Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: anyone catch Michael Moore on Oreilly last night?

  1. #21
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,337
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by valleyjet[/i]@Jul 28 2004, 10:24 PM
    [b] Say what you want but Moore's film hits the nail right on the head. He totally exposes Bush as the lying coward and murdering SOB that he is.

    No wonder our simple minded Neo-con friends here can't stand him. [/b][/quote]
    It's sad if you believe this. Even Moore as much admitted that it wasn't lying but he was going to keep calling it that. With the same logic a 3 year old uses when he calls the moon 'the gum gum'

    But it is what it is.

  2. #22
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    This was in today's Daily News:

    BOSTON - I finally tracked down Michael Moore. I saw him walking in the street outside the Democratic convention center and pounced on him like the paparazzi on J.Lo. Moore had been dodging me because his movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11," was becoming increasingly indefensible by something called "facts." But to his credit, Moore took up my street challenge and agreed to appear on "The O'Reilly Factor." We debated for 10 minutes, and here's what happened:

    * He said President Bush "lied" about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction even though the 9/11 commission, the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation and Lord Butler's British investigation all say Bush did not lie.

    * Moore defines a "lie" as anything that turns out not to be true. By following this logic, weather forecasters must now be categorized as pathologically dishonest.

    * Moore said he would not have attacked the Taliban government in Afghanistan after the 9/11 attack. Instead, he would have captured Osama Bin Laden by using "commandos." Apparently, Moore believes the Taliban would have allowed his commandos to root out Osama and his boys with impunity. He related the commando strategy to me with a straight face.

    * Moore denied that Ronald Reagan's arms buildup had anything to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union and freedom for Eastern Europe.

    * The filmmaker then went on to say that preemptive war is wrong and would have been immoral even in the case of Adolf Hitler. Moore said he would have prevented Hitler from assuming power in the first place. I didn't have time to ask him how he would have done that, but I assume commandos would have been involved.

    So, hey, Michael Moore, thanks for showing up and debating. Now we know the underpinnings of your world outlook.

    What is still astounding to me is how many people continue to embrace Moore's fantasies and deceptions. Some people actually applauded him at the Democratic convention, but the heavyweights stayed away. The Kerry campaign has made it quite clear that Moore and other left-wing bomb throwers are not to be seen around the candidate. In fact, John Kerry's people actually censored some of the speechmakers from using inflammatory anti-Bush rhetoric. That is almost unheard of at a political convention.

    But old reliable Howard Dean came through. He continues to be Moore's best pal, appearing with him at a Bush bash in a Cambridge hotel. It is absolutely frightening how close Dean came to being the Democratic presidential nominee.

    This may surprise you, but I do not dislike Michael Moore. He is a true believer. He wants a completely different kind of country, and he'll do anything to make that happen.

    The problem with Moore is that the ends justify the means. He knows his statements and movies are not based on facts, but he continues to say they are. Even in Moore's world, where truth doesn't exist, there should be some kind of ethical standard, but there isn't.

    And the fact that Howard Dean and other powerful Americans accept that situation is more troubling than anything Moore could ever say.

  3. #23
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oreilly is a big puss liar

  4. #24
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,585
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@Aug 2 2004, 11:21 AM
    [b] Oreilly is a big puss liar [/b][/quote]
    Nice answer there. Your sharp like a spoon.

  5. #25
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    170
    Post Thanks / Like
    Please site some lies. Stop the bashing! You make yourself look like an ass.

  6. #26
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    oreilly is AN ENTERTAINER..That's it!
    wake up cons..FOX NEWS is the media department for the republican party..It's not journalism...
    If Bush is so geat fine..But you people Bring up Michael moore more than liberals do!
    Get over IT!

  7. #27
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    170
    Post Thanks / Like
    You didn't answer my question site some of his lies. If you can't that is fine, just answer my question.

  8. #28
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    1,541
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'd like to see a prequel...

    Fahrenheit: Vince Foster

  9. #29
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,177
    Post Thanks / Like
    umm..There's three points to this movie...

    Bush was asleep at the wheel prior to 9-11..TRUE!(wolfiwitz and Rummy were focused on iraq)

    Bush has very strong ties to the saudi royal family...TRUE! (could this perhaps come into play when dealing with the fact that 90% of al qeada and their financing comes from within the kingdom..Sure it could..WE'll get tough with Iraq rather than the sauds...


    Did Bush scare people into thinking that Iraq was a major threat with ties to Bin Laden..YES! bush did...

    GET OVER IT!!
    This guy was not qualified in 2000 and still is not qualified to be president.....


    republicans are so F-ING DUMB....You people say "Let's Kill MIchael Moore"!!YOu people sign your posts with quotatiosn about Michael Moore!! It's so funny..

  10. #30
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    170
    Post Thanks / Like
    BMAN you stated that Oreilly is a liar. So I asked for you to site his lies and you haven't done so yet. Why?

  11. #31
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@Aug 2 2004, 11:37 AM
    [b] oreilly is AN ENTERTAINER..That's it!
    [/b][/quote]
    Of course micheal moore(on) is not an entertainer rather an intellectual...for those revovering from a labotomy that is.

    Oh...and speaking of liars: [url=http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm]Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11[/url]

  12. #32
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    268
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Matt39[/i]@Jul 28 2004, 08:35 PM
    [b] heres the transcript

    [b]
    MICHAEL MOORE, FILMMAKER: That’s fair. We’ll just stick to the issues.

    BILL O'REILLY, HOST: The issues… all right good. Now, one of the issues is you because you’ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the Senate Intelligence Committee, Lord Butler’s investigation in Britain and now the 9/11 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Vladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?


    MOORE: He didn’t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.

    O'REILLY: Yeah, but he didn’t lie, he was misinformed by — all of those investigations come to the same conclusion. That’s not a lie.

    MOORE: Uh huh. So, in other words, if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage…

    O'REILLY: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn’t the truth.

    MOORE: Well, I’d have to turn around to see it and then I would realize, oh Bill, I just told you something that wasn’t true… actually it’s President Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a…

    O'REILLY: OK, He never said that, but back to the other thing: If you, if Michael Moore is president…

    MOORE: I thought you said you saw the movie? I show all that in the movie.

    O'REILLY: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine…

    MOORE: But that was your question…

    O'REILLY: Just the issues. You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, U.S. intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction; you say he lied. This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious…

    MOORE: Well, that’s almost pathological. I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true; they could pass a lie detector test…

    O'REILLY: All right, now you’re dancing around a question…

    MOORE: No, I’m not. There’s no dancing.

    O'REILLY: He didn’t lie.

    MOORE: He said something that wasn’t true.

    O'REILLY: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources.

    MOORE: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn’t listen to anybody.

    O'REILLY: They wouldn’t go by Russian intelligence and Blair’s intelligence too.

    MOORE: His own people told him. I mean, he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said, “What you got on Iraq?” and Richard Clarke’s going “Oh well this wasn’t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.”

    O'REILLY: You’re diverting the issue… did you read Woodward’s book?

    MOORE: No, I haven’t read his book.

    O'REILLY: Woodward’s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?

    MOORE: I know who he is.

    O'REILLY: OK, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said, “President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, ‘slam dunk.’” If you’re the president, you ignore all that?

    MOORE: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.

    O'REILLY: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.

    MOORE: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn’t communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didn’t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th.

    O'REILLY: Nobody disputes that...

    MOORE: OK, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a “slam dunk” and your going to go to war.

    O'REILLY: You’ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they’re all saying the same thing that’s why. You’re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.

    MOORE: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can’t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war. I mean, I don’t know a worse…

    O'REILLY: It wasn’t a lie.

    MOORE: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?

    O'REILLY: I call that bad information, acting on bad information; not a lie.

    MOORE: A seven year old can get away with that…

    O'REILLY: All right, your turn to ask me a question…

    MOORE: “Mom and Dad it was just bad information…”

    O'REILLY: I’m not going to get you to admit it wasn’t a lie. Go ahead.

    MOORE: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question.

    O'REILLY: OK.

    MOORE: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?

    O'REILLY: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say: “We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.”

    MOORE: But what were they killed for?

    O'REILLY: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people.

    MOORE: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war: to remove a brutal dictator.

    O'REILLY: Well, we’re back to the weapons of mass destruction.

    MOORE: But that was the reason…

    O'REILLY: The weapons of mass destruction…

    MOORE: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat…

    O'REILLY: That’s right.

    MOORE: And there was no threat, was there?

    O'REILLY: It was a mistake.

    MOORE: Oh, just a mistake, and that’s what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, “We’re sorry.” I don’t think that is good enough.

    O'REILLY: I don’t think its good enough either for those parents.

    MOORE: So we agree on that.

    O'REILLY: But that is the historical nature of what happened.

    MOORE: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?

    O'REILLY: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional.

    MOORE: No, not intentional, it was a mistake.

    O'REILLY: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that.

    MOORE: Really, I’m driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead.

    O'REILLY: If it were unintentional and you weren’t impaired or anything like that.

    MOORE: So, that’s all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake — how would you feel towards me

    O'REILLY: OK, now we are wandering.

    MOORE: No, but my point is…

    O'REILLY: I saw what your point is and I answered your question.

    MOORE: But why? What did they die for?

    O'REILLY: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people…

    MOORE: No, that was not the reason…

    O'REILLY: That’s what they died for…

    MOORE: …they were given…

    O'REILLY: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake.

    MOORE: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world…

    O'REILLY: Alright, I’ve got anther question…

    MOORE: Would you sacrifice — just finish on this — would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?

    O'REILLY: Depends what the circumstances were.

    MOORE: You would sacrifice your child?

    O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself — I’m not talking for any children —to remove the Taliban. Would you?

    MOORE: Uh huh.

    O'REILLY: Would you? That’s my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?

    MOORE: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.

    O'REILLY: Al Qaeda was given refuge by the Taliban.

    MOORE: But we didn’t go after them, did we?

    O'REILLY: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qaeda.

    MOORE: That’s why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.

    O'REILLY: OK, well look you can’t kill everybody. You wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan — you wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan, would you?

    MOORE: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.

    O'REILLY: How?

    MOORE: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Usama was…

    O'REILLY: Why was that?

    MOORE: That’s my question.

    O'REILLY: Because Pakistan didn’t want its territory of sovereignty violated.

    MOORE: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didn’t go there. He got a two-month head start.

    O'REILLY: All right, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?

    MOORE: No, unless it is a threat to us.

    O'REILLY: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day long — you would have let him go?

    MOORE: That’s not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.

    O'REILLY: From '33 until '41, he wasn’t an imminent threat to the United States.

    MOORE: There’s a lot of things we should have done.

    O'REILLY: You wouldn’t have removed him.

    MOORE: I wouldn’t have even allowed him to come to power.

    O'REILLY: That was a preemption from Michael Moore. You would have invaded.

    MOORE: If we’d done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, whoa, I’m trying to stop this war right now.

    O'REILLY: I know you are but…

    MOORE: Are you against that? Stopping this war?

    O'REILLY: No, we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to…

    MOORE: So, you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.

    O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself..

    MOORE: Your child? It’s Bush sending the children there.

    O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.

    MOORE: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old…

    O'REILLY: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.

    MOORE: Say, “I, Bill O’Reilly, would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah.”

    O'REILLY: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous…

    MOORE: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?

    O'REILLY: Look it’s a worldwide terrorism — I know that escapes you —

    MOORE: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?

    O'REILLY: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.

    MOORE: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?

    O'REILLY: Iraq aided terrorists. Don’t you know anything about any of that?

    MOORE: So, you’re saying Iraq is responsible for what?

    O'REILLY: I’m saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.

    MOORE: You’re not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.

    O'REILLY: I’m not? You’re his biggest defender in the media.

    MOORE: Now come on.

    O'REILLY: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.

    MOORE: How do you know that?

    O'REILLY: If you were running the country, he’d still be sitting there.

    MOORE: How do you know that?

    O'REILLY: You wouldn’t have removed him.

    MOORE: Look, let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done; you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted…

    O'REILLY: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.

    MOORE: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.

    O'REILLY: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.

    MOORE: The people rose up.

    O'REILLY: Why? Because they went bankrupt.

    MOORE: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up…

    O'REILLY: All right, all right.

    MOORE: …that’s how you, let me ask you this question.

    O'REILLY: One more.

    MOORE: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You don’t do it down the barrel of a gun. That’s not how you deliver it.

    O'REILLY: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam…

    MOORE: Why didn’t they rise up?

    O'REILLY: Because they couldn’t, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off…

    MOORE: Well that’s true in many countries throughout the world…

    O'REILLY: It is, it’s a shame…

    MOORE: …and you know what people have done, they’ve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. There’s many ways…

    O'REILLY: I’m glad we’ve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alright and the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and that’s the fair way to do it. Right?

    MOORE: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?

    O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.

    MOORE: You wouldn’t send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?

    O'REILLY: I would.

    MOORE: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?

    O'REILLY: That’s right.

    MOORE: Where’s the recruiter?

    O'REILLY: You’d love to get rid of me.

    MOORE: No, I want you to live. I want you to live.

    O'REILLY: I appreciate that Michael Moore everybody. There he is.[/b] [/b][/quote]
    Thanks for posting the inteview, Matt.

    Bill O'Reilly, according to himself, would risk his own life because he cares soOOOoooOoooooOOOooo deeply for the people in Fallujah.?!

    Hmmm? Wonder what the Vegas odds are of him actually enlisting?!!

  13. #33
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    11,462
    Post Thanks / Like
    It was an entertaining and interesting interview.

    I think that Moore won the argument.

    Michael Moore does not HATE america. That's a spin job by people who are rooting for the republican party like it's a football team.

    That's a childish and irrational statement. You wanna criticize Moore for his comments and beliefs on the war in Iraq and his thoughts on our president. Fine but when I hear people say that Moore is anti american or the best line of defense against him is that he is Fat. Then, I gotta laugh at how stupid some people can get.

    Iraq was a mistake by The US Goverment/CIA and the current presidential regime. O'Reilly even admitted that The War in Iraq was a mistake in that interview.

  14. #34
    Tom The Nader Fan™
    Guest
    Michael Moore does not HATE america. [/QUOTE]

    Michael Moore hates republicans. Hows that? Better? :lol:

    Read this:

    [url=http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723]http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723[/url]

    PS Christopher Hitchens is a liberal. :D

  15. #35
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    11,462
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Tom The Nader Fan™[/i]@Aug 3 2004, 01:04 PM
    [b] Michael Moore does not HATE america. [/QUOTE]

    Michael Moore hates republicans. Hows that? Better? :lol:

    Read this:

    [url=http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723]http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723[/url]

    PS Christopher Hitchens is a liberal. :D [/b][/quote]

    I agree that Michael Moore hates republicans.

    He made the documentary on 9/11 and George Bush, not as an impartial american who wants to see justice and to see a better goverment.

    He made the documentary for his favorite team, The Democratic Party. It was a documentary used as a vehicle to take Bush out of The White House and make him look bad.

    Michael Moore didn't need a documentary to make Bush look bad,. The Iraq situation is doing that already without Moore's help.

    This is a political agenda by Moore.

    What I do like about Moore's documentary is that alot of things have been hidden from the american public by the media. There are alot of news people that don't do their job.

    They are supposed to be the eyes and ears of society and yet too often, I see instances where the media hides the truth or fails to look for it. The reasons are clear on some issues but not so clear in other areas.

    Moore didn't do the documentary so that The American people can see the truth and he didn't do as an impartial person who was being fair and reasonable.

    It's a spin machine to discredit and make this current presidential regime look bad. Some of which is true, most of which is just political propaganda from a slanted point of view.

    Kind of like Fox News and The New York Post. The very type of media that Moore is fighting against, He embodies from the other side of the spectrum.

    I like cynicism and skepticism from our media, I like when we are combative and when we question our goverment and our leaders and seek the truth. This root for my home team no matter what mentality in this country is sickening.

    The Republicans make me sick, The Democrats make me sick. They will wave their flags blindly and support their own team without ever having an open mind, They are basically all just sheep.

  16. #36
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]He made the documentary for his favorite team, The Democratic Party. It was a documentary used as a vehicle to take Bush out of The White House and make him look bad.
    [/b][/quote]

    Actually Moore is a Green. He supported Nader in 2000. He consistantly calls Democrats pussies. He is now supporting Kerry and has begged Nader to step down for the good of the country.

    [quote][b]The Republicans make me sick, The Democrats make me sick. They will wave their flags blindly and support their own team without ever having an open mind, They are basically all just sheep.
    [/b][/quote]

    Thats the problem. There are only 2 parties. You have to support one or the other. I guess I'm un-American though.

  17. #37
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,585
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by YoungJetsFan[/i]@Aug 3 2004, 03:25 PM
    [b] [QUOTE=Tom The Nader Fan™,Aug 3 2004, 01:04 PM] Michael Moore does not HATE america. [/QUOTE]

    Michael Moore hates republicans. Hows that? Better? :lol:

    Read this:

    [url=http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723]http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723[/url]

    PS Christopher Hitchens is a liberal. :D [/QUOTE]

    I agree that Michael Moore hates republicans.

    He made the documentary on 9/11 and George Bush, not as an impartial american who wants to see justice and to see a better goverment.

    He made the documentary for his favorite team, The Democratic Party. It was a documentary used as a vehicle to take Bush out of The White House and make him look bad.

    Michael Moore didn't need a documentary to make Bush look bad,. The Iraq situation is doing that already without Moore's help.

    This is a political agenda by Moore.

    What I do like about Moore's documentary is that alot of things have been hidden from the american public by the media. There are alot of news people that don't do their job.

    They are supposed to be the eyes and ears of society and yet too often, I see instances where the media hides the truth or fails to look for it. The reasons are clear on some issues but not so clear in other areas.

    Moore didn't do the documentary so that The American people can see the truth and he didn't do as an impartial person who was being fair and reasonable.

    It's a spin machine to discredit and make this current presidential regime look bad. Some of which is true, most of which is just political propaganda from a slanted point of view.

    Kind of like Fox News and The New York Post. The very type of media that Moore is fighting against, He embodies from the other side of the spectrum.

    I like cynicism and skepticism from our media, I like when we are combative and when we question our goverment and our leaders and seek the truth. This root for my home team no matter what mentality in this country is sickening.

    The Republicans make me sick, The Democrats make me sick. They will wave their flags blindly and support their own team without ever having an open mind, They are basically all just sheep. [/b][/quote]
    What Iraq situation? The war is going well, 25 million people are free and the seed of democracy will be planted in the middle east. Wheres the problem? It was the most successfull military operation in the history of warfare. We know Saddam had WMD. He had plenty of time to hide it while GWB was *****footing aroung with the UN.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us