Author Topic: O'Reilly Viewer Mail  (Read 1585 times)

Offline strk

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 776
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2004, 03:20:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LePaul
Everytime I see strk's posts and the Howard Dean avatar, all I can hear is the Dean "Arrrrggggghhhhhhh!" sound byte.   :rofl


you can thank the So Called Liberal Media, who played it 700 times in one week.

It was nonsense, of course, as ABC broke the story that the feed from Dean's mike did not pick up the crowd noise which drowned him out in the room.  THere was a film crew there doing a documentary, when the real tape was brought forward the major news outlets reported that "retraction" briefly but by then the damage was done

Offline Steve

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6728
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2004, 03:28:16 PM »
Saur, my soul is burdened with  guilt from the foolish and selfish things I did as a young person.  You don't want it.
Member: Hot Soup Mafia - Cream of Myshroom
Army of Muppets  Yes, my ingame name is Steve

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2004, 03:31:24 PM »
face it strk.... the guy's  as batty as you are.

lazs

Offline strk

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 776
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2004, 03:38:01 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
face it strk.... the guy's  as batty as you are.

lazs


coming from you I consider that a high compliment indeed

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18758
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2004, 03:53:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
face it strk.... the guy's  as batty as you are.

lazs


I think Dean would argue that :)
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2004, 03:56:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Ding, ding, ding.

The mind of a Bush hater is a strange and dangerous place.  It is capable of blaming Bush for 9/11 because he didnt preemptively strike at Al Qaeda before the attack and criticizing his preemptive attack on iraq before Saddam could do any damage in the same breath.


bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

I'm sorry. Missed point. Move back 3 places and lose a turn.

Offline strk

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 776
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2004, 04:32:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler
I think Dean would argue that :) [/QUOTE

You got anything other than ad hominem attacks?

Offline Saurdaukar

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8610
      • Army of Muppets
Re: Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2004, 04:47:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

I'm sorry. Missed point. Move back 3 places and lose a turn.


I am but a lowly Bush Drone and may require further explanation.

Complete the Liberal circle, please:

1.)  State something obscure.
2.)  Accuse those who disagree with your viewpoint of stupidity.
3.)  Explain 'point' that doesnt make any sense or at the very least contradicts what was said in the previous sentance.

Waiting on three.  :aok

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2004, 05:42:03 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
"The 9/11 Congressional Hearings are basically saying that the Bush Administration / USA failed and should have pre-emptively struck AL Qaeda before 9/11 happened. Isn't this what we did to Iraq?"

Just had to share.  ;)


We failed to STRIKE, not pre-emptively strike. See?

Offline muckmaw

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2004, 06:25:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
Pre-emptive would imply that they hadn't attacked at all wouldn't it?

Kinda like Iraq hadn't attacked at all.


Short memory, Hippie.

Iraq...Kuwait...Gulf war...cease fire...violation of cease fire...Gulf War 2...

Any of this ringing a bell?

Keep drinking the Cool-Aid and saving the whales.

Offline strk

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 776
Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #25 on: March 30, 2004, 06:31:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by muckmaw
Short memory, Hippie.

Iraq...Kuwait...Gulf war...cease fire...violation of cease fire...Gulf War 2...

Any of this ringing a bell?

Keep drinking the Cool-Aid and saving the whales.



Are you really trying to say that Iraq attacked the US?  

How is the Kool-Aid?

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #26 on: March 30, 2004, 07:16:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by muckmaw
Short memory, Hippie.

Iraq...Kuwait...Gulf war...cease fire...violation of cease fire...Gulf War 2...

Any of this ringing a bell?



US sponssored resolution 1441 ringing a bell?

Offline muckmaw

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
Re: Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #27 on: March 30, 2004, 07:21:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by strk
Are you really trying to say that Iraq attacked the US?  

How is the Kool-Aid?


Another day, another argument with a tree-hugger.

Listen, Garfunkel...we did not attack Iraq for no good reason the first time. They made an aggressive invasion  of their neighbor, and we liberated that country.

I guess we should have not fought Iraq in that war either, huh?

MT said Iraq did'nt attack at all. He implied they were innocent victums of the Evil Boosh's and Halibertons World Domination Plan.

The invasion of Iraq was simply a continuation of the first gulf war because Iraq violated the cease fire agreement.

Should'nt you be playing guitar and face painting or something?

Offline strk

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 776
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #28 on: March 30, 2004, 07:55:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by muckmaw
Another day, another argument with a tree-hugger.

Listen, Garfunkel...we did not attack Iraq for no good reason the first time. They made an aggressive invasion  of their neighbor, and we liberated that country.

I guess we should have not fought Iraq in that war either, huh?

MT said Iraq did'nt attack at all. He implied they were innocent victums of the Evil Boosh's and Halibertons World Domination Plan.

The invasion of Iraq was simply a continuation of the first gulf war because Iraq violated the cease fire agreement.

Should'nt you be playing guitar and face painting or something?


Actually, wingnut, I was called up from the reserves for Gulf War I - where were you?

I said it then and I stand by it today - if Kuwait/Iraq didnt have all the Golly-geened oil, we would never have gotten involved

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
O'Reilly Viewer Mail
« Reply #29 on: March 30, 2004, 10:03:35 PM »
O'Reilly sucks hard but that's a great quote.
PS I'll give you my soul for a dozen Krispy Kremes.