It's interesting to me that you didn't respond similarly to the post I responded to, which was similarly devoid of a coherent point, but just happened to be right-leaning in nature.
But I guess you were never pretending to be something other than a partisan hack.
It's interesting to me that you didn't respond similarly to the post I responded to, which was similarly devoid of a coherent point, but just happened to be right-leaning in nature.
But I guess you were never pretending to be something other than a partisan hack.
"...the post I responded to, which was similarly devoid of a coherent point..."
1. Thank you for admitting your post was "devoid of a coherent point". I do appreciate the sincere humility, given how rare this can be these days. So, I'm not just picking on you! In fact, you're maybe a little too hard on youself... You've made oh-so-clear what you think of Tucker Carlson -- that is, a point made, and very coherently!
2. Now, as to the OP being equally "devoid of a coherent point":
Hmmm... He's differentiating between Tucker and the rest of FOX; the former admirable, the latter not so much. Why, there's a point! Coherent too! Do you disagree? That is, with its coherence, not its lack of presented evidence, which IMO is a completely separate matter. Maybe we could even, you know, discuss it a little?
So is the above really partisan hackery? Remember, you're talking to someone who's to the Left of Marx.
It's interesting to me that you didn't respond similarly to the post I responded to, which was similarly devoid of a coherent point, but just happened to be right-leaning in nature.
But I guess you were never pretending to be something other than a partisan hack.
Seriously? OK, sure.
"...the post I responded to, which was similarly devoid of a coherent point..."
1. Thank you for admitting your post was "devoid of a coherent point". I do appreciate the sincere humility, given how rare this can be these days. So, I'm not just picking on you! In fact, you're maybe a little too hard on youself... You've made oh-so-clear what you think of Tucker Carlson -- that is, a point made, and very coherently!
2. Now, as to the OP being equally "devoid of a coherent point":
Hmmm... He's differentiating between Tucker and the rest of FOX; the former admirable, the latter not so much. Why, there's a point! Coherent too! Do you disagree? That is, with its coherence, not its lack of presented evidence, which IMO is a completely separate matter. Maybe we could even, you know, discuss it a little?
So is the above really partisan hackery? Remember, you're talking to someone who's to the Left of Marx.