Thread for orphaned comments
invite response
2005 Apr 11, 5:00pm 156,197 views 117,730 comments
by Patrick ➕follow (60) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 79,997 - 80,036 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
Dan8267
2017 Jan 23, 11:31pm
Awesome cover of Chandler
www.youtube.com/embed/wgfi7HTKxQ4
And another awesome cover. This time acapella.
www.youtube.com/embed/pSjr6ixi4ik
Dan8267
2017 Jan 23, 11:53pm
You know she wrote that about Bob Dylan, right?
Yes, the unwashed phenomenon, the original vagabond. She was totally Taylor Swifting him.
Y
2017 Jan 24, 4:58am
Pushing your old thread to the top of the days list is a form of Trumpian Self-Aggrandizement.
Boy you learn quick! Welcome to the RED SIDE!!!
Trump is Our Dear Leader
"he underestimated the trump number, and quoted the correct obama morning number during the 2013 event. more than half a million people used the service in total for both events. the comments were far from "lie""
No, he didn't. He lied. Here are the real numbers:
In case anyone thought it was a one-time mistake. He also lied in his second conference.
No Alternative to it.
Perhaps as with the Oscars, folks will protest the lack of non-colored people entertainers.
Spicer just held his morning briefing telling reporters that Green Bay looked masterful again last weekend, winning the NFC Championship game by the biggest margin in history.
When told that Green Bay actually lost the game, Trump responded that "They would have won except for the 5 illegal TDs allowed by the referees"
No, he didn't. He lied. Here are the real numbers:
he underestimated the total trump number but had the correct obama morning number. where's the sensationalized "lie"?
In case anyone thought it was a one-time mistake. He also lied in his second conference.
again, that's not a "lie". it all depends on what you consider to be "dramatic expansion"
"he underestimated the total trump number but had the correct obama morning number. where's the sensationalized "lie"?"
No, he purposely used the wrong numbers. We call that lying.
"On Friday, the D.C. Metro published ridership statistics for the past four inauguration days. The figures go up until 11 a.m., presumably on the assumption that riders using the system after that are unlikely to be attending the noon-time ceremony.
Spicer is correct that, per Metro, there were 317,000 trips taken before 11 a.m. in 2013, “President Obama’s last inaugural.†But by that metric, the 2017 figure would be 193,000 — less than half of the 420,000 Spicer claimed.
In terms of full-day ridership, Metro told The Washington Post that riders took 570,557 trips Friday. But by that metric, Spicer is wrong about Inauguration Day 2013, when there were 782,000 trips taken. On Inauguration Day 2009, per the Post, that figure hit 1.1 million."
again, that's not a "lie". it all depends on what you consider to be "dramatic expansion"
No, it's a lie. There is basically no expansion at all since 2009 even according to your graph. There is no definition under which zero is considered a "dramatic expansion"
No, he purposely used the wrong numbers. We call that lying.
that's completely unprovable - you have no idea if spicer was purposely using wrong numbers.
No, it's a lie. There is basically no expansion at all since 2009 even according to your graph. There is no definition under which zero is considered a "dramatic expansion"
now that's a lie - there is clearly an expansion of the federal workforce from the bush years under obama.
"now that's a lie - there is clearly an expansion of the federal workforce from the bush years under obama."
He said "in recent years". He didn't say "under Obama"
"that's completely unprovable - you have no idea if spicer was purposely using wrong numbers."
Well, considering he told 4 other whoppers that same day, he's either the biggest idiot ever to be Press Secretary or he did it on purpose. I'm pretty sure it was on purpose.
This is the difference between liberals & stupid conservatives.
Liberals know when they are wrong.
Conservatives know nothing.
"Yeah Tatty, it's very telling that you can't see yourself in the mirror."
What--do you think I'm a vampire?
We're Republicans! FUCK ORIGINALITY!
CONSERVE(ative) YOUR BRAIN !
If one hasn't read the complete transcript,they don't know what they are talking about.
Those that have,please post the transcript.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 Jan 24, 10:48am
I believe mcqueef would be more succinct. Yes. He wanted to follow in Melania's footsteps. If asked about it, he will say the press is lying.
If one hasn't read the complete transcript,they don't know what they are talking about.
Those that have,please post the transcript.
It was posted months ago. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YReOr_eTktcJ:https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
justme
2017 Jan 24, 11:07am
I'm not sure you can "plagiarize" a cake, not unless the 2nd maker claims that this was an original design. Imitate, yes, plagiarize, no.
I feel hungry. I'm going to plagiarize myself a Bologna sandwich.
Ceffer
2017 Jan 24, 12:36pm
Obama's cake looks like Martin Luther King. Trump's cake looks like Winston Churchill. Anybody can see that.
RC2006
2017 Jan 24, 12:56pm
That's what happens when you let the neighboring country flood a state with their poor for decades.
California also has the highest poverty rate in the US way to go liberals.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article101657302.html
Heraclitusstudent
2017 Jan 24, 1:00pm
I'll say it again:
Calexit is a Russian attempt to divide and weaken the US.
https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/12/13/from-his-home-in-russia-calexit-leader-plots-california-secession/
I'll say it again: Zero Hedge is Russian propaganda.
They don't care about Trump, or California. They just want to divide. And it works well with morons on both sides.
Rew
2017 Jan 24, 2:26pm
I'm pretty sure it was on purpose.
You would be correct if you mean Spicer chose the most favorable numbers he could, for his administration. Trump is putting up a number somewhere between 250 and 500K, by estimates, for the crowd size. What's funny is how irate he, Trump, Kelly Ann, are becoming at being fact checked and called out on their BS. You see this very, "You are all against us" sort of tone taking shape. Whiners. I got news for them. It's going to get worse!
Historically in context that 250-500K looks like this:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/jan/20/inaugural-crowd-sizes-ranked/
It's pretty clear from multiple sources, if we are measuring crowds: the inauguration physical crowd was small comparatively, and the Women's March was undoubtably the largest political march in the history of the USA. There is no wiggle, argument, or blog post which can "alternative fact" its way out of that.
There is little evidence to show "the media" and credible sources are misrepresenting the crowd sizes. Can the same be said for Spicer and Trump's representations? I don't think so.
As for TV viewership of the inauguration: lower as well, for Trump, according to Neilsen, when compared to Obama and others.
Finally, it rained throughout the time Trump talked, unlike his representation of a Godly cloud parting just during his speech. (One more : the CIA speech, Trump stocked the crowd with his administration cheering section, and it was standing only. There was no standing-O. He also gave it in-front of the wall of fallen heroes. That's some low class grandstanding.)
The Trump administration is off to a 'theatrical' start. Was there any doubt it would be any other way?
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 Jan 24, 2:56pm
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
Moochelle's speech.
Exactly. And trump is a secret masochist. He dresses in assless chaps and Melania cracks the whip.
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
Moochelle's speech.
Exactly. And trump is a secret masochist. He dresses in assless chaps and Melania cracks the whip.
WOW.
JUST WOW.
Is that why he talks funny?
Judging by his facial expressions, he's always wearing some sort of pulsating butt plug, controlled remotely
That's what happens when you let the neighboring country flood a state with their poor for decades.
California also has the highest poverty rate in the US way to go liberals.
Putin caused that too
YEAH! It should just say the good stuff for you and the good stuff for me, and that's it. It doesn't have to be so complex because the world isn't, nor are relationships. It's not like anyone would need to try and define anything in for general eventualities, or put things in firm legal terms with little room for interpretation.
We can just have a gentleMANs agreement on things. No pussies.
You trust me right? :)
If someone asks you your relationship status and your reply is "it's complicated" that means you are getting screwed without any benefits. Countries should have simpler relationships. If you want to control every aspect of your partners you will have divorce and hatred. Are you willing to go to war and kill people just because others did not meet some requirement in the treaty. Like I said we still have WTO framework to use when a difference arise. If you "need" a prenup then you will definitely use it.
« First « Previous Comments 79,997 - 80,036 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,234,109 comments by 14,750 users - ElYorsh online now