CDZ Hey GOP: What's wrong with truth?

There was no link with the OP. Tell me, did you visit the site and read all the supporting evaluations? Explain it, then.
You should learn to use Google, it's quite useful. And yes, over the last year, I have read most of the supporting evaluations so their rankings came as no surprise. I'd be happy to explain, if I thought you cared.
 
There was no link with the OP. Tell me, did you visit the site and read all the supporting evaluations? Explain it, then.
You should learn to use Google, it's quite useful. And yes, over the last year, I have read most of the supporting evaluations so their rankings came as no surprise. I'd be happy to explain, if I thought you cared.

You have one thing right, once you let it be known that you believe GOP lies and Dems are honest, we all pretty must stopped giving a shit what else you had to say on the subject.
 
There was no link with the OP. Tell me, did you visit the site and read all the supporting evaluations? Explain it, then.
You should learn to use Google, it's quite useful. And yes, over the last year, I have read most of the supporting evaluations so their rankings came as no surprise. I'd be happy to explain, if I thought you cared.
For crying out loud. OP offers up a question about truth and a chart and you are jumping on me for not diving into research to try to figure out OP's point? Is that how "clean debate" works?
 
You have one thing right, once you let it be known that you believe GOP lies and Dems are honest, we all pretty must stopped giving a shit what else you had to say on the subject.
I'm not stupid, I never said the Dems were honest, only that generally they lied less than the GOP.
 
You have one thing right, once you let it be known that you believe GOP lies and Dems are honest, we all pretty must stopped giving a shit what else you had to say on the subject.
I'm not stupid, I never said the Dems were honest, only that generally they lied less than the GOP.


And you think that is less dishonest than if you had just claimed they don't at alll?
 
For crying out loud. OP offers up a question about truth and a chart and you are jumping on me for not diving into research to try to figure out OP's point? Is that how "clean debate" works?
You claimed that there was no support to the chart and I implied you might find it at the site. I thought complaining about the lack of a link was rather weak. And I have no idea how "clean debate" works.
 
Her problem is, even after Comey exposed her lies, she keeps repeating them
Comey is a Republican and spun the story to the negative.

Oh come on......
Alright, this is from memory... Comey claims Clinton lied that she had only one device whereas she actually had 4 over a period of years. If Clinton operated only one device at a time did she lie? You could spin it either way.

She never claimed she only used one at a time, she claimed she only used one.

(nice try at spin tho)

and the confidential emails she claimed she never sent or received?

And I believe there were some other lies she is still repeating.
 
Last edited:
For crying out loud. OP offers up a question about truth and a chart and you are jumping on me for not diving into research to try to figure out OP's point? Is that how "clean debate" works?
You claimed that there was no support to the chart and I implied you might find it at the site. I thought complaining about the lack of a link was rather weak. And I have no idea how "clean debate" works.
Clearly.
 
For crying out loud. OP offers up a question about truth and a chart and you are jumping on me for not diving into research to try to figure out OP's point? Is that how "clean debate" works?
You claimed that there was no support to the chart and I implied you might find it at the site. I thought complaining about the lack of a link was rather weak. And I have no idea how "clean debate" works.
Clearly.
So, for my edification, which of the rules did I violate?

No Name Calling Or Putting Down Posters
No Trolling and/or Troll Threads
No Hijacking
No Personal Attacks
No Neg Repping
 
The chart is real dramatic what with the red and blue and all. Trouble is, there is not much weight behind a bunch of colored lines without any supporting information. You know, like exactly what questions were asked and who answered them and how was it all collated to make the pretty chart.
Did you visit the site where all the supporting evaluations are?

It's called www.politifact.com.

Did I really just have to say that?
 
Politifact has a liberal bias. Everyone knows that.

??? There's no bias in whether a statement one makes is factually true or not true. There's no bias in facts. There's only bias in how one uses them to make one's case and there's bias in whether one actually uses the facts that exist to make one's case.

That said, if you have a different and legit aggregator of facts, by all means share it. But don't sit there making an unfounded ad hominem assertion to discredit the fact checker on the basis of what you think about the fact checker itself and not about the information it/they shared. Go look at the facts Politifact has checked. They provide a narrative showing the "good and the bad" for each statement whereof they've shared an assessment of its accuracy.

Red:
I suspect what's more accurate to say is that "everyone" is willing to believe that when "their candidate" isn't presented in the best light; however, that seems to be the cry with regard to everyone, not just fact checkers. Moreover, what I hear far more often is "liberal bias" this and that than do I hear "conservative bias" anything, that might be relevant but for the fact it seems that pretty much anything that veers from what conservatives want, conservatives denounce as differing due to liberal bias. In fact, conservatives use that claim so often that it's become a sure sign that those of us who don't care about whether an idea is conservative or liberal know to just ignore the remark, if not the remark and who uttered it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top