Ben Carson
Oct 30, 2015 19:10:38 #
Keenan wrote:
NO, MSNBC, while have more of a "left" bias than the other channels, is not even close to being the "liberal" equivalence of FOX. Fox is an outlier. No other cable news channel is such a blatant crass political hack operation that so totally coordinates with a particular political party, and no other channel so consistently falsifies the t***h at anywhere near the rate that Fox does on a daily basis. Fox tells more lies in one hour than MSNBC tells in a year.
What a complete and utter bulls**t statement.
Oct 30, 2015 20:37:29 #
ArtzDarkroom wrote:
Was it shown somewhere else with other questioners?
It was too important to miss.
It was too important to miss.
If these televised debates ever actually revealed any useful information, like much about the specifics of the clowns' policies rather than serving as a platform for scripted but vague sound bites, planned scripted mudslinging at each other, planned scripted mudslinging towards the press - one of the rights' favorite punching bags that is guaranteed to get loud applause, and a platform for evading and dodging and lying about any of the useful or substantive questions by the moderators, then I could maybe agree with you that it was important to watch.
Oct 30, 2015 20:42:46 #
yhtomit wrote:
What a complete and utter bulls**t statement.
So says the great Vomit. By the way, whenever I read your "contributions", it always makes me think about how appropriate your user name is.
Oct 30, 2015 20:47:20 #
ken hubert wrote:
"Outliar"? Is that even a word? What a douche.
It is the combination of liar and outlier. Fox so-called-"News" inspired me to make a new word. Fox tends to have that effect on me.
Kennie boy, you're back! After all your posts were deleted in the thread where I shredded you on the whole "If the Jews had guns there would have been no WWII" fantasy, I thought you had been banned or something. Why did you delete...actually, never mind. I won't put you on the spot.
Edit: Oh, I just realized that you probably don't know the definition of "outlier" being that your low IQ is what it is...I keep forgetting. So, here, I'll help you:
(from Merriam-webster)
Quote:
outlier
noun out·li·er \-ˌlī-er\
Definition of OUTLIER
...
3. a statistical observation that is markedly different in value from the others of the sample
outlier
noun out·li·er \-ˌlī-er\
Definition of OUTLIER
...
3. a statistical observation that is markedly different in value from the others of the sample
And here is the definition of "outliar" from Keenan's New Word Dictionary:
Quote:
outliar
noun out·li·ar \-ˌlī-ar\
Definition of OUTLIAR
a statistical observation of the rate or number of lies told in a givien amont of time told by one entity that is markedly and substantially higher than any other entity in the sample
outliar
noun out·li·ar \-ˌlī-ar\
Definition of OUTLIAR
a statistical observation of the rate or number of lies told in a givien amont of time told by one entity that is markedly and substantially higher than any other entity in the sample
Oct 30, 2015 21:27:53 #
ken hubert wrote:
Oh, you are definitely different. We just wonder when you suffered your head injury.
I have to admit I do get pleasure out of getting under your skin so easily...
Wait for it...wait for it...little Kennie boy's response will surely include a homosexual interpretation of what I just said as well as something to do with poopoo/rectums, being that he is so fixated on male g*****ls, male homosexuality, poopoo, and rectums.
Oct 30, 2015 23:10:56 #
Keenan wrote:
So says the great Vomit. By the way, whenever I read your "contributions", it always makes me think about how appropriate your user name is.
Thank you. It really means something to me that you finally understand.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.