O'Reily punks Alan Grayson

[CurveLight]

"Like I said before, fox fans will ALWAYS find a way to worship that network." - CurveLight

...and those opposed will always look for spin. Taking the work of O'Reily in total, it is clear that he would not endorse terrorists attacking the US or our interests for that manner.

You were wrong about not being able to curve light and you are wrong about this because of silly assumptions. I've already defended Fox in a different thread when it was accused of lying on something it didnt. Want to make any more assumptions? You're 0-2 right now.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I love how you had to post oreilly trying to spin what he said into mere "satire." do you realize he was serious when he said it? Have you ever listened to the original broadcast? No. Instead of the truth you hunt for a way to defend oreilly saying it's okay for terrorists to attack America. Your "context" defense is not very original. I'm sure divecon will be here soon to rally around your garbage because insecure people always find strength in numbers. Like I said before, fox fans will ALWAYS find a way to worship that network.

Yes I listened to the original broadcast, did you? And like I said you are an idiot for not recognizing satirical humor. He'ssaying that if San Francisco didn' twant to support the military then why should the militry lift a finger to help them

So you listened to the original broadcast? That means you purposefully chose to post oreilly's attempt to spin it to satire versus the original broadcast. Is that because in the original it's clear it wasn't satirical?

San francisco never said they would "support the military" so on top of spinning oreilly you have to lie as well?

The original was aired on the radio and I haven't found a transcript of it. But any reasonable American would know that O'Reilly wasn't seriously suggesting terrorist attack San Francisco, but you in your delusional mind cannot grasp logic nor reason. I pity you.

 

[CurveLight]

I'm sorry. I made the mistake of thinking you were well informed. I won't do it again.

And since you are not well informed, I will just assume that all opinions coming from you are based in ignorance as well.

Thanks for letting me know.

You are some really pathetic people. Find a way to blame everyone else when you screw up.

I though that is what you were doing? Where did I screw up?

Oh, nevermind. More opinions based in ignorance from you. I forgot.

You screwed up when I asked you to post what grayson said and you skipped that for a few posts then try to jump on someone else when he already admitted he did not know everything grayson had said. Smooth.

 

[CurveLight]

Yes I listened to the original broadcast, did you? And like I said you are an idiot for not recognizing satirical humor. He'ssaying that if San Francisco didn' twant to support the military then why should the militry lift a finger to help them

So you listened to the original broadcast? That means you purposefully chose to post oreilly's attempt to spin it to satire versus the original broadcast. Is that because in the original it's clear it wasn't satirical?

San francisco never said they would "support the military" so on top of spinning oreilly you have to lie as well?

The original was aired on the radio and I haven't found a transcript of it. But any reasonable American would know that O'Reilly wasn't seriously suggesting terrorist attack San Francisco, but you in your delusional mind cannot grasp logic nor reason. I pity you.

I never said oreilly suggested terrorists to attack san francisco. Save your pity for those who need it. Start with those incapable of reading simple posts. I said he said it was okay if they did.

So you listened to the original broadcast but chose not to link it? No need. Like a few others absolutely incapable of admitting error or finding fault with fox you'll keep up the kiddie dance. Have fun!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So you listened to the original broadcast? That means you purposefully chose to post oreilly's attempt to spin it to satire versus the original broadcast. Is that because in the original it's clear it wasn't satirical?

San francisco never said they would "support the military" so on top of spinning oreilly you have to lie as well?

The original was aired on the radio and I haven't found a transcript of it. But any reasonable American would know that O'Reilly wasn't seriously suggesting terrorist attack San Francisco, but you in your delusional mind cannot grasp logic nor reason. I pity you.

I never said oreilly suggested terrorists to attack san francisco. Save your pity for those who need it. Start with those incapable of reading simple posts. I said he said it was okay if they did.

So you listened to the original broadcast but chose not to link it? No need. Like a few others absolutely incapable of admitting error or finding fault with fox you'll keep up the kiddie dance. Have fun!

Like I said, I pity you.

 

[CurveLight]

The original was aired on the radio and I haven't found a transcript of it. But any reasonable American would know that O'Reilly wasn't seriously suggesting terrorist attack San Francisco, but you in your delusional mind cannot grasp logic nor reason. I pity you.

I never said oreilly suggested terrorists to attack san francisco. Save your pity for those who need it. Start with those incapable of reading simple posts. I said he said it was okay if they did.

So you listened to the original broadcast but chose not to link it? No need. Like a few others absolutely incapable of admitting error or finding fault with fox you'll keep up the kiddie dance. Have fun!

Like I said, I pity you.

You said you listened to the original broadcast.

You said you hadn't found the original transcript. I already posted a link to the original. Like I said, save your pity for those who deserve and need it.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I never said oreilly suggested terrorists to attack san francisco. Save your pity for those who need it. Start with those incapable of reading simple posts. I said he said it was okay if they did.

So you listened to the original broadcast but chose not to link it? No need. Like a few others absolutely incapable of admitting error or finding fault with fox you'll keep up the kiddie dance. Have fun!

Like I said, I pity you.

You said you listened to the original broadcast.

You said you hadn't found the original transcript. I already posted a link to the original. Like I said, save your pity for those who deserve and need it.

The only link I've seen from you in this thread is the one from MSNBC, that's hardly the original. Oh you need and deserve all the pity you can get.

 

[CurveLight]

Like I said, I pity you.

You said you listened to the original broadcast.

You said you hadn't found the original transcript. I already posted a link to the original. Like I said, save your pity for those who deserve and need it.

The only link I've seen from you in this thread is the one from MSNBC, that's hardly the original. Oh you need and deserve all the pity you can get.

Did you click on the link and actually read it? I know you didn't because if you had you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself repeatedly.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You said you listened to the original broadcast.

You said you hadn't found the original transcript. I already posted a link to the original. Like I said, save your pity for those who deserve and need it.

The only link I've seen from you in this thread is the one from MSNBC, that's hardly the original. Oh you need and deserve all the pity you can get.

Did you click on the link and actually read it? I know you didn't because if you had you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself repeatedly.

Yes I read it and listened to the excerpt, hell I even posted the quote myself. But you need the entire fucking transcript to fully understand the context and that is not provided and I haven't been able to obtain it. Look it's a free country and you're free to stay as ignorant as you choose. If you think that Bill wouldn't care if terrorist struck San Francisco then you are as stupid as you are ignorant.

 

[CurveLight]

The only link I've seen from you in this thread is the one from MSNBC, that's hardly the original. Oh you need and deserve all the pity you can get.

Did you click on the link and actually read it? I know you didn't because if you had you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself repeatedly.

Yes I read it and listened to the excerpt, hell I even posted the quote myself. But you need the entire fucking transcript to fully understand the context and that is not provided and I haven't been able to obtain it. Look it's a free country and you're free to stay as ignorant as you choose. If you think that Bill wouldn't care if terrorist struck San Francisco then you are as stupid as you are ignorant.

He said it 4 years ago so maybe he now realizes how wrong it was. Don't know and it doesn't matter. The point has always been fox fans don't give a fuck what that network puts out so long as the hate is properly directed and you are helping to prove that.

All msm sucks and is pro government but fox makes its money off of hate filled nationalists who don't have the first fucking clue of what our Constitution represents. Oreilly made the comments at a time when it was a daily practice for the war supporters to accuse dissenters of hating america and loving terrorists. Go ahead and continue parading this pathetic context approach. Why not? You already lied when you said you listened to the original broadcast. If you had you wouldve provided a link and if you want to try and spin that to say you meant you listened to it on that day then you wouldn't need to hunt for the rest of the original for your "context" savior. I heard the original broadcast and remember exactly where I was and what I was doing because it was so fucked up to realize the hate from the pro war crowd had reached such insane levels that oreilly knew he wouldn't be in any danger of losing fans or money. People like you help cheer it on. Congratulations.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Did you click on the link and actually read it? I know you didn't because if you had you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself repeatedly.

Yes I read it and listened to the excerpt, hell I even posted the quote myself. But you need the entire fucking transcript to fully understand the context and that is not provided and I haven't been able to obtain it. Look it's a free country and you're free to stay as ignorant as you choose. If you think that Bill wouldn't care if terrorist struck San Francisco then you are as stupid as you are ignorant.

He said it 4 years ago so maybe he now realizes how wrong it was. Don't know and it doesn't matter. The point has always been fox fans don't give a fuck what that network puts out so long as the hate is properly directed and you are helping to prove that.

All msm sucks and is pro government but fox makes its money off of hate filled nationalists who don't have the first fucking clue of what our Constitution represents. Oreilly made the comments at a time when it was a daily practice for the war supporters to accuse dissenters of hating america and loving terrorists. Go ahead and continue parading this pathetic context approach. Why not? You already lied when you said you listened to the original broadcast. If you had you wouldve provided a link and if you want to try and spin that to say you meant you listened to it on that day then you wouldn't need to hunt for the rest of the original for your "context" savior. I heard the original broadcast and remember exactly where I was and what I was doing because it was so fucked up to realize the hate from the pro war crowd had reached such insane levels that oreilly knew he wouldn't be in any danger of losing fans or money. People like you help cheer it on. Congratulations.

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

 

[Polk]

Grayson's comments are "controversial" because Republicans don't like their tactics being used against them.

 

[stevecox]

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

Maybe you didn't get the memo that only liberals are allowed to have a sense of humor.

 

[CurveLight]

Yes I read it and listened to the excerpt, hell I even posted the quote myself. But you need the entire fucking transcript to fully understand the context and that is not provided and I haven't been able to obtain it. Look it's a free country and you're free to stay as ignorant as you choose. If you think that Bill wouldn't care if terrorist struck San Francisco then you are as stupid as you are ignorant.

He said it 4 years ago so maybe he now realizes how wrong it was. Don't know and it doesn't matter. The point has always been fox fans don't give a fuck what that network puts out so long as the hate is properly directed and you are helping to prove that.

All msm sucks and is pro government but fox makes its money off of hate filled nationalists who don't have the first fucking clue of what our Constitution represents. Oreilly made the comments at a time when it was a daily practice for the war supporters to accuse dissenters of hating america and loving terrorists. Go ahead and continue parading this pathetic context approach. Why not? You already lied when you said you listened to the original broadcast. If you had you wouldve provided a link and if you want to try and spin that to say you meant you listened to it on that day then you wouldn't need to hunt for the rest of the original for your "context" savior. I heard the original broadcast and remember exactly where I was and what I was doing because it was so fucked up to realize the hate from the pro war crowd had reached such insane levels that oreilly knew he wouldn't be in any danger of losing fans or money. People like you help cheer it on. Congratulations.

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

You still fail to understand. At the time it was clear he was not simply being satirical and even in the spin off piece from him you posted he straight up said it was a "serious point." For the last time, the problem is his fan base had no problem with it. This was 4 years after 9/11 so if you really think it was just a joke then by all means, cling to whatever you desire to justify his crap. Go ahead and say how dumb I am cause it sure helps prove your point. Take away ad homs and most people in here would be near mute.

 

[CurveLight]

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

Maybe you didn't get the memo that only liberals are allowed to have a sense of humor.

Maybe you didn't get the memo that says you aren't a mind reader and that nobody has said it's okay to even joke about terrorists attacking americans.

 

[CurveLight]

Grayson's comments are "controversial" because Republicans don't like their tactics being used against them.

Iam a Republican and I don't care to a certain degree. If he said Republicans want people to die faster then he was wrong for such a horribly dishonest broadbrush. (if divecon feels the need to chime in let me remind you Texas is not known for its intellectualism. A hurtful truth doesn't make it untrue.)

So far a good portion looks like manufactured outrage.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

He said it 4 years ago so maybe he now realizes how wrong it was. Don't know and it doesn't matter. The point has always been fox fans don't give a fuck what that network puts out so long as the hate is properly directed and you are helping to prove that.

All msm sucks and is pro government but fox makes its money off of hate filled nationalists who don't have the first fucking clue of what our Constitution represents. Oreilly made the comments at a time when it was a daily practice for the war supporters to accuse dissenters of hating america and loving terrorists. Go ahead and continue parading this pathetic context approach. Why not? You already lied when you said you listened to the original broadcast. If you had you wouldve provided a link and if you want to try and spin that to say you meant you listened to it on that day then you wouldn't need to hunt for the rest of the original for your "context" savior. I heard the original broadcast and remember exactly where I was and what I was doing because it was so fucked up to realize the hate from the pro war crowd had reached such insane levels that oreilly knew he wouldn't be in any danger of losing fans or money. People like you help cheer it on. Congratulations.

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

You still fail to understand. At the time it was clear he was not simply being satirical and even in the spin off piece from him you posted he straight up said it was a "serious point." For the last time, the problem is his fan base had no problem with it. This was 4 years after 9/11 so if you really think it was just a joke then by all means, cling to whatever you desire to justify his crap. Go ahead and say how dumb I am cause it sure helps prove your point. Take away ad homs and most people in here would be near mute.

Including yourself.

Tell me what is life like when you take everything literally?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Grayson's comments are "controversial" because Republicans don't like their tactics being used against them.

Iam a Republican and I don't care to a certain degree. If he said Republicans want people to die faster then he was wrong for such a horribly dishonest broadbrush. (if divecon feels the need to chime in let me remind you Texas is not known for its intellectualism. A hurtful truth doesn't make it untrue.)

So far a good portion looks like manufactured outrage.

If it is true then you should be able to provide proof.

 

[CurveLight]

You're seriously stuck on stupid. As I've stated, anyone of reason knows that O"Reilly was being facetious when he made those comments. But obviously you are too fucking dense to understand it. You actually take O'Reilly literally and that makes you very stupid.

You still fail to understand. At the time it was clear he was not simply being satirical and even in the spin off piece from him you posted he straight up said it was a "serious point." For the last time, the problem is his fan base had no problem with it. This was 4 years after 9/11 so if you really think it was just a joke then by all means, cling to whatever you desire to justify his crap. Go ahead and say how dumb I am cause it sure helps prove your point. Take away ad homs and most people in here would be near mute.

Including yourself.

Tell me what is life like when you take everything literally?

Lol.....when did I commit an ad hom? I don't take everything literally. Is this your new oreilly defense? Figures. Making false accusations is nothing new when you can't discuss an issue. Did you ever explain how you listened to the original broadcast yet couldn't provide a link for it? Maybe you can invent an ad hom out of that and ignore it!

 

[CurveLight]

Grayson's comments are "controversial" because Republicans don't like their tactics being used against them.

Iam a Republican and I don't care to a certain degree. If he said Republicans want people to die faster then he was wrong for such a horribly dishonest broadbrush. (if divecon feels the need to chime in let me remind you Texas is not known for its intellectualism. A hurtful truth doesn't make it untrue.)

So far a good portion looks like manufactured outrage.

If it is true then you should be able to provide proof.

You mean besides linking your posts? True, that would be an unfair extrapolation. So let's see.....

TexasOnline: Official Portal of Texas

Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We all know Texas is known for several things such as bbq, oil, inability to defend its borders, racism, and let's not forget the love of guns and the celebration of killing unarmed people. But intellectualism? Not even close.