"terrified of Bill?" Who told you that? Was it Bill?
BBSeat., don't use up all your fanciest words at once. Save some for the Rapture. It's gonna be dandy.

knowledge

This huge, 6'8" Obama guy was intentionally blocking O'Reilly's shot and he got what he deserved. Obama's people are terrified of Bill because they know that he's far more knowledgable about everything than thier own candidate.

Reply to'TAH' re "Standard Tactics":

I don't know enough from the shreds of facts surrounding the referred episode to either defend or condemn either party thus far. And neither do any of the dupes below who've already concluded that this 6'8" fellow was 'assaulted'.

My original comment on this subject was to Cliff's 'Cliff Note' (above) making this very point:

It may be best for one to suspend their emotion long enough to allow some intellect and genuine deliberation to shape one’s conclusions from time to time.

Sound reason, of course, will continue to be a casualty to the primal urges of the froth-mouthed haters of ‘all-things-Bush/Fox/Oreilly’.

Your own ‘standard tactics’, as so eloquently expressed by you and your witless comrades below, preclude such reason.

In case no one else noticed-the very thing that Dildo OReilly admits to doing...in other words...his own version of the even is ILLEGAL. I hate to break it to Papa Bear but it is actually a crime to 'force someone to move'. There is a name for that-it's called assault.

Always a pleasure to see the Bush apologists getting it from all sides but I notice the usual suspects are missing from this particular debate.

Loathe as I am to pipe in in the middle of a schoolyard scuffle, but I must ask this question of the single fellow from Seattle,

Do you defend the actions of Orally regarding his actions toward the Obama staffer? Or believe his explanation of it? I notice that in all your posts you have failed to even mention the incident about which the post was created.

Or are we looking at the standard tactic of the Bush apologist. It's impossible to defend their actions so let's attack the attackers.

Your tactics are as transparent as the glass house you are occupying. Throwing stones in such a situation is not an advisable course of action.

(I was the latest anonymous - still no attacks?) Earth to Steve: Well, thank the gods that your a Brit... maybe we can use that as an excuse to excuse the fractured logic - dim, very dim. And speaking of dim... I too must 'smile' when I imagine our resident twit, Eve - struggling with her own deductive faculties, finger firmly planted up the nose.

It was not I that alluded to prior studies in philosphy - that was the defender of resident twits, Sir Paddy.

I merely suggested that one should not allow emotion cloud reason and that an ability to see the West from the East (through Eastern eyes) and vice versa may be pertinent in current affairs - period.

Perhaps your Royal Twitness could take the finger out long enough to key in an explanation as to how, in following your particular brand of "logical deduction" that my words are interpreted as a declaration of "how brilliant and superior" I am(?).

I am not an American - I am a British citizen - But I cannot believe the way that this guy is being treated by Fox News. (The spin stops here!) They never mention him - They talk about Mit Romney none stop - They talk about every other candidate - But never Obama. They do not like him. They want to take him down. They are unbalanced and right wing. As a neutral observer I would say, "Fox News is the American Taliban".

Ahh!!! There it is, Paddy!!! That emotional factor (and a bit of the bottle) that dictates so much of the liberal stance on issues today: 'Bush is an inarticulate stumbler, thus, all that the current administration stands for must be erroneous'.

We should be careful that we don't allow distain for Bush bury us. A woman, an Afro-American, a Baptist Minister, or a Mormon for President of the USA? ABSOLUTELY!!! But NOT from among present candidates, and NOT at the present time.

What the US needs MORE THAN ANYTHING at this critical juncture in the history of the world - and certainly following the less than stellar presidency of GWB – is an articulate, and unflinchingly resolute character who is sufficiently versed in lessons of the past and the characters and temperaments of peoples beyond their immediate (domestic) points of reference to recognize the grave threat that will face America if another stumbler takes the helm now.

Contrary to the fantasies of those who seek immediate troop withdrawal or a fixed timeline, such an act – followed up with one-on-one meetings with the Ahmadinejads and Kim-Il-Songs of the world (as proposed by some) by a sniveling contingent of Ron Paul-type US diplomats – would serve only to irrevocably seal our collective doom.

Nor do we by any means need an absolute saint for President right now (note present contemporaries around the world with whom we must interact). Evil times require tough guys. Proven ‘street-cred’ and actual governmental experience in facing down and resolving problems is a far greater asset at this point in our times. Thus, we MUST save the ‘historic breaking of gender/race/religion barriers’ (quaint but useless) for another time and, hopefully, a better selection of those who would do so.

The last post was mine. Didn't mean to post anonymously. :)

Well said Paddy. Although I have my doubts that the little lad understands logical deduction.

I find your posts good for a laugh, teenyweenyseattlelad. Such arrogance and pomposity. Makes me smile.

In my experience, people who are very intelligent rarely find it necessary to tell everyone how brilliant and superior they are.

Cheers.

LOL, BBSL!!! Good try. I'm not without my trips to foreign lands, including the last time I was having to swear to everyone I met that I hadnot voted for Bush or shared his positions. Became rather reflexive after a while.

Also, I was not answering for Eve, but because I get these comments right away I just felt compelled to respond.

Sorry, have to run. I'm playing the Rudy Giuliani 9/11 Drinking Game™ during the debate and I need to open another bottle.

(Reply to Paddy)'Faux' - that's cute... is that your own or is it borrowed from your 'philosophy prof'? I'm sure Eve appreciates you explaining her point for her. Actually I'm a bit of a 'current issues' junkie and watch ALL the 'Big 3' (MSNBC, CNN, FOX). I am, however, sufficiently detached emotionally to let a bit of intellect and reason determine which points of view carry more validity for me. Over thirty years experience abroad (among those characters and temperaments upon whom our future lies) also may permit some insight that one's time in the college library may not....

Her point is BBSL (which sounds like a sex want ad acronym btw) that you have to be willfully ignorant to think that Bill O'Reilly is fair, balanced or even coherent. Willfully ignorant people choose to get their "news" from Faux ergo (as my philosophy prof used to say) you, our very own BBSL, watch Faux!!! Easy, no?

Yes, Eve dear, I do so frequently. Your point?

Seatllelad, tell us please, do you watch O'Reilly's show? Or any Fox news shows.

... and 'Tina' is yet another Democratic intellectual.

Fox news is horrible. O'Reilly is a dick. EVERYONE know's that. If someone wants the real news, they don't go to Fox, PLease. Fox is in the same category as TMZ.

Pull your head out Cliff. The 'Breck Girl' and Obama's greatest fear is that of getting pinned into a position where they may actually have to explain the down-the-road consequences of the numerous pie-in-the-sky scenarios dangled before the noses of gullible dupes like yourself. Republican frontrunners, on the other hand, don't have this problem. Observe them as they willingly appear on both MSNBC and CNN and learn. Helpful Hint: It may require one to submit one's emotion to a touch of intellect from time to time.

I'd pay money to see o huey debate, say........Bill Clinton. Oh what fun.........

Mellowjohn is right.

O'Reilly is trying to get some victimhood he can play up to try to win ratings back. If he can get arrested at a Dem event that would be the high point of his career. He could go on his show and say how the Dems are afraid of free speech, different ideas, and so forth. It's all theatrics on billo's part.

Republicans love nothing more than feigned victimhood. For evidence look no further than the Fla. recount protests.

It's probably about how unfair they all are to boycott "Fair & Balanced" Faux..... but it may be harder to make that point now though....

in billo's world, it's all about billo. the rest of just are just props.

Can't wait for the video. My guess? Oh lufa is working on a (sniff) "story" on how Obama and other Dems are freezing out faux. A tear jerker from a ...........well...........jerk.....

I'm thinking there is bound to be some gooooood video of this eventually.