear yourself???

You don't attack??? Really??? You believe that??? Your life is mis-characterization and misrepresentation. Stop it before you make me laugh so hard I might my undies! You are funny!!!

She explained the because of his ACTING SUPERIOR, not his race, she sent him to someone he would feel more comfortable with. And he obviously felt better with the white male lawyer since he was willing to pay for his help rather than get the inferior black female's help for free.

It was the white lawyer's cheating his own kind that gave her the insight that people take advantage of the POOR no matter what color the poor are.

And I notice you used the same words "your kind" that you CON$ say make her a racist. Do they make you a racist also?

Oh My!!! A Profiler!!! God help us all!!! Lions and Tigers and Bears, Lions and Tigers and Bears!! When I refer to MLK's speech being wasted on your kind, I was referring to lack of perception and intelligence, not political persuasion. Take a step back and consider that there were problems on both sides of the equation, which she admitted to, and stop with the excuses. Glenn Beck was a Hero and a lone voice of sanity that day, for which she was ungrateful. Live with that too.

 

[drsmith1072]

No dipshit. I simply asked you if you had proof that they weren't plants because, YOU were making the blatant asummption that they are all members of the movement. Again, show proof that I directly said they were all plants....You're a fucking liar!

And, has been proven, plants have been busted at tea party events. Youtube is full of examples of them being outed.

Oh, and i'm not hiding behind anybody's skirt. I simply pointed at that you are one of those whiney lil' fucks that runs to the neg rep button when you don't get your way. And, you are also one of those idiots that claim that rep means nothing to you. You just ONCE AGAIN outed yourself as a complete fucking tool!....because if rep meant nothing to you, why would you head to the neg rep button?...Seriously, you're a fucking clown!

LOL Nice spin but by asking me to prove that they weren't plants you were implying that they were plants. Up to the point of my response to your spin I had not mentioned the word "plants" in reference to the tea party, so the onus is on you to prove that they were plants since you tried to claim that they were.

What does it matter that SOME of those examples have been plants?? Does that mean that ALL examples were plants?? See where your spin has gotten you?? LOL

I rarely use the neg rep button and only do so with hacks like PP when they chime in to attack and then cut and run after getting called out for the BS. He said he was leaving so I figured it would get his attention and it did. However, he still failed to adress how he dishonestly edited my post and took the first half out of context so he could attack me. That was expected but at least he came back. LOL

So once again you LIE, spin and make claims that you can't support. How typical.

Yeah, it got his attention and obviously made him laugh. Do you really think your neg rep did anything?......Oh, and you can't claim he cut and ran because he showed back up. I guess I can claim that you cut and ran after you exposed yourself as being completely ignorant on business matters in that other thread. You did after all leave. But I won't make that claim, seeing as though I understand that people log off to go and do more important things, which i'm sure was the case.....But hey, you keep accusing others of doing so. It only further boosts what's already known about you by many on both sides of the aisle. You're a hack!

As far as your first paragraph. Do you understand the meaning of circular arguments?....Because that is exactly what you engage in. Like I've said many times before, it doesn't matter what anybody says to you. It doesn't matter what valid facts are presented to you. You will just engage in that circular BS, and I am quite entertained by helping to feed your circular obsession!....One of these days, you just might figure it out.

LMAO!

Yeah and it got him to come back even if he still did run away from his own dishonesty but he still did come back. I figured it was a way to get his attention and it did. Oh and yeah he did cut and run based on the fact that he ran away from his own dishonesty and didn't have the integrity to admit that he took my comments out of context.
Unlike you, I don't run away. If i am proven wrong I will admit so and have shown that to be the case in the past.

See this is where your dishonesty and desperate need to attack me exposes you as a hack.

My first paragragh was taken out of context and was calrified by the whole content of my post. There is no ciruclar reasoning but it is quite telling how you pick up someone elses's argument and come at me with their dishonest spin showing how you have to fed your attacks like the good little lemming. LOL

Fact is that you asked me to prove a claim I NEVER made. Not once did I mention that they were plants. However, YOU asked me to prove that they weren't plants which clearly implied that they were. You made the implication so the burden of proof is on YOU.

 

[drsmith1072]

What part of, "and so I didn't give him the full force of what I could do" and "I sent him to one of his own Kind" do these people do not get.


Clearly the woman has changed her beliefs, but there IS NO denying she once held RACIST beliefs. If you claim other wise you either have never even watched the tape, either the whole thing or the clip, OR you are A partisan hack.

She was telling a story about how she came to realize that her past world view was wrong so she changed her ways and you morons are too busy taking her comments out of context to see the whole picture.

Just more of the usual willfully illinformed.

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

 

[Jarhead]

She was telling a story about how she came to realize that her past world view was wrong so she changed her ways and you morons are too busy taking her comments out of context to see the whole picture.

Just more of the usual willfully illinformed.

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

And as she continued to relate the story, she said that she helped him by introducing him to an attorney that was "one of his kind"....not referring to how she saw the "white attorney" back then, but how she was referring to the "white attorney" in today's words.

To me, that is the way a racist identifies people.

Now some are saying that she was feeding into the audience....but why does one need to feed into the audience using racial undertones?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I hadn't thought of it that way jarhead. Thats a valid point to be making.

 

[Intense]

She was telling a story about how she came to realize that her past world view was wrong so she changed her ways and you morons are too busy taking her comments out of context to see the whole picture.

Just more of the usual willfully illinformed.

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

You just cannot accept that she is burdened by her own prejudice. Look at it as a Human Condition. Stop Bullshitting Yourself.

 

[drsmith1072]

Typical left wing lies against FOX....
Fact..... The WH,Dept of Agriculture and the NAACP ALL jumped all over the story and pushed this lady out before FOX ran the video.....

But why bother with the truth when you lefties want to rag on FOX.....

AGAIN you right wingers need to learn how to read.

The fact that she resigned before they aired it, nvm that they posted it on their website, has no bearing on and does not change the fact that foxnews ran with the story that night and jumped to conclusions as o'reilly called on her to resign and hannity tried to use here to depict the administration as racist based their own rush to judgment.

But why bother with the truth when you righties want to defend FOX.....

 

[drsmith1072]

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

And as she continued to relate the story, she said that she helped him by introducing him to an attorney that was "one of his kind"....not referring to how she saw the "white attorney" back then, but how she was referring to the "white attorney" in today's words.

To me, that is the way a racist identifies people.

Now some are saying that she was feeding into the audience....but why does one need to feed into the audience using racial undertones?

Actually based on how the story was being told she appeared to be talking about how she felt at that time as she was describing that incident that happen so long ago. However, since you can read her mind and know exactly what she was thinking I guess we should just take your baseless opinons as if they were fact an not question them? LOL

Fact is that you are making an assumption and can't back it up with anything other than your own biased opinions as you try to spin how you believe that you know what and how she was feeling when she gave her speech about how she initially felt years ago but then realized that she was wrong.

Got anymore more spin basd assumptions??

 

[drsmith1072]

Actually, we are not. You are caught up in the spin. She confessed to a wrong, atoned, learned from the error, and communicated that. Keep trying though. You can do it!

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

You just cannot accept that she is burdened by her own prejudice. Look at it as a Human Condition. Stop Bullshitting Yourself.

You just cannot accept the facts as you present your biased opinions as fact and try to misrepresent and take her comments out of context so you can spin a dishonest attack against her based on the very same spin breitbart tried to make. Stop Bullshitting Yourself.

 

[Jarhead]

Actually, IF you had read or heard the whole parable including the follow up you would have realized how YOU are caught up in the spin because she confessed to THINKING about engaging in a wrong, then ended up not doing so and helping the farmer because as she clarified both before and after it wasn't about race, it was about poor people. Fact is that she did NOT discriminate against him and ended up helping him despite your misinsterpretation. Keep trying though. You can do it!

So thanks for giving an example of how the right is willfully illinformed.

And as she continued to relate the story, she said that she helped him by introducing him to an attorney that was "one of his kind"....not referring to how she saw the "white attorney" back then, but how she was referring to the "white attorney" in today's words.

To me, that is the way a racist identifies people.

Now some are saying that she was feeding into the audience....but why does one need to feed into the audience using racial undertones?

Actually based on how the story was being told she appeared to be talking about how she felt at that time as she was describing that incident that happen so long ago. However, since you can read her mind and know exactly what she was thinking I guess we should just take your baseless opinons as if they were fact an not question them? LOL

Fact is that you are making an assumption and can't back it up with anything other than your own biased opinions as you try to spin how you believe that you know what and how she was feeling when she gave her speech about how she initially felt years ago but then realized that she was wrong.

Got anymore more spin basd assumptions??

No spin at all. Simply an assumption.

She has given me absolutely no reason to think she was referring to "how she was thinking at the time"...

She told a story, then admitted she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making...

AND THEN she told the audience that she helped him by having him meet with an attorney.

Problem is the way she related THAT part of the story....she said "I suggested he meet with an attorney"...and she told the audience that she had him meet an attorney of "his kind".

Nowhere did she relate the story as her telling HIM to meet an attorney of his kind. She simply told him to meet with an attorney...and she told TODAY'S audience that it was one of HIS kind that she introduced him to.

In my eyes, the lady has racial bias. No doubt in my mind.

 

[drsmith1072]

And as she continued to relate the story, she said that she helped him by introducing him to an attorney that was "one of his kind"....not referring to how she saw the "white attorney" back then, but how she was referring to the "white attorney" in today's words.

To me, that is the way a racist identifies people.

Now some are saying that she was feeding into the audience....but why does one need to feed into the audience using racial undertones?

Actually based on how the story was being told she appeared to be talking about how she felt at that time as she was describing that incident that happen so long ago. However, since you can read her mind and know exactly what she was thinking I guess we should just take your baseless opinons as if they were fact an not question them? LOL

Fact is that you are making an assumption and can't back it up with anything other than your own biased opinions as you try to spin how you believe that you know what and how she was feeling when she gave her speech about how she initially felt years ago but then realized that she was wrong.

Got anymore more spin basd assumptions??

No spin at all. Simply an assumption.

She has given me absolutely no reason to think she was referring to "how she was thinking at the time"...

She told a story, then admitted she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making...

AND THEN she told the audience that she helped him by having him meet with an attorney.

Problem is the way she related THAT part of the story....she said "I suggested he meet with an attorney"...and she told the audience that she had him meet an attorney of "his kind".

Nowhere did she relate the story as her telling HIM to meet an attorney of his kind. She simply told him to meet with an attorney...and she told TODAY'S audience that it was one of HIS kind that she introduced him to.

In my eyes, the lady has racial bias. No doubt in my mind.

WOW thanks for your completely disheonst and BS MISinterpretation and showing how YOU see it through your biased eyes but the FACTS show otherwise.

FACT: She was telling a story about what happened 20+ years ago so YES that pretty much spells out that she was talking about how she felt at that time since it was right in the middle of her story.

FACT: according to the parable she admits that she HAD bias but realized that she was wrong and your dishonest spin and intentional misinterpretation is that "she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making" even though she admitted that it wasn't about race but that it was about poor people. Thanks for being dishonest AGAIN.

FACT: Yeah she initially took him to an attorney but that is not where it ended. After she realized the attorney wasn't helping the farmer SHE continued to help him and gave her own time to do so in order to help them keep their family farm. You would know that if you knew the whole story instead of relying on right wing spin and lies as the basis for your own spin.

WOW you really are desperate to spin aren't you? Again, she was telling a story about how she felt BACK THEN and that was her state of mind BACK THEN. Your desperate need to take her comments out of context and misinterpret them to suit your own dishonest spin is no better than what breitbart did in the first place. GJ hack.

In the end all you have is your own biased assumptions and misinterpretations that you see through your own biased eyes and how they influence the baised OPINIONS that you keep inside your mind.

 

[Jarhead]

Actually based on how the story was being told she appeared to be talking about how she felt at that time as she was describing that incident that happen so long ago. However, since you can read her mind and know exactly what she was thinking I guess we should just take your baseless opinons as if they were fact an not question them? LOL

Fact is that you are making an assumption and can't back it up with anything other than your own biased opinions as you try to spin how you believe that you know what and how she was feeling when she gave her speech about how she initially felt years ago but then realized that she was wrong.

Got anymore more spin basd assumptions??

No spin at all. Simply an assumption.

She has given me absolutely no reason to think she was referring to "how she was thinking at the time"...

She told a story, then admitted she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making...

AND THEN she told the audience that she helped him by having him meet with an attorney.

Problem is the way she related THAT part of the story....she said "I suggested he meet with an attorney"...and she told the audience that she had him meet an attorney of "his kind".

Nowhere did she relate the story as her telling HIM to meet an attorney of his kind. She simply told him to meet with an attorney...and she told TODAY'S audience that it was one of HIS kind that she introduced him to.

In my eyes, the lady has racial bias. No doubt in my mind.

WOW thanks for your completely disheonst and BS MISinterpretation and showing how YOU see it through your biased eyes but the FACTS show otherwise.

FACT: She was telling a story about what happened 20+ years ago so YES that pretty much spells out that she was talking about how she felt at that time since it was right in the middle of her story.

FACT: according to the parable she admits that she HAD bias but realized that she was wrong and your dishonest spin and intentional misinterpretation is that "she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making" even though she admitted that it wasn't about race but that it was about poor people. Thanks for being dishonest AGAIN.

FACT: Yeah she initially took him to an attorney but that is not where it ended. After she realized the attorney wasn't helping the farmer SHE continued to help him and gave her own time to do so in order to help them keep their family farm. You would know that if you knew the whole story instead of relying on right wing spin and lies as the basis for your own spin.

WOW you really are desperate to spin aren't you? Again, she was telling a story about how she felt BACK THEN and that was her state of mind BACK THEN. Your desperate need to take her comments out of context and misinterpret them to suit your own dishonest spin is no better than what breitbart did in the first place. GJ hack.

In the end all you have is your own biased assumptions and misinterpretations that you see through your own biased eyes and how they influence the baised OPINIONS that you keep inside your mind.

I know the whole story.
I watched the entire clip that was available.

You must have watched an edited one.

It is quite obvious you did.

When she talked about an attorney she referred to the attorney as "one of his own kind".

She was telling TODASY"S audience that he was better off with "one of his own kind"....

She was telling today's audience that she thought it best he meet with a white attorney. That is OK with me...

But she referred to the whiute attorney as one of his own kind.

Sad you are too blind to know racism when you see it.

 

[drsmith1072]

No spin at all. Simply an assumption.

She has given me absolutely no reason to think she was referring to "how she was thinking at the time"...

She told a story, then admitted she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making...

AND THEN she told the audience that she helped him by having him meet with an attorney.

Problem is the way she related THAT part of the story....she said "I suggested he meet with an attorney"...and she told the audience that she had him meet an attorney of "his kind".

Nowhere did she relate the story as her telling HIM to meet an attorney of his kind. She simply told him to meet with an attorney...and she told TODAY'S audience that it was one of HIS kind that she introduced him to.

In my eyes, the lady has racial bias. No doubt in my mind.

WOW thanks for your completely disheonst and BS MISinterpretation and showing how YOU see it through your biased eyes but the FACTS show otherwise.

FACT: She was telling a story about what happened 20+ years ago so YES that pretty much spells out that she was talking about how she felt at that time since it was right in the middle of her story.

FACT: according to the parable she admits that she HAD bias but realized that she was wrong and your dishonest spin and intentional misinterpretation is that "she could not allow her own bias get in the way of her decision making" even though she admitted that it wasn't about race but that it was about poor people. Thanks for being dishonest AGAIN.

FACT: Yeah she initially took him to an attorney but that is not where it ended. After she realized the attorney wasn't helping the farmer SHE continued to help him and gave her own time to do so in order to help them keep their family farm. You would know that if you knew the whole story instead of relying on right wing spin and lies as the basis for your own spin.

WOW you really are desperate to spin aren't you? Again, she was telling a story about how she felt BACK THEN and that was her state of mind BACK THEN. Your desperate need to take her comments out of context and misinterpret them to suit your own dishonest spin is no better than what breitbart did in the first place. GJ hack.

In the end all you have is your own biased assumptions and misinterpretations that you see through your own biased eyes and how they influence the baised OPINIONS that you keep inside your mind.

I know the whole story.
I watched the entire clip that was available.

You must have watched an edited one.

It is quite obvious you did.

When she talked about an attorney she referred to the attorney as "one of his own kind".

She was telling TODASY"S audience that he was better off with "one of his own kind"....

She was telling today's audience that she thought it best he meet with a white attorney. That is OK with me...

But she referred to the whiute attorney as one of his own kind.

Sad you are too blind to know racism when you see it.

That explains why you are so misinformed. Look for the transcripts and get the FULL context instead of merely relying on a "clip" because it suits your needs to be illinformed.
No need for you to spin anymore since it's obvious that you are willfully misinformed and don't have the integrity to address the facts.

It's just sad that you are so far gone that you continue to present your own biased misinterpretations as you take her descriptions of events of the past and her state of mind in the past and try so desperately and dishonestly to apply them to the present.

She was telling TODAY'S audience about her state of mind in the PAST and how she admits that her PAST views were WRONG. Why is that so hard for you to understand.

I do find it quite telling how desperate you are as you try to frame an event from the past by using present tense verbs and avoid past tense verbs as if that somehow substantiates your spin that she is NOW racist.

Thanks for the spin hack.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I still think its funny that no one has acknowledge that even the uber liberal media matters agreed that FOX news did not air the story prior to her resignation.



Sorry I think about that every time this thread pops up.