January 04, 2006
David Letterman & Bill O'Reilly
Bill O'Reilly walked out on Letterman's stage with a " don't mess with me" air of confidence but Letterman met him with a wide open gaze and a gift for observation that O'Reilly doesn't understand. O'Reilly wanted to show Letterman that he was oh so cool and amusing opening by responding to Letterman's greeting using the term "nice winter soltice" instead of "Christmas" telling Letterman that saying Christmas is out. At that point, it was clear where O'Reilly wanted to open the interview but Letterman soon took control. 1/3/05
Bill immediately launched into his oft repeated stories to illustrate the validity of the Christmas Wars.The report about the school that forced the kids to change the words of Silent Night was proven wrong and reported by Marie Therese on News Hounds
Letterman was not the least impressed with O'Reilly's reports telling him , "I don't feel threatened" letting O'Reilly know that the concept had little importance. O'Reilly claimed it was an effort " to erode traditions." Then he told two more "War on Christmas" tales not worth repeating. Letterman listened and then let Bill know that he was not convinced saying plainly, "I don't believe it!"
Letterman quickly moved the interview asking Bill about his "friends" in the Bush administration describing the situation as "dark" O'Reilly admitted that things were "pretty rough" adding that they were not his friends and there was more chance that Bush would come on Letterman's show than his own.
Then BOR launched into a little soliloquy about winning in Iraq adding a negative comment about Cindy Sheehan.
"When Cindy Sheehan calls terrorists freedom fighters,we don't like that." That was the turning point for Letterman and he went after O'Reilly who claimed that Sheehan was "run by far left elements."
When Letterman asked O'Reilly why we are in Iraq in the first place, BOR started a spin about foreign leaders having similar intelligence acting like an expert with knowledge beyond Letterman's grasp. At that point Letterman gave the perfect response.
" I'm not smart enough to debate you but I think 60% of what you say is crap."
comment: Who can argue with that analysis? Here is a transcript of the interview.
Reported by deborah at January 4, 2006 02:59 PMThis was great TV.
See for yo'self @ http://www.crooksandliars.com.
Posted by: sickboy at January 4, 2006 04:05 PM
I happened upon this last night and it was great television. Letterman was trying hard to remain calm in some spots. The studio must have dropped about 30 degrees during the exchange.
When they got on the Cindy Sheehan topic, Letterman asked O'Reilly if he'd ever lost a family member to combat. O'Reilly admitted he hadn't, to which Letterman responded, and I'm paraphrasing, "Then how the Christ can you criticize how this woman is grieving?"
O'Reilly made a fair point that he wasn't going to glorify terrorists that blow up women and children as 'freedom fighters' but Dave had already gotten the point across.
Letterman also made the point that yes we support the troops, yes they are the best in the world, but why exactly are we there? He asked this question at least 3 times and O'Reilly had no answer.
Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 04:05 PM
Letterman has gained respect from me after watching him call out Red-Baiter O'Reilly on his B.S. O'Reilly is a perverted chickenhawk and a pathological liar to boot; how anyone can take this man seriously is beyond me.
BTW Red-Baiter: It's MI6, not M16. What an assclown.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 04:18 PM
"I'm not smart enough to debate you but I think 60% of what you say is crap." -- David Letterman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That was generous of Dave.
BTW, Jonathon: are you looking forward to the new season of MI-5?
MTL
Posted by: MikeTheLiberal at January 4, 2006 04:21 PM
I never watch those late night talk shows,
but i was flipping at a commercial of the footbal game that wouldn't end and saw most of this
it was priceless TV,
why would bill be on that show? was he trying to sell something? Letterman wasn't impreesed and really didn't take any junk.
proceless
Posted by: lord rayden at January 4, 2006 04:23 PM
"Mr. Letterman is a smart guy who can spot a phony with telescopic accuracy and expects his guests to bring something to the table. If a guest begins to sink on the show, the bottom is a long way down."-Bill O'Reilly
Amen, Bill, amen.
BTW Mike: what is MI-5?
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 04:26 PM
"The studio must have dropped about 30 degrees during the exchange."-Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 04:05 PM
That would make the studio approx. 20 degrees.
AAR
Posted by: adamannapolis at January 4, 2006 04:26 PM
BTW Mike: what is MI-5?
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 04:26 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A great series from the BBC (called "Spooks" in the UK) that runs on the A&E; Network.
http://www.aetv.com/mi5/
MTL
Posted by: MikeTheLiberal at January 4, 2006 04:29 PM
And now for the "no-spin" spin:
With O'Reilly as Guest, Letterman Denounces Iraq War & Criticism of Sheehan
NewsBusters, January 3, 2006
Displaying a hostility to President Bush and the Iraq war similar to that expressed by Comedy Central's Jon Stewart, on Tuesday's Late Show David Letterman went further than I've ever heard him in revealing his derision for President Bush's decision to launch the Iraq war and contempt for anyone who dares to criticize Cindy Sheehan...
http://newsbusters.org/node/3454
Posted by: -R at January 4, 2006 04:30 PM
I thought the opening piece on the war on x-mas was stupid and O'Reilly should have known better than to do that in nyc on Letterman. His ego must have forced him to do it, or maybe his buddy Gibson is cutting him in on the proceeds of the War on Christmas book. Dave made him look foolish on that part and it was awkard to watch. Otherwise, the interview was pretty lame. No real substance. Letterman's questions were lame and transparent. He has a show to run and must worry about ratings. Of course, I realize it is a late night comedy show.
Finally, I felt a little weird watching Dave's defense of Cindy Sheehan. What was that about? I feel terrible for Ms. Sheehan. However, I agree with OReilly that those individuals who have taken advantage of her for their own agendas should be ashamed.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Posted by: jim at January 4, 2006 04:31 PM
Letterman: "I'm not smart enough to debate you."
That was obvious from the start.
It was surprising that O'Reilly remained so calm and cordial in the face of Letterman's ignorant attacks.
And O'Reilly didn't "add a negative comment about Cindy Sheehan" -- what he stated is a well-known fact:
http://patterico.com/2005/08/25/3505/cindy-sheehan-terrorists-are-freedom-fighters/
It's indisputable that Sheehan has labeled terrorists in Iraq "freedom fighters."
If Letterman wants to blindly defend someone like that, that's his right, as it is O'Reilly's right to share Sheehan's views of terrorists as "freedom fighters" with the world.
Posted by: Observer at January 4, 2006 04:31 PM
Letterman: "See, I'm very concerned about people like yourself who don't have nothing but endless sympathy for a woman like Cindy Sheehan. Honest to Christ." [audience applause]
O'Reilly: "No, I'm sorry."
Letterman: "Honest to Christ."
O'Reilly: "No way. [waits for applause to die down] No way you're going to get me, no way that a terrorist who blows up women and children."
Letterman: "Do you have children?"
O'Reilly: "Yes I do. I have a son the same age as yours. No way a terrorist who blows up women and children is going to be called a 'freedom fighter' on my program." [mild audience applause]
Letterman: "I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling, I have the feeling about 60 percent of what you say is crap. [audience laughter] But I don't know that for a fact. [more audience applause]
http://newsbusters.org/node/3454
Posted by: -R at January 4, 2006 04:35 PM
Whole clip can be seen at cbs website
http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/
MI-5 is UK Security Service.
The programme the Professionals was CI-5
Posted by: Thor at January 4, 2006 04:36 PM
-R
what do you think of Newsbusters in general?
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 04:41 PM
-R
what do you think of Newsbusters in general?
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 04:41 PM
I stayed up and watched Letterman last night. I agree with all the above posters that it was great TV. When Bill is challenged outside of his own show and he can't control the debate, he loses. He can't handle being challenged outside of his bubble.
I also loved how the audience applauded loudly almost every time Letterman ripped into O'Reilly. And before trolls start saying "well of course, the show is taped in NY so it was stacked with liberal New Yorkers"....that is FALSE! Most of Letterman's audience is tourists from out of town. The midwest and the South. Red States!
It was refreshing to know that those folks agreed with Letterman and saw the phony O'Reilly for what he is.
P.S.
As someone mentioned above, the story O'Reilly told about the school kids not being allowed to sing Silent Night...that was untrue. O'Reilly lied to Letterman's audience with that story, as he does with so many other things.
Posted by: Mary from Manhattan at January 4, 2006 04:42 PM
If Letterman wants to blindly defend someone like that, that's his right, as it is O'Reilly's right to share Sheehan's views of terrorists as "freedom fighters" with the world.
Posted by: Observer at January 4, 2006 04:31 PM
THAT isn't the point.....the point is that he has done far worse than to quote that one sentence.......this guy has shirked no chance at smearing this woman, and anyone for that matter, who has displayed even the slightest dissent from GOP talking points when it comes to Iraq. ALL dissenters, in O'Reilly's mind, are aligned with "far left" organizations......Tell that to my mother....78 years old and a Republican......here's the point....BORe is a ridiculous jackoff and a partisan hack and Letterman exposed him, to a predominantly youthful audience, as just that...a Jackoff........anyone who defends O'Reilly isn't paying attention to his bullshit as much as they are to GOP talking points and blindly protecting their "dear leader"( notice the small case letters in dear leader) small case for a small case. P.L.U. j
Posted by: joeyess at January 4, 2006 04:47 PM
"blindly defend" the right to dissent for a gold star mother?
she asked lil w, "what noble cause"? that's really terrible to demand an explanation, eh?
just answer this one question lil w/o'lielly apologists....just one...
if China invades the US and occupies our country.....
how would you refer to the insurgents fighting to remove the occupier?
freedom fighters, maybe?
get it, yet?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 04:47 PM
So what did Ms. Sheehan say that was A LIE:
-------------------------------------------------
"You know that the president says Iraq is the central front in the war on terrorism, don't you believe that?" asked Mark Knoller of CBS, surrounded by a host of other reporters.
"No, because it's not true," Sheehan replied. "You know Iraq was no threat to the United States of America until we invaded. I mean they're not even a threat to the United States of America. Iraq was not involved in 9-11, Iraq was not a terrorist state. But now that we have decimated the country, the borders are open, freedom fighters from other countries are going in, and they [American troops] have created more terrorism by going to an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country. The terrorism is growing and people who never thought of being car bombers or suicide bombers are now doing it because they want the United States of America out of their country."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45938
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 4, 2006 04:48 PM
You think that's far fetched?
lil w has borrowed more money in 5 years than all the other presidents in 200+ years.....1.2 Trillion.....we are now in debt 8 trilllion...
most of what he borrowed is from the house of saud and china.....
what if they call the note due?
what if we can't pay?
keep shrinking that govt so grover norquist can drown it...eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 04:51 PM
I watched the video, as I nomally don't watch late night shows. I swear that O'Really? says 60%? after Dave made the 60% comment and you can see from O'Really? facial expressions that he was ready to explode but thought better of it.
I watched it twice to make sure I heard correctly and I'm not sure if it was Bill who said 60%. Anybody else hear that?
Posted by: edfromned at January 4, 2006 04:53 PM
When they got on the Cindy Sheehan topic, Letterman asked O'Reilly if he'd ever lost a family member to combat. O'Reilly admitted he hadn't, to which Letterman responded, and I'm paraphrasing, "Then how the Christ can you criticize how this woman is grieving?"
Posted by: mac the mouth
-------------------------------------------------
mac,
I didn't hear what David Letterman said (he kind of said this under his breath), but I thank you for posting it.
How in the hell can falafel understand her grieving? I can't understand it - I can try to imagine it, but I NEVER want to know what it feels like to lose a child.
And to lose a child for a war that didn't need to happen? It is truly unimaginable.
Scarlet, PbD
p.s. Hey, Lord Rayden, I haven't seen you in a while - nice to hear from you again.
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 04:53 PM
It is so painful to hear media personalities like Letterman make an utter fool on himself. And he's not a comedian. Comedians don't simply read jokes others write - they compose the jokes themselves. Spontaneously, unscripted.
Comedians are smart, and knowledgable and use metaphors that are compelling, but still funny. A good example is Wanda Sykes. She's a liberal, but her jokes and metaphors seem to strike a chord that bears relevance to current affairs. She, unlike Letterman, reads the news and analysis - not just exclusively what others say about what they saw in the news and using this "diluted news" as a platform for some show. How can he comment on a show he claims he doesn't watch? Which politics-savy American doesn't watch the Oreilly Factor?
Also, the intellectual disparity between Oreilly and Letterman was blatantly obvious. One was informed and reasoned, the other was a bad joke, whose fan base are probably as uninformed as he is. My hope is that people take him as unseriously as they do his jokes.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 04:54 PM
Wonder about his nephew who he said had opted to serve in the army! Is he in Iraq or in a cushy place ?
Posted by: Sonny at January 4, 2006 04:55 PM
David Letterman is the epitome of SMART! He spanked falafel - big time!
He made falafel look like the fool that he truly is.
Doesn't falafel always look so uncomfortable when he's on someone else's show? And he always tries to make a joke (which never goes over) like he's so witty (NOT!).
Go David - great job!
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 04:58 PM
Joeyess and Woke Dude:
Don't even bother with Observer(unless you want out be made public enemy no.1 on his site like he did by smearing Newshonds), he's really Mike from Sickofspin.com, he's been banned before and i'm pretty sure he will be baned again before the day is out.
Mike, why do you even bother to post here? If you can't stand us, then go back to Sickofspin.com and leave us alone.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 04:59 PM
Wait for BO'Re to gloat and pity Letterman tonight. Gonna be a classic.
Posted by: Foggg at January 4, 2006 05:00 PM
woke dude,
I agree that sheehan has a right to speak, but she has become a puppet and lost most of her credibility, except among fringe groups. Sadly she has become a pathetic side-show, who will be out of the spotlight when she no longer serves a purpose or embaresses the cause again. (ie. anti-semitic remarks)
Finally, your analogy using china is not quite appropriate, as the US entered Iraq under numerous UN resolutions, the last of which authorized such action, and based upon international law once Iraq lost it's sovereignty under those laws. I am unaware of any justification for unlawful invasion by the chinese.
Posted by: jim at January 4, 2006 05:02 PM
OReilly has jumped the shark if he's going on Letterman and being bested. I don't think Bill's heart is in it anymore. The mantle has been passed to Sean Hannity,well,it's less a mantle than a shabby overcoat of the type seen most often on flashers,but...
BTW, of the $8 trillion, $4.5 trillion is held by "the public",the rest is interagency debt and half of that is SocSec. The latest figures for the debt distribution is 67% domestic and roughly 1/3 overseas.The notes are not callable.
Posted by: TJM at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
As proclaimed on the "about" section of the NewsBusters website:
NewsBusters.org is a project of the MRC's News Analysis Division, led since 1987 by MRC Vice President for Research and Publications Brent Baker. The Media Research Center was founded on October 1, 1987 by a group of young, determined conservatives headed by L. BRENT BOZELL III. The MRC's other Web projects
- TimesWatch: a site dedicated to documenting and exposing the liberal political agenda of the New York Times
- Free Market Project: auditing the media's coverage of the free market system
- CNSNews.com: the CyberCast News Service, where you get "The Right news. Right now."
So what do I think of NewsBusters & the MRC? It's junk! Junk-junk-junk!
Comedy Central's War on Christmas
by L. Brent Bozell III
CNSNews.com, December 22, 2005
The "war on Christmas" centers primarily on the way in which so many schools and businesses are scrubbing the word and the concept of Christmas from the public square to AVOID ACLU LAWSUITS OR COMPLAINING NON-CHRISTIANS, not a one of them, I might add, I've ever met.
Some say it's not a "war," that it's only an outbreak of multicultural sensitivity. No, it's a war, and it's being waged by those DELIBERATELT ATTEMPTING TO UNDERMINE OUR JUDEO-CHRISTIAN HERITAGE.
The Viacom corporation is an active participant through its Comedy Central channel. Its method is not excessive sensitivity, but wild-eyed insensitivity. This cable sinkhole is ATTACKING CHRISTIANITY WITH CONTEMPTUOUS MOCKERY. It's TV programming that approximates urinating on the Koran, except that is to be condemned, and this is to be celebrated...
http://www.cnsnews.com/bozellcolumn/archive/2005/col20051222.asp
Posted by: -R at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
My understanding is that BOR is an only child so the nephew must be on his wifes side.
They should interview his nephews parents and see how keen they are for their son to go to Iraq
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
TJ: For christ's sakes this isn't about Letterman. Will you please stay on topic or leave. Preferably the latter. And by the way if you hate Letterman so much how do you know so much about him?
Qit talking out of both side of your mouth.
Posted by: edfromned at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
One was informed and reasoned, the other was a bad joke . . .
-------------------------------------------------
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA . .
AND WHICH MARRIED MAN preaches 'morality' and purports to investigate 'sexual predators' on his show whilest 'talking perversion' and paying off young ladies to 'seal the record of taped recordings' . .
Now WHO'S the joke . .
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 4, 2006 05:04 PM
a bad joke, whose fan base are probably as uninformed as he is. My hope is that people take him as unseriously as they do his jokes.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 04:54 PM
wow, you described someone there TJ......in fact you hit the nail on the head, for o'lielly....
i'm not a letterman fan and never have been....however, he made some points with me for daring criticize lil w and o'lielly....i might have to start watching him now......maybe he's trying to re capture some of stewart and colbert's audience?
who can cite the #'s of watchers of these two "entertainment" shows?
i forget, what exactly was o'lielly's "informed and reasoned" response to why we are in iraqnam?
help me out here....TJ?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 05:04 PM
Those quick to go off on BOR seem to forget that Letterman changed the subject more than once when BOR asked him a question. The response "Why are we there in the first place?" came because Letterman didnt have a good answer to BOR's legit questions.
I'm a HUGE Letterman fan... but after last night, I think of him as a complete ass. You don't lash out at a GUEST for God's sake. It's a comedy show. You don't invite someone to your home (a theater in this case) then beat the crap out of them. He could have been much more mature about the whole thing.
He basically divided his whole audience last night. NOT a good thing.
Posted by: Bill at January 4, 2006 05:07 PM
Joeyess and Woke Dude:
Don't even bother with Observer(unless you want out be made public enemy no.1 on his site like he did by smearing Newshonds), he's really Mike from Sickofspin.com, he's been banned before and i'm pretty sure he will be baned again before the day is out.
like the dear leader says........BRING IT ON......I've seen SICKO"S site.......full of racism, class warfare, and nat'lism.....nothing short of Goebells, Himmler, etc.................once again, sicko, bring it on...........god, I can't stand the fact that you people call yourselves Americans when you are out of the country.........oh, that's right, sicko's dear leader didn't even own a passport until Jan. of '01, so maybe sicko is as adept at going abroad as chimpy mcflightsuit.
Posted by: joeyess at January 4, 2006 05:09 PM
My understanding is that BOR is an only child so the nephew must be on his wifes side.
They should interview his nephews parents and see how keen they are for their son to go to Iraq
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
-------------------------------------------------
Scotty,
I didn't know falafel was an only child. So when he said on his own show, 'My own flesh and blood is in the armed forces' (paraphrased), he was LYING?!??
That's low, that's really low.
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 05:10 PM
So Bill,
Let me get this straight -- you don't like it when a TV host has political opinions that divide the audience or attacks his guests.
Have you ever watched Bill O'Reilly or FOX News?
Posted by: -R at January 4, 2006 05:11 PM
I'm a HUGE Letterman fan... but after last night, I think of him as a complete ass. You don't lash out at a GUEST for God's sake. It's a comedy show. You don't invite someone to your home (a theater in this case) then beat the crap out of them. He could have been much more mature about the whole thing.
He basically divided his whole audience last night. NOT a good thing.
Posted by: Bill at January 4, 2006 05:07 PM
where have you been? how about Jeremy Glick? or any of the other countless people that falafel beats up on his show nightly? aren't they "guests" in his home, or studio? think things thru a little better before posting.....cognitive thought......just a hint.
Posted by: joeyess at January 4, 2006 05:14 PM
How do I know so much about Letterman?
Because it's impossible to miss the horrifying imagery of the buck-toothed rabbit-like figure that rekindles terrible childhood memories of some really distasteful horror movies. How can you flip channels and miss such abhorrent imagery?
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 05:16 PM
thats what I saw on another website and a quick check online finds no brothers or sisters
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 05:17 PM
TJ you do seem to hate just about any and everything don't you? DO or have you ever posted anything on this site that's been remotely positive?
Christ on a crutch, even $2.08 has from time to time.
Go take a happy pill or a stiff belt, whatever it takes to alter your Dark Cloud, whoa is me syndrome.
Get a grip.
Posted by: edfromned at January 4, 2006 05:24 PM
wokedude,
Letterman has more viewers precisely because during the late night time slot, a majority of his views are probably drugged up, or profusely drunk to watch anything serious.
And those who tune in want some good laughs, not some misinformed political opinion.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 05:24 PM
He basically divided his whole audience last night. NOT a good thing.
Posted by: Bill at January 4, 2006 05:07 PM
First of all, it sure didn't sound like the audience was divided to me....they were applauding each time dave bested o'lielly....
if you are talking about the tv audience, how do you know....you think you are representative?
and
it isn't letterman who "divided" the american people, it has been the main ingredient of this regime to divide and conquer us for his bosses, the oil and war companies...and this after promising he was a uniter....what bs....
want to start supporting the America that includes not creating unnecessary wars, not torturing, not trampling our bill of rights and constitution?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 05:28 PM
My apologies Bill has a sister named Janet
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 05:28 PM
Joeyess,
I've been on Mike's site as well, even got banned there and read his pathetic rant on how Newshounds, which he called newspuppy, is unfair and biased. Didn't catch the racism, can you give me an example on his site? Thanks.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 05:29 PM
edformed-
Untrue! I've said a bunch of positive things e.g there is a good chance that the NYtimes editor will spend some time in Jail, Bush will never sign the Kyoto treaty, the CIA rendition program will continue, as will the NSA surveillance program.
If these aren't positive things, I don't know what is.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 05:31 PM
Scotty,
Thanks, I appreciate the honesty (and the time you took to research it). Now all we need to know is if Janet's son is in the armed forces?
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 05:33 PM
Because it's impossible to miss the horrifying imagery of the buck-toothed rabbit-like figure that rekindles terrible childhood memories of some really distasteful horror movies. How can you flip channels and miss such abhorrent imagery?
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 05:16 PM
_________________
Are you sure you're not talking about John Gibson?
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 05:34 PM
ah, i see, and exactly how many viewers does dave have compared to o'lielly?
you think anyone who doesn't support lil is on drugs? then, about 70% must be high on drugs, instead of what......??? being blotto on budweisers?
get a clue...(T)roll (J)erky
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 05:34 PM
Also, the intellectual disparity between Oreilly and Letterman was blatantly obvious. One was informed and reasoned, the other was a bad joke, whose fan base are probably as uninformed as he is. My hope is that people take him as unseriously as they do his jokes.
Posted by: TJ
-------------------------------------
You said it, TJ. O'Reilly is PATHETIC. But I think the comment about his fan base was out of line - after all, they're getting their information from him, so they shouldn't be blamed for it...
This clip's a keeper!
Watching O'Reilly sputter and turn red as he tried to push his talking points while Dave kept his cool and called him on the bullshit was priceless. It's just further proof that O'Reilly can't survive outside his hermetically-sealed bubble at Fox News.
I rank this one up there with Jon Stewart bitch-slapping Tucker Carlson! If this sort of thing keeps up, I'm going to have to make myself a compilation DVD of my favorite moments...
DCF
Posted by: DrClayForrester at January 4, 2006 05:35 PM
TJ your just made a fool out of yourself. The New York Times isn't going to have anyone go to jail. If anyone does it will be the leaker. God Damnit. Read the Constitution will you?
Bush will never sign the Kyoto treaty and your grandchildren will breath the shit he's allowing to get dumped into the air. Brilliant!
the CIA rendition program will continue, as will the NSA surveillance program. And your proud of the fact that this fascist is allowed, for now, to do this? What a fucking patroit you are. Again read the Constitution bucko! AAnd make sure you buy gasmasks for your grandkids.
Posted by: edfromned at January 4, 2006 05:40 PM
10 reasons why not to watch fox: 1 - 10 billie o'lieley
Posted by: wisedup at January 4, 2006 05:44 PM
"Mr. Letterman is a smart guy who can spot a phony with telescopic accuracy and expects his guests to bring something to the table. If a guest begins to sink on this show, the bottom is a long way down."
--Bill O'Reilly, February 27, 2001
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21855
Posted by: -R at January 4, 2006 05:52 PM
As someone mentioned above, the story O'Reilly told about the school kids not being allowed to sing Silent Night...that was untrue. O'Reilly lied to Letterman's audience with that story, as he does with so many other things.
[/q]
Mary, I caught that, too. He also repeated the lie that red and green colors were banned from a Plano, TX school.
I hope someone clues Letterman into these discrepencies.
Posted by: Kim, Pb.D at January 4, 2006 06:05 PM
Why don't you all just blow each other?
Letterman proved to me he's an idiot...and most intelligent people agree.
All of you either fail to listen, or you suffer from not being able to look at any other perspective other than your own orgy of liberal BS.
Letterman was bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival. It was awesome.
-Iraq War Vet
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
Observer,
"It's indisputable that Sheehan has labeled terrorists in Iraq "freedom fighters."
What exactly would you call people fighting to free their country from occupation? Just because you don't like the way the name sounds doesn't make it any less true.
“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”
President Reagan (05/31/86)
Posted by: Robrob at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
BTW, of the $8 trillion, $4.5 trillion is held by "the public",the rest is interagency debt and half of that is SocSec. The latest figures for the debt distribution is 67% domestic and roughly 1/3 overseas.The notes are not callable.
Posted by: TJM at January 4, 2006 05:03 PM
---------------------------------------------
That's a neat piece of "mis-information" there...
[Correct me if I'm wrong but if the notes are not callable, that means the US cannot even redeem them...]
callable bond
Definition
A bond which the issuer has the right to redeem prior to its maturity date, under certain conditions
.................................
I'm not smart enough to debate you but I think 60% of what you say is crap....
Bill O'reilly was served fully by David Letterman..
That video is priceless
Posted by: Krusty at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
So Jay, just to set things straight... are you claiming to be an "Iraq War Vet" or were you just posting what someone else wrote?
===================
Letterman was bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival. It was awesome.
-Iraq War Vet
Posted by: Jay
Posted by: Robrobr at January 4, 2006 06:11 PM
Dave’s own audience turned on him last night – if you did’t see that you should be bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival…like Dave.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:12 PM
Captain - M1 tanks. Do you even know what that is? Are you questioning me? I think 100% of what you say is crap. You’d cry and run like a baby if you were in my unit…but then again we’d probably make you.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:16 PM
I enjoy how O'Reilly can never really come out and say "I" when expressing his opinion. It's always "we" or "Talking Points believes..."
That's priceless. Inflate that sack you profess to have and come out and say "I", Bill. It's ok, we won't hate you any less for it. That, folks, would be ridiculous.
Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 06:16 PM
The audience applaued at some of the things O'Reilly said, and at some of the things Letterman said. They applaued the loudest at the 60% comment.
Exactly what you would expect from an audience composed of mostly tourists from diverse areas.
Claiming that Letterman's audience "turned on him" as ridiculous as me saying there was stony silence to each of O'Reilly's comments.
You needn't turn to hyperbole to try to make your point.
Posted by: Kim, Pb.D at January 4, 2006 06:17 PM
Letterman proved to me he's an idiot...and most intelligent people agree. :by Jay at 6:07pm
_________________
Have you read TJ's comments. Good God, if you call those intelligent you need help bad.
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 06:19 PM
it's hilarious that the trolls think billy one a point when dave said he wasn't smart enough to debate him...
heh,heh,heh
it's called sarcasm...and that is what dave does best....
get a clue....
war vet, eh?
where, when, what unit?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:20 PM
You people have no respect.
Did you see David Letterman on O'Reilly? Why not?
That's because the little boy needs to be comforted in his own house. I view that as weakness - attacking your guest. I'd woop Dave's ass.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:20 PM
O'Reilly did get some applause... no question about it. But to even consider that it was louder or more sustained than Letterman's is just being a little bit nutty.
Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 06:22 PM
You people have no respect.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:20 PM
Why don't you all just blow each other?
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
Posted by: Kim, Pb.D at January 4, 2006 06:22 PM
Who gives a crap about applause. Listen to yourselves - you act like little school girls picking apart this and that.
Get off the hippie-lettuce for one day.
Its not cool to hate the President. You hurt all of us trying to protect your weak asses.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:25 PM
you view attacking his own guest as wrong?
how the hell could you possibly support o'lielly then, or hanjobitty or any of the faux propaganda team...
uh, did you get any debriefing since you been back ?
*************************************************
Once Home, Troops Face New Battle
Company A is back from Iraq, but the National Guard veterans find few resources to help them adjust to civilian life.
By Vanessa Gregory and Claire Miller, Special to The Times
PETALUMA, Calif. — For the first time in two years, the soldiers of Company A are home for the holidays.
But normal life still eludes the families of the California National Guard unit — based in this town north of San Francisco — that suffered one of the state's highest casualty rates in Iraq. There are sudden overwhelming anxiety attacks, financial hardships and strained marriages.
"They bring home these empty shells of people, and that's what they are. They left the people they used to be behind," said Rene Gilmore, whose husband, Staff Sgt. Michael Gilmore, spent seven months on tense security patrols in Balad, Iraq, before he was wounded by a roadside bomb explosion.
Like many of the 7,000 California National Guard troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, the soldiers of Company A, 579th Engineer Battalion, returned to a system mainly equipped for weekend drills and periodic call-ups to state emergencies, such as forest fires.
Asked to play a front-line role overseas for the first time since the Korean War, members of the Guard nationwide often feel like second-class citizens when they return home.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-guard27dec27,0,3303217.story?coll=la-home-local
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:26 PM
You apparently gave a crap about applause:
[q]
Dave’s own audience turned on him last night
[/q]
Since there was no booing, apllause was the only way to guage their approval of what either was saying.
[q]
Get off the hippie-lettuce for one day.
[/q]
[q]
You people have no respect.
[/q]
Posted by: Kim, Pb.D at January 4, 2006 06:28 PM
A)Letterman is NOT a comedy...it's late night "talk programming".
B)Letterman kicked Billy's ass.
C) There were NO "terrorists" in Iraq prior to the US occupation and destruction of the country. AFTER the US blows the country back into the stone age, killing around 100,000 civilians...OH! "terrorists" suddenly appear. I think I would call them "freedom fighters" too! We attacked Iraq for one simple reason. We want their oil. We also want to make sure nobody else gets it. Why did we choose Iraq? Because after more than a decade of embargo, it was the weakest country in the oil rich region and they were about to cut a deal with the EU. This administration didn't want that to happen. So, what do you have then? American Imperialism at it's finest. We pay the military/industrial complex billions of tax dollars to destroy the infrastructure of a county, then use tax dollars to pay Brown & Root, Bechtel, and Halliburton to rebuild what we just destroyed. Amazing what is done with our tax dollars!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:28 PM
Woke Dude,
Take your hand off the bong when you type panzie - its hard to read your scribble. Can you write little boy?
O'Reilly has a show that is about hardcore debating, Letterman has a comedy show...what got him so worked up to attack Bill. Bill rode Letterman like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:30 PM
Its not cool to hate the President. You hurt all of us trying to protect your weak asses.
============================================
so you liked Clinton and Carter then, right?
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 06:30 PM
woke dude... nice find. I'd be very interested to see what happens in the coming months and years how soliders cope with coming home from Iraq - especially those who've had their tours extended and extended and extended and... I truly wish them all the best, but there's been some jerking of the chain in regards to soldiers that were supposed to have rotated out of country months ago that aren't going anywhere.
Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 06:31 PM
sorry for the typo. It should have read "destroy the infrastructure of a COUNTRY"
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:31 PM
teddy doesn't agree with you, jay.....
wonder which rights you were fighting for? the right to die for oil profiteering?
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president... is morally treasonable to the American public.
Theodore Roosevelt
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:32 PM
Captain - M1 tanks. Do you even know what that is? Are you questioning me? I think 100% of what you say is crap. You’d cry and run like a baby if you were in my unit…but then again we’d probably make you.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:16 PM
____________
Oh, look. We have a warrior in are presence. I'm sure he can tell us he's been in the military for at least 20yrs. like most trolls. How he's fought in VietNam, and Iraq (both wars).
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 06:32 PM
Jay,
I think it's almost time for you to drop and give us 50, soldier.
Posted by: mac the mouth at January 4, 2006 06:33 PM
so you liked Clinton and Carter then, right?
Scotty,
I serve the Commander and Chief. That's what we do when your at home listening to your records and cracking jokes with your friends. I've killed people for your ass because the Commander and Chief told me to.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:34 PM
Jay,
There are other vets on this site who disagree with you, but that withstanding, most of the other veterans have, when called, stated their unit and whatnot.
Just asking.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 06:34 PM
Dear Jay,
Woke Dude is no "panzie"(sic). He could probably take you out before you knew what hit you. Get your head out of your ass. It makes viewing television much easier.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:35 PM
No man is above the law and no man is below it: nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it.
Theodore Roosevelt
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:35 PM
Letterman is a piss poor debater. O'reilly is a stupid hackjob and anyone with a brain could tear apart everything he says at will. He says Sheehan says that the insurgents and terrorists are freedom fighters. Well guess what... they ARE. Even O'Reilly would be forced to admit that, because he admits that we made a mistake invading that country. And we did. We are a conquering invading force. And like ever other conqueror we come with the message of liberation. That's bull[censored] and I am sick of seeing people spin around that fact for the sake of political correctness. Cindy Sheehan has no need to sound politically correct. Her words do not need to be filtered through some bogus lens of political correctness. There is the truth, and then there is the spin.
So when you accept the fact that we are a conquering invading army, what does that make the victims who fight the conquerors? Bingo. Freedom fighters. Sheehan sees this as the simple and obvious truth that it is and has no motive to dance around these facts. And anyone who believes that we made a huge mistake invading another nation (an act of aggression) must also believe the insurgents are freedom fighters. In reality the word terrorist is the word that is incorrect. If someone were to invade America, destroy our country, and kill thousands of our people, would I give a damn if their media called me a terrorist if I decided to exercise my god given right to resist the invaders?
Posted by: Iconoclast421 at January 4, 2006 06:35 PM
jay
1st...please tell us your unit and where and when you served. because with your smartass mouth, i doubt very much that you are even out of jr. high yet....
you might be a little suprised to learn that all on here are not pot smoking hippies who have never served.....some of us have....and way, way before you were ever born so, "stand down" big talker...
Dissent is the highest form of patriotism...Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:39 PM
Jay blathered:
I've killed people for your ass because the Commander and Chief told me to.
----------------------------------------------------
Very interesting, Jay. Virtually every Veteran on this list, myself included does not talk about "killing people". As far as I am concerned, you just exposed yourself as a POSER Military WANNABE whose only combat experience has been watching Chuck Norris movies. Fuck Off!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:39 PM
"Why don't you all just blow each other?"
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
Internet technology is not yet that advanced.
--------------------------------------------------
"Letterman proved to me he's an idiot...and most intelligent people agree."
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
By "intelligent people" do you mean people as intelligent as you, Jay? I just want to understand your definition of "intelligent". Most of my "intelligent" friends don't often defend their point of view with statements like, "Why don't you all just blow each other?"
--------------------------------------------------
"All of you either fail to listen, or you suffer from not being able to look at any other perspective other than your own orgy of liberal BS."
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
I'm sorry, I wasn't listening. I was to busy ignoring your perspective.
--------------------------------------------------
"Letterman was bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival. It was awesome."
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
Must have missed that part. Maybe it was edited.
--------------------------------------------------
"-Iraq War Vet"
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:07 PM
Bully for you. By the way, sorry about Bush misusing you guys so that he and his corporate friends could get even richer on war contracts and oil. Good luck with that.
Posted by: Gooch_X at January 4, 2006 06:39 PM
ROTFL....Woke Dude, we must be on the same psychic hotline about this Jay kid...LOL
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:41 PM
so you liked Clinton and Carter then, right?
Scotty,
I serve the Commander and Chief. That's what we do when your at home listening to your records and cracking jokes with your friends. I've killed people for your ass because the Commander and Chief told me to.
========================================
you mean Commander-in-chief. BTW you didnt answer my question, did you like Clinton and Carter?
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 06:42 PM
My Grandfather was a Three Star General in the Marines, my father is an Armor Full Coronal, and my brother is a Sonar Tech on Nuclear Submarines.
You have no authority or right to ask me anything about my service civilian. Where did you serve, when did you serve, how many people have you killed (and I mean the one’s up close). Don’t ever ask me questions about my service to this country.
Your kids may come into the service, and when they do I’ll be waiting or someone like me will and I’ll whip that little fucker into a mean killing machine that daddy isn’t going to have shit on. Then ask him what’s he’s done…and watch him stare at you with eyes that say “You could never understand this”.
You could never understand this. And everyone who has served understands me. Bye.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:42 PM
Bye Jay....enjoy your fantasy land...rotflmao!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:45 PM
My dad this, my brother that...you have no right...
Let me tell you something sonny, you have no right and no juice to come on here and start denigrating people as if you think you know who we are and what we have or haven't done...
you, my friend are an idiot...and a liar....otherwise you'd share your qualifications...instead of telling us about your dad and brother...
just another bushit artist
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:46 PM
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:42 PM
_________________
What a little bag of shit. I'd say he is still in JR.High School.
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 06:47 PM
you believe this little shit, sparta?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:48 PM
BTW, Jay...MY father was an Air Force "COLONEL". At least I know how to spell it...LOL
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:49 PM
Jay,
Do not give any specifics about yourself. You don't have to. It is rude and disrespectful to question a veteran's service to his country, especially when those doing the questioning may not even be Americans at all. Why do you want to know the specifics about him? So you can look him up?
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 06:49 PM
Posted by: Jayat 1/4/2006 06:34 PM
A sentence for ya Jay: You're a fucking chickenhawk poser who claims to be a man in the military............just like your hero Chimpy McFlightsuit.
BTW: bragging about killing people is just sick. Real people in the military never brag about that kind of thing.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 06:49 PM
vermontdave,
Want to bet you'll never get an answer on what unit Jay is in? He's just another snot nosed chickenhawk.
Posted by: Didi at January 4, 2006 06:50 PM
btw moron,
i never said a fkn word about how many you kia....just shows what a fkn imposter you really are.....to even talk that way...
Sparta,
do you suppose it's o'lielly>?
is his middle name, jay?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:50 PM
I'll kill one just for you Spartacus next month. I'll look into his eye when he's dying, and tell the arab "Spartacus wanted this". He won't understand but my grin and your name will be the last things he witnesses on this Earth. It will be cool, and you can dream about it when you're lonely.
You never know who your talking to online. You just don't...isn't that crazy.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:50 PM
my father is an Armor Full Coronal, :by Jay
___________________
He could have least learned how to spell it.
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 06:50 PM
I find him kind of sad but funny at the same time, Dude. Hope you had a great holiday season. I took my daughter to Barbados for Christmas and New Years...hence my absence till today.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:51 PM
what a bunch of crap......just like o'lielly...
bullshit from head to toe......
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:51 PM
All veterns here know I'm right. They can understand me. They have been through the suck. Nevermind, I'm the 13 yr. old cheerleader just having fun...the kind you still dream about you little dirty girlie boys.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:53 PM
Jay...put the crack pipe down...slowly. If what you say about your grandpa & dad are true, they must be proud you sick little fuck
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 06:54 PM
Buh-Bye Jay, thanks for the entertainment... Sissies like you rarely hang around very long.
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 06:54 PM
Lil Jay blathered:
I'll kill one just for you Spartacus next month
----------------------------------------------------
Oh! please do, Jay. I just love it when someone wins at playing "Call of Duty" on their XBOX 360...BTW..I thought you were leaving, you little poser, wannabe piece of shit.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 06:55 PM
Troll Jerky
It so happens with your ilk...(chickenhawks) are wannabees who think they can become an imposter at any time and pretend they have served when they didn't
'
you know, like lil w....
as a war vet, i have every right to question anyone who comes on here and proclaims their war service...i don't question vets, just war vets...
and every fkn one has told me where and when he served and with what unit.....we are proud of it...
and it just proves this idiot is an imposter....get it?
not only would he not back up his bullshit, he started talking about his dad and brother....a dead giveaway that he's an imposter.....
just like lil w...and o'lielly...
he brought it up, it's my duty to call him on it for the sake of all of us who have served...
get it?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 06:55 PM
ll veterns here know I'm right. They can understand me.
-----------------------------------------------------
Veterns???
Well I'm a VETERAN & I have no idea what the hell you're rambling on about.... Why don't you just tell the truth... you never put on a uniform in your life.
Posted by: Didi at January 4, 2006 06:56 PM
"You have no authority or right to ask me anything about my service civilian. Where did you serve, when did you serve, how many people have you killed (and I mean the one’s up close). Don’t ever ask me questions about my service to this country."
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:42 PM
You don't sound very proud of your service. Tell me, did something bad happen in Iraq? Sometimes it's good to get these things out in the open. Lets not forget you started this by signing your first post at 06:07 PM as "Iraq war vet".
So why did you join the military? Did you do it because you believe in protecting America and everything it stands for? Or did you do it so that you could go online to any site and demand instant respect because you willingly allowed yourself to be a tool for a corrupt government?
-A Civilian
Posted by: Gooch_X at January 4, 2006 06:56 PM
Also, the intellectual disparity between Oreilly and Letterman was blatantly obvious. One was informed and reasoned, the other was a bad joke, whose fan base are probably as uninformed as he is. My hope is that people take him as unseriously as they do his jokes.Posted by: TJ
-------------------
I agree, TJ, it was obvious that BOR was intellectually uninformed (his Dodgeville, WI bit about the school changing the lyrics to "Silent Night" is false and easy to check out just by going to the school's own website; in addition to intellectually uninformed, add intellectually lazy to the list too).
And, you're right, BOR looked like a bad joke (much like his supposed jest to the city of San Fran calling on Al Qaeda to attack them).
And, yes, BOR's fan base is probably as uninformed as he is (a study out of U of PA shows that Stewart's "stoned slackers" are smarter than BOR's fan base; or, how about the U of MD's PIPA study that showed FOX "news" viewers are more likely to be misinformed than viewers of other news outlets).
One can only hope that people don't take BOR as seriously as he takes himself.
;-)
On Tonight's "O'Reilly Factor" (from BOR.com)...
Talking Points Memo: Culture war on the Late Show
Sounds like BOR is setting the stage to do some non-stopping pimping of his upcoming culture war book due out this year. Gag.
Posted by: dd at January 4, 2006 06:57 PM
Woke Dude wrote:
he brought it up, it's my duty to call him on it for the sake of all of us who have served...
----------------------------------------------------
Can I have an Amen from the Veterans?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaamen!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 07:00 PM
Pussies. I don't care if you believe me or not. I'm man enough to stand up to all of your bullshit while all of u gang up on me. That says enough about me, but I'm still going to kill (KIA bitch!) one for Spartacus. You all act like a bunch of spoiled brats. Why don't u just hug eachother and sing some fag peace song. Out again. I've enjoyed our conversation. Big pussies - take this opportunity to dog me while i'm gone...i'm person i'd woop your ass - believe it.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 07:00 PM
Didi,
I wasn't expecting an answer.
TJ,
C'mon man, do you really believe, "Don't tell them anything, they might not even be from this country."?
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:00 PM
Nevermind, I'm the 13 yr. old cheerleader just having fun...from jay
cheerleader? just like your hero, lil w!
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:01 PM
Can someone delete this clown? His mocking of servicemen and women and the tradition of proud service is getting under my skin.
Posted by: Scotty at January 4, 2006 07:03 PM
By the way,
I don't demand respect...I earn it.
Carry on panzies...slash me to pieces.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 07:04 PM
"a roller coaster at a redneck carnival"
Ok, I'll bite. Does it have udders or wear a saddle?
Posted by: devilbush at January 4, 2006 07:04 PM
Jay,
You couldn't whip Hilary Clinton with a three punch head start... My guess is the Bill O'really could handle you quite easily.... O'really Boozed up and all.
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 07:05 PM
Jay..I bet you're happy about the don't ask, don't tell policy..you couldn't kill people in the Peace Corps
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 07:05 PM
that sounds great Sparta.......glad you had some time in paradise...
spent most of the time with my new granddaughter.....what a blessing to my life.....i watch her every day for a few hours....
glad you made it back safe and sound....
mr big talk wants to declare himself an iraq war vet, but then, can't remember what his unit is???
imagine that, Sparta....you have any trouble remembering?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:07 PM
O/T
On Al Frankens show today, he was talking about the USO tour he just came back from. He mentioned that the Sgt.Major in Iraq is the last guy in the military who was drafted that is still serving.
Kind of a weird mile-stone thing.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:11 PM
Jay, you're full of shit. I come from a family that 'actually' served. My aunt did covert security operations for the Navy. She specialized in the research of better security via information confidentiality and integrity. She was a code breaker. Discharched as Lt. Commander in 1998. My grandfather served in Vietnam on various ships, including the Ike. I don't really understand your aggression, but the fact that your're on o'reily's dick so hard seems to indicate that you can't think for yourself. I can tell you that none of my serving family respects his views. ACTUAL dedicated servicemen and women are focused on their operations, orders and comrades. The fact that you sabre rattle seems to indicate, to me anyway, that you're a military fan boy that WISHES he has the glory but is either too young, to weak or too stupid to be accepted into a unit.
In short, bitch shut the fuck up.
Posted by: Jae Signal at January 4, 2006 07:11 PM
"I don't demand respect...I earn it."
-Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 07:04 PM
Earn it...how? By calling people "pussies", "pansies", and "dirty girlie boys" when you can't come up with facts to support your warped point of view?
Yeah, I bet you "earn" a lot of respect.
Posted by: Gooch_X at January 4, 2006 07:12 PM
I'll look into his eye when he's dying, and tell the arab ...... :by Jay
________________
Yeah there little big man, you could probably do something like that if you broke into a civilians home and caught him sleeping. Now why don't you go back over to the kids site and leave the adults alone.
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 07:12 PM
My prediction is that Letterman's rating will begin to fall promptly.
So does Letterman agree with Cindy Sheehan that people who blow up school kids waiting for candies are "terrorist-sympathisers"?
One could deduce the intensity in the studio, it looked tense and serious, very unlike Jay Leno. Its acceptable to be ignorant, but when you're not sure of something, it is excessively rude to tell your guest "I don't believe you"! Even savages are more courteous, and respectful -not of their guests, but of themselves.
Imagine Letterman's audacity in claiming "it doesn't affect me [the war on christmas]", of course it doesn't! Is he Christian? No! then if it doesn't affect him, why react so defensively to well researched examples of liberals-gone-wild?
Can people now understand why Ann Coulter wrote a best selling book on "How to talk to a liberal if you must"? Letterman was Rude, ignorant, shallow, disrespectful and showed a brazen lack of politesse and poise. Letterman displayed his thuggery on TV, a trait he usually reserves for the wild animals in his ranch.
Letterman is wealthy, but you can make a thug out of a prince, but you can't make a prince out of a thug. Is it little wonder some woman felt obliged to file a restraining order against Letterman?
His ratings will begin to fall, unless he either clarifies his position of the "terror-sympathiser" thing he seemed to agree with sheehan on, and apologises to all veterans.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:13 PM
Because it's impossible to miss the horrifying imagery of the buck-toothed rabbit-like figure that rekindles terrible childhood memories of some really distasteful horror movies. How can you flip channels and miss such abhorrent imagery?
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 05:16 PM
_________________
Are you sure you're not talking about John Gibson?
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 05:34 PM
- Excellent point John it probably was
-I'm a HUGE Letterman fan... but after last night, I think of him as a complete ass. You don't lash out at a GUEST for God's sake. It's a comedy show. You don't invite someone to your home (a theater in this case) then beat the crap out of them. He could have been much more mature about the whole thing.
He basically divided his whole audience last night. NOT a good thing.
Posted by: Bill at January 4, 2006 05:07 PM
David didn't lashout he maintained his composure but he's good and quick and on the mark so he bested o Reilly easily
-Watching O'Reilly sputter and turn red as he tried to push his talking points while Dave kept his cool and called him on the bullshit was priceless. It's just further proof that O'Reilly can't survive outside his hermetically-sealed bubble at Fox News.
DrClay exactly .....well put
Posted by: Ken at January 4, 2006 07:14 PM
one question fore you go, killer...
if you are so damn brave, why would you be scared to share your vast war experience with a few pussies like us?
or was it just a lie? admit it and you'll feel better...
heh,heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:14 PM
jay, if you've served answer this question: what's a forward drill?
Posted by: Jae Signal at January 4, 2006 07:15 PM
vermont dave,
always enjoy your posts which are timely and unique...happy new year and thanks...
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:17 PM
Woke Dude wrote:
imagine that, Sparta....you have any trouble remembering?
----------------------------------------------------
After thirty years of service, I can still name every single unit I served with and most of the names, Dude. We have reunions every year. In our little military community we have interesting ways of ferreting out wannabes. We always ask "what training class were you in and what year?" and "what was your swim buddy's name". ANYONE who went through BUD/S definitely KNOWS those two things. Wannabes will stutter some bullshit answer. We do NOT tolerate "posers" and we go after them and expose them very publicly, usually with TV cameras present!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 07:17 PM
A forward drill is what they do to me when I am on my knees, with my mouth open
Posted by: jay at January 4, 2006 07:18 PM
Correction: So does Letterman agree with Cindy Sheehan that people who blow up school kids waiting for candies are "Freedom fighters"? He needs to clarify his position.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:18 PM
A backside drill is what I do to TJ, when he is on his knees.. Jay
Posted by: jay at January 4, 2006 07:19 PM
jay wrote:
A forward drill is what they do to me when I am on my knees, with my mouth open
----------------------------------------------
Just as I thought. Jay, you ought to know that most military units consider themselves fraternal. They don't take kindly to people bullshitting.
Posted by: jae signal at January 4, 2006 07:20 PM
clarifies his position
heh,heh,heh
you mean like lil w and hallicheney tried to do again today?
what a joke...
ok, ok....do any fkn thing you want.....invade another country, spy on americans, out our own cia, destroy FEMA....
just quit giving speeches....i can't take it anymore.....!
do you suppose that is what they are hoping for?
heh,heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:21 PM
Ok, here's a simpler question, jay. Why are visitors to ANY military base prohibited to take photographs while on base? The forward drill question would only be known by someone who has served in a forward area, i.e. potentially hot.
This question can be answered by anyone who so much as served as cook on Mcquires AFB, now closed.
Posted by: Jae Signal at January 4, 2006 07:23 PM
I'm ashamed and embarrassed if it's true that this Jay character ever served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
Enlisted personnel do not talk about killing as casually as he did. It's something a real man holds personal, to himself, not something to brag about.
I know we have many servicemen/women as our regulars and they do us proud, everyday. They never 'brag' about killing.
And to bring this up because Letterman whooped Falafel's butt last night is uncalled for.
Shame on you.
Letterman is a real American - Falafel is some strange, perverse, whacko shell of a man who sexually preys on young female employees while in his shower, not far from where his wife and two babies sleep. He's pathetic.
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 07:24 PM
Woke Dude...did you catch Jesse Ventura on tv the other night? He claims to be planning to leave the country if things don't change.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 07:24 PM
TJ
just so simple...answer this...
if China invades and occupies the US because we owe them a trillion......
and you and i fight to end the occupation.......
would we be freedom fighters?
by the same token,
when our military leaders decide to create a free fire zone, where every living man, woman, child, old person, baby, dog, cat and plant is obliterated.......or when our bombs hit a hospital, a school or a mosque,.......would you characterize our soldiers as terrorists, too?
just wondered what the criteria in your world is for "freedom fighter" and "terrorist"
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:24 PM
Seems like Jay and TJ, got themselves a room... They should make a cute couple........
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 07:25 PM
EtJ wrote:
Seems like Jay and TJ, got themselves a room... They should make a cute couple........
---------------------------------
You know what they say about overly aggressive military types. Ever see American Beauty?
Posted by: Jae Signal at January 4, 2006 07:27 PM
sparta...
i missed it, ventura was a breath of fresh air for awhile...but i think he found out that unless we take america back from the money and lobbyists.....it's impossible that it will ever be for, of, and by the people again....
Abramoff is just one who got caught out of many who have subverted our govt to reap huge profits
pimps=oil and war and healthcare industries
ho's=lil w, hallicheney and most of the elected representatives
john's=US taxpayers
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:29 PM
woke dude,
What ever I'd do, I'll never, ever, strap myself up and blow up school buses, or trailes of kids witing for candies, or hospitals! How low can you guys sink in your ridiculous and misplaced moral relativism? To grant these evil souls any credibility is beyound any sliver of comprehension. You simply can't make this nondense up, unbelievable.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:29 PM
Woke,
Happy New Years to yourself and congrats on the new addition.
ps. I still don't think our new friend has said what unit he served with.
Jay, you were armor? The local Gaurd battalion from my neck of the woods is armor and they're still there. Who where you with?
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:30 PM
Must have been a quickie ?!?!?!?
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 07:31 PM
TJ...take your meds..you're babbling again buddy
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 07:31 PM
Jay was with the wet panty brigade of the bush cheerleader squad.. The fuhrer can do no wrong, in jay's world.
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 07:33 PM
this just shows how ignorant you are of war, buddy...
because war is hell, war is a mistake of the worst kind and guess what....you don't ever know what your handiwork will destroy despite your best intentions...
what is unbelieveable is how you have swallowed the "evil"...them or us bullshit spread by the neocons....they hate our freedom, eh? as we occupy their country and oil....
you are really confused if you can't simply answer the questions i posed to you....
because the truth is that war is evil...war is the real enemy...
iraqi insurgents are your "evil" but if our troops do exactly the same thing.....kill women and children...it's just a mistake?
if we defend our homeland against an occupier, we are freedom fighters, but the iraqis are terrorists??
who invaded whom?
you think we haven't killed thousands of innocents by invading iraq?
you are seriously deluded.....
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:36 PM
And as an American, I cannot and should not be neutral, or fair in my characterization. It is unpatriotic to either see this war on terror through the eyes of the homicide bombers instead of the civilian victims of such their savagery, as is usually the case throughout history, where terrorists always win the sympathy of liberals.
From the child rapes in the Congo, to the murderous regimes of some of the world's worst dictators.
And please tell me I didn't read a supposed war veteran insinuate that US military targets hospitals and civilians. Are you suggesting that, Mr Woke Dude the veteran?
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:36 PM
you need to re read my post if you want to twist what i say, that's typical of your yellow ilk....
the entire point was that you cannot control what happens once the pandora's box of war is opened....
and again i ask you....who opened that box in iraqnam and why?
oil
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:39 PM
woke dude,
Your view of war from the warrior perspective is certainly different from my view of war from the civilian perspective. Civilian observer in the combat zone, not as an ignoramus civilian like Letterman.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:40 PM
terrorists win the sympathy of liberals?
what an ass!
i could say fascists win the sympathy of conservatives, eh?
how many innocents have been killed by fascists?
one more question you'll refuse to answer....
of all those innocent people dead in iraqnam now...
how many would have died if lil w and his neocon cowboys would not have invaded and occupied?
answer or just quit addressing me chickenhawk
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:42 PM
Boy, it's very apparent that David Letterman really touched quite a few nerves out there!
Go David! Let's shove these neocons out of power - using every resource we can.
Great job.
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 07:44 PM
TJ,
Letterman makes some valid points. You chant the government mantra provided to fox. This site is about the government controlled fox news channel, their propaganda. The attempts at brain-washing the American sheeple. Trolls such as yourselves underline the effectiveness of the brain-washing of America. Incapable of thought, merely parroting what fox news tells them. Think for yourself, or be chewed up by the machine.
Posted by: EtJ at January 4, 2006 07:44 PM
TJ,
You have stated in the past that you believe in the qualities of isolation. Now, you seem to say that we should be saving the planet. Which one is it?
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:45 PM
TJ please quit. Let others read this blog for themselves to make up their own minds.
They will dog us when we're gone anyway (big suprise), and potentially edit this blog to make themselves look better, but I think people can decide for themselves.
Go Horns. Watch the game you nerds. Christ!
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 07:46 PM
what pandora's box? You either TARGET SCHOOL BUSES FILLED WITH CHILDREN, or you don't. You either remain indifferent to happy kids waiting for candies or you're not.
To blur that line is not surprising, but it is morally reprehensible and unforgivable.
You can oppose this war, you can oppose Bush's policies, but is it repugnant, egregious and despicable to blur that line and draw preposterous moral relativisms where they don't exist.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:47 PM
O/T
From the child rapes in the Congo, to the murderous regimes of some of the world's worst dictators
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:36 PM
-----------------------------------------------
Actually, the problems in the Congo kicked off after the demise of MOBUTU Sese Seko...
Mobutu was alledgedly supported by the US (to supposedly prevent the march of communism) and the world turned a blind eye to his crimes.. once he lost power.. all hell broke lose
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1120825.stm
The US needs to stop messing with other countries affairs & if they do they should atleast have the decency to clean up...
I thought the thread was Bill O'reilly & Letteman
Posted by: Krusty at January 4, 2006 07:51 PM
btw,
hope that "i had to stick up for america and lil w" works for you when the good lord asks you why you didn't stand up for "humanity" instead of torture, invasion and war...
It always amazes me how deluded the indoctrinated are....
on the one hand...neocons are able to gain their blind allegiance to a nationalistic fascist regime
while at the same time, the corporations ruin our labor market declaring it a global world.....
ever think about that contradiction, TJ?
why is it ok for the corporations to move all the jobs to India or 3rd world countries, break our unions and communities, praising global economies......(although they really moved out to take advantage of no benefits given, no work conditions needed, no pay bargaining, no safety.......in the name of globalism
but yet americans are invading, occupying, dying for some nationalistic nebulous terror goals that the corporations don't have to worry about, but in fact are profitting from daily....
splain that contradiction to me TJ
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:51 PM
"You can oppose this war, you can oppose Bush's policies, but is it repugnant, egregious and despicable to blur that line and draw preposterous moral relativisms where they don't exist."
TJ, perhaps you haven't heard that most attacks in Iraq are only against the occupying troops. Say 90% or so. But most aren't successful, due to training, body armor, and so forth. So the few against civilian targets tend to be more deadly. They're not ALL killing children, of course!
Posted by: Alex Thorpe at January 4, 2006 07:53 PM
I heard BOR's radio show a few mintes ago and he played a VERY edited version of this interview. Of course he made himself look like he creamed Letterman.
Posted by: ganesha at January 4, 2006 07:55 PM
TJ
quit swallowing the bs
how do you know what the target is meant to be on either side?
you think the razing of falluja wasn't a war crime?
i'm telling you so you know....
there are NO WINNERS IN A WAR
there is no good and evil....just evil, destruction, killing, maiming
do us both a favor ok...view this video...it's something they don't show us on msm, let alone faux...
http://www.worldworld.com/xmas.html
Honor the warriors, not the war
vvaw.org
ivaw.org
optruth.org
mfso.org
gmfp.org
veteransforpeace.org
veteransforcommonsense.org
veteransunited.org
Peace Out
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 07:57 PM
woke dude,
It isn't okay for neither scenario to happen.
Again, I respect any principled opposition to the Iraq war. But to blur that line between the pure terror unleashed by these homicide-bombers that target innocent civilians where they can grace the screens of al Jazeera, and accidental civilian casualties that are often met with emergency medical care by US soldiers is what I find unacceptable.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:57 PM
TJ,
I'm sorry, but you're being incoherent. And your new friend isn't helping.
Killing is justified only in the act of self defence. A person who straps bombs to themselves is just as wrong as the leaders of nations who order their young to go into battle for corporate profit.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:59 PM
Letterman is wealthy, but you can make a thug out of a prince, but you can't make a prince out of a thug. Is it little wonder some woman felt obliged to file a restraining order against Letterman?
Your joking TJ right?
A woman who receives secret messages over the TV? If you think this is a valid argument you more obtuse than I thought.
Posted by: theroachman at January 4, 2006 08:05 PM
you are probably right Krusty. sorry if i added to the off topic....
however, sheehan and the iraq war are somewhat the topic due that being what letterman and o'lielly were discussing....eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:06 PM
"It is unpatriotic to either see this war on terror through the eyes of the homicide bombers instead of the civilian victims of such their savagery, as is usually the case throughout history, where terrorists always win the sympathy of liberals."
-Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:36 PM
How exactly is trying to understand the motivation of SUICIDE bombers "unpatriotic"? Unlike you, TJ, I don't believe folks just drop out of the womb as evil people. It is important to understand WHY people use violence against other people. It is important to understand their grievances, whether they are valid or not, so that we can recognize the deeper problems that may exist. We are constantly being told by the right-wing echo chamber that terrorists are evil and must be killed. Terrorists are probably taught that we (westerners) are born evil and we should all be killed as well. With both sides using extreme violence to kill "evil" it is hard for someone like myself to know who is right and who is wrong. I don't condone violence of any kind. Whether it is "them" retaliating against "us" or "us" retaliating against "them". But we have to understand that the USA has done some pretty shady things that have negatively affected the poorest of many third world countries.
Posted by: Gooch_X at January 4, 2006 08:08 PM
well, you have to have your "justification" for going to war, so you refuse to see that these "terrorists" are nothing but powerless people who believe enough in their cause to die for it....
which is what all war is based on....fundamentalist idiots being manipulated by corporations to do their bidding and make those profits...
hmmm, think on it tho....at least they have the guts to put themselves on the line for what they believe in...
unlike lil w, hallicheney and most of the neocons and republicans who adorn congress....
and their shills, like you...
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:13 PM
I love those Jays...and TJs etc...
Their icon/prophet....couldn't even figure out the British military intelligence isn't "M-One-6"....
I was laughing all through his stuttering......
Actually, Letterman should have more fun at BOR expense...... contact the Plano and other school districts that BOR claimed were anti-christians...and let them respond.
For BOR to claim some journalistic pedigree is laughable....
Posted by: gnusman53 at January 4, 2006 08:15 PM
well put, goochx
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:15 PM
And what exactly is this cause these "powerless" terrorists are dying for ? To make Iraq safe for Sadaam Hussein and his henchmen again ? Or is it perhaps to turn Iraq into the new Afghanistan so Al Queda and their ilk can have a new safe haven to operate from since we destroyed the one they planned 9/11 from ?
Posted by: tony at January 4, 2006 08:20 PM
tony, hey, how ya doin'?
tell us,
if China invaded and occupied the US and you and I fought the invading army, what would we be fighting for?
would we be trying to turn the us into the new afghanistan?
or just drive out the occupier?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:23 PM
does it make sense to you to remove a secular dictator who the religious extremists hated to the point that they would not deal with him.....
and turn the country over to the very same religious extremists so that it is now an ISLAMIC THEOCRACY controlled by IRAN?
that make sense to you, tony?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:26 PM
Instead of responding with a tired old talking point how about just trying to answer the question ? What cause are these "powerless terrorists" who you have so much sympathy for dying for ? Do you know ? Do you even care ? Or are you okay with their cause as long as they think its something worth dying for, even if it isn't a cause that is in the best interests of the people of Iraq , American citizens or the world community?
Posted by: tony at January 4, 2006 08:29 PM
"And everyone who has served understands me."
As someone who served during the (First) Gulf War, I certainly understand you, Jay. You are a sad, sack seeking out fulfillment by pretending to be something that you are not. There are many different political opinions in the military, but there is one constant. Respect. You have shown no respect from word one in this thread. You may whine that others here have shown you little respect, but if you truly were an officer in the U.S. Army it wouldn't matter what others did. Our officers carry themselves with a military bearing that is clear in all they do. You sir, do not possess it.
Please stop pretending to be one of our nation's finest. Even if someone were to believe your masquerade, the impression they received would only reflect poorly on those who are most worthy of our respect.
Posted by: Jeff at January 4, 2006 08:30 PM
oh, yeah, what about afghanistan now?
the taliban totally banned opium production.....
now, the war lords are again supplying the world's largest supply of heroin....capitalism, eh?
.....warlords......(you know the ones we allowed to capture osamabeenforgotten instead of finishing the job ourselves)
now, we are turning it over to NATO....
get it yet?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:32 PM
Mr. O'Rielly,
I commend you for stand up to Letterman.......I also wrote him and suggested that he not use the word "Christ" in vain. It was so unnecessary on his part to try to give this kind of emphasis on his invalid statement.
Keep up the good work Bill because the world needs to hear more of what you have to say; no matter how you say it, it needs to be said.
God bless you!
PS We faithfully watch your program.
Posted by: Dianne Rossman at January 4, 2006 08:33 PM
"Which politics-savy American doesn't watch the Oreilly Factor?"
Thanks, TJ! That was the best laugh-line I've read in such a long time.
Posted by: Al at January 4, 2006 08:34 PM
Well stated Jeff
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 08:35 PM
Wokup,
Give Tony a chance man, I think it's Jay's cousin.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 08:35 PM
ah, divert eh?
no tony, you answer me...
what possible reason did we have to INVADE AND OCCUPY a sovereign nation?
oil
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:35 PM
which just happens to be the same question letterman shut o'lielly up with, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:36 PM
right on, vermont...
i get riled up when people pretend to be war vets...
my bad...
heh,heh
it is actually to be pitied, rather..eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 08:37 PM
I saw most of the Letterman segment off of the Political Teen website. Although the tape began after the war on Christmas items, the rest of the interview was as Deborah describes. Letterman was composed and articulate. BLO received only two rounds of applause while Letterman garnered applause after most of his statements.What Letterman said about Cindy Sheehan was particularly poignant - words to the effect that if you haven't lost anybody to this war, you can hardly speak for her. BLO said that critics of Bush need to "stop with the lies" - a piece of advice that Mr. Bill obviously does not heed with regard to his own bloviating. Letterman's remark about the 60% was absolutely priceless.
Welcome back Spartacus. I was concerned about you as your reasoned commentary was noticeably absent for a while. Hope you had a great vacation. Also hope that Jay is gone from this thread. His delusional and violent postings serve no purpose other than to hijack the thread. I don't agree with TJ on anything; but his postings are, at least, grounded in the real world. Anyway, the Letterman exchange demonstrates why Mr. Falafal's appearances outside of Fox are limited to brief "comedy" segments and not real meaningful debate.
Posted by: claudo at January 4, 2006 08:38 PM
Posted by: Dianne Rossman at January 4, 2006 08:33 PM
Does his good work include sexually harrassing young female employees??
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 08:38 PM
Posted by: Dianne Rossman at January 4, 2006 08:33 PM
that’s funny, Are you one of the intellects TJ was taking about?
Posted by: theroachman at January 4, 2006 08:41 PM
Dianne Rossman this one is for you:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html
Posted by: kdog at January 4, 2006 08:43 PM
Their icon/prophet....couldn't even figure out the British military intelligence isn't "M-One-6"....
Posted by: woke dude
-------------------------------------------------
Woke dude,
I didn't hear this when I watched the program. I think uk Dave was talking about it on the off topic forum. Apparently it's MI6 as in Military Intelligence and falafel changed the 'I' to a ONE.
That is too funny - falafel doesn't even know that the name stands for Military Intelligence.
What a pea brain he is - and he's someone people listen to?
Letterman doesn't boast about being an intellect when it comes to politics, but he does keep abreast. But for the idiot, Falafel, to say M-ONE-SIX is just too funny for words!!!
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 08:45 PM
Wonder what "good works" Dianne is talking about? She is upset about Letterman taking the name of Christ in vain; but is obviously unconcerned about O'Reilly's constant lies and denigration of those who don't agree with him. And sexual harrassment, on the scale of commandments, should rank higher than taking the Lord's name in vain. Maybe Dianne wants BLO to talk dirty to her!
Posted by: claudo at January 4, 2006 08:50 PM
Dianne wrote:
I also wrote him and suggested that he not use the word "Christ" in vain.
----------------------------------------------------
In vain according to who? Taking the "Lord's" name in "vain" has nothing to do with what Letterman said!
You might want to check out the book Sermon on the Mount by Emmett Fox.
Dianne's post is another CLASSIC example of a christian not having a fucking clue about her own religion. "Well...this is what they taught me in blble class is bullshit". If you're going to use the "Bible" in your post, at least be intelligent enough to understand what it actually SAYS!!!!!!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 4, 2006 09:31 PM
Krusty, don't get in any financial discussions,you're innumerate. You obviously know absolutely nothing about the government debt.
Posted by: TJM at January 4, 2006 09:43 PM
Tony,
We do not sympathise with terrorists, but your hero Ronnie Regan did............funded and equipped Saddam's ass, along with Osama Bin Forgotton and his crew...............what say you now?
Dianne,
The world needs to hear more of Red-Baiter Bill's hate speech like this?
".........and if Al-Queada comes in here and blows you guys up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Franscico. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."
Seriously, Dianne, get some mental help.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 4, 2006 09:55 PM
I'm not the Jay that was posing as an Armor Captain.
Up until now I've been just reading along, and I have noted some similarities between the discussion here and nearly all of the partisan (both sides) talk-radio shows.... nobody is willing to complete a discussion. Somebody always reverts to changing the subject, picking on some insignificant statement, or outright hostility.
As an example 'tony' asked a reasonable question - what are the Iraqis fighting back against? What could Joe average Iraqi hope to gain by attacking US troops? Who else, but an enemy of the US - call them terrorists, if you will - would want the US to leave Iraq and thereby leave them to be overtaken by someone else? I'm not a total supporter of the war, mostly I'm just sick of it, but that's a decent question.
Posted by: Different Jay at January 4, 2006 10:21 PM
Does Letterman put his pencil in everybody's drink before they come out, or was this a unique and peculiar foresadowing of the disdain he'd display for his guest?
Posted by: half-vast conspirator at January 4, 2006 10:21 PM
Different Jay,
Then I ask you this question - hypothetically - if China invaded the U.S. and they had a much better army than ours, but said our leader was evil and we needed a regime change and they were here to help facilitate that.
What would you be fighting against?
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet, PbD at January 4, 2006 10:44 PM
As an example 'tony' asked a reasonable question - what are the Iraqis fighting back against? :by Different Jay
___________________
Well answer this question. Why are Americans fighting the Iraqis?
Posted by: john t at January 4, 2006 10:44 PM
woke dude,
It isn't okay for neither scenario to happen.
Again, I respect any principled opposition to the Iraq war. But to blur that line between the pure terror unleashed by these homicide-bombers that target innocent civilians where they can grace the screens of al Jazeera, and accidental civilian casualties that are often met with emergency medical care by US soldiers is what I find unacceptable.
Posted by: TJ at January 4, 2006 07:57 PM
TJ,
I'm sorry, but you're being incoherent. And your new friend isn't helping.
Killing is justified only in the act of self defence. A person who straps bombs to themselves is just as wrong as the leaders of nations who order their young to go into battle for corporate profit.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 4, 2006 07:59 PM
Actually, I think TJ's point is lucid and hardly incoherent.
Let's assume two scenarios:
1. Evil government decides to invade and impose will on other country by attacking militarily, targeting specifically combatants.
2. Factions within said country attack civilian men, women and children within their own country withthe intent of disrupting the momentum of scenario 1.
Now, let's agree that both scenarios are bad. Are you saying that scenario 1 is equivalent to #2?
Also, if killing is only justified for self defence then I assume that the kliling we did in WWII was unjustified, as Hitler was not an impending threat to us at the time? I'm not drawing an analogy between iraq and WWII - just trying to see if your "killing justification" is an absolute or not.
Posted by: Todd at January 4, 2006 10:52 PM
Different Jay,
Technically the question asked by 'tony' is off-topic. That may be why most people won't address it here. I hope the newshounds don't mind too much if I do address it.
"What could Joe average Iraqi hope to gain by attacking US troops?"
I don't know how they think such attacks are beneficial. I can only guess (which is all anyone can do really, because even when they issue a press release explaining why, would you believe them?). As a starting to my guess I am going to assume that they are acting with some semblance of logic (if they are acting illogically any and all reasons are up for grabs).
1: They think attacking is better than not attacking.
2: Not attacking the US must be leading to a conclusion of the war that they don't want. Possible conclusions they don't like?
a.) They believe the US isn't going to leave, and will remain as the explicit rulers of Iraq.
b.) They believe the US is going to leave, but will retain implicit rule by leaving a puppet government in control that will keep 'them' (whoever they are) in a political/power position they don't like.
c.) Again US withdraws, but they feel the elected government will keep 'them' in a political/power position they don't like.
These are general classes, and do not address specific motivations, but as I said before, I can't address specifics.
We are used to living in a democracy. We like it. There are very, very few Americans that don't think we have the best governmental system out there. But guess what, even some Americans out on the political extremes would overthrow our government if they could (I live in Montana, so most of our whackos lie on the far right, but there are also whacko lefties out there too). These are people who live here, and still are able to get a warped view of what democracy means for a country.
Now imagine that instead of being used to living in our democracy, you were used to a dictator. You have a developed, and justifiable, distrust of governments. When some of these whackos approach you about joining their cause, will you join them out of a fear of government, a religious belief, revenge of a killed loved one, a feeling of acceptance/importance, some combination of these, or some other unrelated reason? Even if you don't, how many recruits do they need to fill the ranks of their insurgency? Current estimates hover around 20,000 (95% of which are Iraqi, from the Pentagon, so the average insurgent is Iraqi). In a country with about 25,000,0000, that is less than 1 in 1,000 joining the insurgency.
One in a thousand. In a country so abused by the rule of Saddam, a country rife with religious and ethnic problems, a country that is looking at the power of the US and wondering why they still lack what we call the basic amenities of modern life (constant food supply, clean water, electricity, etc.) is it that hard to see how one in a thousand has been led astray.
Will the insurgency/attacks lead them where they want to go? No, not with so few. They can only hope to keep the insurgency alive and growing.
And so that is why I believe they do what they do. It is as futile as those who roam the woods in the northwest of my state thinking that they will ever secure a piece of the US for themselves. Yet they are still out there (both here and in Iraq).
If you think that they should be smarter and see the futility... well I wish they were smarter too.
Posted by: Jeff at January 4, 2006 11:02 PM
"As an example 'tony' asked a reasonable question - what are the Iraqis fighting back against?"
Simple - they seen a foreign occupying power from the other side of the world in their country, see that they practice torture, see that they lock up Iraqi citizens with little or no cause, no charge, and no recourse. They also see a drop in the quality of their life as basic utilities like electricity, water, and sewage are more scarce than before, and unemployment is higher, up to 50% at one time, though I think it's improved. The Iraqi women in particular see their freedoms more restricted, and their dress code, as the nation becomes more fundamentalist. And they hear on the news that all this happened to them because a Saudi hiding in Afghanistan told people to fly planes into a few buildings. Is it any wonder that they want the occupation to end, by any means necessary?
Posted by: Alex Thorpe at January 4, 2006 11:09 PM
~~~~~~~~~
take this opportunity to dog me while i'm gone...i'm person i'd woop your ass - believe it.
Posted by: Jay
~~~~~~~~~~
I love internet thugs. They are my favorite.
Posted by: Dr. Matt at January 4, 2006 11:30 PM
I didn't hear this when I watched the program. I think uk Dave was talking about it on the off topic forum. Apparently it's MI6 as in Military Intelligence and falafel changed the 'I' to a ONE.
That is too funny - falafel doesn't even know that the name stands for Military Intelligence.
What a pea brain he is - and he's someone people listen to?
Letterman doesn't boast about being an intellect when it comes to politics, but he does keep abreast. But for the idiot, Falafel, to say M-ONE-SIX is just too funny for words!!!
Scarlet, PbD
Posted by: Scarlet
=================================================
Bill O'Reilly did refer to the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) as (M-one-6). There is also MI5, which is the security service.
No wonder the intelligence America used from the UK was wrong if America used M16 for their reasoning to go to war with Iraq.
Security Service (MI5), based at Thames House in London, is the UK's security intelligence Agency, responsible for protecting the UK, its citizens and interests, at home and overseas, against the major threats to national security. Eliza Manningham-Buller is/was responsible for the work of the Security Service, for which the Home Secretary has Parliamentary accountability.
Yhe Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), based at Vauxhall Cross in London, is primarily responsible for gathering intelligence outside the UK in support of the government's security, defence, foreign and economic policies. John Scarlett is/was responsible for the work of SIS, for which the Foreign Secretary is accountable in Parliament.
Posted by: Nick Caine at January 4, 2006 11:37 PM
Ah, you Americans really crack me up. On every single bloody issue you maintain your conservative or liberal ideals to the point of ridiculousness. I can't understand for the life of me how anyone can call Iraqi insurgents freedom fighters, or how anyone can not understand why calling them freedom fighters is wrong. The irony of the same people who criticised the Right for manipulating Terri Schiavo not pointing out how the Left are doing the exact same thing with Cindy Sheehan is overwhelming.
Posted by: Milton Keynes Chris at January 4, 2006 11:38 PM
where you from milt?
see, in this country, if some other country invaded and occupied us, i feel pretty certain we would fight to rid ourselves of the occupier
pretty hard for you to understand, eh?
hmmm?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 11:50 PM
furthermore,
your analogy is so false...
first, terri schiavo was unable to make decisions or speak for herself.....and her husband was carrying out what he said were her wishes....what right did they have to contest that over and over and over......???
and
mrs. sheehan is plenty able to ask what her son died for? and why should other people's sons have to continue to die?
ooooooH,,,,,,how dare her, eh?
where's the analogy? who is using her? just other people who believe this war was wrong and unnecessary...
see, what you don't seem to get is that mrs. sheehan is part of a larger organization of mother's who lost sons......as well as, military families speak out.org, veterans for peace.org, iraq veterans against the war.org, vietnam veterans against the war.org, veterans for common sense.org....
see, there are thousands of us, all vets or their families asking the same question....
you want to call us all some vast left wing conspiracy?
you better think about it, cause alot of us served.....every organization i listed is comprised of veterans....
are we using mrs. sheehan?
Posted by: woke dude at January 4, 2006 11:57 PM
The following is reported by TVSpy.com....
Letterman vs. O'Reilly
Letterman knocks O'Reilly out of his spin zone.
K.L.
Salon.com
On his show last night, Bill O'Reilly jovially encouraged viewers to catch his appearance later in the evening on "The Late Show With David Letterman," promising they would find it "fascinating." It was. And the only reason for O'Reilly to plug it was to try to get out early, appear unscathed, and start spinning. Good luck. We cannot wait to hear how he tries to explain it away on his next show.
What precisely was it that made Letterman's takedown of O'Reilly so satisfying? Was it the way Letterman casually called out O'Reilly's war against "the war against Christmas" for the dopey sham it is -- comparing it to a movement to put diapers on horses? The way audience members cackled aloud when O'Reilly claimed he had no friends in the Bush administration? How Letterman brushed off O'Reilly's bush-league attempt at ideological sparring with the inarguable line of defense we've all wanted to try out on a drunk uncle or Rush-fueled neighbor: "I don't believe you." And then later: "I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling that about 60 percent of what you say is crap." Personally, I most cherished the way Letterman's level gaze and head-on attack unnerved O'Reilly. Listen to his voice quaver through his lame Memphis library anecdote, and watch his fidgeting hands and knee; those are the shaky motions of a man who knows he has been figured out.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 5, 2006 12:04 AM
I'm from Milton Keynes (a crappy little city in England full of roundabouts). I perfectly understand why the Iraqis call the insurgents freedom fighters in the same way that I understand why the Viet Cong were called freedom fighters by the Vietnamese or why the final soldiers in Berlin might have been called freedom fighters by the Germans. My point is that no matter how wrong the war in Iraq is, its just a little insensitive and Jane Fonda-esqe to call the people blowing up your, and our, troops, as well as indiscriminately killing Iraqi men,women and children, 'freedom fighters'. It glorifies them just a tad.
Posted by: Milton Keynes Chris at January 5, 2006 12:11 AM
Watch David Letterman last night, will never ever watch again. Might not be much, but I know I will not give that moron any ratings, and that will make me feel good. For him to defend a woman that has put down this country, called insurgents freedom fighter, and so many other things,if he would just do his homework on everything she has been saying he could not justify her words. Just shows that Letterman just don't get it. He has his flunkys do all the research, opens his big mouth and thinks he is funny. Like I said, he just don't get it.
Posted by: Marie at January 5, 2006 12:13 AM
Agreed the manipulation of Terri Schiavo was a lot worse. But there are clear similarities between Sean Hannity using her to further his agenda, and Michael Moore using Cindy Sheehan, who I do have a lot of sympathy and respect for, to further his. I hope you can understand where I'm coming from.
Posted by: Milton Keynes Chris at January 5, 2006 12:16 AM
woke dude said:
mrs. sheehan is plenty able to ask what her son died for? and why should other people's sons have to continue to die?
ooooooH,,,,,,how dare her, eh?
Please point out anyone who said Sheehan shouldn't be asking anything she wants. Even your demon Oreilly says she has that right.
People only get pissed when she starts spouting shit like the US isn't worth dying for (ever) and sympathy for "freedom fighters" BS.
At that point, she goes from legitimate argument to retarded rhetoric.
Posted by: Razer at January 5, 2006 12:21 AM
no, i can't understand where you are coming from bro...
michael moore has not needed mrs. sheehan to point out the idiocy of this lil w regime....
you are way off base in my humble opinion...
i am telling you plain...
mrs. sheehan is backed by thousands of veterans and their families.....
no one is "using' her to do anything but point out what our weak kneed press refuses to.....
that this war was unnecessary and being created by the oil and war companies for profit....plain and simple
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 12:23 AM
I think thats pretty naive but its your opinion.
Posted by: Milton Keynes Chris at January 5, 2006 12:26 AM
she can say whatever she wants and so can you....
but you know, it's pretty fkn weak to attack the mother of a dead soldier and smear her over and over as a media whore on all the rw shows....
if it's necessary to do that instead of just answering the question honestly.....that says alot right there, and thousands of americans saw the weakness and lies emanating from people who attack war veterans, their mothers, or anyone else who dares question their policies and actions...
and their propaganda arm, including o'lielly, hannity, and rush addict.....have enlisted many just like you to demonize the mother who's son died for what?
wake up or join up
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 12:28 AM
better yet, send your child, your brother/sister, your loved one to die
for what?
an ISLAMIC THEOCRACY who will bow down to the oil companies and allow them to harvest the iraqis' natural resource....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 12:30 AM
"People only get pissed when she starts spouting shit like the US isn't worth dying for (ever) and sympathy for "freedom fighters" BS."
She never said the US isn't worth dying for, I've seen this misquoted a lot. She did say "This country isn't worth dying for", with Iraq being the country in question.
Myself, I have a ton of sympathy for the Hell that the Iraqis have been put through in the past few years. I'd never want anything like it to happen to me, or anyone else I know.
Posted by: Alex Thorpe at January 5, 2006 12:31 AM
"Watch David Letterman last night, will never ever watch again."
.............................
Sounds like Letterman did a good job. The righties around here are all in a tizzy. Seems B.O. got an intellectual high colonic.
Posted by: DaveO at January 5, 2006 12:31 AM
oh, you think i'm naive eh?
and mrs. sheehan and all these organizations made up of war veterans who have been there, done that....
we are the naive ones, eh??
typical rw attitude toward vets.....
they only respect the ones they can still send to war to fight for their profits...rich old men...sending young poor men and women to die for them.....
when they return......it's another story entirely....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 12:34 AM
No I don't think they're naive, just you.
Posted by: Milton Keynes Chris at January 5, 2006 12:38 AM
Love your comments, woke dude.
Posted by: DeppFan at January 5, 2006 12:38 AM
My favorite quotes from O'Reilly: "Anybody who calls those terrorists 'freedom fighters' will not be welcome on my show." He actually got applause for that! Woo-hoo! Another quote: "I respect your opinion. Now I think you should respect mine." Dave's response: "Uhh..Umm...". And when he asked Dave to back up his claim that 60% of what Bill says is crap, Dave replied, "Well, I don't watch your show." Slam dunk. Shattered the backboard. You just schooled, Letterman.
Posted by: Damail at January 5, 2006 12:43 AM
Dang it. I meant to say - you just GOT schooled, Letterman
Posted by: Damail at January 5, 2006 12:45 AM
Whacko Jay tried to write:
take this opportunity to dog me while i'm gone...i'm person i'd woop your ass - believe it.
----------------------------------------------------
First of all, you're not "wooping" anyone's ass. The most you could do is "type" someone in the nose.
Now about your grammer and structure, last time I checked all branches of the the military require at least a High School Diploma. With that in mind, let me help you with your English so that when you ARE old enough to be in the military, you will be able to get into the service of your "Commander-in-chief".
Here is your sentence written as an adult would write it:
You can take this opportunity to harrass me while I'm gone because in person I would attempt to assault your ass. You are all free to assume I am speaking the truth.
Posted by: Spartacus at January 5, 2006 12:45 AM
Jay's parents probably came home and caught him on the computer and made him go to bed.
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 01:05 AM
Woke Dude,
Maybe you should go to sleep ;)
Posted by: MS at January 5, 2006 01:09 AM
One of Letterman's staffers must have compiled a Top Ten List of the most ignorant Liberal talking points for David to read....
I haven't thought about Letterman since the late eighties.
Posted by: Jose Chung at January 5, 2006 01:13 AM
I haven't thought about Letterman since the late eighties.
Posted by: Jose Chung at January 5, 2006 01:13 AM
_______________
Then how in the hell would you know what went on on that program. Or are you just following along behind your troll buddies like a good little lamb?
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 01:35 AM
Marie attempted to write:
Watch David Letterman last night, will never ever watch again....
----------------------------------------------------
After reading your entire post, I must say that you will not be missed by CBS. Letterman obviously is far to intellectual for you. They actually use words that contain more than two syllables and they can spell!
Why is it that the far right wing is made up of either very wealthy white people or total morons like this lady??!!!!
Posted by: Spartacus at January 5, 2006 01:42 AM
Dave should audition for his own "Stupid Tricks" segment. I'd love to see the World's biggest babbling boob. Dave's attempt to bring any rational self thought ideas to the table was hillarious. Dave just showed that he and Dan Rather have more in common than just being boring. They can also claim that they've both publicly exposed themselves with their "brilliance". Good Job Bill O'Reilly!! Thanks for bringing logic to the forefront of American ideals. I'm getting tired of fending off societal based morons who only believe a human should act on their urge to have sex, take drugs for every problem, and eat their way out of problems they can't take drugs for. Bravo Bill!
Posted by: Robby at January 5, 2006 03:47 AM
one must assume that there is a concerted effort afoot by the right whingers to spin the o'reilly/letterman encounter in favour of o'reilly.
As always, it's a case of "If we say it enough times, some people may start to believe us"
Posted by: uk_dave at January 5, 2006 04:17 AM
After reading a few of these posts I find it interesting that it is always men who assume that Cindy Sheehan is being used as a "puppet of the liberals." Is that because you don't believe that women can be articulate and able to form reasoned opinions? I suggest you google "Cindy Sheehan" to read her actual words. She is highly intelligent and clearly no one's puppet; if you think she is, you are simply too biased to register what she is saying.
As for David Letterman, the discussion with Bill O'Reilly showed Letterman to be empathetic and a gentleman --- two qualities O'Reilly lacks. O'Reilly came across as arrogant, inflexible, and cold-hearted. You couldn't pay me to watch Bill O'Reilly's show. It doesn't surprise me that Letterman hasn't watched it, either.
This was just another example of David Letterman allowing the audience to witness his basic decency. It's not often that he allows the audience to see past the performer, but he did last night and he did right after September 11. If you saw his show right after the destruction of the Twin Towers, you'll remember the depth he showed then.
In contrast, Bill O'Reilly is just a shallow, mean-spirited blowhard.
Posted by: arvad at January 5, 2006 04:23 AM
Iraq War Vet said:
"Why don't you all just blow each other?"
Well, there's no better way to win a crowd over to your point of view than to start off with the implication that they're all gay.
"Letterman proved to me he's an idiot...and most intelligent people agree."
How did he "prove" that and what national poll did you take to determine that "most intelligent people agree?" You wouldn't just be pulling that out of your ass, would you?
"All of you either fail to listen, or you suffer from not being able to look at any other perspective other than your own orgy of liberal BS."
And what facts do you have to back up that opinion? Or are you--again--just pulling things out of your ass?
"Letterman was bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival. It was awesome."
I'm sure you know quite a bit about "redneck carnivals," but what the hell are you talking about here? Did you SEE the show? Watch it again and explain to me how LETTERMAN was the one embarassed.
"-Iraq War Vet"
I do NOT believe you are a veteran. I suspect you had your doctor "find" a pilonidal cyst, like your hero, Rush, did that got you out of the draft.
Posted by: Cranky Media Guy at January 5, 2006 05:07 AM
Krusty, don't get in any financial discussions,you're innumerate. You obviously know absolutely nothing about the government debt.
Posted by: TJM at January 4, 2006 09:43 PM
----------------------------------------------
Oh dear I guess I better give up my career as a corporate financier & advise comanies that Callable notes means your creditors never get paid..
GEEE,
TJM you my friend are a complete & utter.........
Your attempt to confuse people has failed and you have failed to state your case or point...
If debt never gets paid why on Earth do Countries (like Argentina) default and go into the dog house
There are not enough hours or days in the year or this lifetime to educate your ignorant .....
SO DREAM ON!!!
Posted by: Krusty at January 5, 2006 06:40 AM
TJM,
I asked you to explain your statement, and you are obviously incapable of it ... Do you get your facts straight from Bill O'reilly..
You need to spend more time with your face towards the pursuit of knowledge and less time infront of BOR backside
Posted by: Krusty at January 5, 2006 06:47 AM
Krusty, callable bonds mean callable by the issuer. The government doesn't issue them,the gov't bonds are due at maturity only. Those bonds are then redeemed by the gov't.;when Pres.Clinton had a couple of surplus years,as bonds matured they were paid and the next auction was for a lower amount thereby lowering the overall debt. Bonds held by China,et.al, are not due on demand,so once they own them they can try to sell them in the market or wait for redemption,clipping interest coupons all the while.
Let me know what area you give advice in. For the last 20 years,I've been involved in restructuring companies and sometimes liquidating them,so I can be on the lookout for your clients.
Posted by: TJM at January 5, 2006 07:09 AM
A lot of people seem to perceive that there was some kind of intellectual disparity between Letterman and O'Reilly. I don't agree. O'Reilly exists by projecting in opposites (spinning). he is an illusionist. He calls his show a no spin zone, yet it is full of spin. Letterman cut right across that by not playing the O'Reilly spin game, by not being drawn into debating point by point, but by focusing on O'Reilly as being disingenious - which he is.
To me, Letterman being able to do this indicated that while acting the joker he nevertheless far outsmarted O'Reilly, who appeared like he didn't know what hit him.
Posted by: Euro the european at January 5, 2006 07:23 AM
A lot has been said about Sheenana use of 'Freedom Fighter'. O'Reilly grandstands on this every chance he gets.
It must be said anybody that blows up innocent civilians is inhumane and a very sad aspect of this time.
Yet can Americans say without any sense of shame that their nation have not blown up innocent people in the name of finding supposed WMD's. Whether the bombs are strapped to a human being hell bent on some extreme belief, or being ordered by some extremist group or dropped from American planed, who's pilots are following orders from some ideological group hell bent on some extreme belief - is there much difference for the innocent people (collateral damage I think it is called) who are being killed - who's bomb it is ?
Posted by: John at January 5, 2006 07:40 AM
Letterman: I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this....
Enough said......
Now "Letterman" is your "Hero"??
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 07:55 AM
It's impressive that right wingers manage to continue to use blanket statements, it's black or white is it?
Prove to me that all "freedom fighters" are terrorists. Is it because they oppose the US that makes them a terrorist?
Blowing up house, innocent children and women? Does this define the definition of terrorist? Has the US Military not blown up houses, children and women? Will you rebut that the US hasn't done it intentionally and do so with proof that this has not occurred? Have you proof that all deaths of the innocent by "insurgents" are intentional?
Are they not allowed to defend Iraq? If so, why not? What percentage of them are Iraqi? Do you Republemmings know this statistic?
Would you be a freedom fighter or a terrorist for fighting an invading force on US soil?
I've no doubt that there are some who target innocent people and it's deplorable, but simply opposing the US does not make one a terrorist.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 08:32 AM
I don't get all that fuss about the "freedom fighters" thing. I would understand it if Sheehan's son had been killed by a suicide bomber, or homicide bomber or whatever you want to call him. Most people who rant against the use of the expression "freedom fighters" speaks about scumbags blowing themselves up with innocent children and women. But Sheehan's son has been killed in combat, against members of Moqtadar el Sadr's militia, who has nothing to do with Al Qaida, Al Zarqawi (or whatever it is spelled), or even terrorism… Why wouldn't those be called "freedom fighters", like all those who fought against an occupying army ? (that's how they consider the US army in Iraq).
Posted by: Zzorglub at January 5, 2006 08:36 AM
Like Letterman, I don't watch BLO; but in reading Media Matters, Think Progress, and of course News Hounds, I am able to understand that he is full of shit. During the "war" on Xmas, all you needed to do was google "Bill O'Reilly" and you would come up with numerous articles, from numerous newspapers, that were sharply critical of the falafal man. Letterman, as a talk show host, must be attuned to what is being featured in the media. Now that I've addressed DaMail and 2008, I'll move on to Robby. What part of the Letterman segment involved "society based morons having having sex...?" Robby would appear to be a nasty little prude - but I suspect that, as O'Lielly seems to be his hero, Robby likey the phone sex!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 08:45 AM
Has the US Military not blown up houses, children and women? Will you rebut that the US hasn't done it intentionally and do so with proof that this has not occurred? Have you proof that all deaths of the innocent by "insurgents" are intentional?
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 08:32 AM
Musings like these are exactly why I am glad you are where you are and can only wring your hands from a distance....
For the record I will take the USA every day of the week and twice on Sunday over that frozen mess you reside in....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 08:53 AM
Canadian paul,
You can define terrorism anyway you like, but your opinion - being a Canadian is weightless, irrelevant and can't be considered as seriously as those from Britain, Australia, Japan and other members of the coalition who've contributed to ensuring a democratic Iraq emerges, as opposed to the dictatorship you and your country relished, and would obviously miss.
You're also unfit to provide a credible definition of terrorism having never experienced it, but only produced and noutured potential ones as well as provide safe haven for them.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:55 AM
I don't watch BLO; but in reading Media Matters, Think Progress, and of course News Hounds, I am able to understand that he is full of shit.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 08:45 AM
LOL! Priceless!!
Letting the others do your thinking for you again?
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 08:56 AM
2008,
That frozen mess is called the socialist republic of Northern Honduras.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:57 AM
That frozen mess is called the socialist republic of Northern Honduras.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:57 AM
LOL...too funny....
Still want to tell us how to run our own damn country...amazing
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:00 AM
Claudo,
Can I ask what country you live in?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:00 AM
2008, you obviously don't read the sites I referenced. What they do is take the statement and deconstruct it using primary sources that illustrate the facts of the matter.Their research is well done. A recent example would be the "war" on Xmas - BLO clearly stated (the websites have the transcripts) that two school districts banned red and green clothing. MMFA quoted staff from the school districts who refuted the charges. MMFA provided links to webpages of the specific school districts. And regarding Bill's little prurient piece about a wild gay party at Brown University (a local issue for me), the refutation was in the Brown Daily Herald (in addition to an article in the Providence Journal Bulletin) where the president of Brown was quoted in defense of charges made about her by O'Lielly. The first person who ripped BLO a new one was Al Franken; who, I might add, has just returned from his third trip to Iraq. How many times has BLO been in the war zone. What say ye, denizens of trolldom?
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 09:08 AM
2008,
What I find confusing is how and why these Canadians remain obssessed anti-Americanism and America, and like drug addicts, can't seem to realise how history will reflect harshly on them.
For most of them, it isn't enough to refuse to support a democratic Iraq, they feel they must undermine it any way possible because a victory for Iraqi people might look like a victory for the US, something they deplore. They would rather see the rape rooms re-open for business under the tyranny of Saddam Hussein than read about a free Iraq liberated by coalition forces.
Even if they have a principled position on Iraq, what are they doing about Iran? North Korea? Syria? Nothing! All they do is sit like spectators and lecture others about the definition of terrorism, something they know very little about. Its one thing to hear a Brit or an Aussie opine on this issue, its another thing to read that of a Canadian.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:11 AM
For the record I will take the USA every day of the week and twice on Sunday over that frozen mess you reside in....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 08:53 AM
TAKE is about all you have done....eh?
And, it's pretty funny deriding someone because their country and their leader didn't go along with invading and occupying a country for oil profits.....be proud of it Canadian Paul...
/
these lil w supporters wouldn't fight for it themselves, but have the audacity to deride others who would...
what's the word you use all the time OHATE?
priceless!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:12 AM
Response to TJ - you obviously have not been reading my posts carefully. I am proud to say that I was born in and remain a resident of a beautiful BLUE state founded by a Puritan dissenter who believed in the right of people to worship as they please; and who would be appalled to see the efforts of the right wing Christians to enforce their beliefs into the public square. We love our bay and have an openly gay mayor of the ""Renaissance City". We also have a liberal republican senator who might not get a second term. Now, TJ, can you figure it out?
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 09:16 AM
Claudo,
I've never been to Rhode Island, but I've heard it's indeed a beautiful state.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:18 AM
I do NOT believe you are a veteran. I suspect you had your doctor "find" a pilonidal cyst, like your hero, Rush, did that got you out of the draft.
Posted by: Cranky Media Guy at January 5, 2006 05:07 AM
Seems to be a "spate" of that occurring on this thread, eh Cranky?
Alot of talk, and that's all they do...when it comes time to serve, they send your kids, eh?
Just some bs artists hired by faux to disrupt these threads and insult everyone......
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:19 AM
Thanks Woke Dude and Spartacus and a few others for your very humorous and civil sparring with bumbling guppies TJ and Jay. I giggled far too late into the night/am.
Unfortunately Jay and TJ reminded me of myself before I decided to figure out what the hell I was talking about anyway! Erpp!
It's fun to play games with big words, but its even more fun to try to have a real conversation about exactly what you really do and don't know.
Posturing may feel good but it looks awfully awkward from over here.
Here's something I know, Letterman ripped Olielly.
Posted by: sleeplessseer at January 5, 2006 09:21 AM
Sheehan's son has been killed in combat, against members of Moqtadar el Sadr's militia, who has nothing to do with Al Qaida, Al Zarqawi (or whatever it is spelled), or even terrorism… Why wouldn't those be called "freedom fighters", like all those who fought against an occupying army ? (that's how they consider the US army in Iraq).
Posted by: Zzorglub at January 5, 2006 08:36 AM
Excellent point!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:22 AM
TJ and 2008. Is that all you have? Insults and talking points?
Why not just answer my questions? I ask questions, you attempt to insult my country. Have you no answer for my questions? What are you afraid of? Don't wuss out on me now. If you're not up for serious debate, then say so, I'll understand.
Your "replies" are more telling than anything else. Infact, it's somewhat amusing so it won't bother me if you continue.
"You have no idea" "It's none of your business" and 1000s of other things about Canada. I've heard it before and none of it is new, but if it's all you've got...
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 09:23 AM
After O'Reilly's disgusting treatment of Jeremy Glick I will forever despise the man. And after an almost never-ending list of ridiculous comments, an inability to stop from praising himself, and displaying a staggering lack of even the most general of knowledge, he's also a complete laughing stock to me now. He's both evil and an idiot.
But he came across better than Lettermen did in their exchange, in my opinion. Accusing someone of talking 60% crap, which in O'Reilly's case is actually a compliment!, but without watching his show or providing a single piece of evidence or quote of one of O'Reilly's many lies.
Rationally, I know that O'Reilly deserves everything he gets and much more, but watching the exchange left a bad taste in my mouth. The conservative keeping his cool, backing up his opinions with facts, and being respectful. The liberal sneering pompusly, making accusations with nothing to back them up, and treating a guest like garbage. It's just not what I want to see. We should leave the arrogance, the bullying and the fact-less accusations to O'Reilly and his ilk. Liberals should be better than that.
Posted by: Daps at January 5, 2006 09:27 AM
" it isn't enough to refuse to support a democratic Iraq, "
from the idiot troll...
Please explain how a constitution that stipulates that no law can be legislated that does not comply with ISLAM....
is a democracy?
Because they will allow the US oil companies to pillage the world's 3rd largest supply of oil? That good enough for you?
Since you aren't an Iraqi, maybe you should stfu, since that was your advice to Canadian Paul...eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:29 AM
be proud of it Canadian Paul...
woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:12 AM
Yawns.......What a surprise....
You love a pacifist who embraces socialist ideals just like you do.....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:31 AM
That is all the repugnantneocons have left C-Paul....insults and attack the messenger.....
or insult and divert....
great to see o'lielly embarrassed on a real national tv program, now he can crawl back under his faux rock and lick his wounds...for the next time he decides to come out of the protected lair...
eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:31 AM
smear and attack,
nothing real to add to the conversation, eh?
whatsamattau? no thought process left after spewing rw talking points, or is Karl busy thinking up another round of grand jury answers?
all your heroes are criminals, OHATE
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:34 AM
It's none of your business"
You said Paul.....You have Absolutely no say whatsoever in how we run our country....
Good luck with yours though....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:34 AM
Canadian Paul,
How is a suicide bomber who blows up a school bus laden with school kids "defending Iraq"? How?
I don't find such comments utterly tasteless just because I'm American, but if you showed as much compassion for the innocent civilian victims as you do the terrorists, you might be more credible.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:35 AM
Even if they have a principled position on Iraq, what are they doing about Iran? North Korea? Syria? Nothing! All they do is sit like spectators and lecture others about the definition of terrorism, something they know very little about. Its one thing to hear a Brit or an Aussie opine on this issue, its another thing to read that of a Canadian.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:11 AM
Amazing much like many left wing Liberals here....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:36 AM
And I certainly agree with 2008. Canadians should be more worried about their fragmenting country thats breaking apart and stop this psychotic fixation on anything anti-American.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:39 AM
Still have no answers?
Since how your country is run affects my country, I am allowed to have an opinion. You expressed opinions about my country, so obviously you can't follow your own advice.
Regardless, this discussion is about Iraq. (Well, it's suppose to be about Letterman and O'Reilly), so it's not really just about you run your country, is it?
I'm a Canadian, yes. Apparently a pacifist socialist, so why are you afraid to answer my questions? Are you afraid of little ol' me?
Anyway. I really don't need to say any more, I believe you're doing a great job making yourself look like a fool. I'll let TJ and yourself continue to amuse us.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 09:40 AM
great to see o'lielly embarrassed on a real national tv program
woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:31 AM
LOL! Yeah woke he was real "embarrassed"
Like you even watched...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:41 AM
And I certainly agree with 2008. Canadians should be more worried about their fragmenting country thats breaking apart and stop this psychotic fixation on anything anti-American.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:39 AM
They certainly have more than their fare share of problems...at the end of the day I believe it is really all about envy of our way of life.
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:44 AM
Since how your country is run affects my country, I am allowed to have an opinion.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 09:40 AM
What you need is a vote......don't have one of those do you...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:46 AM
Canadian Paul,
How is a suicide bomber who blows up a school bus laden with school kids "defending Iraq"? How?
I don't find such comments utterly tasteless just because I'm American, but if you showed as much compassion for the innocent civilian victims as you do the terrorists, you might be more credible.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:35 AM
Now tell us troll jerky....how is blowing up falluja and making it a free fire zone....defending or democratizing iraq?
you are clueless because you are a typical lapdog chickenhawk....spewing the same bs for 5 years now.....
even your deserter hero admitted at least 30K (most likely 100K)
innocent iraqis dead because of his mistakes.....
in war, the intentions do not count for shit.....it's the result...
and the result is....no one wins....get it?
if not, i suggest you go see it for yourself, then come back and give us a report....oh, stay a year will you, so your views aren't censored by being "embedded"...eh?
Talk is cheap!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:47 AM
What you need is a vote......don't have one of those do you...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:46 AM
-----------------------------------------
He lives in Canada, not Ohio or Florida.
Posted by: nipigon1 at January 5, 2006 09:49 AM
didn't see it, eh OHATE?
here ya go......http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/04.html#a6571
a site named for your heroes....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:50 AM
how is blowing up falluja and making it a free fire zone....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 09:47 AM
You should share your pacifist commentary with the brave Marines who were being constantly shot at....
I suspect they would "really" appreciate your point of view.....
Way to "support" the troops...I bet they love folks like you
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:53 AM
But this Letterman show highlighted the much under-reported education gap in America. This is what happens when you have two Americas, one knowledgable, the other insecure and myopic. Its impossible for a debate to flourish or ides to flow.
Letterman displayed his inferiority complex. He seemed territorial (seemed afriad Oreilly was going to snatch his show from him) and had to use rude remarks to seize the show back from Oreilly.
It was evident Letterman didn't even know the details of the prelude to the Iraq war, and his only way out of his boxed-in position was to claim - "I know that 60% of what you say is wrong", how? on which issues are the remaining 40% correct?
Oreilly should also realise that he might have intellectually intimidated Letterman, and many of these other entertainment hosts. Perharps he should avoid topics that might proove too challenging for them.
I felt most sorry for the audience - obviously letterman fans who came to have a good time, but felt uncomfortable not applauding or embarassing letterman. Some agreed with Oreilly, but this wasn't what they paid tickets to go see. They wanted comedy, not hard-core politics.
Letterman should be humble enough to apologise to his fans for his rude behavior, apologise to Oreilly, and apologise to the troops for suggesting he agreed with Sheehan that insurgents were freedom fighters.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:57 AM
He lives in Canada, not Ohio or Florida.
Posted by: nipigon1 at January 5, 2006 09:49 AM
The tired old "We was Robbed" line......
Don't accept any responsibility for a lame assed election effort....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 09:57 AM
yeah, them ides are hard to argue against allright....
like calling a theocracy a democracy
they greet us with flowers
their oil will pay for it
we are liberating in our occupation
yeah, in my education, we call them "ides" lies......
i could post lil w and hallicheney's lies all day and night and still have plenty for tommorrow, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:01 AM
"I know that 60% of what you say is wrong", how? on which issues are the remaining 40% correct?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:57 AM
That was a crowning moment don't you think....
He did not have a single fact or instance to back it up and had just admitted "I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this"
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:03 AM
you keep saying the same thing
that iraqi insurgents aren't fighting for freedom.....from occupation
are you dense or just a total liar...
again,
if china invaded the US, and the war vets (i know you would just be like the vichy french) attempted to rid the us of the chinese occupiers.....would you consider us freedom fighters?
this question deserves an up or down vote from you trolls....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:06 AM
like calling a theocracy a democracy
they greet us with flowers
their oil will pay for it
we are liberating in our occupation
yeah, in my education, we call them "ides" lies......
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:01 AM
You are just rambling on with your pacifist ideals again.......
Just the same 'ol same 'ol.......It has to be your way or the highway right....
You...Are the picture of intorerance
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:08 AM
Take it from someone who grew up ultra conservative/religious and ended up with liberal views.
I've been there.
I know the mentality.
Reading thru all the above posts; I see typical polarized arguments for and against.
The question of who truly won on the Tonight Show 'debate' depends on which viewpoint the audience is watching it from.
Letterman had enough presence of mind to keep it social and refrain from pulling a Jon Stewart on O'Reilly's ass.
And that attitude can be a winner for mild liberals, but it can look weak to hardline conservatives.
Personally, I felt Letterman didn't exploit O'Reilly's weak points.
And that's forgivable.
But to be objective; there is no clear-cut win for either host or guest on the show.
Both liberals and conservatives have valid points on why one side deserves the 'win'.
So in lieu of rehashing issues dependent on point of view, I'll indulge my conservative darkside instead.
The asshole in me.
It has been a long read from top to bottom, but that military crackpot/poser really takes the cake.
As soon as the kid started bragging about his 'kills'.
BAM.
I got that geek pegged.
I could always read people like that.
It's classic Psych-101.
Hell, I used to be one.
Chalk it up to immaturity. The kid'll grow out of it.
But until then...
BWAHAHA! Whata loser! Whata fuckin' loser.
And that's what conservatives have fighting on their ranks?
You shitting me? I hear a few valid points by conservatives here and it all gets drowned out by this whacko nutjob from the armed forces veterans of the good ole U.S.ofA.
Go 'kill' us some more of 'em Ayrabs in your dreams, huh.
To conservatives with a clue: see that lil 'army' kid in there?
That's who you got filling up the ranks.
Pathetic.
Gives moderate conservatives a bad name.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:09 AM
it's not a debate show, but entertainment...
just like o'lielly's isn't a debate show, but entertainment, eh?
we could see if they will replay the debates from 04 if you wish....
then, we could begin to see who kicked whose ass and who knew something and who was just bullshitting, and who was getting some kind of feed from Karl from his receiver hidden under his coat...
heh,heh,heh
let's see, i remember JK saying something about diplomacy with iraq's neighbors........
and lil w saying we don't negotiate with terrorists......
must not have meant the saudis, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:10 AM
why do you persist in calling a decorated war veteran a pacifist, Mr. Chickenhawk wannabee?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:13 AM
woke dude,
Lets take a trip way back and review the events that preceded the Fallujah raid. This isn't the kind of history you read in an article 5 years dwon, this is the history you should have experienced, and followed right in the making.
First, Falluja was initially untouched by shock and awe or any military campaign, even after the fall of bagdad.
There were very few US troops there initially, so it wasn't in a sense "occupied" or filled with foreigners in their fatigues and humvees. But there were lots of contractors trying to kick-start the rebuilding process.
But following the live feeds being broadcasted by Al Jazeera of four american civilian contractors, their alive bodies dragged down the streets, as the lawlessness there kept appearing in the news, it was impossible to avoid cleaning that city which didn't see combat, unlike others.
Remember how the city was evacuated, all civilians were told to evacuate the city, and those who couldn't were assisted, before the Fallujah raids began.
This is the nuanced part of history liberals and Letterman can't absorb or appreciate, and would rather make simplistic generalised comments. No seasoned American who followed the news leading up to the Fallujah raid would post such mis-informed commentary -especially on Fallujah, where many marines were lost, and those whose homes were damaged had to be compensated for it.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 10:17 AM
why do you persist in calling a decorated war veteran a pacifist
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:13 AM
Because that is exactly what you are, a "Pacifist"
Perhaps you might want to take a peek at your musings.....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:18 AM
thanks for the lucidity, Joe Hardy....
not sure why, the neocons ranks are filled with chickenhawks,...
maybe because that's who their leaders/heroes are, eh?
i call them neo conservatives because true conservatives cannot support a president who does the things this one has...
increase the debt to 8 TRILLION, borrowing 1.2 Trillion from our enemies saudi arabia (16/19) and china....
conservatives pay their bills, not go into debt for their children and grandchildren
conservatives take care of the homeland first...not think they have to become policeman of the world so they can pose in a flight suit and declare victory over a country that did not attack us and was no threat....
conservatives will be the ones who pitch these neocons back into the pit of wailing and knashing of teeth.....sounds like Rush Addict's show, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:20 AM
2008 thinks that Canada is jealous of us - c'est a rire ou en anglais Laugh Uproariously Out Loud. Right - they want their seniors to drive a couple of hundred miles to get cheaper perscriptions, 45 million of their citizens to have no health insurance, gay people to be discriminted against, and of course evangelical Christians telling them how to live. And I forgot - they really want their young people to fight a war based on a combination of imperialism, oil based capitalism, and end time Christianity. Yeah, it's all good. And TJ, as an African-American, you should appreciate the fact that Canada was the end terminus for the Underground Railroad in addition to the overall tolerance of the Canadians.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 10:20 AM
And 2008, "what's so funny about peace, love, and understanding?"
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 10:21 AM
woke perhaps you have forgotten the use of the term...
pac·i·fism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ps-fzm)
n.
The belief that disputes between nations should and can be settled peacefully.
Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes.
Such opposition demonstrated by refusal to participate in military action.
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:22 AM
let's see now, i served in a war zone
and you didn't
who you calling pacifist chickenhawk?
heh,heh,heh
what a poser!
just like jay, eh? was that you spouting off at the top of the page OHATE?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:22 AM
attack the messenger
smear the war veterans
that all you got, ch?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:23 AM
So you're saying, 2008, that Ghandi was wrong?
What do you have against Ghandi?
What do you have against Jesus Christ?
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:26 AM
definition day, eh?
Chickenhawk n. A person enthusiastic about war, provided someone else fights it; particularly when that enthusiasm is undimmed by personal experience with war; most emphatically when that lack of experience came in spite of ample opportunity in that person’s youth.
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:26 AM
who you calling pacifist chickenhawk?
Well....again....You woke....you are a pacifist
Sorry if you fail to enjoy the definition....however it still is accurate...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:28 AM
Troll Jerky says...
First, Falluja was initially untouched by shock and awe or any military campaign, even after the fall of bagdad.
There were very few US troops there initially, so it wasn't in a sense "occupied" or filled with foreigners in their fatigues and humvees. But there were lots of contractors trying to kick-start the rebuilding process.
*********************
let's see, first....over half of the "reconstruction" money has not been spent on reconstruction, just destruction.....
get it?
WE DESTROYED IRAQ
secondly,
your logic, as usual, is unbelievably false......
if china invades the US and sets up a govt in, Atlanta.....
does that mean Chicago isn't also occupied by foreign invaders?
what a dunce? you must have went to elite private schools, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:32 AM
c'est a rire ou en anglais Laugh Uproariously Out Loud.
claudo at January 5, 2006 10:20 AM
If it is so great perhaps you should consider a short move north....
It would appear you have a deep seated love for their way of life, why not give it a try?
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:32 AM
That pacifist comment: BULL.
He is a goddamned vet.
Whish SHOWS he isn't aversed to military action.
That he is opposed to this war for reasons all his own, DOESN'T mean he is a pacifist.
Pacifists tend to hate all wars.
Be it justifiable or 'erroniously based on bad intel'.
Bottom line, he is not one.
Now you seem to think the term 'pacifist' has a negative connotation by consensus.
Now make no mistake, it DOESN'T.
If you seem to feel like it has negative connotations in your 'neck' of the woods.
In the world that matters: it DOESN'T.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:33 AM
just more namecalling and that's all you ever got....just talk
like when you were young and could have served, eh?
it's ok, OHATE, you don't have to fear the bad men
war vets will protect you, despite your disparagement....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:34 AM
claudo,
Why should I appreciate some distant history that bears very little relevance to the present? Canada is an extremely hostile country for blacks to live in, especially as they are striving to be more "European" or "Europe-like" from how it was described in an article I read.
I feel so bad for black residents in that country, and to watch the way the media's covering their problem of gun violence is truly unfortunate. Such coverage would be deemed racist and unacceptable here in America.
It is true Canada did a lot in opposing slavery, and even fought in the American civil war along with union soldiers, but they have certainly diverged from that noble history to a tainted present as pro-tyranny state.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 10:36 AM
Whish SHOWS he isn't aversed to military action.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:33 AM
LOL!! Love the all caps parts.....
It only means "At one time he severed" period, end of story
Has nothing to do with thoughts or opinions "today"
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:36 AM
A pacifist never condones military action.
He has.
You are wrong.
ROFL.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:39 AM
What's your point about pacifism, 2008? Dude knows, up close and personal, that "war is hell" so if he is a pacifist what f'n business is it of yours? And as far as O'Reilly being in combat - here's an example of a BIG FAT WHOPPER -
O'REILLY: "So you know what we're talkin' about. Cause I was in combat and when you are there your adrenalin is flying through your ears. And you know you've got the gun and I just couldn't understand - we had a guy in here from one of the human rights saying you have to try this marine and I almost got - I was incensed. How did you feel about it?"* BLO was never in combat - can't quibble with that one 2008. Dude, on the other hand has been there and back!
transcript from O'Reilly's show May 6th, 2005
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 10:39 AM
TJ: Cite proof.
If you want to know about Canada, simply ask. I'll answer. Or would that stop your ability to just throw out unfounded statements and accusations about a country you've obviously never been to?
If being a pacifist means that I oppose violence as a means to get what you want then yeah, sign me up. If it means I'd rather see problems solved in a civilized and intelligent manner, then put my name down.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:41 AM
A pacifist never condones military action.
He has.
You are wrong.
ROFL.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:39 AM
Oh Really now.....
So from your brilliant intellectual viewpoint a person "never" changes their opinion regarding war?
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:44 AM
2008,
SHOW SOME FUCKING RESPECT TO THE VETS ON THIS SITE, ASSHOLE!
Typical rw chickenhawk..............they can dish it out all they want but they cant take it when someone calls them out on their bullshit.
Why do you hate our vets, 2008?
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 10:45 AM
So in your own 'brilliance' the changing of opinion constitutes pacifism?
You are outmatched here.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:45 AM
Jackass comment of the day:
"Which politics-savy American doesn't watch the Oreilly Factor?"
Well, I'd guess any American who can think for him/herself, for a start.
Thanks for the laugh, chuckles.
Posted by: BedtimeForBonzo at January 5, 2006 10:45 AM
TJ, 2008: Are both of you trying to be cariactures or is it accidental?
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:47 AM
I'll look into his eye when he's dying, and tell the arab "Spartacus wanted this".Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:50 PM
-------------------------------------------------
AND I assume the Arab will be UNARMED . .
When the phrase 'a piece of shit' was coined, they had you in mind, loser . .
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 10:48 AM
You are outmatched here.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:45 AM
Impossible....
I'm dealing with Liberals speaking Liberish like you...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:49 AM
by your own logic then
you are a pacifist if actions speak louder than words, eh?
lip service ch....sends others children to die for their profits...
got alot of KBR stock OHATE?
did you know they went bankrupt in 2004?
yeah, that's right,,, it's ok for corporations to go bankrupt one year.\\and receive no bid contracts that double their stock prices in the next year....
oh, yeah, they also got a fed judge to limit their asbestos liability...imagine that....using the courts that way...
ok for corps, not individuals with your heroes, eh?
you are on the wrong side of history and humanity...OHATE!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:49 AM
AND I assume the Arab will be UNARMED . .
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 10:48 AM
__________________________________________
Priceless.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:50 AM
Once again, 2008 brings nothing to the table except gibberish about "liberish" - soooo clever!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 10:51 AM
Canadian Paul,
I won't cite any links here because this forum isn't about the racist-infested media outlets there. But if you're curious, you can check out a previous thread on Canada, where I listed some links to articles in the GlobeandMail, and the star.
Thanks for the offer but the little I know of your country has completely turned me off. And what are you supposed to tell me about your country other than the "we didn't go to Iraq" line?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 10:52 AM
Canadian Paul,
most likely, they are the same troll, OHATE doesn't like to post alone so he posts under at least two names at a time so he has someone agreeing with him'
he thinks it equates to credibility
heh,heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:52 AM
TJ
how can you talk about racist media and support faux?
unbelieveable.....
"in the house", eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:55 AM
Impossible....
I'm dealing with Liberals speaking Liberish like you...
Posted by: 2008
___________________________________
Hold.
Did you just surrender in there.
I demolished your flawed 'pacifist' logic.
And your response is giberish about 'liberish'?
If this is how fast you concede...
Then you are indeed: OUTCLASSED.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:55 AM
Once again, 2008 brings nothing to the table except gibberish about "liberish" - soooo clever!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 10:51 AM
I would hate to confuse you with logic....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:56 AM
not to worry then, cause there is seldom if ever any logic in any of your posts
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:59 AM
I would hate to confuse you with logic....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006
_____________________________________
Perhaps there is a reason you confuse everyone with your 'logic'.
You have NONE.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 10:59 AM
there is seldom if ever any logic in any of your posts
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 10:59 AM
You are simply too obtuse to grasp it....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:01 AM
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer Thu Jan 5, 3:48 AM ET
WASHINGTON - As politicians led by President Bush scrambled to ditch campaign contributions from disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich cautioned Republicans they risk losing control of congressional majorities if they try to put all the blame on lobbyists.
"You can't have a corrupt lobbyist unless you have a corrupt member (of Congress) or a corrupt staff. This was a team effort," Gingrich told a Rotary Club lunch in Washington on Wednesday. He called for systematic changes to reduce the enormous financial advantages that incumbents have in congressional elections.
As head of a conservative movement based on ethics concerns and promises to curb federal growth, Gingrich led the GOP in 1994 to its first House majority in 42 years.
But he decided to resign in 1998 when Republicans lost seats a year after Gingrich himself was fined $300,000 for violating House rules barring the use of tax-exempt foundations for political purposes.
**********************
Anyone else see the incredible hypocrisy and humor with these folks who choose not to confuse us with logic?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 11:03 AM
You are simply too obtuse to grasp it....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5
_____________________________________
When there is nothing to grasp, obtuse wouldn't help any.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 11:04 AM
So you can't back up anything you've said? Why not just admit to it?
And you don't want to learn, why not just admit it?
You've an opportunity here. I'm giving you a chance to learn. Of course, it's your choice to accept it or not, but how can you continue to be critical of something if you're unwilling to learn more about it?
Insult, deride, accuse and assume all you'd like, you're free to do so, but everyone knows from what perspective that opinion is coming from, someone who has admitted they don't know really that much about what they're talking about and refuses the opportunity to get a better understanding.
From my perspective I'm not an expert on the US nor have I ever claimed that I was. I have been to the country many times. I am fully aware that most Americans are decent, friendly people. I am always striving to understand more, to move beyond sheer ignorance and to that end am willing to learn, and really how can I not? American is omnipresent through the globe. You're more than willing to accept accolades, and in some cases seem to demand them, but when it comes to critism you refuse to hear of it and insult in turn.
I'm well aware of the problems Canada has, and it has many, I just don't suffer from blind devotion to the belief we are the end all and be all of everything.
You're entitled to remain in ignorance, it's your right as an American citizen, but if you refuse help in learning more that is your problem, not mine.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:08 AM
In a study sponsored by the American Urban league on minories in the media, which I read in the Washington Post - Fox News scored the highest in terms of diversity.
The most racist American news outlet is CNN, where no black journalist ever lasts long. One of their most painful lines are comments like "leaders in the African American community...such as Jesse jackson" or comments by Wolf Blitzer claiming Katrina victims "were so black..". If you watch CNN on an average day from 5pm to 3am, you'd never see a black journalist or guest - except if Condi rice appears.
But when I watch Fox, I stop being "black", and I become just an American without labels or titles. fox was the first to reveal how UN soldiers were rapping 8 year old Congolese girls - something I don't think I ever saw in the front page of the NYtimes or Washington Post, Fox reported on how democrats have been using racial slurs and oreo cookies to intimidate Maryland lieutenent Governor and more. So woke dude, you need to wake up.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:10 AM
I'm well aware of the problems Canada has, and it has many
Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:08 AM
Paul.....Your own country needs you!
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:11 AM
posted by TJ:
'the little I know of your country has completely turned me off'
TJ,
why is it that rightwingers like yourself hate EVERYBODY?
You are truly pitiful, I would feel sorry for you, but unfortunately you are just too unlikable.
Posted by: Office Ed at January 5, 2006 11:12 AM
Oh and TJ...
As for what you said you linked, I do remember the thread.
You only listed one article in the Toronto Star which didn't actually contain anything about racism.
I wouldn't be surprised if Toronto Star did print something about racism. They're a deluded bunch over there and I wouldn't use their paper for bird cage liner. They have some good reporters and they have some bad ones and the have some editors which are so beyond being out of touch with reality that it's quite impressive.
Toronto Star does not represent Canada any more than I think Fox News represents America.
Nor do I think you're a good representative of the US.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:15 AM
why is it that rightwingers like yourself hate EVERYBODY?
You are truly pitiful, I would feel sorry for you, but unfortunately you are just too unlikable.
Posted by: Office Ed at January 5, 2006 11:12 AM
And Now the view from accross the pond....
Here to help us run "Our" country too?
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:17 AM
Canadian Paul,
I would just like to say on my behalf that I am sorry for my fellow Americans(Total Jackass & $.000208)intolerance and complete ignorance towards your country of Canada. Trust me, we're not like this. Side note: what provence from Canada are you from and what city?
TJ
Just thought you should know, Canada is offering to send in 2,000 troops to Afganistan, allowing a partial withdrawl from the region. Some of these troops will eventually die making this sacrifice begining in August of this year.
You can just say thank you now, and be on your merry way.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 11:18 AM
I have the capacity to participate in my own country's future, 2008, but thanks for the concern.
TJ: Bernard Shaw is not feeling your love!
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:19 AM
such a polite man.....
proud to know we have good neighbors like you to our north, Canadian Paul...
used to travel to Lake Nippissing (loved the name as a kid) every year and catch all the fish, (with dad and learned to clean and cook them...croppies, pike, bluegill, sunfish), pick all the blueberries (and help mom make pies), and get that wonderful maple syrup....
only thing was picking those leeches off after a swim...heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 11:20 AM
Shaw left in 2001.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:26 AM
CNN, where no black journalist ever lasts long. One of their most painful lines are comments like "leaders in the African American community...such as Jesse jackson" or comments by Wolf Blitzer claiming Katrina victims "were so black..". If you watch CNN on an average day from 5pm to 3am, you'd never see a black journalist or guest - except if Condi rice appears. from TJ
more false logic....ie...if there are no black announcers, they must be racist...
you, i guess, are unable to see that black folk like condi are not put there to help black folk....but to further delude and confuse.....
rice, powell, gonzo....they do not support any policies that are good for blacks or latinos.....they are just tokens being used by the corporate pimps.....
you really think the neocon/fundamentalist/rw base would elect a minority?
get a clue, bro!
I'm not defending the rest of msm, they are all racist...that is because of who owns and operates them....get it?
And............
there is no more racist network than faux......and this site is living proof if you have paid any attention to the threads pointing it out....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 11:27 AM
"CNN, where no black journalist ever lasts long"
Shaw was on CNN full time for 21 years. He now makes ocassional appearances.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:34 AM
TJ,
How many Black journalists does Fox have?
Oh, that's right Fox doesn't have any journalists, sorry I brought it up.
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 11:35 AM
Thats right Woke dude, tell blacks, like me whats good for me as an African American. I'm sure you know better than I do, whats good for me. I'm also sure that you know better than Condi, who grew up in the segregated South, whats good for blacks.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:35 AM
This is prbably why woke dude might fit in fine in Canada.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:37 AM
TJ,
Didn't Rice say something about being too busy with piano lessons, or something similar, to notice racial problems "in the segregated South"?
Posted by: nipigon1 at January 5, 2006 11:39 AM
2008, tell you what, when the US can keeps its nose out of other peoples business, I'll do the same. OK?
Posted by: Office Ed at January 5, 2006 11:43 AM
Thats right Woke dude, tell blacks, like me whats good for me as an African American. I'm sure you know better than I do, whats good for me. I'm also sure that you know better than Condi, who grew up in the segregated South, whats good for blacks.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:35 AM
________________
So in your opinion Woke shouldn't even talk about Blacks. But you can tell Canadian Paul what's good for him and what his country should do or shouldn't do. Do you know what a hypocrite is?
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 11:43 AM
Here's the truth about O`Reilly's "War on Christmas" in Wisconson story from the Wisconsin State Journal Tuesday, December 27, 2005........
"Police cars cruised the streets of the Iowa County village and buses idled outside the holiday concert held a week ago at Ridgeway Elementary School, in case the school had to be evacuated. Proud grandmas and grandpas had to be on an approved list to get in, and a video camera was trained on the crowd in case of violence.
An overreaction? I don't think so. The school was so overwhelmed with angry calls that teachers and administrators had to use cell phones just to carry on normal business. Given that the school received thousands of nasty e-mails from all over the country, the security was prudent.
The nasty-grams and calls were prompted by an Orlando, Fla., group called Liberty Counsel, which went nationwide with charges that the school had changed the lyrics of "Silent Night" as part of a plot to secularize Christmas.
The fact that this was wrong didn't stop Ridgeway school officials from being denounced everywhere from Bill O'Reilly's show to the Rev. Jerry Falwell's online column, where Falwell wrote they were "blindly determined to kill off Christmas in the classroom."
Actually, it turned out that the changed lyrics of "Cold in the Night" are part of a copyrighted Christmas play called "The Little Tree's Christmas Gift." It was written by Dwight Elrich, music director at Bel Air Presbyterian Church in California, the church attended by former President Ronald Reagan and his wife, Nancy. Elrich was astounded his play about a lonely Christmas tree was seen as anti-Christmas.
"I'm a choir director in a church," he told The Washington Post. "I do Christmas carols in retirement homes! I perform Silent Night' 40 or 50 times each year! I thought the play was a really charming, wonderful, positive story about love and acceptance. ... Removing it from the Christian tradition was something I never thought anyone could ever come up with. We were telling a story about a little tree, so we used a familiar tune to help the kids get it.".........O`Reilly is an evil liar.
Posted by: A Hermit at January 5, 2006 11:43 AM
nipigon1,
Don't know about that, but that must have been the secret of her success. He parents shielded her from predominantly democrat dixie south. He wasn't going to allow his daughter be bugged down with societal problems while her fellow counterparts were forging ahead with their studies.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:45 AM
Didn't Rice say something about being too busy with piano lessons, or something similar, to notice racial problems "in the segregated South"?
Posted by: nipigon1 at January 5, 2006 11:39 AM
Zing!!!
Posted by: J at January 5, 2006 11:46 AM
oops...
link to Wisconson story:
http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=wsj:2005:12:27:539160:LOCAL
Posted by: A Hermit at January 5, 2006 11:46 AM
Good find, Hermit.
As I understand it as well, Silent Night's tune was used because it would be familiar to children, and therefore make it easier to learn to sing it with the lyrics that were written.
They could have sung Silent Night, but it likely wouldn't have been within context of the play.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:49 AM
You callin Billy Bob a liar?
Posted by: J at January 5, 2006 11:52 AM
2008, tell you what, when the US can keeps its nose out of other peoples business, I'll do the same. OK?
Posted by: Office Ed at January 5, 2006 11:43 AM
Hey ed if you want to brush up on your long distance Hand-Wringing so be it...right?
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:57 AM
Yeah, TJ, she definitely can and should be proud of her parents.
Posted by: nipigon1 at January 5, 2006 11:58 AM
Dave's wrong, 99.9 percent of what Bill says is crap.
Posted by: wesn08 at January 5, 2006 11:58 AM
2008,
if you've got a point, let me know.
Posted by: Office Ed at January 5, 2006 12:00 PM
Thats right Woke dude, tell blacks, like me whats good for me as an African American. I'm sure you know better than I do, whats good for me. I'm also sure that you know better than Condi, who grew up in the segregated South, whats good for blacks.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 11:35 AM
TJ......woke is a Liberal...Through his arrogance and intolerance he is merely seeking to "educate" you. You should feel grateful don't you know...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 12:02 PM
This is prbably why woke dude might fit in fine in Canada.
Posted by: TJ at 1/5/2006 11:37 AM
TJ, another sign of Chimpy's No Child Left Behind Act going astray.
Also, this is why we don't like you. Grow Up.
My guess is that you have experienced racism in my time, as have I, and I think you should know better than to not be this much of an asshole and to be so intolerant of other people.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 12:04 PM
2008,
Woke is also a war vet who served his country.............what about you? Fuck off, asswipe.
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 12:11 PM
Didn't Rice say something about being too busy with piano lessons, or something similar, to notice racial problems "in the segregated South"?
It's a well known fact that Rice's family was considered upper middle class and did not support the civil rights movement. That they wanted their daughter to be a well rounded person is to their credit. Their shielding her from her contemporaries and society in general has contributed to her lack of humanity. Lack of humanity in my opinion is not a characteristic I want in a Sec. of State. Blacks who vote rethug wish they weren't Black. I've got news for them though, the rethugs aren't going to let you into their club, no matter how many times you vote for them. They'll use you and then do everything in their power to keep you where they want you. I don't think it's even necessarily racism, but definitely classism.
Posted by: ganesha at January 5, 2006 12:17 PM
Sheesh: it's hell having to get in the back of the comment line.
Jay, you are sad, sad, SAD. Enough said.
and as a veteran, I say AAAmmmeeeennnn! Better late than never.
Goochx,If it is PM, it should be 1807,ha ha. Good comments.
To Woke,Edster, and all of the rest of my buds: also good posts!
Dildo has another "book" coming out? Holy retch, Batman! He blathered on at length on the radio factor about his appearance on Letterman, playing almost the whole segment in clips, with BOR's pithy, swaggering comments in between. He showed Letterman, he did!
Don't know how much more I can take before my head explodes! The only thing that gets me thruogh is that maybe,just MAYBE, these murders,criminals, crooks and thugs finally get what they SO RICHLY DESERVE, and that we have a righteous housecleaning in Congress in 2006 and 2008,for the rest,if they are not in jail yet{not holding my breath}.
{sigh,} anyway, happy new year to all, and to the trolls, words fail me.
Dnurse
Posted by: dnurse,Pbd at January 5, 2006 12:29 PM
I don't know how any Republicans can say Bill O'Reilly won that debate.
1. Letterman's show is not a political forum. He brings on guests, allows them to plug their product and tell some funny stories. It is telling that Dave didn't mention what product Bill was hawking.
2. If one watches Letterman regularly, like me, the amazing thing was what was missing from the interview. Usually after everything the guest says, the audience cheers, laughs or applauds. After everything O'Reilly said, there was only silence. Every time Dave put down O'Reilly, the audience whooped and applauded enthusiastically.
3. The one moment of Applause O'Reilly got was when he said Cindy Sheehan shouldn't be calling terrorists "freedom fighters". The audience agreed with him on that one point.
4. That applause for O'Reilly prompted Letterman to say "I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling that about 60 percent of what you say is crap, but I don't know that for a fact."
5. O'Reilly has a tendancy on these shows when he's in trouble, to say stuff like "Watch the Factor, you'll get addicted, we'll send you a hat." He did it to Jon Stewart and even on his own show to Howard Stern. It's a way for him to change the subject and plug his merchandise. Letterman wouldn't let him get away with something so trite, saying "Well send Cindy Sheehan a hat."
6. Letterman ended with a handshake, saying "Bill, it's always a pleasure." The audience roared laughing because that's a backhanded put-down Letterman often uses. When O'Reilly goes on The Daily Show and Real Time with Bill Maher, the audiences give him a hard time because they are almost all democrats. In stark contrast, this time Bill was given a hard time by an audience representing mainstream America.
It's a pity Letterman feigns stupidity on political matters. He did the same thing when Bush came on a few years back. If only Dave boned up on politics a little before these interviews.....he'd tear these guys apart.
Posted by: specialneedspresident at January 5, 2006 01:27 PM
Krusty, callable bonds mean callable by the issuer. The government doesn't issue them,the gov't bonds are due at maturity only. Those bonds are then redeemed by the gov't.;when Pres.Clinton had a couple of surplus years,as bonds matured they were paid and the next auction was for a lower amount thereby lowering the overall debt. Bonds held by China,et.al, are not due on demand,so once they own them they can try to sell them in the market or wait for redemption,clipping interest coupons all the while.
Posted by: TJM at January 5, 2006 07:09 AM
-------------------------------------------
Now that was not so hard was it... your initial comment appeared to imply that the US does not have an obligation to redeem them...
See what you can remember when you put your mind to it...(do not worry about my clients.. you can read about them in the FT & WSJ)
The US owes a bundle of internal and external debt & the current spending spree is not beneficial to the US economy (hardly covered on Faux News).....
So please next time you want to throw cold water on someone elses argument (ie foreign powers taking action on possible future US loan defaults) it always pays to run your argument over in your mind before you post misleading comments...
OMG did the yield curve just invert....
Posted by: Krusty at January 5, 2006 01:28 PM
TJ
fyi
98% of black folk do not support lil w, hallicheney, or their tokens
i guarantee you that the policies i support are much more favorable to blacks than those condi and colin support.....
did you see the 35,000 poor blacks standing in their concentration camps in nawlins? no electricity, no a/c, no facilities, no food, no water for 5 days......
tell us how you can possibly be in the 2%? who can the 2% be??
clue us in about yourself, TJ.......who are the 2%?
wonder why the victims couldn't get taken in by the rest of La?
why did they have to go out of state to another concentration camp?
segregation problem under the rug, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 01:34 PM
merely seeking to "educate" you. You should feel grateful don't you know...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 12:02 PM
you're welcome, OHATE......
i didn't know you were able to learn something each time we all kick your ass on here...
with your weak arguments and half truths and lies supported by newsmax references....
and of course, your "liberal" use of namecalling us "liberals" as if your namecalling is an argument in itself....what a maroon....
heh,heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 01:42 PM
I'm certainly not insulted by being called a liberal. I'm proud I am liberal.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 01:44 PM
It's something how the trolls come on together and they leave together.
HMMMMM, kind of funny.
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 01:56 PM
i didn't know you were able to learn something each time we all kick your ass on here...
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 01:42 PM
"ass kicking" just like you Surrendercrats did in 2004.....
The phrase "ass kicking" when spoken from the mouth of a Liberal like you is ludicrous.....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:04 PM
"It's something how the trolls come on together and they leave together.
HMMMMM, kind of funny."
What a coinky-dink!
Say... you dont think they might all be the same... nah!!!!
Anyway, it would have been nice if when Letterman was explaining how he has read about all of O'Reilly's lies (and therefore didnt have to watch the show -- Comprende, wingtards?) - it would have been nice if he would have plugged this site or mediamatters.com. Maybe he'll do a follow up, but I doubt it.
Either way though, Dave made O'Lielly look like the ass-clown that he is. And he did it in a way that should resonate with people who aren't as wonkish as people like us...
Posted by: Demosthenes at January 5, 2006 02:11 PM
did you see the 35,000 poor blacks standing in their concentration camps in nawlins
why did they have to go out of state to another concentration camp?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 01:34 PM
Good Gawd Dud you have lost it....
"concentration camp"
Really.....Go get some help....Your Loathing is eating away your brain...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:12 PM
resonate with people who aren't as wonkish as people like us...
Posted by: Demosthenes at January 5, 2006 02:11 PM
Nobody cares
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:14 PM
"ass kicking" just like you Surrendercrats did in 2004.....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:04 PM
-------------------------------------------------
'Surrendercrats', duh, is that like 'cutting and running' like 'WE'RE STAYIN' THE COURSE BUBBLE' is NOW doing after getting the 'ass-kicking' from John Murta (coincidence, huh!!) . .
Bush Says U.S. Will Start Cutting Iraq Troop Levels
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid;=aUzJaWKxCW1Y&refer;=top_world_news
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 02:21 PM
the phrase ass kicking coming from a chickenhawk
sounds pretty silly.....too!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 02:22 PM
Man, there are some real whack-jobs on this thread.
We got a real cast here:
TJ: Does that "T" stand for "token", buddy? Do you enjoy being exploited for political gain? Or are you just one of those self-loathing rethugs? Like all those prominent gay rethugs who support legislation that is oppressive to other gays... Get a clue.
2008, aka O'Hate: You sure write a lot of posts. Unfortunately, not a one of them contains any relavant information whatsoever. It seems to me you are just a copy and paste talking-point machine. But as soon as anyone asks you to get into more detail about your talking points, you transform into an insult-generator. Get some help, junior.
Jay: I think we all realized you were a phony right off the bat. But it was nice to have some of the vets around here confirm that fact for us civvies. You need some counseling, son. Did mommy and daddy not give you the attention and love you so longed for? This man is a parody of a freeper. He can't be serious...
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 02:24 PM
what do you call what happened to the victims of Katrina, OHATE?
maybe you agree with Bar Bush, eh....they are better off having lost their entire existence......except their actual lives....
what say you?
want your grandma, or other loved ones housed at the dome for 5 days when disaster strikes?
you do have loved ones in your life, i hope....
both those who love you and that you love?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 02:40 PM
[QUOTE - John in Chicago]
2008, aka O'Hate: You sure write a lot of posts. Unfortunately, not a one of them contains any relavant information whatsoever. It seems to me you are just a copy and paste talking-point machine. But as soon as anyone asks you to get into more detail about your talking points, you transform into an insult-generator. Get some help, junior
[END QUOTE]
Damn you! I was going to say that. 2008 has yet to say anything of real and true substance.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 02:44 PM
maybe you agree with Bar Bush, eh....they are better off having lost their entire existence......except their actual lives....
what say you?
want your grandma, or other loved ones housed at the dome for 5 days when disaster strikes?
you do have loved ones in your life, i hope....
both those who love you and that you love?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 02:40 PM
What part of "Mandatory Evacuation" or "This is the Big one" is so hard to understand?
True some could not leave....
Also True, many made the "choice" to stay......ever heard the phrase "personal responsibility"?
I guess the Looters in the streets were all escapees from your "concentration camps"
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:50 PM
"I guess the Looters in the streets were all escapees from your "concentration camps"
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:50 PM
-------------------------------------------------
Yeah, funny you bring that up. Funny how they were protrayed as scavengers when they were white, and as looters when they were black.
But whats even more interesting is taht you have once again failed to make any point whatsoever with your latest contribution to the discussion, and as is your modus operandi, you failed to address woke dude's questions.
I am so shocked!
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 02:53 PM
stupid response rwr...
what if your grandma can't walk, or is some other way incapable of helping themselves? or too poor to leave, no car, no money, just scared...
apparently, you and others like your hero, the legacy deserter, \
have no ability to put themselves in the shoes of those victims....
just blame them for it, eh? sick....
btw, your response has answered my question about you loving or being loved...
pitiful
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 02:54 PM
but you can change that by learning
empathy
caring about others instead of just yourself and $$$$$$
give it a try
others will notice
you;ll gain a life in the process
sincerely
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 02:55 PM
personal responsibility?
anyone in the lil w regime ever take that for anything they have done or haven't done, or haven't done well?
when?
rummy
wolfy
brownie
bolton
on and on....irregardless of the enormity of mistake, the bad actors have been rewarded and honored with medals or been appointed to high positions....
because they did well? NO
because they upheld the lies...YES
not to hard to figure out
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 03:01 PM
U peeps is fugged up so we niggaz is gwoina start hangin in dis hood so gets out...........................Heellz YAAA
Posted by: Jigaboo Jones at January 5, 2006 03:07 PM
2008, in the confines of his comfortable middle class existence, talks about "personal responsiblity" on the part of the Katrina evacuees. Leave it to a good conservative to blame the victims. 2008 doesn't know poor people; because if he did, he would realize that many do not own cars (the "welfare cadillac is a myth). In NOLA, mass transit was not exactly available for those wishing to leave.And perhaps he doesn't know (as it didn't get much press coverage)that those African Americans wanting to cross the Mississippi into the Gretna suberb were turned back by whites with guns. How can this person (and that's insulting to the human race) dare to talk "personal responsiblity" after seeing the shots of people who had lost EVERYTHING! The liberals were "stealing Xmas" while the NOLA evacuee children didn't have a home - let alone a decent Christmas. If 2008 had to leave his possessions and his pet to the ravages of flood, he'd be singing a different tune. In my years as a child protective social worker, I worked closely with cops. Most were very fine people who did their job effectively but with compassion. There were others who were abusive scum. 2008 claims to have been in law enforcement. I think we can say which of the aformentioned categories he was in.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:11 PM
Also True, many made the "choice" to stay......ever heard the phrase "personal responsibility"?
I guess the Looters in the streets were all escapees from your "concentration camps"
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:50 PM
aaahhh....$2.08 worth of thinking.......ever heard of poverty? how about someone that doesn't have a credit card and a car? that is what we mean't when we said that the "poverty issue" in america was exposed with Katrina......that so many were without the resources of transportation or credit cards, that they had to stay put.....unlike you, who is capable of cutting and running at leisure....your failure to grasp human struggle is mind numbing......so much for you "compassionate conservatives" hey I've got liquor free bourbon and "healthy" cigarettes....makes about as much sense as your fearless leader talking about his "compassion".....disgusting, weak, bedwetting, conservative is what describes you to a tee! now, shoo fly.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:13 PM
Posted by: Jigaboo Jones at January 5, 2006 03:07 PM
U peeps is fugged up so we niggaz is gwoina start hangin in dis hood so gets out...........................Heellz YAAA
deborah..........this is as disgusting and offensive as it gets.............kick this son of a bitch to the curb, would ya?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:19 PM
Also True, many made the "choice" to stay......ever heard the phrase "personal responsibility"?Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 02:50 PM
-------------------------------------------------
Ya know, checkbook balance, they said that about the Jewish people years ago, and it didn't fly then, and it ain't flyin' now . .
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 03:21 PM
Second Joyess's motion. These creeps belong on Stormfront - not here.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:24 PM
claudo....did you link to this person?.....check that out....nice.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:26 PM
Response to Joeyess - wow!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:32 PM
Blame GB for Katrina
Blame him for the Mine disaster
Blame him for going to war
Blame him the deficit
And make Cindy Sheehan the spokesperson for your cause.....just imagine the Chinese are invading and you can understand (or excuse) her. But never attack her cause she can say anything-she is the mouth piece.
So many on here are think alike that the only opinions you are ever gonna get here only validates your misguided hate of everything America does. SAD :(
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:34 PM
hey $2.08.......do you have any self-respect? if so, why do you feel you need to deride and invalidate the less fortunate?.....don't you care that babies and single mothers.....(WORKING poor) were so carelessly forgotten and then, based on the color of their skin, denounced as looters?......you ARE the bastard son of BORe, aren't you? do us and the nation a favor......join the armed forces and frag yourself.....you will be honored as a hero, I guarantee it.....the bush/crime family can't have the stain of military suicide on it's hands, so you will be assured to be interred at Arlington.......full honors of course, minus the fact that you have contributed exactly nothing to this country or this debate.............shoo fly.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:36 PM
go ahead call me a neocon-troll and question my 20 years of military service.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:40 PM
Blame GB for Katrina
Blame him for the Mine disaster
Blame him for going to war
Blame him the deficit
And make Cindy Sheehan the spokesperson for your cause.....just imagine the Chinese are invading and you can understand (or excuse) her. But never attack her cause she can say anything-she is the mouth piece.
So many on here are think alike that the only opinions you are ever gonna get here only validates your misguided hate of everything America does. SAD :(
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:34 PM
huh? a lot of illiteration, by anxious assholes, placing pointless posts. try another writing course......your last one failed, miserably......i'm not looking down my nose at you, but you made no sense and it all ran together. try again.....
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:42 PM
ok joeyess,
Why do you hate the America that we live in today so much?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:43 PM
And remember, Fox News was continuously showing the same clips of African Americans "looting" - when I would use the term surviving.They juxtaposed that footage with shots of white people waiting in line for supplies at a Mississippi Wal*Mart. They did the same thing with the footage of a basketball game fight, a ways back, which involved a group of minorities - it was shown repeatedly. And TJ thinks that Fox is the least racist network!?
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:44 PM
We can't blame Bush for the actual events; but we can blame him for not (as 2008 would say) "taking responsibility". If we were as lax and negligent in our jobs, as the Bush administration, we would be fired!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:48 PM
Blame GB for Katrina
Blame him for the Mine disaster
Blame him for going to war
Blame him the deficit
I don't blame the man for the hurricane, just the HORRIBLE response to it, and so should you. I don't blame the man for the mine disaster, only the loosening of FEDERAL regulations by HIS administration that led to it. and so should you. I do blame him for going to war in Iraq.......IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11......and you should too. I most certainly blame the man for the defict.....HE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT......$280 BILLION SPENT IN IRAQ, YOU NIMROD, FOR NOTHING BUT HIS HARD-ON.....and you should too. but without possessing the ability to think critically or voice your thoughts cogently.....I can only hope. and you should too.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 03:50 PM
"Why do you hate the America that we live in today so much?"
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:43 PM
-------------------------------------------------
No, sir, it is you who hates America. Do you know why? Because you do not question, in fact you EXCUSE, the wreckless policies of this Administration. You and your ilk make any and every excuse for the deserter Bush.
We, on the other hand, are the true patriots. We love America so much that we want to it to live up to the ideals that it used to. As the lone super power, it is incumbant on us to make the world a better place. Not a more dangerous, fearful place.
REAL patriots are the ones who question the actions of their Government.
Jingoistic sheep are the ones who say things like "America, Love it or Leave It". OR who consider any questioning or criticism of America to be "hating America". That narrow view is so simplistic it would be laughable, if it weren't fo effing sad.
You are a sad man, Tim.
I do not hate America. But I do have a huge problem with the right-wingtardification of this country. The people America deserve better than the lying, thieving crooks currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 03:50 PM
joeyess,
why do you hate the America that we live in today so much?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:52 PM
Headlines today read that this was the worst day in Iraq since 2003. American casualties up to 2187. How can anyone, with any rational thinking ability, defend this indefensible administration?
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 03:54 PM
And another thing, "Tim in OK"
We are trying to help America, and the world. People like you are trying to protect your party - no matter how much damage it causes the nation.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Take off your blinders and open your eyes to George Bush's America. Look at what he has done to our once-thriving economy. Look at how he has squandered the once great alliances across the globe. Look at how the "Great Uniter" has put a rift so deep in this country's gut that it may never heal. Look at how he has filled key positions in vital government posts with know nothing cronies.
Look, in horror, upon George Bush's America. If you can say that this is how you want your country to be, then I guess you are supporting the right person. As sad as that may be.
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 03:55 PM
For you John...
Every reform movement has a lunatic fringe.
Theodore Roosevelt
Liberals like you and your ilk here Are the fringe....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 03:56 PM
So John you love America but only when it starts conforming to your ideals? Is that the right conclusion?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:57 PM
Tim, why do you blindly accept everything that the Bush administration is doing? As Americans we have the right and responsibility to speak out when we think this country is taking a wrong turn. Should the abolitionists have kept their mouths shut about slavery?
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 04:00 PM
Tim
This is what I HATE about America today. THE LYING!! 'Illegal Wiretapping' could have prevented 9/11!!! Hell, Bubble's PDB (Aug.'01) said 'OLB flyin' planes into skyscrapers' and this tidbit, along with knowledge of Moussaoui paying $8,000 cash to fly jets, was never even brought up at the WH meeting on 9/4/01 . .
The Dick is truly a JOKE and he thinks at least half the American population walk around pickin' our noses and scratchin' our butts . . .
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Cheney Says Eavesdropping `Critical' to Security
Jan. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Vice President Dick Cheney will say in a speech today that eavesdropping inside the U.S. without court approval has helped prevent terrorist attacks in the last four years and suggest that a similar program might have prevented the Sept. 11 attack on the Pentagon.
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 04:00 PM
go ahead call me a neocon-troll and question my 20 years of military service.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:40 PM
ok joeyess,
Why do you hate the America that we live in today so much?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:43 PM
no one questions your military service, tim. why do you question my patriotism? You see, I don't "hate" america as you so sophmorically put it........I love my country......the one my father died for in WWII......in the ball turret of a B-17, with the 8th Army Air Corps.......I love Americas ideals...I don't have time to explain them to you and if you don't know of what i speak then YOU are a waste of time.....however, when the gap, between America's ideals and my government's actions is so vast that the country is divided like it is.....I tend to get PISSED at the people that caused the division and their enablers............LIKE YOU!!!!!!!!!!.....so don't come in here questioning my patriotism.......patriotism is the last vestige of a scoundrel....and i think the scoundrel that i smell is YOU.......shoo, fly.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:01 PM
Tim.....you're attempting to engage in a battle of wits and you've come un-armed.....quit while you're ahead..............
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:03 PM
"So John you love America but only when it starts conforming to your ideals? Is that the right conclusion?"
If, by "my ideals", Tim in OK, you mean honesty and fairness, then yes. If, by "my ideals" you mean not invading nations backed on a pack of lies, then yes. If, by "my ideals" you mean not raping the benefits of U.S. veterans when they return home, then again, yes. If, by "my ideals" you mean a government that actually tries to work out problems intelligently rather than by threats and spin, then yes. And if by "my ideals" you mean not lowering yourself to the level of the terrorists by torturing people, then again, a big hearty yes. That is the right conclusion.
What are your ideals, Tim in OK? Unless they include the Resubjegation of non-white people, the dumbing down of the armed forces, the reshaping of America into a Theocracy and the plundering of the U.S. treasury, then I fail to see how this Administration is living up to any sort of ideals (other than greed and cronyism, if those can be considered ideals).
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:07 PM
2,187 American casualties 2008. Maybe those soldiers need to be more "responsible." The "lunatic fringe" are scum like you who have theirs and don't give a rats ass about anybody else. No problem in sending off somebody else's kids to die. If it were up to you and your filthy fellow travelers, we would have stayed longer in Vietnam and racked up lots more deaths of other people's children. And let's get real, Bush's popularity is still around 50% - hardly the mandate of heaven.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 04:08 PM
Tim.....you're attempting to engage in a battle of wits and you've come un-armed.....quit while you're ahead..............
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:03 PM
Another "perceived" Liberal victory....you people slay me...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:09 PM
2,187 American casualties 2008. Maybe those soldiers need to be more "responsible." The "lunatic fringe" are scum like you who have theirs and don't give a rats ass about anybody else. No problem in sending off somebody else's kids to die. If it were up to you and your filthy fellow travelers, we would have stayed longer in Vietnam and racked up lots more deaths of other people's children. And let's get real, Bush's popularity is still around 50% - hardly the mandate of heaven.
AMEN, brother.........
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:10 PM
Another "perceived" Liberal victory....you people slay me...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:09 PM
would if I could.............literally.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:13 PM
hey,2008.......ya gonna start spell checkin' us now? hyuk, hyuk.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:14 PM
yeah j,
I guess I am just another apologist for the GB admin......your superior intellect(prerequesite for being liberal, don'tcha know) has me baffled into silence.
Guess I will banish myself to my troll room now.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 04:15 PM
still around 50% - hardly the mandate of heaven.
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006
being EXTREMELY generous.............
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:16 PM
claudo
I'm guessing the term "volunteer" escapes you....
What part of Military Duty can be extremely Dangerous to your health do you fail to comprehend?
Personal Responsibility clud....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:17 PM
yeah j,
I guess I am just another apologist for the GB admin......your superior intellect(prerequesite for being liberal, don'tcha know) has me baffled into silence.
Guess I will banish myself to my troll room now.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 04:15 PM
bye..........
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:17 PM
"yeah j,
I guess I am just another apologist for the GB admin......your superior intellect(prerequesite for being liberal, don'tcha know) has me baffled into silence.
Guess I will banish myself to my troll room now."
posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 04:15 PM
Maybe you should get some help with that inferiority ciomplex you are apparantly suffering from.
Why am I not surprised that a Wingtard once again completely failed to address any real issues.
All we got out of him was "Why do you hate America".
LMAO
C'mon, newshounds, admit that these trolls are all plants by you guys designed to make the right wing look worse than they already do. These people can't be real...
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:19 PM
Posted By Bill:
"You don't lash out at a GUEST for God's sake."
...criticism of David Letterman for taking Bill O'Reilly to task, and asking tough questions. Apparently Bill has never watched the O'Reilly Factor....or he would know that attacking guests is an O'Reilly tradition!!!
Posted by: Mark at January 5, 2006 04:22 PM
I will be back tomorrow...
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 04:22 PM
claudo
I'm guessing the term "volunteer" escapes you....
What part of Military Duty can be extremely Dangerous to your health do you fail to comprehend?
Personal Responsibility clud....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:17 PM
I guess the concept of a flawed policy and lying the nation into war escapes you............they didn't volunteer for the whims of the lay-about son of a lousy and criminal ex-president.......you fuckers are going to find out in '06 just how much the military loves this guy.....30 ex-military running for office in this country and ONE of them is a repug....the rest? all dems.......and all winners.......peace.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:22 PM
"Another "perceived" Liberal victory....you people slay me...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:09 PM"
-------------------------------------------------
Another worthless comment from the peaNut gallery.... And what are you, wingtard-at-large Kaye Grogan or something? Whats with putting the word "perceived" in quotes? Are you trying to "prove" a point of some kind? Is that some new kind of "literary" tool I am unaware of?
And do you ever have anything of any substance whatsover to say? Or do you just lurk in the background, occasionally tossing out insults but never, ever addressing any real issues beyond your copy-and-paste talking point of the day?
How much is the GOP paying you? Are they paying you in bananas?
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:25 PM
what "real issues"? How Katrina Blanco was more interested in her make-up and fshion than the abandoned corpses in New Orleans? What issues are you talking about?
Tim you're exactly right. I had sincerely hoped these liberals would emigrate from America after this last election, and leave the country to those who genuinely love it and appreciate it.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:26 PM
will be back tomorrow...
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 04:22 PM
should we alert the military? I can't wait...........I'm gonna miss him.....;<)
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:28 PM
You liberal ass holes suck! YOU are hurting my fucking country! I am sick of you atacking Bill oreilly and others that do not subscribe to your fucking bull shit.
Posted by: Brian Schreiber at January 5, 2006 04:28 PM
these liberals would emigrate from America after this last election, and leave the country to those who genuinely love it and appreciate it.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:26 PM
Remember all the promises.......
I don't know which was better the "threats" to leave the nation or the thought of that Dope Michael Moore holed up at home for three days straight crying his sad eyes out....
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 04:31 PM
what "real issues"? How Katrina Blanco was more interested in her make-up and fshion than the abandoned corpses in New Orleans? What issues are you talking about?
Tim you're exactly right. I had sincerely hoped these liberals would emigrate from America after this last election, and leave the country to those who genuinely love it and appreciate it.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:26 PM
I'll die before I leave this country and people like YOU will die before I leave this country. trust me on that one Gilligan.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:33 PM
Go away, Brian, go away and be afraid, be very afraid, hide under your bed!!
The e-v-i-l-d-o-e-r-s are gonna get you BOOOOOoooooo!!
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 04:33 PM
Mark:
If Letterman is going to "take Bill Oreilly to Task", maybe he should have caught up with his history, or at least have his staff research citations that back up his incidious claims.
But My hope is that this confrontation will expose America's education gap, as was displayed by Letterman.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:34 PM
You liberal ass holes suck! YOU are hurting my fucking country! I am sick of you atacking Bill oreilly and others that do not subscribe to your fucking bull shit.
Posted by: Brian Schreiber at January 5, 2006 04:28
then leave the site and go hump your own kind.....there's plenty of sites for the likes of you.......stormfront.com comes to mind.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:36 PM
"what "real issues"? How Katrina Blanco was more interested in her make-up and fshion than the abandoned corpses in New Orleans? What issues are you talking about?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:26 PM"
Does the ignorance of you people know no bounds?
I'll take a little bite out of your misdirection (shocker!) just because its so damn easy.
While I won't excuse the actions of any of the officials, both local and federal, regarding the Katrin response, there was one KEY difference in what you brought up compared to what Mike "the Saudi Horse fucker" Brown did.
You see, it was Mike Brown who personally wrote the emails about what a "fashion god" he was and how he had to make sure he looks "busy".
On the other hand, there is not one single memo written by Blanco, or even with her copied into it, mentioning anything about her appearance. The memos you are so delusional about were written by her aides, to aides.
Although there were some Blanco memos written to the Chimperor asking him for emergency federal assistance -- days before the hurricane struck. Memos that were ignored while Bush continued his vacation.
Kinda reminds me of another memo Bush ingored when he was on vacation in 2001......
Anyway, get your facts straight. As it stands, you have come to the gun fight wielding a swiss-army knife. You are making this way too easy.
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:38 PM
Go away, Brian, go away and be afraid, be very afraid, hide under your bed!!
The e-v-i-l-d-o-e-r-s are gonna get you BOOOOOoooooo!!
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 04:33 PM
bedwetters, aren't they?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:38 PM
all trolls to the diaper aisle.............all trolls to the diaper aisle..........
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:41 PM
I read your misrepresentation regarding Bill O and David L, you make it sound like Letterman chewed him up. Letterman admitted he has never watched the show so how can he really know anything.
I saw the interview, it didn't go down in the tone you spoke in. the tone you represent is the left leaning view that fox news is a right wing spin network and that O'Rielly is a right winger.
Try some honesty, I found your site looking for the transcript for a project.
Posted by: Rick at January 5, 2006 04:41 PM
2008,
Have you ever heard any republican faintly suggest they would protest a vote by leaving this country? How many conservatives do you hear accusing US troops of being terrorists like John Kerry did?
How many republicans supported Clinton push for America to join the International Criminal Court? But many democrats do, and are more willing to send US soldiers to EU courts and face their kangaroo justice system.
The only form of patriotism liberals can show is to expose America's national security secrets, deem insurgents "freedom fighters", hastily believe any suggestions of toture without any evidence, and liken our troops to the nazis and pol pot, as my shameless senator Durbin did.
thats why democrats are having a hard time gaining power because Americans are still not sure where their loyalties lie. France, or the US?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:42 PM
And of course once they have their ass roundly handed to them they resort to "wasnt it funny that they lost the election" or "michael moore was crying"... Anything but the real issues at hand.
But hey, I can play that.
Wasnt it fucking hilarious when it was revealed that Bush deserted his Reserve unit?
I thought it was so funny when it was revealed that Bush's Quaker Oats mother told the hurricane evacuees that they were "better off", didn't you?
Oh, and I was in stictches when we learned that Bush was spying on Americans! That was a good one!
These people have no shame, if in fact, they are even real people at all. I have my doubts.
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:44 PM
tim in OK, mark, brian, $2.08, tj, .............look folks, five jackoffs in a circle jerk..........hey boys, Rush called and said he just got a new supply of Oxy and a gross of condoms, wants you to swing by the mansion......have fun, enjoy the santorum.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:47 PM
John,
Both of them did, Brown and Katrina Blanco. Documents she released show she was meticulously interested in her fashion, and make up, instead of rolling those sleeves and getting to work. You, should catch up on your on readings.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:47 PM
Letterman admitted he has never watched the show so how can he really know anything.
-------------------------------------------------
Rick,
Letterman says he 'READS' as we all do. We read the actual articles or transcripts of his shows and then compare what Vibrator Man says to 'articles and/or transcripts of TRUTH' conveniently omitted by Falafal during broadcasts . .
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 04:50 PM
add rick to the "circle" of friends.......hey rick, rush invited you too!
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:51 PM
So TJ - were you as concerned about Santorum's Nazi remarks as detailed by the ADL? -
"After Santorum Apologizes, ADL Reiterates Concern About Use of Nazi Imagery In Filibuster Debate." And no evidence of torture - are you as seriously deluded as you appear to be. That comment cannot be dignified with an answer??!!!
p.s. high five to Joeyess and John!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 04:51 PM
Hey token, err, I mean TJ, I hate to break it to you, but last time I checked there was plenty of proof of torture.
And the last time there were any elections, which was November of last year, I believe it was Democrats who won across the board, no? Except in TX, but that is Wingtardville anyway.
So Durbin is your senator as well as mine, huh? Imagine that. A supposedly black professional living in liberal Illinois who supports the Reich-Wing agenda. Oh, the irony.
Are you a self-loather, TJ? Or are you just afraid of the dark? So afraid that you're willing to give up the liberty that Americans have fought and died for for the past 200+ years because you are afraid of the big bad al Qaeda?
Cuz all I see is someone who regurgitates tired, long ago discredited talking points over and over again. Someone who supports a man who strummed his six-string while poor blacks died and sufferred in n'awlins. A man whose idea of cutting the deficit is to give more tax cuts to the rich while cutting spending on vitally important communinty and social programs.
Yep. Self-loathing. Ain't that a bitch...
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:53 PM
p.s. high five to Joeyess and John!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 04:51 PM
backatcha
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:53 PM
And TJ - the stuff about the thrown Orio cookies has been debunked - check it out. Dream team for 2008 - Clinton/Obama. Mfume for Senate!!!
Posted by: claudo at January 5, 2006 04:54 PM
do you hear accusing US troops of being terrorists like John Kerry did?
-------------------------------------------------
Yesterday we bombed a house and killed 14 civilians after an unmanned drone reported seeing a 'terrorist' enter the home . .
No terrorist(s) were found in the home of the dead civilians . .
The military refuses to reveal the timeline between the 'sighting' and the 'bombing' . . WHY?
Posted by: Liz PbD at January 5, 2006 04:54 PM
"Both of them did, Brown and Katrina Blanco. Documents she released show she was meticulously interested in her fashion, and make up, instead of rolling those sleeves and getting to work. You, should catch up on your on readings.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:47 PM"
To quote my favorite late night tv host, " dont believe you". I saw the released docs, not a one of which was written by Blanco. Prove otherwise, Token.
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:54 PM
I caught this telling comment from a prominent Libertarian blog:
Letterman to O'Reilly: 60% of what you say is crap
HammerOfTruth, January 4, 2006
The best neocon defense of O'Reilly (so far) seems to come from the VENOM SPEWING Michelle Malkin:
"Bill O'Reilly took on David Letterman last night. Advantage: O'Reilly. The Political Teen has video. Letterman recycled chickenhawk arguments, muttered 'Honest to Christ!' when O'Reilly refused to back down from his criticism of Cindy Sheehan, and attacked O'Reilly's show despite admitting he doesn't watch it."
If this is the best she has to offer, perhaps Malkin should either retire her goose-stepping blog or ADMIT ABSOLUTE DEFEAT on this issue.
Update by Stephen VanDyke: To be more fair and balanced in our presentation of smackdown news, I readily to admit to feeling that 60% of what Paul Shafer says to Dave Letterman is SYCOPHANATIC CRAP. Of course, I'm just spit-balling here.
http://hammeroftruth.com/
Posted by: -R at January 5, 2006 04:56 PM
Yep. Self-loathing. Ain't that a bitch...
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:53 PM
tj is just a whiteboy living in Ill. eating cheetos, with orange hands and a little orange penis to match.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:57 PM
no girlfriends and only talks to his mother.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:58 PM
cogent arguments and facts do nothing for these trolls. so I'll bitch slap 'em like this ALL day!
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 04:59 PM
no, why should I be concerned about Santorum's remarks? He didn't compare American troops to nazis and Pol Pot did he?
And another reason democrats have failed as a party is that not one democrat i remember denounced Durbin for his remarks before he gave his fake apology which i didn't accept. Not one! I remember CNN claiming "republicans are upset at Durbin..", and it was true, because democrats kept quiet, giving their implicit support to him and his insults to the troops.
This is the same disturbing silence you hear from democrats when EU leaders pretend they had no knowledge about the CIA rendition program, which democrats knew to be false, this is the silence you hear from democrats when foreign dictators like Hugo Chavez spits out his anti-American messages, because many feel that if America looks bad, Bush will look bad.
But how can they convince an electorate they are Americans, and on our side when they remain silent, or refuse to take a stand when America is being maligned abroad? The only exception i know is Joe Biden who openly rebuked the BBC at some event in Switzerland.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:01 PM
thats why democrats are having a hard time gaining power because Americans are still not sure where their loyalties lie. France, or the US?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:42 PM
I'm betting France.....
Besides being Pacifists the Liberals seem to love Socialism as well......
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 05:02 PM
joyless,
You're such a pervert! If pillows could speak you might be charged with assault.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:05 PM
not one of you trolls have ever done one fucking thing in service to this nation and yet you continue to spew bullshit about being "better" americans than liberals..........well if torture, illegal wars, corruption of your party, hypocrisy(read terri schiavo), violations of the Constitution and adultery is your idea of a "better" american then I guess you got me beat...I give up, surrender, you win.......funny boys.....hope you all get what you deserve, an america that is safely and completly in a social darwinistic sense of itself....and when you are all senior citizens, and you may be, god help you if you ever need any kind of compassion....they'll just slide you your daily plate of gruel and tell you to enjoy it and shut the fuck up. peace.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 05:12 PM
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:05 PM
I'm not the one going to Rush's mansion tonight.....have fun, don't get any on ya.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 05:14 PM
You're such a pervert! If pillows could speak you might be charged with assault.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:05 PM
considering where I work, my guess is that I've had more women than you've ever jerked off about....right, jonathon?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 05:17 PM
claudo,
It funny you mentioned Obama. I voted for Obama. I hoped, that he would use his "media darling" status to bring some attention to the horrendous and failed public school system in Chicago. The democrat governor and mayor simpy don't care - their kids attend privte schools.
I hoped that he would appear on these shows, and at least bring more attention to the poverty, News Orleans-style poverty that hides behind to beautiful Chicago Sky scrappers. But what has he done?
Nothing! Wikipedia describes him as a "superstar", of what? Isn't it time we start demanding results from our elected officials?
The truth is Obama simply can't connect with the inner city life of chicago, having lived abroad or in hawaii most of his life, as a very wealthy kid.
I know its only his first year, but our media here in Illinois never ever ask critical questions, why only about three schools meet the NCLB required average, or why there are still homeless people, and ghetto lifestyles with rundown neighborhoods and still alarming crime rate in America's "murder capital".
Both the tribune and suntimes are more interested in Obama's "exotic name" than they are in his performance as the only black US senator.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:17 PM
Why do you hate the America that we live in today so much?
Tim & 2008
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."-Thomas Jefferson
"To announce that there must be no critisism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatrotic and servile, but it is also considered morally treadonable to the American public."-Theordore Rosevelt
For the love of God Tim & 2008, WAKE UP!!!!!! This country is headed towards bankruptcy, poverty is growing, more and more of our men and women in arms are dying for King Shrub's war for oil, our own Government is spying on us, and you two are questioning our patriotism? You have the nerve to call us American haters just because we don't blindly follow a Chimp and his line of Neo-Facists in office? Shame on both of you. If you want to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear, then fine, but do me a favor, if you don't care then leave and don't return, but don't you dare jepordize my generation's chances for living in a better America that the one that this generation is living in now.
Why do both of you hate America?
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 05:43 PM
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 06:08 PM
are the schools that bad in Ill.?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:18 PM
Rick, 2008 andTJ,
Which party won the most recent elections in NJ and Virginia?
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 06:20 PM
Illinois is a blue state, where the powerful are surprisingly detatched from reality. And its funny when you consider all the influential sons and daughters of Illinois, from Bob Novak, George Will, Hillary Clinton just to name a few.
Our state hosts the murder capital of america, hosts the most decaying, drug-infested neighborhoods, has a terrible record of school drop-outs, low standard of public education in the high schools. Lots of domestic problems, none of which either these powerful people mention, of debate. And you're suggesting I shouldn't criticize an out-of-touch senator?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 06:22 PM
only one thing i can say to you tim
there is no honor in disparaging war vets or fallen troops mothers
so please don't bother addressing me....
Honor the warriors, not the war
and i'm not the only one........there are thousands of us who really served in war zones and know something you never will
...you have no honor attacking war vets and their parents...
vvaw.org
ivaw.org
optruth.org
veteransforpeace.org
veteransforcommonsense.org
militaryfamiliesspeakout.org
goldstarmothersforpeace.org
veteransunited.org
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 06:23 PM
pa·tri·ot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ptr-t, -t)
n.
One who loves, supports, and defends one's country
Yeah, I brought it up, go look up the word patriot and see if it really fits you.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 06:18 PM
hey hayseed.......I don't see the word "government" in there anywhere.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:24 PM
TJ,
I understand blaming the Democrat governor for the school system after all he has been in office for a few years since your republican governor resigned after being indicted.
Why would you blame a Senator for the schools when they are a STATE function? Are you really a republican or just a liar? Remember you are supposed to be in favor of state's rights and less federal government.
I think that the governor republican or Democrat should take the blame for the schools, but you are being a little bit hypocritical to blame a Senator.
Posted by: J at January 5, 2006 06:26 PM
Our state hosts the murder capital of america, hosts the most decaying, drug-infested neighborhoods, has a terrible record of school drop-outs, low standard of public education in the high schools. Lots of domestic problems, none of which either these powerful people mention, of debate. And you're suggesting I shouldn't criticize an out-of-touch senator?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 06:22
hey tj.....why do you hate illinois?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:26 PM
In Other Words:
Letterman: I don't really know shit from shinola, and I am not smart enough to debate you on actual facts, but I have a FEELING you're wrong. Not from actually listening to YOU but from what I hear from others who likely don't actually listen to you either.
Modern Liberalism: don't bother with messy facts - just tell us what you FEEL.
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 06:30 PM
Hey Tim...I used to enjoy your point of view..didn't always agree with it..but you were always civil, what's up??
Posted by: kdog at January 5, 2006 06:31 PM
ok woke up,
valued the cyber friendship for a while, man.
Probably be back when Dems take back over. and yeah, I do believe that is gonna happen.
Anytime that you want to get together to compare DD214's, just let me know. If it is only 1 page, leave it at home. You trumpet the 2 years or so that you did so much, that I find it telling.
My Regards,
:)
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 06:37 PM
go ahead call me a neocon-troll and question my 20 years of military service.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:40 PM
let's see, your first post disparaged mrs. sheehan... the mother of a fallen soldier
your second post, shown above trumpets your 20 year career...
if you care to read the thread....you'll see i have only responded or called out an imposter named jay for claiming to be something he wasn't......
These are a few of his posts, someone you know? a relative perhaps?
>>from jay....
Why don't you all just blow each other?
Letterman proved to me he's an idiot...and most intelligent people agree.
All of you either fail to listen, or you suffer from not being able to look at any other perspective other than your own orgy of liberal BS.
Letterman was bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival. It was awesome.
-Iraq War Vet
Dave’s own audience turned on him last night – if you did’t see that you should be bent over and ridden like a roller coaster at a redneck carnival…like Dave.
I'll kill one just for you Spartacus next month. I'll look into his eye when he's dying, and tell the arab "Spartacus wanted this". He won't understand but my grin and your name will be the last things he witnesses on this Earth. It will be cool, and you can dream about it when you're lonely.
You never know who your talking to online. You just don't...isn't that crazy.
Your kids may come into the service, and when they do I’ll be waiting or someone like me will and I’ll whip that little fucker into a mean killing machine that daddy isn’t going to have shit on. Then ask him what’s he’s done…and watch him stare at you with eyes that say “You could never understand this”.
You could never understand this. And everyone who has served understands me. Bye.
Posted by: Jay at January 4, 2006 06:42 PM
ok-tim...that is all...you may now fall out and finish spit shining your shoes
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 06:38 PM
Modern Liberalism: don't bother with messy facts - just tell us what you FEEL.
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 06:30 PM
how about when newt gingrich said susan smith, murdering her two young sons, was the result of our liberal and permissive society?......was he speaking from facts or only telling us what he felt?......turns out susan smith's stepfather had been having an affair with her since she was 15....here's the kicker....he was head of south carolina's christian coalition and head of the state republican party....never heard as much as a peep from newt to liberals over that little flap....or where is the apology from hannity over the terri schiavo circus.....or was he only saying what he felt.....you fucking hypocrites are the problem with this country and you're all going to burn for it..........trust me.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:39 PM
i don't trumpet a damn thing and you know it...
but i'm not gonna let one of your ilk come on here, debasing real vets and their parents and pretending to be hard....
dig?
i was in from 68-72......so i'll never have the years of spit shine experience that you have incurred....so i'll just bow out....
still, i do know enough to know this is....
no honor in disparaging other vets or their moms!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 06:42 PM
kdog,
Sorry man the atmosphere in here has changed.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 06:43 PM
TJ....I'm waiting to hear....why do you hate Illinois?.....(blink, blink)
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:43 PM
J : I don't blame him for the decades of neglect the public schools have been subjected to, but I blame him for not drawing any attention to the problem at all. He's the media darling, imagine if he wrote a nice op-Ed in the tribune of Suntimes condemning the state of decay in thes public schools, or the persistent crime problem. it may not be within his jurisdiction to talk about it, but in Gods name, bring more attention to it, and let no child be left behind. haven't we enough people in prison yet?
And I don't hate Illinois. What I hate is class divide that exists in this state. There is the powerful media and wealthy class, and there's the underclass. The underclass never gets any media coverage, and the poverty and despair thats tearing up families are almost not covered in the elite Chicago media where there are so few minority journalists. Dick durbin and the governor are just out of touch, so I preserved my hope that Obama will break from this elite crowd and expose Illinois' New Orleans.
We read about Iraq everyday, but the violence there is comparable to that in Chicago. The difference is that one gets full coverage the other doesn't. One gets billions in reconstruction, the other doesn't.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 06:43 PM
waiting for tom's response as well...........
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:45 PM
Never saw so much frantic troll activity in all my life. What is the purpose trolls? What sort of gratification do you get from coming on here imitiating Beavis and Buthead? Your own kind doesn't like you, or what?
I hope all you trolls take a minute to read Woke Dude's compilation of Jay's posts (not to be confused with other Jay's of course). This is your fellow traveler. Proud?
And get real. This guy's a solider the same way I'm a ballerina. The only thing he's ever fought is a hangover. Jay: Stop sniffing the glue, man, you'll feel better.
Watched O'Reilly's edited version of he and Letterman last night after reading partial transcripts the day before. My absolute favorite line of Dave's wasn't the 60% crap comment, it was "ok, so let's get back to your little red and green stories..."
Way to go Dave.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 06:51 PM
I am not sure how to respond Joey since I am a "fucking hypocrite" and I am "going to burn for it". Oh, I know how to respond:................./birdchirp
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 06:51 PM
And I don't hate Illinois. What I hate is class divide that exists in this state. There is the powerful media and wealthy class, and there's the underclass. The underclass never gets any media coverage, and the poverty and despair thats tearing up families are almost not covered in the elite Chicago media where there are so few minority journalists. Dick durbin and the governor are just out of touch, so I preserved my hope that Obama will break from this elite crowd and expose Illinois' New Orleans.
We read about Iraq everyday, but the violence there is comparable to that in Chicago. The difference is that one gets full coverage the other doesn't. One gets billions in reconstruction, the other doesn't.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 06:43 PM
don't try to paint yourself as a compassionate conservative now.........sell it somewhere else! as far as the violence in Iraq being comparable to Chicago? BULLSHIT!!!!!! just like brit anti humean.....I defy you to walk down the streets of Bagdad in broad daylight and claim it is just as safe as Chicago.....Jesus H. Christ! is your conservative disconnect so vast?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:51 PM
uh, let's see
lil w spending half a Trillion in iraqnam...one half of which earmarked for reconstruction has been spent on security instead, is obama's fault
do tell!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 06:54 PM
btw....
135 died in iraqnam today, 5 were americans.....
last year at this time, 1 a day avg.....by summer it was 4 a day and now who knows...??
you wanna cite some statistics to match what you're saying about Chi town?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 06:56 PM
am not sure how to respond Joey since I am a "fucking hypocrite" and I am "going to burn for it". Oh, I know how to respond:................./birdchirp
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 06:51 PM
ohhhh i don't know.....maybe some facts?.....oh, that's right, you have none. only invective and accusations of liberals and the ills that accompany them.........now, do you see why i called you a hypocrite?.....didn't think so......
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:57 PM
Gosh TJ is George aware of this situation?
Perhaps you could ask him to come and help your state the same way he helped in Louisianna.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:00 PM
It's like this dude. I am busy grading homework and I stop in from time to time. If you want to get into a reasoned discussion then I am more than prepared. If you are going to to immediately start swearing at me and telling me I am "going to burn", then talk to the hand. My Freshmen act more mature than that.
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 07:02 PM
Deniro: You talking to me man? You must be talking to me, i'm the only one named dude....
etc...
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 07:05 PM
"Better to be king for a night than schmuck for a lifetime." :-)
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 07:08 PM
I'm not a compassionate conservative - whatever that means, I'm an isolationist conservative, and more importantly, an American!
My point is that of all the almost 75 pages per newspaper, almost nothing about the issues Americans care about are chronicled in the news media.
The democrats running the state are happy to keep the status quo, so that more illitrate kids can subscribe to their socialist welfare policies instead of dealing with the core problems that sustain this culture of poverty.
Conservatives are much more interested in the welfare of the domestic fabric that make up America. With our failed education system, will our kids be able to compete in a global environment? Why are there supposedly more African Americans in Prisons than in Colleges? Why do we still have homeless people on our streets?
These are questions reasonable Americans are asking, but the questions being asked by the media are different.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:08 PM
Just saw the clip! What a stitch! I hadn't watched Letterman in years, but that cat has class! Honestly how can anyone take O'Reilly and Gibson's "War on Christmas" seriously? What a joke!! And to listen to Bill act as if the country needs to get over Shrub f-ing up and getting us into this immoral war-I give Dave credit for holding his composure. The nerve of some people. But when Letterman pointed out that O'Reilly, who has sacrifced nothing during this war, had no right to speak on behalf of Cindy Sheehan-claiming that she was being used by the "far left," I just laughed out loud as the blood drained from O'Reilly's face. What a chump!
Posted by: SouthPaw at January 5, 2006 07:09 PM
what happened to the reponse from woke up about me being a troll
and the one that I responded with?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 07:11 PM
George Bush is not the governor of Illinois!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:11 PM
It's like this dude. I am busy grading homework and I stop in from time to time. If you want to get into a reasoned discussion then I am more than prepared. If you are going to to immediately start swearing at me and telling me I am "going to burn", then talk to the hand. My Freshmen act more mature than that.
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 07:02 PM
then don't come here and deride liberals just because we demand accountability from our government........don't you? if you don't hold this administration accountable then you are a hypocrite.....you people demanded accountability for a blow job, I just thought that since your sensibilities are so easily offended as to applaud the impeachment of a president for fellatio, then i would bet the farm that an illegal war, rampant corruption, and circumventing the Constitution would be grounds for a first class hanging....but I could be wrong....
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:13 PM
I'm not a compassionate conservative - whatever that means, I'm an isolationist conservative, and more importantly, an American!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:08 PM
what is the color of the sky in your world? apparently GW doesn't know what a compassionate conservative is either.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:17 PM
I'm not a compassionate conservative - whatever that means, I'm an isolationist conservative, and more importantly, an American!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:08 PM
what is the color of the sky in your world? apparently GW doesn't know what a compassionate conservative is either. never heard the term, huh? oh the disconnect!!!!
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:18 PM
Joeyess,
Do you notice any similarity, between what Tom is saying about you, and what I've posted previously about you?
You want a discussion, but can't sustain one because you're incessantly rude and can't do without the use of profanities that tanish the quality of any debate.
Tom's point was precisely what I mentioned in previous threads, and you thought I was bluffing. You need to be more civil and composed if you're to be taken seriously. Grow up and show some maturity!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:18 PM
George Bush is not the governor of Illinois!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:11 PM
Bingo, he's the King of America and fixing things is his specialty. No Child Left Behind! my behind.
And isn't your Conservative party the one anxious to substitute Intelligent Design for actual Science? If your kids end up ignorant and unemployable don't blame the liberals.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:19 PM
yeah, like if he said the same thing politely you wouldn't still discount it with name calling, diversion and attacking the messenger>>>
hehehehehhehehhe!
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 07:20 PM
"And isn't your Conservative party the one anxious to substitute Intelligent Design for actual Science? If your kids end up ignorant and unemployable don't blame the liberals."
Whhhhaaaatt?
I'll give you the opportunity to correct yourself, because this ignorance is beyound contempt. If you're going to talk about soemthing, please be sure to at least do some research! So correct yourself now, and preserve any shred of integrity you have.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:23 PM
Dignity talk from a black man who supports lil w?
Puleeze!
ever hear the term....self loathing?
try renting A Soldier's Story and watch it closely, TJ
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 07:26 PM
President Bush said Monday he believes schools should discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching students about the creation of life.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/08/01/national/w200833D87.DTL
Is there somebody up the Republican food chain that trumps Shrub's position?
Posted by: SouthPaw at January 5, 2006 07:26 PM
Tom's point was precisely what I mentioned in previous threads, and you thought I was bluffing. You need to be more civil and composed if you're to be taken seriously. Grow up and show some maturity!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:18 PM
What a bald-faced liar you are. Read all of your own posts and then come back and pretend Joeyess is the rude, intolerant one. You hate whole countries! Most countries! You HATE everyone and everything outside of your little troll village.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:27 PM
George Bush is not the govenor of Illinois!
Posted by: TJ at 1/5/2006 07:11 PM
LMFAO.................what a dumbfuck.
Jonathon
Posted by: Jonathon Holmes at January 5, 2006 07:28 PM
JayMayandJoseph,
One last time, are you going to salvage yourself and you name, by amending one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seem in my entire life? Or would you like some eductaion on what this controversy is about?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:29 PM
I'm betting France.....
Besides being Pacifists the Liberals seem to love Socialism as well......
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 05:02 PM
joyless,
You're such a pervert! If pillows could speak you might be charged with assault.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 05:05 PM
Modern Liberalism: don't bother with messy facts - just tell us what you FEEL.
Posted by: Tom at January 5, 2006 06:30 PM
not to mention the daily invective thrown around on 1300 + radio stations. all of the sudden, when the sky darkens on the political horizon, you folks want to be civil? should have thought about that when you were slapping that man/bitch Gingrich on the back for painting everyone without the correct conservative credentials as un-american....too little, too late.....I'm going to enjoy watching the dismantlement of a presidency, come '07......coming to a C-Span near you.....the impeachment of GWB!
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:31 PM
One last time, are you going to salvage yourself and you name, by amending one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seem in my entire life? Or would you like some eductaion on what this controversy is about?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:29 PM
educate us tj.....i can't wait.....tell the atheist on the thread about I.D
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:35 PM
Conservatives are much more interested in the welfare of the domestic fabric that make up America. :by TJ at 7:08pm
__________________
So that's why this country is in such GREAT shape. HAHAHAHA!!!
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 07:35 PM
WHAT HAPPENED TO MY 6:18 POST AND WOKE UP'S RESPONSE?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 07:36 PM
What a bald-faced liar you are. Read all of your own posts and then come back and pretend Joeyess is the rude, intolerant one. You hate whole countries! Most countries! You HATE everyone and everything outside of your little troll village.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:27 PM
thanks for handling my light work..........
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:37 PM
"I'll give you the opportunity to correct yourself, because this ignorance is beyound contempt. If you're going to talk about soemthing, please be sure to at least do some research! So correct yourself now, and preserve any shred of integrity you have.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:23 PM
One last time, are you going to salvage yourself and you name, by amending one of the most ignorant posts I've ever seem in my entire life? Or would you like some eductaion on what this controversy is about?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:29 PM
Give me the opportunity? Give me one last chance? Until what?
Shaking in my high-heeled leather liberal boots....
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:39 PM
WHAT HAPPENED TO MY 6:18 POST AND WOKE UP'S RESPONSE?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 07:36 PM
you've been supplanted by me.............don't ya know? it's that evil liberal conspiracy.....
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:40 PM
those posts are gone, eh? what about it deborah? i never mind being deleted, but prefer when they leave the posting....that way, i don't think i lost me mind....heh,heh
maybe it got flagged by the "program" eh?
see, that's what happens when you frequent "free speech" sites, tim......now you probably got a file on you....
lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.....
heh,heh
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 07:42 PM
Let me help you with some facts:
In America, political parties do not decide the school curricula! School boards do, and its entirely localized, not national. So the conservative party couldn't have "substituted anything"!
And reflect on the word "substitute"! Is it feasible or possible to substitute anything for the theory of evolution? No! Because after high school, in college biology, almost every concepts in physiology is explained in terms of evolution.
The debate was whether or not the theory of "intelligent design", can be taught as another possible theory of how life began, so students can understand the flaws in the theory of evolution and appreciate its inconclusive nature. Others insisted this debate didn't belong in a science class, and the judge agreed.
Some would argue this debate would even provoke better understanding of the theory of evolution, allow kids be more inquisitive and more probing, exacly what we want in a science classes.
Finally, the court case was in Pennsylvania, not Illinois where no such debate exists.
If the media did their job, you wouldn't display your ignorance this blatantly.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:44 PM
TJ accusing someone of ignorance...that is rich:)
Posted by: kdog at January 5, 2006 07:47 PM
this guy is arguing for replacing science with fantasy, like it's ok because a handful of religious extremist fundamentalists won a few school board seats,,,, therefore...forget science...it means whatever the fundies say.....
then calls anyone who doesn't agree ignorant...
heh,heh.....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 07:48 PM
If the media did their job, you wouldn't display your ignorance this blatantly.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:44 PM
funny....that's exactly what we say about you trolls concerning this administrations illegal war, wiretaps, etc.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:49 PM
Tom and TJ,
If you don't like profanity why don't you go find a fucking christian site to comment on. I suppose you probably thought it was funny when Cheney told someone to fuck off on the senate floor.
Posted by: john t at January 5, 2006 07:51 PM
Krusty,in the forlorn hope that you'll read this,you are not innumerate,you simply can't read.My initial post was to woke dudes question of what happens if China calls the debt.In that sense, as asked,the bonds aren't callable. In the financial sense they're not callable either. How you managed to infer that they were not redeemable,I can't say but maybe reading comprehension is too high a standard.There was no "misinformation" in the post.There is a good chance I'll read about your clients in the FT or the WSJ or the BR.
Posted by: TJM at January 5, 2006 07:51 PM
Shaking in my high-heeled leather liberal boots....
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:39 PM
you have high heeled leather liberal boots? COOL!!!!
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:52 PM
Some would argue this debate would even provoke better understanding of the theory of evolution, allow kids be more inquisitive and more probing, exacly what we want in a science classes.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:44 PM no one argues that in the scientific community......only in the holier-than-thou conmunity........btw.....do you folks REALLY want kids to be inquisitively probing anything?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:55 PM
If the media did their job, you wouldn't display your ignorance this blatantly.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:44 PM
You hit the nail on the head there Teej! There's the difference between you and the rest of us. We read books, publications, and go to....college! We don't rely upon Faux news to educate ourselves.
Man, I should be getting paid for this....next?
And yes, Joeyess, I own any number of high-heeled black leather boots with very pointy toes. Never know when they might come in handy!
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:57 PM
woke dude,
You can't "replace science" with anything! God have mercy. I majored in biology, the theory of evolution can't "be replaced" with "non science", why is that so hard to understand?
Science is something that changes, experiments waiting to be disproved or refuted, not something static or permanent. Kids should have a wide spectrum of knowledge at that early age. Teaching ID isn't going to hurt them a bit. But being an ex-teacher youself, you should know that a little bit of controversy, debate, makes subjects a little less boring.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:57 PM
There was no "misinformation" in the post.There is a good chance I'll read about your clients in the FT or the WSJ or the BR.
they can stop buying though....right? no more bailing out the usa? buying the yen or the euro?
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 07:58 PM
TJ=the truth beagle
i do believe...heh,heh....i wondered what happened to you.....
i was worried all that 3rd person stuff and all
the truth beagle says this, the truth beagle says that
so......in SCIENCE class we should have kids discussing religion?
like the one where the earth sits on a big turtle and....
it's kinda scary thinking you might teach in a public school, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 08:03 PM
TJ=the truth beagle
i do believe...heh,heh....i wondered what happened to you.....
i was worried all that 3rd person stuff and all
the truth beagle says this, the truth beagle says that
so......in SCIENCE class we should have kids discussing religion?
like the one where the earth sits on a big turtle and....
it's kinda scary thinking you might teach in a public school, eh?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 08:03 PM
Actually, Woke, I was a public school teacher in another life and they wouldn't let me teach Wiccan and astrology no matter how interesting it was....
Can I sue someone over this?
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 08:09 PM
TJ,
A good blog to check out on the state of our public school system is
www.dailyhowler.com
Bob Somerby is liberal, and he doesn't pull punches. He also has a passion for education.
peace
Posted by: vermontdave at January 5, 2006 08:11 PM
I was pointing out how someone falsely claimed conservatives were trying to "substitute" ID for the theory of evolution.
I am stating that nothing unscientific can substitute science. I don't care if ID is taught, in a biology class or not, the point is we shouldn't for one moment think that all science is static. And no one's thinking of a scenario where a whole lecture will be devoted to ID, its simply starting a lecture on evolution by stating there are other "unscientific theories of how life began"...,
Teachers can then exploit this opportunity to tell students how experiments are conducted from simple hypothesis, research, and stuff that primes that kids up and gets them more interested in how simple observations become scientific principles.
Whats so bad about that? Thats not religion!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:17 PM
vermontdave,
I'll check the site out, thanks.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:18 PM
It sure as hell isn't science mr. garrison....
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 08:19 PM
And no one's thinking of a scenario where a whole lecture will be devoted to ID, its simply starting a lecture on evolution by stating there are other "unscientific theories of how life began"..., Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 08:17 PM
No one's thinking of that scenario other than the "Creationists" (Evangelical Conservatives) who disingenuously changed the name to "Intelligent Design" and tried to have it pawned off as "science".
If you want to indoctrinate kids by teacahing Christian theology in public school then fess up and call it teaching Christian theology. Otherwise, you're just another liar.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 08:28 PM
yeah JMayJo....
sue TJ and his fundamentalist mentors....
heh,heh,heh
don't think he had those religions in mind when he and mr. hat began the "science" discussion
Interesting and disengenuous how the fundies attacked public education and humanity teaching for 30 years saying it was teaching "values" education like sex, art, music, etc...and should instead focus on math, reading and science
who knew their definition of science included ONLY their religion's precepts??
well, we know now and will no longer stand for it......
start your own schools
and another thing while i'm on the subject
i'm sick of watching buses roll down my street to the catholic HS bringing students from several surrounding counties......and taxpayers are paying for it....
the same folks who didn't want to pay to bus black kids to decent schools (so they could continue their segregation in the suburbs)....
have no problem busing kids the other direction to a private school......
and then complain about the costs of public education, which, unlike private schools, take all students, irregardless of their disabilites, grades, or socio economic status...
what's that you say? their parents pay taxes too? so fkn what?
there is a perfectly good public school down their block...no one is making them send their kids to get indoctrinated in their religion...
if they choose that....let THEM pay for it all.......
why should we?
Posted by: woke dude at January 5, 2006 08:41 PM
pa·tri·ot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ptr-t, -t)
n.
One who loves, supports, and defends one's country
Yeah, I brought it up, go look up the word patriot and see if it really fits you.
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 06:18 PM
______________________________________________
hey hayseed.......I don't see the word "government" in there anywhere.
Posted by: joeyess at January 5, 2006 06:24 PM
______________________________________________
The country is the people.
Not the government.
The government is there to serve the people.
Not the other way around.
Hence, to question the government is in the best interest of the people.
When the people has become complacent and apathatic and have lost the WILL to question governments, the country has then set itself up for easy take-over by tyranny.
That is why you see dictatorships spring up more easily in places where people do NOT have a voice in government.
Hence to question the leadership is PATRIOTIC.
And to label these questions unpatriotic is PROPAGANDA.
Make no mistake, having a balance of liberal and conservative views checking each other, is what makes this country great.
Shipping off half the country because they don't conform to your views will make you North Korea.
A deviant country where everybody conforms and nobody questions the tyranny because those who can are already too oppressed to do so.
Notice how that 'people's heaven' is dirt poor and wretched.
That is America when you take away everybody but the rednecks.
Never forget the foundations this great country was built on:
The government is FOR the people.
The people do NOT exist for the government.
Ergo, when the people questions the government, it tells you that the COUNTRY has found its governance lacking.
If you think nobody should be putting the tough questions to the government, go to North Korea.
You'll fit right in.
Posted by: Joe Hardy at January 5, 2006 09:16 PM
WTF is wrong with this guy(BOR)! First, he threw a temper tantrum on NPR's Terry Gross show a couple years ago over Al Franken's book and name. Then he yelled at callers on his radio show whenever they disagree with him, including cons for that matter. Later, he makes bully remarks on morning TV shows on the mainsteam networks. Also later, he didn't like the fact that KO on MSNBC was talking about Bill's sex tapes affairs in which it ruined himself in the Media business. And now, he goes on a rampage on Letterman's show, mouthing off everything from Xmas wars to Cindy Sheenan. I swear! This ranting lunitic has a mental disease up the yazoo, and his diehard supporters seem to follow him like the Night of the Living Dead.
Bill! Your one of the lost Looney Tunes! Your no better than Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, and Rev. Jim Jones.
Posted by: Proud Liberal at January 5, 2006 09:30 PM
Deborah,
Thanks for letting this one drift into the OT.
Posted by: vermontdave at January 5, 2006 09:33 PM
Oreilly should also realise that he might have intellectually intimidated Letterman, and many of these other entertainment hosts. Perharps he should avoid topics that might proove too challenging for them.
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 09:57 AM
{intellectually intimidated Letterman} You are kidding aren’t you???
#####################
Just the same 'ol same 'ol.......It has to be your way or the highway right....
You...Are the picture of intorerance
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 10:08 AM
You really shouldn’t talk about lil’w that way, it’s treasonous.
By the way, what is “intorerance” a picture of.
####################################
Why should I appreciate some distant history that bears very little relevance to the present?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 10:36 AM
Yes, why worry about the distant history of a president flouting the law, and spying on his opponents. Could never happen again, could it?
One of the reasons we study history is to learn from it, but then that would cloud some peoples visions I guess.
#############################
If being a pacifist means that I oppose violence as a means to get what you want then yeah, sign me up. If it means I'd rather see problems solved in a civilized and intelligent manner, then put my name down.
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:41 AM
Careful P C sure wouldn’t want to get called out for trying to solve a problem without fighting and killing. There is just so much to be gained by war, and certainly nothing to be gained by diplomacy, and civil debate.
P.S only area I have been to in Canada is Quetico National park on canoeing trips.
What some beautiful scenery. Will remember those trips until I get Alzheimers.
########################################
I don't think it's even necessarily racism, but definitely classism.
Posted by: ganesha at January 5, 2006 12:17 PM
IMHO That is hitting the proverbial nail on the head
####################################
Blame GB for Katrina
Blame him for the Mine disaster
Blame him for going to war
Blame him the deficit
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:34 PM
Katrina – no I do not blame lil’w for that storm, or the destruction afterward (although the levies maybe should have been upgraded).
What I do blame him for is appointing unqualified people to positions of great importance.
The mine disaster – again, not his fault. I do question his appointing mine company insiders to regulate the safety of said mines.
Going to war – Yes, that was his decision. (Don’t even tell me everyone agreed)
The deficit – Are you just kidding, Who else do you want to blame that on, clinton’s surpluss.
##############################
So John you love America but only when it starts conforming to your ideals? Is that the right conclusion?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 03:57 PM
No, the ideals America was founded on.
---And if by "my ideals" you mean not lowering yourself to the level of the terrorists by torturing people, then again, a big hearty yes. That is the right conclusion.---
Posted by: John in Chicago at January 5, 2006 04:07 PM
Great post John.
########################
How many conservatives do you hear accusing US troops of being terrorists like John Kerry did?
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 04:42 PM
The problem with these things is that rwr’s never seem to be able to get off of the talking points. What kerry said was,
and there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of -- of -- of -- historical customs, religious customs, whether you like it or not. Iraqis should be doing that."
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2005/12/kerry-on-us-troops-terrorizing-iraqi.html
now before you jump up and down, read his comment, tell me, if armed troops broke into your home in the middle of the night wouldn’t you be terrified, hence, terrorizing children.
I know it requires being able to understand the nuance of an educated speaker, but take some time and think about it.
Tell me you think that the Iraqi’s aren’t the ones who really should be doing that.
Posted by: bob h at January 5, 2006 10:46 PM
Tom's point was precisely what I mentioned in previous threads, and you thought I was bluffing. You need to be more civil and composed if you're to be taken seriously. Grow up and show some maturity!
Posted by: TJ at January 5, 2006 07:18 PM
What a bald-faced liar you are. Read all of your own posts and then come back and pretend Joeyess is the rude, intolerant one. You hate whole countries! Most countries! You HATE everyone and everything outside of your little troll village.
Posted by: JayMayandJoseph at January 5, 2006 07:27 PM
It would seem that JMaJ is correct in this case, if you're attitude towards me being Canadian is any indications, TJ. Most here realize this though, and take what you have to say for what it is worth. You're willing to pass judgement on my nation without willing to know anything about it. If Canadians were a race, what kind of attitude would this represent? Has history taught you nothing. I'm not upset by anything you've said about Canada. I know that, for the most part, Americans don't know a whole lot about this country, except when the news reports us in a bad light. The offer to broaden your mind is still open, but I will not stop you if you choose ignorance.
I'd be willing to respect your opinion if you presented yourself worthy of respecting, but so far you have not done that. Though, to be fair, you do more than 2008 does with his/her/its desire just to here his/her/itself type. 2008 contributes as much to coherent, intelligent discussion as Tom Cruise contributes to coherent, intelligent discussion.
If it is important, I do not nor have I ever hated America or Americans. I do disagree with some (not all) policies of the government. I could probably just as easily sit down with you and have a friendly drink together (though I don't actually touch alcohol...personal choice). We could discuss something like baseball. You probably don't follow hockey and NFL bores me to tears, I'm a CFL fan. Hell, for that matter, we could watch an episode of Spongebob Squarepants together.
Anyway, try and keep your anger in check, TJ, it's just not healthy. That's right! I'm a liberal with socialized medicine, so I'm concerned about even your health!
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:57 PM
WHAT HAPPENED TO MY 6:18 POST AND WOKE UP'S RESPONSE?
Posted by: tim, in OK at January 5, 2006 07:36 PM
Hell tim even the Liberal Newshounds grow tired of woke's endless incoherent rantings......
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:17 PM
Though, to be fair, you do more than 2008 does with his/her/its desire just to here his/her/itself type.
Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:57 PM
What part of your opinion doesn't matter do you not understand or comprehend.....
You do not live here or have a vote here....go fix Canada, they need your intellectual thoughts and opinions...
Posted by: 2008 at January 5, 2006 11:21 PM
Canadian Paul,
You can define terrorism anyway you like, but your opinion - being a Canadian is weightless, irrelevant and can't be considered as seriously as those from Britain, Australia, Japan and other members of the coalition who've contributed to ensuring a democratic Iraq emerges, as opposed to the dictatorship you and your country relished, and would obviously miss.
Posted by: TJ
Comment: TJ, that is biggest load of crap, I have ever had the displeasure to read.
Canada is a great country, and as part of the Commonwealth, I'm glad as a Brit to have them as so.
Canada has military personnel in Afghanistan, and has lost soldiers in that conflict.
=================================================
You're also unfit to provide a credible definition of terrorism having never experienced it, but only produced and nurtured potential ones as well as provide safe haven for them.
Comment: Oh dear, oh dear, America has had a terrorist attack; nobody knows how we feel, boo hoo!!!
Get over it; you act as if no other country has ever been attacked by terrorists. Nobody can feel our pain. Well we all did, until George W. Bush went on the rampage, and all sympathy was lost.
TJ Wrote: "But only produced and nurtured potential ones as well as provide safe haven for them."
Comment: Of course America has never raised money for terrorist organisations, have they? Why don't you go away and check-up on what seedy little things America has done to nurture, and provide safe haven for their radical pals.
Irish-Americans have raised millions of dollars through NORAID, to help the IRA's cause. As a Brit I've had to watch as the IRA, on mainland Britain, has committed many terrorist atrocities. So get your facts right TJ, before castigating a great country, who is a great ally to both the UK and America.
Canada, France and Germany were all correct to stay out of the Iraq War. It was a war, which was fought under a false premise. The UK and America were wrong to attack Iraq. The other countries that have been mentioned were right to stay out of it. They and their citizens have been proven to be right about Iraq. America and the UK have been proven to be wrong in their lies that have been perpetuated by Bush and Blair. That Saddam Hussein and Iraq were an imminent threat to the world, with their non-existent stockpile of WMD's.
As Donald Rumsfeld said, "we know where they are, they're there, and over there, and all around that part of Iraq." This was all done with extravagant arm waving and hand gestures on Rumsfeld's part. So they knew that they had WMD's. And they knew exactly where Saddam was hiding them. But low and behold, they were gone when America invaded Iraq.
So you tell me TJ, who was in the right? Canada, France and Germany, or the UK and America.
Canada has always been there side-by-side with her allies during just wars. I know some Americans believe that it was just America who took part in the D-Day Landings, (who hasn't watched Saving Private Ryan?) But the Canadians and the Free French, gave many lives to take back Europe from Adolf Hitler's Nazi German
Posted by: Nick Caine at January 5, 2006 11:25 PM
Though, to be fair, you do more than 2008 does with his/her/its desire just to here his/her/itself type.
Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 10:57 PM
What part of your opinion doesn't matter do you not understand or comprehend.....
You do not live here or have a vote here....go fix Canada, they need your intellectual thoughts and opinions...
Once again, you've failed to contribute anything meaningful.
Really, I can make my own points, you don't have to make them for me.
I don't need your permission to comment on the USA, sorry. Does your freedom of speech only extend to Americans? Is this the sort of democracy you're trying to bring to Iraq? I'm sure your troops would be fascinated to hear exactly what they should be in harm's way for.
And really, if my opinion doesn't matter to you, why do you feel the need to comment on it? You do fear what I have to say, don't you? Or is it you just can't take any critism? Am I hurting your feelings? Do you want a hug?
As a citizen of the world, I have every right to comment on what happens in it. Don't like it, then really, it sucks to be you. Complain to your congressman! Complain to FOX! FOX seems to like to critize Canada, so I guess this is one of those..."He can dish it out, but can't take it" moments.
Yet. Here's an offer. I'll give you a chance to learn more about Canada, just as I have offered to TJ. Care to change your ignorance?
Posted by: Canadian Paul at January 5, 2006 11:40 PM