Txdigest.com

Unfortunately, the people who really need to understand this are not going to. No matter what the reality is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lctYermoe-o

GQ?

What is that..is that a network?

Anyone else watch it besides you?

A spot on a horse's ass ?

The question is, when will Keith Olbermann be fired from GQ? Whatever that is.

If you think Keith is a great mind, that tells me all I need to know.

Keith Olbermann is a doofus.

Olbermann is a dumbass, and anybody that follows him is a bigger dumbass.

Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

So I guess that you are in agreement with Keith, that just because you think Trump would make a better Potus than Hillary,then you are to stupid to breathe.

Where is Olbemanns in depth appraisal of Hillary, I mean he's a journalist, so he wants to be fair,right?

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

Rusty, I avoided the commentary because it was so insultingly stupid. I didn't see a need to go there, but I guess you wanted us to.

I also assumed you were being funny, because I couldn't imagine you actually believe nearly everyone at this site is "Deplorable."

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

I don't use an entertainer for political information.

you can, too many others seem too

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

I don't use an entertainer for political information.

you can, too many others seem too

I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

rusty wrote:

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

I don't use an entertainer for political information.

you can, too many others seem too

I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

Oh yeah..and with Ronald Reagan it was..AN ACTOR???

Or could it be that I don't agree with HIS opinion? Not all opinions, on both side, should be the only way just because they're "on the correct side". Just like I don't agree with Mark's opinion that all democrats are evil or idiots. You aren't evil or an idiot, we just don't agree on some things. Just like I will vote for a reality show host over a treasonous, corrupt politician.

rusty wrote:

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:Just what I thought.
Not one person has discounted the commentary. Only the commentator, or even more ridiculous, the avenue of delivery.

I don't use an entertainer for political information.

you can, too many others seem too

I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

You did here, which indicates you do use entertainers for information.

So, are you voting for the liar married to the liar former President?

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:

John in Plano wrote:
I don't use an entertainer for political information.

you can, too many others seem too

I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

You did here, which indicates you do use entertainers for information.

So, are you voting for the liar married to the liar former President?

Wait a minute, because I posted an opinion I agree with you suggest that that's where I got my information? Hmmmm, quite a stretch.

I've said numerous times that I'm not all that keen on Clinton. But I don't guess one liar is any worse than the other if all you're looking for at is lies. Hell, if I based my vote on whether or not a candidate is a liar I would never be able to vote for anybody.

I'm not even sure how you can use the "Clinton is a liar" angle to defend Trump.

rusty wrote:

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:
I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

You did here, which indicates you do use entertainers for information.

So, are you voting for the liar married to the liar former President?

Wait a minute, because I posted an opinion I agree with you suggest that that's where I got my information? Hmmmm, quite a stretch.

I've said numerous times that I'm not all that keen on Clinton. But I don't guess one liar is any worse than the other if all you're looking for at is lies. Hell, if I based my vote on whether or not a candidate is a liar I would never be able to vote for anybody.

I'm not even sure how you can use the "Clinton is a liar" angle to defend Trump.

It is called the "yeah but" argument.

Trump is probably a liar, agreed.

There is no doubt, and it isn't even arguable, that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a serial liar.

Trump has never committed treason. He's never had the opportunity.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has committed treason on multiple occasions.

only thing good about the TRUMP is the things that he says he will do and as an unknown entity Trump might do what he promises to do Mark .

we know that 'illary' will just be another term of mrobama .

rusty wrote:

John in Plano wrote:

rusty wrote:
I don't look to entertainers for political "information" either, but the "opinion" is pretty spot on.
But, then again, I'm not getting ready to vote for a reality TV star for President. Who will be next, the naked guy from Survivor?

You did here, which indicates you do use entertainers for information.

So, are you voting for the liar married to the liar former President?

Wait a minute, because I posted an opinion I agree with you suggest that that's where I got my information? Hmmmm, quite a stretch.

I've said numerous times that I'm not all that keen on Clinton. But I don't guess one liar is any worse than the other if all you're looking for at is lies. Hell, if I based my vote on whether or not a candidate is a liar I would never be able to vote for anybody.

I'm not even sure how you can use the "Clinton is a liar" angle to defend Trump.

Wait a second, your link so yea even Stevie Wonder can see you found it and shared it so it's obvious it's your source of political info.
It's ok, some would say he serves the low info voter.
And I offered no defense of either candidate.
I did phrase a question calling Hillary and Bill liars, which you admit they are,so why whine about calling them liars?