The desperation is pretty thick around here

For a change, St. Whiny is trying to badger a witness. I've already said that I will support the Democratic nominee. As of today, there hasn't been a single vote cast. So what's your point, Greyhound?

The bigge issue isn't who I support, but how you assholes support serial liars, cheaters and thieves, yet constantly lash out at Democrats for lesser offenses.

Not only does that make you complicit in their lies but hypocritical shitheads. Either that or mindless thralls of the RWW propaganda machine.

I suspect a healthy mix of both.

No wonder Whiny is no longer allowed to practice law in his Salina "office." Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Which serial liars, a good description of Hillary, by the way, have I supported? Which candidate have I ever supported comes even remotely close to Hillary's level of corruption and dishonesty? Did I support GW Bush? No. Did I support Obama? Briefly, until it became clear he was lying through his whole 2008 campaign. Did I support Romney? No. Do I support Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina, Christie, Bush, Huckabee, or the rest? No. I wish I could support Paul, but he's just too Republican.


I have mixed emotions about Bernie. I don't like his policies, but I don't think he's dishonest. In some circumstances, honesty trumps policy.


But quit lying about where I stand to justify your hypocrisy about supporting corruption.

The primaries haven't begun and Hillarious is at a 50-50 average position with the likely Republican candidates in the polls for a national election in the fall of 2016. So Hillarious is calling out Bill to campaign for her .... and now the truth is emerging.

Hillarious is the housewife .... or is that actually the Apartment Wife of Bill of Clinton. Hillarious in the process of proving what many knew all along .... she would be NOTHING if it weren't for her former President husband. So she is actually not better than the "conservative housewives" she pans for not being "independent."

A majority of people think Hillary is untrustworthy. What's your point? It's a fact. Originally Posted by bambino

What's my point? It was clearly stated.
If you can't see my point it's because you consider any opinion or set of facts that opposes your own as pointless. If your point is Sen. Clinton is untrustworthy and the other candidates have track records like I posted, who do you consider to be trustworthy? Is honesty in statements an important part of being trustworthy?

Honesty is important. And it is a fact that Senators Clinton and Sanders have a lower % of mostly false, false, and pants on fire statements on the campaign trail as rated by this site (Politifact)

I gave numbers for several candidates from both parties. The numbers are what they are. Sorry you don't like them Being truthful is a big part of being honest(IMO)

Once again for the hundredth time, none of the candidates (IMO) is worth fanatical support. None. Zip.
Several are very worthy of voting against. And unfortunately that's the nature of the beast.

The media is a liar...

(Snick)

No link. Again.
But this should be easy for you to prove.
Let's see it. Your proof.



Every day, PolitiFact and PunditFact staffers look for statements that can be checked. What biased assholes! We comb through speeches, news stories, press releases, campaign brochures, TV ads, Facebook postings and transcripts of TV and radio interviews. How dare they check things and places that have an undeniable and verifiable record. Because we can't possibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones. How dare they use the freedom of the press to decide what's newsworthy! You ignore or can't seem to figure out that the exact same bias is used on all the "targets" in the same manner. It is equally applied to both parties.

As he coughs out another load of shit, piss, and cum, he points his finger and condemns the site for using statements it can confirm. Not the ones made as the candidates do their best to tear she-be-a-twat's ears off the sides of her head while they skull fuck her. No. They dare use the ones stated in public and are on the record. They take publicly made statements and check to see if the truth has been spoken. Simple, right? They said something about something and are being held accountable.

Yes j douche-bag. The "desperation" as you call it is getting very thick, very deep. You keep saying over and over and over who the liars are. You tell us without the wealth (or usually any at all) of links that should support your statements. And you are wrong time after time. You put your hands over your ears and go "ararararararararararararraara rr". Then you post another steaming piece of shit.

She-be-a-flaming-asshole is you with Tourette's. And makes even less sense (if that is possible) than you. The more viscous her attack, the more out on a limb she is.
Cog said honesty is important. I agreed and posted a pertinent set of like method stats that were straight forward and not cherry picked. They were applied the same for all names listed. And unfortunately went against what she wanted to believe or hear. Instead of refuting or disagreeing she pulled her usual bullshit. She used to have something to say. Now she is taking the fact out on us that her prostate is part of a lumberjack's set of wind chimes (don't ask, it's a long and sordid tale).
She is now joining gay rey as the only the second person I've put on ignore. The sound of the bat putting her head into the cheap seats just doesn't do it for me anymore.
I'm going to miss the little bastard. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Oh , Goody ! Hopefully your yellow backed lying liberal fudge-packed ass will prove NOT to be as weak as YOUR hero woomby was and " ignore " me for only a few days before returning to lie to me and others with YOUR BS. I won't miss YOU SOB ! Adios, Mofo !

What's my point? It was clearly stated.
If you can't see my point it's because you consider any opinion or set of facts that opposes your own as pointless. If your point is Sen. Clinton is untrustworthy and the other candidates have track records like I posted, who do you consider to be trustworthy? Is honesty in statements an important part of being trustworthy?

Honesty is important. And it is a fact that Senators Clinton and Sanders have a lower % of mostly false, false, and pants on fire statements on the campaign trail as rated by this site (Politifact)

I gave numbers for several candidates from both parties. The numbers are what they are. Sorry you don't like them Being truthful is a big part of being honest(IMO)

Once again for the hundredth time, none of the candidates (IMO) is worth fanatical support. None. Zip.
Several are very worthy of voting against. And unfortunately that's the nature of the beast. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

The problem with you Munkin is that you don't know when you're being lied to. Ben Carson...100% untruth? Right there you know that this is some kind of parody or an out and out lie. Yet, you believe it....why? Anyone with any common sense would know that no one (not even Hillary) is a 100% liar, but Ben Carson? Your credibility dropped to zero at that point. Also, according to political there are lies and there are lies. If Donald Trump says that his building is the tallest in...oh, Florida (and it was when it was built) and it's not now, then that is a lie the equivalent of Hillary saying that she arrived in Bosnia under sniper fire. Politico says that they are the same... Hell, they even give Hillary credit for only partially lying about that day. Since there was gun fire in the distance somewhere then he saying that they landed under fire was partially true according to Politico. Ask any soldier, hearing gunshots in the distance and being under sniper fire are two very different animals.

Of course I could point out the obvious, that Hillary had made far fewer statements, given less press time than anyone in this election cycle.

Where's Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"?


.

Where's Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"?


.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

He isn't running, chicken dick the inbred chimp.

He isn't running, chicken dick the inbred chimp. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Take your ball-battered eyes elsewhere, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. You're too fuckin' stupid to comprehend that the issue being discussed in that post is considerably less about Qdumbo than it was about drawing conclusions based on the biases of Politifact, you retarded, chicken shit shepherd.

Take your ball-battered eyes elsewhere, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. You're too fuckin' stupid to comprehend that the issue being discussed in that post is considerably less about Qdumbo than it was about drawing conclusions based on the biases of Politifact, you retarded, chicken shit shepherd. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You sorry ass retarded chimp, you will do anything to hijack, and/or deflect from any conversation to Obama or slick Willie. Or try to address the OP for a change.

You sorry ass retarded chimp, you will do anything to hijack, and/or deflect from any conversation to Obama or slick Willie. Or try to address the OP for a change. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

You're ball battered and addled, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. Despite you're jackass attempt at deflection, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, Politifact became the issue when it was mendaciously introduced as the epitome of truth at a point -- the point of hijack -- prior to the post @ #27, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

Now that you've stupidly launched your stupid-ass self into WK orbit again, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, answer the fuckin' question: "Where's Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor'"?

You're ball battered and addled, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. Despite you're jackass attempt at deflection, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, Politifact became the issue when it was mendaciously introduced as the epitome of truth at a point -- the point of hijack -- prior to the post @ #27, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.
Politifact Was introduced about the candidates running, and was pointed out to your retarded chimp ass Obama isn't. Just pure deflection on you.
Now that you've stupidly launched your stupid-ass self into WK orbit again, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, answer the fuckin' question: "Where's Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor'"?
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I kept my doctor, and my insurance plan. Did you. chicken dick the retarded chimp?

As far as your repeated stupid question it is a moot point seeing Obie is not running.

JD called him "Munkin"... HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I kept my doctor, and my insurance plan. Did you. chicken dick the retarded chimp?

As far as your repeated stupid question it is a moot point seeing Obie is not running. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Politifact's veracity became an issue when it was introduced as the infallible judge of truth, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. That you're too damn stupid to understand that point isn't at all surprising, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. That you are still seeing the same veterinarian is also not substantive, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. Why don't you do something out of character, Ekim the Inbred Chimp? Why don't you WK in a proper manner and cite where one can find Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor', Ekim the Inbred Chimp?

Politifact's veracity became an issue when it was introduced as the infallible judge of truth, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. That you're too damn stupid to understand that point isn't at all surprising, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. That you are still seeing the same veterinarian is also not substantive, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. Why don't you do something out of character, Ekim the Inbred Chimp? Why don't you WK in a proper manner and cite where one can find Politifact's appraisal of Odumbo's lie, 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor', Ekim the Inbred Chimp? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Chicken dick the retarded chimp, you are the one chattering about Obama, why don't you cite where politifact rated his comment as you are the only inbred that thinks it is important. He isn't running..........Just your usual chimp hijack..