Democrat caught telling bald face lie.

He's pretty fucking despicable and that's the kindest thing I can say.
 
Grayson is a complete loon who represents everything that is wrong with government today, and just how pitiful career politicians have become. He is Pelosi, with a bigger penis.

He has zero chance of reelection.

Possibly less than zero.
 
A politician lying? Wow. I soooo never saw that coming.

It's worse than just lying. It's taking everything his opponent said out of context and painting him as a woman abuser. I think it's downright slander. Grayson has no ethics and no morals, he has no business in our congress but then that's the caliber of person demonRats vote for.
 
Grayson is a complete loon who represents everything that is wrong with government today, and just how pitiful career politicians have become. He is Pelosi, with a bigger penis.

He has zero chance of reelection.

Possibly less than zero.

I don't know about that, they elected the asshole once.
 
A politician lying? Wow. I soooo never saw that coming.

It's worse than just lying. It's taking everything his opponent said out of context and painting him as a woman abuser. I think it's downright slander. Grayson has no ethics and no morals, he has no business in our congress but then that's the caliber of person demonRats vote for.

So, basically, he's a politician then. He's not the first - on either side - and sadly, unless Americans get smarter fast - he won't be the last.

I don't condone his actions but this happens because 'we, the People' fall for it. If we didn't, or if we refused to vote for the 'gutter politicians', then maybe they wouldn't do it. Then again, if we didn't vote for 'gutter politicians' we wouldn't vote at all.
 
Grayson gets pushback for ‘Taliban Dan’ attack | The Upshot Yahoo! News - Yahoo! News

He took a statement completely out of context. The Republican challenger said the OPPOSITE of what this guy claimed he said. When confronted on it his staff claimed they stand by their opinion.

To claim it's a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that Dan Webster isn't remotely part of the Taliban. You'd first have to prove that Webster isn't a right wing theocrat.

Why am I not surprised that the terminally stupid defend it.
 
Grayson gets pushback for ‘Taliban Dan’ attack | The Upshot Yahoo! News - Yahoo! News

He took a statement completely out of context. The Republican challenger said the OPPOSITE of what this guy claimed he said. When confronted on it his staff claimed they stand by their opinion.

To claim it's a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that Dan Webster isn't remotely part of the Taliban. You'd first have to prove that Webster isn't a right wing theocrat.
Dick not only asks that one prove a negative, he wants two negatives to be proven!

:rofl:

*snort*
 
Grayson gets pushback for ‘Taliban Dan’ attack | The Upshot Yahoo! News - Yahoo! News

He took a statement completely out of context. The Republican challenger said the OPPOSITE of what this guy claimed he said. When confronted on it his staff claimed they stand by their opinion.

To claim it's a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that Dan Webster isn't remotely part of the Taliban. You'd first have to prove that Webster isn't a right wing theocrat.

Why am I not surprised that the terminally stupid defend it.

I've come to accept your ignorance. How hard is this? If you want to make the claim that this is a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that the wingnut isn't a right wing theocrat.
 
To claim it's a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that Dan Webster isn't remotely part of the Taliban. You'd first have to prove that Webster isn't a right wing theocrat.

Why am I not surprised that the terminally stupid defend it.

I've come to accept your ignorance. How hard is this? If you want to make the claim that this is a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that the wingnut isn't a right wing theocrat.
OMG!

He did it again!

Prove a negative, CG. Go for it. ;)

:rofl:
 
To claim it's a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that Dan Webster isn't remotely part of the Taliban. You'd first have to prove that Webster isn't a right wing theocrat.

Why am I not surprised that the terminally stupid defend it.

I've come to accept your ignorance. How hard is this? If you want to make the claim that this is a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that the wingnut isn't a right wing theocrat.

I suspect that there are many - left and right - who are highly entertained by you accepting my ignorance and then following that statement by demanding I prove a negative. Irony much?
 
Why am I not surprised that the terminally stupid defend it.

I've come to accept your ignorance. How hard is this? If you want to make the claim that this is a bald faced lie, you'd have to prove that the wingnut isn't a right wing theocrat.
OMG!

He did it again!

Prove a negative, CG. Go for it. ;)

:rofl:

Are you here to circle jerk, or do you have something to add? Provide a coherent argument that the wingnut in this race isn't a theocrat, and I may concede the argument.
 

Forum List

Back
Top