Thursday, September 07, 2017

99 Out of 100 Pantie-Wringers Agree!

"Ninety-nine people out of a hundred would interpret this language as threatening and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous at best and dangerous at worst. Bottom line: It is un-American to threaten journalists," the letter said. [More]
Where'd you take your survey sample from?

Real threats don't need interpretation.

2 comments:

  1. "Analysts have speculated that the group is doing so to motivate existing members and recruit new members."

    And the NYT and other groups feel "threatened." What a load of hogwash.

    Typical liberals. They could never define what exactly is "threatening" that the NRA wrote. But, like hate speech; the Libs can't define it, but they know it when they see/hear it.

    "Pantie-Wringer"s is the perfect description.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The lack of a Comments section tells you everything you need to know.

    ReplyDelete

Keep it on topic. Submit tips on different topics via left sidebar Contact Form.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.