do you know why boxers never like to box in the other guys country?
the judges are often biased
[PAX] My Idiot President
- Thread starter Stu
- Start date
do you know why boxers never like to box in the other guys country?
the judges are often biased
well there's aggression and then there's aggression
but the point is that we might not be playing on a level playing field so its easy for you to sit on your high horse and criticise how i have to defend my position here while you have the luxury of being able to bombard me with personal insults
Ahem...
"I run a fact checker company called truthbomb and i put your name through it. Here's what it said:
skarekrow is a questionable source of information and likely a fullblown commie pretending to be a liberal
because he is rated 'questionable' EVERYTHING he says should now be totally discounted. None of it should be looked at. None of his individual claims or facts should even be entertained and he should be dismissed out of hand
[warning: the above post is fake news posted as satire]”
Just because you call it “satire” doesn’t mean it isn't FULL of personal insults...so don’t attempt to turn it around on me.
I posted a very relevant post in response to your own and instead of an actual response back or you playing on a “level” playing field as you call it, you decided to make it and me and my post into an insulting joke.
So no...you have no right to be upset or butthurt when it comes flying back in your face.
Poor you.
i think i used a very effective comedic device to illustrate to you the absurdity of these 'fact checker' services because as i illustrated through my joke anyone can create a fact checker and give it their own bias and then use it to supposedly 'debunk' anything they disagree with
services like 'snopes' have been exposed as having a strong bias
also when we consider that big tech companies like google employ algorithms that decide what you see in search engine searches and that facebook is looking to use fact checkers to throw out information they deem 'politically incorrect' you can begin to see the start of a technocratic control of information
you have to ask: 'who decides what is politically correct?'
heres a video showing the leadership of googles reaction to clinton losing the election....yes the video is hosted on the breitbart platform but forget breitbart and watch the video: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018...derships-dismayed-reaction-to-trump-election/
as for other sites you have flagged up as 'right wing' i did not get them from those sites direct as i do not use those sites direct. I go them from michael riveros site 'whatreallyhappened' which takes a selection of news stories from across the web
See...now how fucking difficult was it to legit answer me?
Sure they can have bias...but those who show it have been exposed...and that was not Snopes that I pulled from.
People don’t have to use certain platforms they think are biased.
You tell me to ignore your source for the video but dude...Brietbart?
They are state news run by the WH and nutters.
They still spread totally false propagandist stories and to even suggest they have ANY credibility is sad.
I’m sure that people who contributed to the campaign were upset...that doesn’t mean that Google is changing search results...you have yet to prove that one bit.
Nor have you proven that fact-checking sites are all untrustworthy because of some love triangle within the Snopes owners...so don’t go to Snopes.
Just because one minority/cop shot someone doesn’t mean they all are so inclined does it?
As for your sources, you need to really look at what is opinion and what is factual.
You really blur the line big time and so do most of your articles offered as “proof”.
Who decides PC-ness?
The majority.
Doesn’t always mean it’s right in retrospect, but that is who decides.
If a majority of people dislike Trump then there will be more negative stories popping up as searched for than good.
That is the super-basic breakdown of the algorithm.
As for your “comedic device”...
Try, your attempt at a passive-aggressive device to insult someone with the pretense that it’s all just a funny joke made in jest.
Don’t pull that shit with me man and I won’t bounce the insults back at you, okay?
Big kisses now!
i knew the video was out there and did a search for it. i then found it hosted on breibart so i used that link
the video stands alone
Big kisses now!
kiss kiss!
Okay...the video is an hour long dude...I skipped from place to place and never once heard anything other than - Yeah, it sucks, but it will work itself out.
What is this supposed to prove?
It’s a fail.
Please list time signatures such as 4:30 when the fellow is talking about how it will eventually be okay.
Also, again...Breitbart is not a legit news agency...so when they host such videos, it only makes me wonder how they are trying to spin it for their own purposes and the purposes of the WH.
it proves the heavy bias of the google leadership towards hilary clinton
Blasey Ford's Kavinaugh Testimony Unravels After Ex-Boyfriend Refutes Key Claims
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 10/03/2018 - 05:55
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) fired off an intriguing letter to Christine Blasey Ford's attorneys on Tuesday, requesting several pieces of evidence related to her testimony - including all materials from the polygraph test she took, after her ex-boyfriend of six years refuted statements she made under oath last week.
Grassley writes: "The full details of Dr. Ford's polygraph are particularly important because the Senate Judiciary Committee has received a sworn statement from a longtime boyfriend of Dr. Ford's, stating that he personally witnessed Dr. Ford coaching a friend on polygraph examinations. When asked under oath in the hearing whether she'd ever given any tips or advice to someone who was planning on taking a polygraph, Dr. Ford replied, "Never." This statement raises specific concerns about the reliability of her polygraph examination results."
Ford's ex-boyfriend also claims that she never told him about any type of sexual assault in almost a decade of knowing her (of which they were romantically involved for six years).
"During our time dating, Dr. Ford never brought up anything regarding her experience as a victim of sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct. Dr. Ford never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh," the ex writes, adding "While visiting Ford in Hawaii, we traveled around the Hawaiian islands including one time on a propeller plane. Dr. Ford never indicated a fear of flying.
Ford's ex goes on to note "Dr. Ford never expressed a fear of closed quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit," further refuting her testimony. "She ended up living in a very small 500 sq. ft. house with one door."
BREAKING: Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging: dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits. Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0
— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018
The "second door" story has separately come under scrutiny in recent days, as some have suggested the second door she installed due to "clausterphobia" as well as "anxiety, phobia and PTSD-like symptoms."
That said - RealClearPolitics' Thomas Lipscomb notes that the door may have actually been installed to accomodate a renter at her house.
since 1993, and through some listings even today, there was another tenant at what is now the Ford property. It is listed as this person’s residence from 1993 to July 2007, a week or so after she sold the house to the Fords.
Her name is Dr. Sylvia Randall, and she listed this address for her California licensed practice of psychotherapy, including couples psychotherapy, until her move to Oregon in 2007.
Currently she only practices in that state, where she also pursues her new career as a talented artist as well.
But many existing directories still have Dr. Randall’s address listed at what is now the Ford residence.
Randall was evasive when Lipscomb called her - refusing to answer whether she sold the house to the Fords or was a therapist to the Fords. Perhaps the FBI needs to interview Randall before they conclude their speedy investigation.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...nravels-after-ex-boyfriend-refutes-key-claims
it proves the heavy bias of the google leadership towards hilary clinton
Blasey Ford's Kavinaugh Testimony Unravels After Ex-Boyfriend Refutes Key Claims
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 10/03/2018 - 05:55
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) fired off an intriguing letter to Christine Blasey Ford's attorneys on Tuesday, requesting several pieces of evidence related to her testimony - including all materials from the polygraph test she took, after her ex-boyfriend of six years refuted statements she made under oath last week.
Grassley writes: "The full details of Dr. Ford's polygraph are particularly important because the Senate Judiciary Committee has received a sworn statement from a longtime boyfriend of Dr. Ford's, stating that he personally witnessed Dr. Ford coaching a friend on polygraph examinations. When asked under oath in the hearing whether she'd ever given any tips or advice to someone who was planning on taking a polygraph, Dr. Ford replied, "Never." This statement raises specific concerns about the reliability of her polygraph examination results."
Ford's ex-boyfriend also claims that she never told him about any type of sexual assault in almost a decade of knowing her (of which they were romantically involved for six years).
"During our time dating, Dr. Ford never brought up anything regarding her experience as a victim of sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct. Dr. Ford never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh," the ex writes, adding "While visiting Ford in Hawaii, we traveled around the Hawaiian islands including one time on a propeller plane. Dr. Ford never indicated a fear of flying.
Ford's ex goes on to note "Dr. Ford never expressed a fear of closed quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit," further refuting her testimony. "She ended up living in a very small 500 sq. ft. house with one door."
BREAKING: Fox’s @johnrobertsFox obtains letter from Ford ex-boyfriend alleging: dated for 6 yrs, never told of sex assault, Ford coached friend on taking polygraph, flew frequently w/o expressing any fear of flying/tight spaces/limited exits. Doesn’t want to b/c “involved”. pic.twitter.com/jVeW0qaJD0
— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 3, 2018
The "second door" story has separately come under scrutiny in recent days, as some have suggested the second door she installed due to "clausterphobia" as well as "anxiety, phobia and PTSD-like symptoms."
That said - RealClearPolitics' Thomas Lipscomb notes that the door may have actually been installed to accomodate a renter at her house.
since 1993, and through some listings even today, there was another tenant at what is now the Ford property. It is listed as this person’s residence from 1993 to July 2007, a week or so after she sold the house to the Fords.
Her name is Dr. Sylvia Randall, and she listed this address for her California licensed practice of psychotherapy, including couples psychotherapy, until her move to Oregon in 2007.
Currently she only practices in that state, where she also pursues her new career as a talented artist as well.
But many existing directories still have Dr. Randall’s address listed at what is now the Ford residence.
Randall was evasive when Lipscomb called her - refusing to answer whether she sold the house to the Fords or was a therapist to the Fords. Perhaps the FBI needs to interview Randall before they conclude their speedy investigation.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...nravels-after-ex-boyfriend-refutes-key-claims
Taken from your Russian "news" site.
Nice try.
zero hedge isn't russian
So are you trying to say that her ex boyfriend has not refuted her claims?