To our right wing half man president. A shoe clerk by all standards.

Only those denied to other mentally ill people with delusion-based conditions.

 

Come on now, everyone knows those conditions aren't hip and sexy enough to warrant activism. If it isn't somehow linked to sex, it doesn't rate.

 

It was about TRANS only.

 

But they have the self-declared moral high ground. Just like every religious ideologue who ever lived.

 

Nah, the religious ideologue still holds the moral high ground. You've just lowered yourself to the progs level. No good Christian would have sex, let alone associate in public with a prog.

 

That's like saying that active and full blown schizophrenia is only a problem if the sufferer deems it to be so.

When the above-mentioned is committed (by haters) and prescribed meds, we can assume the treating psych is also a hater.

 

Which religion?

 

OMG

 

Which prog movement?

 

No, seriously. If you claim 'religious' people have the moral high ground, you'll need to explain which religions, and how it is that they share the moral high ground. Pretty sure Pagans and Satanists will have a different perspective to say, a Tantric Hindu, and different again to a Shintoist, who differs from a Catholic. You see the problem?

 

Yeah, the problem is, if I don't single anyone out, there won't be a way to get pissed at me and attack me for my views. Check my post again and take notice of the times and your quote time. There should be a difference. I don't have to follow anyone's rules. They aren't laws. The burden of proof is not on me, unless I want to be as accurate as possible. It then lies on the reader to determine if my post is worth proving.

When I do prove something, opposing views are not correct, though believed. It really does not matter if I prove something or not. Anything can be questioned. Anyone can twist anything to mean whatever they want. And, they do.

That being said, I never belonged to a debate club.

 

Back when FDR was president, he loved religions. Well, not so much the Catholics. And less the Jews of course.
Then in walked Kennedy a loyal Catholic and then Democrats embraced the Catholics. Then the Catholics got angry at Roe v Wade so a lot of Democrats resumed hating Catholics. Democrats run hot and cold on religion.

 

I dont really care what this woman thinks, I just find it amusing that you cite dailykos and expect to be taken seriously.

 

Daily KOS? I don't read that site but isn't it one created by the Russians to cause turmoil in our elections?

 

And to vote for your hate party you have to a fake Christian, a real Christian wouldn't have voted in a pagan for president.

 

Daily KOS has been around since 2002!

https://www.dailykos.com/masthead#dk

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-kos/

 

Doesn't make a difference , does it if the story is true , right, The Hill http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...t-members-daughter-rips-trump-transgender-ban CNN https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/28/poli...n-zinke-transgender-military-trump/index.html and MSN https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/us/interior-secretary’s-daughter-rips-on-trump’s-transgender-ban/vp-AAqKkWe So it doesn't matter what the source is if it is true , do you agree.

 

Lets take a look at the only thing you look at
Note at the bottom , it is deemed the worse news source .

 

Why do democrats flip flop when it comes to Russia? One moment there is love and kisses for the Russians followed by sheer hate and disgust.

 

They don't, the right wing is the one that your majority was anti Russia but since they won the election for you , most your party doesn't care. They wouldn't care if they were Nazi's , KKK or white supremacists and that's why for the first time in history all those groups support a American president. Which says all that needs to be said about who you people are.

 

CNN

LEFT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: The Cable News Network (CNN) is an American basic cable and satellite television channel that is owned by the Turner Broadcasting System division of Time Warner. It was founded in 1980 by American media proprietor Ted Turner as a 24-hour cable news channel; however, by April 2016, a CNN executive officially described the channel as “no longer a TV news network” and instead as “a 24-hour global multi-platform network.” CNN has a left bias in reporting and sometimes uses sensational headlines. CNN typically sources its news sources. Do not confuse CNN’s talk shows with actual reporting of news. Further, they have failed numerous fact checks from Politifact. (5/16/2016) Updated (6/4/2017)
Source: http://www.cnn.com/


CNN's file

This scorecard shows the ratings for statements made on air by CNN personalities and their pundit guests. Rulings do not include statements made on air by politicians or paid spokespeople.

Statements made on CNN
Click on the ruling to see all of the statements made on CNN.

• True (16%)(13)
• Mostly True (37%)(29)
• Half True (20%)(16)
• Mostly False (9%)(7)
• False (14%)(11)
• Pants on Fire (4%)(3)

Our CNN feeds

• A feed of statements made on CNN

Recent statements made on CNN...->http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/cnn/

 

Too bad you never bothered to verify FauxNoise on the same source because this is what comes up.

http://www.politifact.com/search/statements/?q=foxnews

60% of what FauxNoise spews are blatant falsehoods as opposed to a mere 27% for CNN.

What does that tell you?

 

The biggest liar of all media groups as noted at the bottom of this post

 

Fox and CNN are literally the exact same thing, just opposite sides of the spectrum. Very biased and make stuff up. We're all in agreement here with the sources cited.

 

There is reason I didn't include Fox News Channel...FNC wasn't used as a source on this thread.

Lets remember when Politifact was fact check for it's accuracy and being bias they also didn't pass the fact checking.

The Politicfact trurthometer was fact checking FNC opinion or commentary programs. "Fox and Friends, Shawn Hannity...are not news programs, one is an entertainment program and the later is a commentary program.

Holey crap, FNC quoted Donald Trump and gets a "mostly false."

CNN quotes President Clinton that "oral sex isn't sex" and CNN gets a "pants on fire."

When CNN during the 1990's went to becoming part of the Democratic party and the Democrat party went to the far left in response Rupert Murdoch founded FNC in 1996 since there were no longer any non liberal bias news organizations.

As was revealed by the hacked DNC and Podesta emails that were published by Wikileaks, CNN, MSNBC. New York Times, Washington Post, ABC News, NBC News and CBS news were all exposed being in collusion with the DNC, the Crooked Hillary campaign or the Obama White House.

Sixty years ago there was only one major news outlet in America that was considered to be non bias, the Christian Science Monitor. While the L.A. Times back then had a conservative bias and the N.Y.T. and the Wa-Po were already known for having a liberal bias. Back in 1968 Walter Cronkite and CBS News got caught lying to the American people about the Tet Offensive of 1968 during the Vietnam War. Walter Cronkite was no longer the most trusted man in America.

At this moment FNC is reporting on Russian mercenaries fighting in Syria and North Korea.

CNN as usual is reporting on Russia Russia Russia and the Trump White House.

MSNBC as usual is talking about Russia Russia Russia and impeaching of President Trump.