Thread: Moore vs. O'Reilly

I have three beefs with Bill:

1) The Hitler comment. Why in the world would you not pound that into Mr. Moores fat face? You would have supported a pre-emptive strike against Hitler? Hello, that's exactly what we did against Saddam.

2) The issue of sending his own children to die in battle. Bill kept dodging the question and saying, "I'd go myself". Bad form Bill. You don't allow your guests to dodge questions, you shouldn't do it yourself. If Bill couldn't/wouldn't send his own child he should have said, "That's the job of the President and one reason I'll never run for that office, but I do feel Mr. Bush was justified in doing it." Honest, to the point and completely justified.

3) He never did point out why President Bush didn't LIE. Bill tripped over his own tongue on that one. That should have been an easy slam dunk but Bill let Jabba the Moore get away with it.

All in all, I think Bill had Moore right where he wanted him but came off looking very bad. Sorry Bill, you had the ammunition but you missed the target.

Agreed! I get the feeling that the network had the muzzle on Bill or something. He usually has a much quicker wit and doesnt get flustered easily.

I'm hoping it was a trap. Treat him nice and soft on his own turf just to lure him onto the Factor. I'm kind of interested in what his e-mails are gonna look like at the end of his show tonight. I'd bet my next paycheck they'll be evenly split between his supporters and his detractors.

I hope u r right. O'Reilly had to jump through a lot of hoops to get a debate with Moore and may have been more restricted than we're told. Hopefully, this is just the beginning.

The people like O'Reily, Boortz, and Hannity had been warned that they had to play nice or their credentials would be taken away. Now, because the libs were treated so nice they will want to come on the Conservative shows. Then the feast begins.
Trust me guys, Moore, Garraffalo, and Franken will not show up at the Republican convention. Why, because someone would twist their heads off, drink their blood, and then throw their heads in the weeds..

Moore vs Rush in a debate over that WMD bullshit would be a trip. O'reilly is a morooooon that couldn't even follow the rules in his "No Spin Zone". Damn shame that, I used to like his show.

Here http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/index.php?shop=1&cat=2 is a good site for a 'lil anti GW stuff. I liked the one that said

"Somewhere in Texas a village is missing an idiot"

Now, I'd like to see a Franken vs O'reilly bout. Now, that would be real entertainment. Hell, I'd even order it on pay-per-view.

Originally Posted by Weight39

Now, I'd like to see a Franken vs O'reilly bout. Now, that would be real entertainment. Hell, I'd even order it on pay-per-view.

They already had a Franken vs Hannity bout and Sean wiped the floor with him. After that Sean talked with Genean Garafillo and that went over pretty well. I certainly don't agree with most of her views but at least she's honest and willing to talk in a straightforward manner.

O'Reilly is an idiot. He used to be interesting, a nice change of pace... but he's turned into a freakshow.

He never lets his guests get a full sentence out before he's interrupting them. He could be winning an argument by a landslide and he'd still put on this whole act of getting flustered and charging back with all sorts of accusations.

I think he hurts conservatives more than he helps them.

I like Bill O'Reilly and I hate Michael Moore. Based on that transcript however, it looks like O'Reilly got OWNED.

Michael Moore is kidding himself though if he can not see the difference between lying and making a decision based on misinformation. CLEARY there is a difference, and anyone with a junior high education knows that. Moore should just ADMIT Bush did not lie.

Also, I don't see why Bill didn't jump on Moore regarding sacraficing our children. Parents don't make their children sign up for the Armed Forces. People who join the Armed Forces are considered adults and know full well what may happen when they sign up. Moore was making it sound like Parents were making their kids sign up for their war, just to get killed. Ridiculous.

Originally Posted by bludevil

Also, I don't see why Bill didn't jump on Moore regarding sacraficing our children. Parents don't make their children sign up for the Armed Forces. People who join the Armed Forces are considered adults and know full well what may happen when they sign up. Moore was making it sound like Parents were making their kids sign up for their war, just to get killed. Ridiculous.

I've heard this argument a lot and think you might be missing the point of the original question. Moore was simply trying to get Bill to say whether he thought the war in Iraq was justified enough that he would have sent his own child the way President Bush sent other people's children. Now, I'm 100% biased in Bill's favor, but I don't think it was an outrageous question. As a matter of fact, I think it was a damn good question and I'm very dissappointed in Bill for not handling it better. The decision to send our armed forces into harms way lies sloely with the Commander in Chief. It's a responsibility very few people on this Earth could handle. If Bill couldn't/wouldn't make that decision I have no problem with that. I don't know if I could either. But all he had to do was tell the truth, "That's a decision I don't think I could make, but I firmly believe Mr. Bush made the right decision." That would have answered the question with no doubts, instead he dodged the question and made himself look bad on his own show.

I would like to see Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore in a pie eating contest. I think Moore will take him, unless Rush uses Oxcontin, then it is a no contest.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

I would like to see Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore in a pie eating contest. I think Moore will take him, unless Rush uses Oxcontin, then it is a no contest.

Now THAT could get ugly.

I know it's immature but I'd like to see O'Reilly kick Moore's fat ass.

On a more serious note, Moore's ideas are sooo flawed any debate between him and O'Reilly would be no contest.

Originally Posted by Var

Agreed! I get the feeling that the network had the muzzle on Bill or something. He usually has a much quicker wit and doesnt get flustered easily.

I don't think so....
Bill normally barks without a muzzle, WHY all of sudden
when he is out-witted and flustered, it's the result of
network intimidation.

Even champions lose the fight when
they don't prepare properly due to
underestimating their adversary.

Originally Posted by SJ69

On a more serious note, Moore's ideas are sooo flawed any debate between him and O'Reilly would be no contest.

O'Reilly isn't exactly flawless

What was the point? They were arguing left lies vs right lies. Then Moore tried(The sadly everyso popular stereotype-for-a-reason) using the democrat approch.. hit him in the emotions with the,"would you sacrifice your kid" question. My awnser would have been,"Id let my kid go to war, given the same change as every other person in the armed forces has." Not to mention..,"Kid"? omg, seriously.. If theres anyone on this planet that isnt somebodies son or daughter let me know I need to meet them. All the people in our forces are more than mature enough to make that decision as an individual, and no soldier has ever sacrificed their child. Anyways I didnt hear the whole thing, just clips; waste of time if you ask me. It was just good ratings because dems wanted to see bill get smashed, and reps wanted to see Moore whipped so everyone got something.

All I have to say about "Misguided Information" That led 900 Soldiers to their deaths is that the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES should have CONFIRMED the information FIRST!!!! Any CEO or President of a company would have to do the same or they would get canned!

Originally Posted by andyo

All I have to say about "Misguided Information" That led 900 Soldiers to their deaths is that the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES should have CONFIRMED the information FIRST!!!! Any CEO or President of a company would have to do the same or they would get canned!

Hahahahahahahaha.........confirmed? As in Saddam holding up WMDs to the news cameras and saying, "yes I have them, here they are." "So send your 21'st century Juggernaut after my goat herding ass and kill me and my family".

You see this here is the kind of stuff that drives historians like myself crazy. Its the way actual history is distorted by people so's they can bend it to fit their current political leanings. Most people are incapable of placeing themselves in the context of history from 6 mo's ago, let alone 10 years ago.

It was never,ever OUR responsibility to prove or disprove Saddam had WMDs. It was HIS responsibility, under signed treaty and UN legislation, to prove he DIDNT have any. The onus of proof was on HIM not us. You do remember the time when Iraq had the 2'nd largest chem/bio stockpile in the Arab world dont you? "Egypt was/is 1'st". You should cause Iraq was the 2'nd Arab state to use the stuff,"again Egypt was first". Saddam had tons and tons of VX,Sarin,Soman,Mustard, and Bio's such as anthrax,and, suspected smallpox. These were found by UN inspectors and much of them destroyed. However Iraq obstructed the inspectors,lied to them, hid stocks from them, and eventually kicked them out of the country.

At one time Iraq had the most sophisticated nuclear weapons program in the Arab world. Up until the time the Israelis bombed the research reactor at Osirak that is. MOST of the funding for this Iraqi nuke was done by Saudi Arabia, and also in cahoots was the military Govt. of the time in Brazil. Saudi Arabia was funding the rebuilding of Osirak up to the time of Gulf war-l . Brazil deposed its military Govt. and gave up nukes. However Brazil's main contribution to this evil threesome was missile development.

There has been much talk about the Bush's being in bed with the Saudi monarchy. Look, the Saudis have had far to much impact on American policy since the 50's. Democrat presidents have been manipulated as much, or more, as Republicans. Thats what oil wealth brings to the table. Frankly I have always despised the rotten house of Saud.

Back to Saddam. You remember how, in the months prior to Gulf-ll, how Saddam made indirect comments that he would release WMDs if invaded. The Saudis and Kuwaitis were scared shitless that Saddam would nerve gas them. The head goat herder in SA himself said Saddam "would unleash hell if attacked". And the problem with all this was that the Iraqis themselves admitted they couldnt account for tons and tons of chems and precursors they themselves admitted they had.

The WMDs werent the only breeches Saddam committed. Other then fucking with the inspectors at every opportunity he shot at Alliance war planes, massacred his Shiites, bought off the UN "oil for food" and used the money to buy weapons instead of feeding his people. He attempted to kill a former US President, constructed missiles that violated the cease fire agreement.......in fact he violated every UN resolution,cease fire agreement, and "understanding" ever made against him, and that he himself agreed to.

What were we supposed to do? Pass a 30'th UN resolution with the understanding that this time we really,really,really,really,really, mean it?

So now the Liberal left, thru their indirect stooges and newspaper editors, are attacking the war. They have to do it indirectly because both Kerry and Edwards voted to authorize the attack. I remember when this all started I said to a friend, "if we can pull this off without losing more troops then people who died in the 9/11 attacks it will be a success." Troops die in war, thats a fact. War's are never popular, they are just sometimes necessary.

And the bottom line is we sent our armies to Iraq, to the other side of the world, and destroyed an enemy, because we wanted to send a message to the worlds tyrants that WE COULD! My only regret is we didnt go farther. Thank God we still have young people who will risk their lives, and endure the un-endurable, to protect us. "THEY" are the best of us.

But history is what it is. You cant re-image it to fit your political philosophy's. I suspect that 99% of the liberals crying about our "900 dead" couldn't give a shit about those kids over there.Its really all about you and your politics being vindicated aint it? But let me guess, because you are of an age group ,the same as our troops in Iraq, you have an emotional/psychic connection with the young men and woman fighting this war right? OR, you painful contribution is your paying of taxes. OR, your doing both! And besides your great,great uncle was a soldier and that kinda makes you one right?

Yeah your a regular bunch of Heeeros.........Semper Fi, Death before dishonor, Lead,follow,or get out of the way, and whatever the hell the squids say. I salute you all ..........take care...........Rich

Originally Posted by Rich46yo

It was never,ever OUR responsibility to prove or disprove Saddam had WMDs. It was HIS responsibility, under signed treaty and UN legislation, to prove he DIDNT have any. The onus of proof was on HIM not us.

Well, I guess he pretty well proved it considering we haven't found any and he has been out for quite a while. I am sure you could give a shit, but I imagine this does nothing positive for the World's opinion of us. Why are you arguing this point anyway, you have already admitted that this war was about oil, like any person with eyes could see.

Didn't Kerry just say that he would build a bigger special forces unit that can better handle anti-terrorist attacks and take our ground troops out of Iraq?

The issue now isn't was it right or wrong to go there, but how are we going to finish it.

since we are already in iraq, we need way more soldiers around there plus afghanastan(sp) etc to get the job done quicker and stop wasting time..u go in with many pple in a fight not a couple!! but anyways, oreilly made him self look like a fool on his t.v. show...how can you not say that Bush did not lie right to our faces? here are a couple links for u guys to watch where bush says it point blank right to our faces and then changes his mind...smh at the ignorance around..i enjoyed the debate but orielly couldnt say anything with basis..

http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play...ines/8154.html
everything is quite true expect the yoko ono...for those who may actually think so...smh

Here's a Kerry quote for you:

“I’d like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations.”

Who think's it's a good idea to put American forces under U.N. control?

""""""""Why are you arguing this point anyway, you have already admitted that this war was about oil, like any person with eyes could see."""""""

Is it? Or is "oil" simply a piece of the puzzle? Last time I checked its the Iraqi people who are getting the cash from the sale of their oil. Does that sound like America is a nation of conquerors intent on forming an empire? Saddam never proved or disproved anything, thats the whole point! The series of events that led to the attack on Iraq didnt just start 2 weeks ago, they have been formenting for over ten years.

Kerry hasnt said much of anything about the war, or Edwards. What are they supposed to say? They voted for the damn thing! For our troops to be put under UN control would be a travesty. That is the final key to the UN taking over as the true world Govt., "control of the US military". The United Nations has carefully crafted a benign image of itself that most people believe. They dont know "why" they believe it, they dont know anything about the organization or how its worked against America almost exclusively during its tenure.

I suggest folks study the history of the UN before you give it power over our everyday lives. You might think twice about it...........take care...........Rich

The money for the oil is definitely going to the Iraqi peeps, but I have a feeling we are getting a pretty sweet deal for the barrells we purchase.

As for Kerry, I don't really see him doing much to beef up special forces. I also don't see him getting us out of Iraq, but I don't see GW doing it either.