{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/14/2016 3:04:03 AM
16
Always depend on democrat politicians to be human garbage.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/287324-indicted-dem-orlando-victims-would-still-be-alive-if-agents
English
-
Dennis Hastert paragon of Republican values.
-
Edited by Robin: 7/15/2016 8:10:15 AM[quote]Always depend on politicians to be human garbage.[/quote] Fix'd
-
Because republicans are friggn saints right? As they poison both you and your childs water supply
-
First off. We shouldn't not be funding 10 dollar a month birth control pills. If a woman can't gather 10 bucks in a month she can keep her legs shut. Republicans ain't saints but Damned if they are at the level of nasty, bigoted, and hateful the democrats operate under. But the republicans don't have the backing of the "news" media, Hollywood, and public school system to punch their propaganda. FYI. I'm a libertarian/conservative and registered independent.
-
The bill was a "must pass" and republicans took the opportunity to attach personal demands to a bill that was suppised to benefit the country. There was no party politics in that zika bill only the governemnts duty until republicans had to push agendas. Doesnt matter whether you were for or against. Are you going to seiously justify what they did?
-
Oh get out of here. The democrats are the kings of earmarks for local, personal stuff. Lmao At least the bill you put had things that are valid issues. Some people don't want to pay for everyone's medical crap.
-
Edited by ReignofSpartain: 7/14/2016 11:53:28 PMRemember that when the democrats own the senate next time. Next time we need to push a bipartisan bill for the sake of the US health, i hope they attach a plethora of agendas Oh wait No i dont Because im not a douche Edit: nice to know the kind of logic you use
-
I didn't say I approved dip! And trust me they will.
-
That's just a failed bill that never came to fruition. If you want to see which side [i]actually[/i] poisons your water supply, look no further than the Democrats in Michigan.
-
Could you atleast do a little better than that. National review is a widely known conservative based media they would never report blame on republicans anyways. I read so much democrat and flawed democtat ideology you KNOW this is a heavy leaning article. Did you assume i didnt take source/rational thinking and fallacies section of english in college or what? Its mandatory (atleast my school/maybe state). I wouldnt be a prick and post something that said would be super far left source claiming (fiscally or socially) the basis of conservative ideology is flawed. So why would you try it on me?
-
Do you dispute the facts presented in the article? Instead of complaining about bias, it's better to read between the lines and pick out the facts.
-
So if you throw me a fox news saying that half the obama administration are sleeper muslims but if i dont believe it its a bias on my end? What we know as a fact (no false finger pointing) is republicans trying to attach their agenda to a zika bill. No bias. I can find a super liberal new source on the same story and if you dont believe it is your bias. Correct?
-
[quote]So if you throw me a fox news saying that half the obama administration are sleeper muslims but if i dont believe it its a bias on my end?[/quote] You'd have to find a source on something that outrageous. You also don't have to reach the same conclusion as the journalist. They'll provide some facts, and they'll provide some analysis. Distinguish between the two. [quote]I can find a super liberal new source on the same story and if you dont believe it is your bias. Correct?[/quote] I might not believe what they're trying to spin, but I'm sure they'll bring up some facts.
-
Edited by ReignofSpartain: 7/15/2016 1:59:52 AMThere you go. Under your logic .. [quote]Do you dispute the facts presented in the article? Instead of complaining about bias, it's better to read between the lines and pick out the facts.[/quote]
-
Okay. So 47 Republicans voted against a provision in a piece of legislation. If I wanted to defend the Republican Party, I'd go find the text in the legislation and see what was voted against specifically. The journalist provided some fact, and he provided some emotional spin.
-
Your entire response can be summed up with, "I don't trust that source". You could have at least [i]tried[/i] to refute the claim. Actually, don't bother. I'm not expecting much.
