You claimed I opposed Obama's policies because I'm a Fox conservative and because he was black.
I'm tired of yours.
No you haven't.
Wikipedia is unreliable, as it is subject to editing by its users.
And *still* you refuse to supply ONE NAME!!**JUST ONE!!**
Why won't you name on of these "propagandist" reporters? Why not?
Because you're a liar. You're a fundamentalist liberal, lying for his cause; no different from a funamentalist christian lying for his.
Opposite sides of the same damn coin.
I'm no longer interested in pursuing this line of discussion.
Projection, dude.<quoted text> Wow dude. You're either blinded by partisan fury, or you're a straight up liar.
BULLSHIT you didn't!!<quoted text> I never said you opposed obama because he was black.
Just as soon as you tell me which Fox reporter you saw is a blatant propagandist fr the GOP. I'm still waiting.<quoted text> Tell me the post number.
Why--because you lied to me?<quoted text>I have said several times that the whole "name a reporter" game you're playing is dishonest,
You said they were.<quoted text> and that I do not think that the regular reporters on fox are primarily propagandists.
And *I* was the one who had to explain the difference between a commentator and a journalist to you. Jesus fucking christ, talk about liberal dishonesty!!<quoted text> Their commentators are,
You haven't mentioned any names until right now.<quoted text>I did name a name - gretchen carlson - because I happened to be watching a video of her discussing "what would regan do"
You're a liar.<quoted text> And you ignored it twice.
You could have named only one or two; but instead, you went to the unreliable Wikipedia.<quoted text>I referred you to the wiki sources, because I do not feel like listing all of them myself.
I didn't ignore it; and you are *still* not providing a name.<quoted text> I also mentioned specific things (like the "daily memos" and the former employee testimony on the matter), which you ignored.
You are as dishonest as any fundie christian; or as delusional. Either way, what you claim here isn't true.