Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mdittmar

Oh, no! MANY women?? You mean like 37?
92? 135??


62 posted on 09/27/2016 1:49:05 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Buckeye McFrog

“Oh, no! MANY women?? You mean like 37?
92? 135??”

Exactly. I was going to post a similar statement.

This is why the media has lost all credibility with me.

“Many people are now saying . .. “
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

“Sources say . . .”
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

“Has led to increased questions about . . . “
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

“Some are now saying . . . “
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

“. . . these controversial comments . . .”
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

” . . . are stirring controversy . . .”
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

“Has renewed debate over . . . “
Worthless opinionating by the writer, not worth the time it takes to read it.

And so on.

When you get done filtering out such subjective onanism, you really get no useful information from the media.


87 posted on 09/27/2016 2:00:35 PM PDT by Chad N. Freud (FR is the modern equivalent of the Committees of Correspondence. Let other analogies arise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson