This is the same O'Reilly that shelled out an "undisclosed" amount of cash for a sexual harassment lawsuit (rumored to be $2 million)?

22 pages of it...
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3mackris1.html It starts getting creepy around page 7...

None of these guys are saints. Though Olberman hasn't been hit with anything yet... or am I wrong there?

Either way, she's a big girl - and with implants even bigger - and like you said before, you put yourself out there expect things to happen.

Again - not saying Olberman was right in his attacks - but Miss California's pics my cost her more than anything. And if you don;t like Olberman - quit watching him.

Like I mentioned earlier - I quit listening to Beck years ago - but now I have family members buying into his schtick and that's my true concern.

 

edit.

nvm

 

haha, I dont watch much of Olberman because I feel like he rots my brain. Its funny how you refuse to put any real negative spin on what he said, as I mentioned a few times now. Its "not right" - haha. But your response is "OReilly's not a saint" etc. etc. etc. ad hominem arguments or analysis of OReilly's background are not important to me. They have nothing to do with the issue of responsible news reporting. I dont care if Olberman was counterfeiting money. What he said has no place in the newsroom. It was a low blow directed at someone whom he idealogically opposes ans wants to destroy.

But at this point I am speaking to the wall. You refuse, absolutely refuse to give any detailed characterization of the Olberman segment. Maybe if you ignore it, it will go away. Maybe if nobody is perfect, then nobody is accountable for their mistakes. Basically, you are creating a broad set of things that "are not right" and you lump all of these things into this set and ignore what makes them different.

Your new argument is that every Miss America contestant should expect this type of treatment? No?

The big girl with bigger implants is an interesting statement. Similar to the nature of Olberman's style.

We cannot even begin to reconcile our views because you refuse to concede even the most basic and obvious arguments.

 

I'm sorry... Are you truly a moron?

Refusing to put a real negative spin on something??? In your world, tell me, does every have to nod their heads as you walk by?

For christ sake, how many times do I have to say Olberman was wrong?

This has become as futile as arguing with my first wife... lol

This thread was started about how these right wing nut jobs - Beck in particular - are ranting that the sky is falling and that the goon squads are going to come beat down your door courtesy of our current "muslim" President.

And you want me to agree with you about Olberman attacking some silicon implanted twit that can't shut up?

Give it a rest - for I'm not looking for you to agree with me about Beck - I've proved here a few times that this guy is one ball short of a ******* set and had to vent about it.

 

All is well. I'm not some concieted nitwit if thats what you think.

But it is hard for me to understand your Beck rant when you cant even properly characterize a 4min clip from Countdown.

Obviously you are not interested in anymore debate.

Maybe you should give your "proof" to your family before they become completely brainwashed by right-wing nut jobs. While your at it, tell them how you feel about Miss California. That will surely gain thier empathy

 

Aaahhhhh.... Springtime. Flowers blooming, bees buzzing, and love is in the air!

 

Wanda Sykes wishes death upon Rush Limbaugh and hilarity ensues...

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_ha..._limbaugh_dead

I'm glad the President still has a sense of humor. It would be a shame if he took his job too seriously

 

Now even Gen Patreaus is conceding that Gitmo needs to be closed.

http://www.rferl.org/content/transcr...s/1738626.html

Conservative radio host "Mancow" tries waterboarding and fails - calls it now torture on Olberman's show.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...78420#30951130

And still Hannity doesn't have the conjones to try it himself - we all know Beck will cry.

 

I will concede that closing Gitmo now appears to be the right thing to do. But let me explain why. Patreaus says that it needs to be closed to affirm our reputation as a nation of laws. But it is a reputation and not our moral composition that is at stake. In fact, most of the people still at Gitmo will not be released but will be put into high-security facilities. Gitmo is such a facility and of course has practical value. So we dont need Gitmo but we need places a lot like Gitmo. It is being closed because it represents an ethical lapse. This representation was promoted primarily by liberals and no doubt had political motivation. You cant have Obama say to the world that Gitmo is used as a recruitment tool (with no evidence to support it) and not damage your reputation. But by bashing Gitmo, Obama bashes Bush and so his motivation is not as pure as it seems. In fact, even the democrats have denied the funding for closing Gitmo since no concrete plan has been given to them. So yes, it may need to be closed, but it is a self fullfilling prophecy. <If I say that x is wrong and I continue x, then the world sees me as doing wrong. Not becasue x is wrong, but because I said that it was.>

It would be more productive to talk about who is at Gitmo, how they got their, the rights that hey have, and how we administer justice to them.


The watewrboarding issue I think is more interesting. I saw the tape of the radio host when it happened. Of course, Olberman heralded this example as certain proof that it is wrong. Olberman does not care what this guy thinks unless it supports his own views. If he thinks that examples are the best proof, perhaps he should talk to everyone else who has been waterboarded. To avoid turning this into a debate of semantics, lets ignore definitions and see where it leads. Forget the defintion of torture. Look at the facts of what happened.

Who was waterboarded?

three of the worst terrorists in the world including the mastermind of 9/11

Why?

to gather information about the terrorist network and plans from the most knowledgable of the terorists

What did we learn from them if anything?

if Obama would release the memos that he claims support his side then we could find out exactly and would not have to listen to Cheney or Obama make speeches about things that no one has read, if Obama would just provide a little transparency, a little evidence which he claims to have but refuses to release and will not explain why.

Was it the wrong thing to do?

It would be easier to answer this if we had the memos, but most who oppose waterboarding will simply say that the end does not justify the means. But this is not some universal truth. The end justifies the means in many cases. We kill foriegn soldiers to protect our lives and freedom, we lock up prisoners to protect public security. Does anyone feel bad for the people who were waterboarded? Are you empathetic to their situation? Do you imagine yourself in their shoes? Do you imagine yourself planning the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Do you imagine yourself intentionally ending thousands of innocent lives?

 

This is odd.

First you agree about closing Gitmo to affirm that we are a nation of laws...

yet...

Turn right around and try to "justify" breaking such laws because it might have been productive??

You are an odd duck indeed.

Here's the gist of it all - you can't have it both ways. The Geneva Convention articles were drafted not just because torture was bad - it was effective on some but it was deemed morally wrong across the board. By us doing it it gives others the justification to do it as well.

We need to do this right or we will be wrong no matter what.