Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/12/trump-lows-ever-hit-rock-bottom-editorials-debates/945947001/

The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives.

Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:

The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives.

Defending everything he does and says has got to take a physical and emotional toll on her. Wonder how she copes.

Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:

The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives.

Well thats kinda her job isnt it?

Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:

The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives.

Defending everything he does and says has got to take a physical and emotional toll on her. Wonder how she copes.

The basic decent of Bush II was in doubt for years. This is some serious revisionism.

I would hate to have been in the room when JORR read this. Just more liberal media sabotaging and undermining this great Presidency.

but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt.

Even after killing a shit load of innocent women and kids I still agree with this.

This isn’t about the policy differences we have with all presidents or our disappointment in some of their decisions. Obama and Bush both failed in many ways. They broke promises and told untruths, but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt.

America wrote:

The basic decent of Bush II was in doubt for years. This is some serious revisionism.

Yeah, really. Bush was compared to Hitler on a daily basis! Why are Democrats rehabilitating him?

Nas wrote:

Funny they only went back two Presidents. The basic decency of Clinton was always in doubt.

I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day.

But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow.

Regular Reader wrote:

Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Regular Reader wrote:

Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now.

Regular Reader wrote:

USA Today is staffed and edited by university liberals who want to impress their friends by SLAYING THE DRUMPFMAN in print. Their audience is their colleagues, not readers.

pittmike wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Regular Reader wrote:

Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now.

Speaking of Romney.

This Obama attack on him during the debates aged quite poorly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

Obama was always a naive moron when it came to foreign policy though.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Regular Reader wrote:

Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now.

pittmike wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Regular Reader wrote:

Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now.

Speaking of Romney.

This Obama attack on him during the debates aged quite poorly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

Obama was always a naive moron when it came to foreign policy though.

Author:	Hatchetman [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:38 pm ]
Post subject:	USA Today
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 945947001/

Author:	SpiralStairs [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Hatchetman wrote: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/12/trump-lows-ever-hit-rock-bottom-editorials-debates/945947001/ man even US fucking A Today is going in on Trump.

Author:	Juice's Lecture Notes [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Sure, I get it, as an archetype, saying a woman would "do anything" for something she desires implies sex in one way or another. ...Nah, nevermind, Trump is definitely enough of a narcissist to think that a woman in congress looking to trade horses actually wants to have sex with him, and stupid and crass enough to tweet about it as the President of the United States.

Author:	Ogie Oglethorpe [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives.

Author:	badrogue17 [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives. Well thats kinda her job isnt it?

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

USA Today https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=109938	Page 1 of 1

Author:	SpiralStairs [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives. Defending everything he does and says has got to take a physical and emotional toll on her. Wonder how she copes.

Author:	DannyB [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
I would hate to have been in the room when JORR read this. Just more liberal media sabotaging and undermining this great Presidency.

Author:	Nas [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:37 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
SpiralStairs wrote: Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: The question needs to be asked, but how low will Sarah Huckster Sanders sink to defend this clown every day? I mean holy shit she lies through her teeth with just about every answer she gives. Defending everything he does and says has got to take a physical and emotional toll on her. Wonder how she copes. Thinking about the book deal she'll get after 1 more year on the job. She has nothing on Kellyanne Conway. I loved watching her make chicken salad.

Author:	Nas [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:41 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Even after killing a shit load of innocent women and kids I still agree with this. This isn’t about the policy differences we have with all presidents or our disappointment in some of their decisions. Obama and Bush both failed in many ways. They broke promises and told untruths, but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt.

Author:	America [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
The basic decent of Bush II was in doubt for years. This is some serious revisionism.

Author:	Curious Hair [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
America wrote: The basic decent of Bush II was in doubt for years. This is some serious revisionism. Yeah, really. Bush was compared to Hitler on a daily basis! Why are Democrats rehabilitating him?

Author:	JORR [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
DannyB wrote: I would hate to have been in the room when JORR read this. Just more liberal media sabotaging and undermining this great Presidency. It's so much easier to read that tweet as Trump calling someone a whore than it is to believe that Hillary meant young black guys when she said "superpredator". But I know, you're an unbiased intellectual viewing the political scene perfectly clearly.

Author:	JORR [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:04 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Quote: but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt.

Author:	312player [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
I still firmly believe Bush was a piece of shit, a bad guy who got a lot of people hurt, maimed or killed.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:34 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Nas wrote: Even after killing a shit load of innocent women and kids I still agree with this. This isn’t about the policy differences we have with all presidents or our disappointment in some of their decisions. Obama and Bush both failed in many ways. They broke promises and told untruths, but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt. Funny they only went back two Presidents. The basic decency of Clinton was always in doubt.

Author:	Brick [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:40 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Curious Hair wrote: America wrote: The basic decent of Bush II was in doubt for years. This is some serious revisionism. Yeah, really. Bush was compared to Hitler on a daily basis! Why are Democrats rehabilitating him? Democrats demonize all Republicans in power. Republicans demonize all Democrats and continue to demonize them after they are gone.

Author:	Regular Reader [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow.

Author:	Nas [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:14 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Frank Coztansa wrote: Nas wrote: Even after killing a shit load of innocent women and kids I still agree with this. This isn’t about the policy differences we have with all presidents or our disappointment in some of their decisions. Obama and Bush both failed in many ways. They broke promises and told untruths, but the basic decency of each man was never in doubt. Funny they only went back two Presidents. The basic decency of Clinton was always in doubt. Depends on what your definition of decency is.

Author:	Brick [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:32 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too.

Author:	America [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:36 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. USA Today is staffed and edited by university liberals who want to impress their friends by SLAYING THE DRUMPFMAN in print. Their audience is their colleagues, not readers.

Author:	pittmike [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:38 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too. Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now.

Author:	Ogie Oglethorpe [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:56 am ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
pittmike wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too. Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now. Speaking of Romney. This Obama attack on him during the debates aged quite poorly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM Obama was always a naive moron when it came to foreign policy though.

Author:	Pal [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:44 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
America wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. USA Today is staffed and edited by university liberals who want to impress their friends by SLAYING THE DRUMPFMAN in print. Their audience is their colleagues, not readers. Appealing to the audience that acts in the same manner to everything Trump does as people who are bothered by Larry David on "Curb Your Enthusiasm".

Author:	Hank Scorpio [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: pittmike wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too. Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now. Speaking of Romney. This Obama attack on him during the debates aged quite poorly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM Obama was always a naive moron when it came to foreign policy though. That is awesome. Russia?! Russia who... the vodka guys? Nahhhh, they're cool now.

Author:	long time guy [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
pittmike wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too. Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now. As such it would be transformed overnight into the Grand Ol' Polygamy (Party)

Author:	Brick [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
ltg made a good joke! I'm about to post in the 180 thread!

Author:	Seacrest [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: USA Today
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote: pittmike wrote: Boilermaker Rick wrote: Regular Reader wrote: I always thought that the paper was squarely targeted at middle America. If this is how they think they feel, it's a sad day. But 1628 lies in 300 days in office alone has to have some kind of effect in flyover land. But calling him unfit for toilet duty, wow. Trump has historically low approval ratings for a reason. I'm guessing most of his supporters would swap him out for GENERIC REPUBLICAN if they could too. Yeah I am pretty sure us in the Grand Old Pedophile party would rather be into the second term of Romney right now. Speaking of Romney. This Obama attack on him during the debates aged quite poorly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM Obama was always a naive moron when it came to foreign policy though. Danny B said the world is a safer place now that Iran and North Korea are on the way to nuclear weapons.