Bill O'Reilly vs. Michael Moore
 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.html

Their both idiots. oOo:

interesting

It's like two children fighting over whose dad is stronger, its moronic oOo:

For the most part, O'Reilly pwned Moore.

sounded like a drunken bar argument...

moore > o'reily

STRVS o'reily impression > Cow Shit > O'reily > Moore

i agree with ninty9, they are both idiots.

Re: Bill O'Reilly vs. Michael Moore
 

[quote="Mr. Maple":8f97d] Hi, im bill o'riely i just woke up from a long night on the town, getting drunk and sucking gicantic man cock, thanks for watching fox news
[/quote:8f97d]

its easy to make fun of moore becasue he is fat and he dislikes what the majority approves oOo:

O'Reilly whole defense on Moore's question.

OHH DOOD HE MADE AM ISTAKE GIVES HIM SA BRAKE MENG COME ON HE MADE A MISTAKE ARGRGHRGGHRRRGHR.

[quote="Short Hand":5b444]O'Reilly whole defense on Moore's question.

OHH DOOD HE MADE AM ISTAKE GIVES HIM SA BRAKE MENG COME ON HE MADE A MISTAKE ARGRGHRGGHRRRGHR.[/quote:5b444]OMGOMGWTFA LIBERAL BANHINM ONOMG

Shorthand is right on this one.If you bothered to read this,quote this post

Bill O'Reilly is a fag puppet biggrin:

i dont like bill o'reilly

ludacris doesnt like bill o'reilly, either
[img]http://www.globalblacknews.com/ludacris.gif[/img]


































rock on, ludacris rock:
[img]http://www.daveyd.com/ludacris97.jpg[/img]

I think if all these idiots put more effort into fixing instead of critization wed be a lot farther than we are.

Roger that.

Stupid armchair quarterbacks. It still amazes me that we had all of this intelligence that weapons of mass destruction were there. President Clinton even believed they were there. Iraq is huge with desert everywhere, and because we haven't found anything after searching about 1% of the land area we are going to assume we were wrong. I'm not convinced yet that they won't find something. Sadam could have avoided all of this if he had not invaded Kuwat in the first place and/or acted like he was hiding something in the second.


But the thing that chaps my arse the most is asswipes like Michael Moore coming along two and a half years after 9/11 and saying that the split second decisions that were made by the police, firemen, military or even President Bush during the attack were wrong. What was he doing that day? Probably sitting at home crapping his pants. To make a big deal about President Bush spending "too many minutes" in that classroom is petty and unrealistic. I wonder how many minutes it took Michael Moore to realize what was happening that day? How long before he quit crapping his pants long enough to realize he had soiled himself?

Bill > Michael

Nuff said.

did you see Farenheit 9/11

Farenfaggotfuckingfagsoncrackwhilebeinghomosfaghom omovie 9/11

Looks like a gay movie.

i dont think it was gay, but you should see it. alot of people talk shit about Michael Moore but yet they didnt even see any of his documentarys.

its like people that dont vote, they bitch about what the government is doing but yet they didnt vote eek: the same thing goes with Michael Moore. watch his documentarys then give an opinion about him or his documentarys.




but it was good, some parts where alittle out there

No, ive seen both.

I really dislike Moore.

Ive also got a few celebrities on my hit list as well.

Tom Hanks better not be one of them biggrin:

I heart Tom Hanks! happy:

I don't know, I haven't seen Farjklaswnhafjklh 911. (I don't feel like spelling it). But, I think it is crazy to blame our president for the deaths of 3000+ of our people.

Trust me, after you totutre Iraqi soliders and suspected officiers for weeks on end, and they don't get anything out of them, it means their are no WMD's. Colonel your usaully cool headed on these topics, but your description of Moore and what he did that day is wrong and aa bit low gor your usual class. He explained in the movie what he was doing.


People lets get this straight there are no WMD's. The only thing found so far was a sarin nerve gas shell, which was missing from Iraq Arsenal in the first place.


9/11 commision confirms Moore's facts.

9/11 commision.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=24



Moore's 6 volumes Of back up via the internet. YES 6 VOLUMES !!!!



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=16



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=17



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=18



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=19



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=20



http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=21


I dont see why you people hate Moore so much... its not like he is suggesting we bomb everything in sight and raze Afghanistan of Iraq into the ground.... unlike O'Reilly who suggested America do that.

[quote="Short Hand":adb0a] but your description of Moore and what he did that day is wrong and aa bit low gor your usual class. He explained in the movie what he was doing.[/quote:adb0a]

LOL - you're probably right Short Hand. This is an emotional issue for me. I usually can see both sides of an issue but in this case I can't. I'm not sure whether there are any WMD's in Iraq or not but I don't believe the President lied about it. He is not the only guy in the world who thought there were. As for the guys being "tortured" that doesn't necessarily prove anything unless you have the guys who actually know something. All I'm saying is that we went through several years of WWII before we ever found an extermination camp. In this modern world of instant information nobody seems to have much patience anymore. Let's wait and let history decide if we were right. Let's quit worrying about whether we were right to go and start worrying about how we end this thing.

I have not seen the Moore movie so I cannot comment on it's contents. My frustration comes from statements made to the press by Moore, and others, concerning how people acted that day. If you are investigating what went wrong with our our procedures, so that we can train our people to react differently the next time, that is one thing. But, it seems to me that all of these inquiries are malicious and intend to accuse, blame and ridicule good people for their weell-intended actions. So President Bush was in that classroom for seven minutes after the second attack. So what? Would it change anything if he had left in seven seconds? No. Do we want a leader who trusts the people under him enough that he can remain calm in that situation, or do we want a guy that runs screaming from the room in fear? It just irritates me that something as small as what the President did for seven minutes is being nitpicked over. How many minutes passed when the Japanese started dropping bombs on Pearl before we knew we were under attack? Guys reported seeing the bombs fall and they thought it was some weird training mission. And they were there! My point is, you don't know how you would react unless you were in that persons shoes. To come back later and second guess them is counterproductive if it is done in a malicious way. But this seems to be OK in today's society. We have no respect for our leaders or each other. It just gets real frustrating for old coots like me. Ever since Woodward and Bernstein got famous every reporter wants to be the one to get the next big scoop and make a name for himself, regardless of what he does to the lives of the people involved. It didn't used to be that way and it makes me sick,

and this thread sleeping:

moore could kill oriley in a second


[img]http://www.daplayazclub.com/uploads/OWNBD.jpg[/img]

Seen 3 of them. Roger and Me, Farhenheit 9/11, and Bowling for Columbine. I didnt really care for roger and me, and bowling for columbine. But fahrenheit was just a bunch of stupid propaganda.

both are commercially motivated skewing to public anticipation no reality in their views

Hey guess what guys?


FACTS!


http://forums.phxx.net/showthread.asp?t ... hread=2727

[quote="Short Hand":1d01d]O'Reilly whole defense on Moore's question.

OHH DOOD HE MADE AM ISTAKE GIVES HIM SA BRAKE MENG COME ON HE MADE A MISTAKE ARGRGHRGGHRRRGHR.[/quote:1d01d]

Moore's whole defense on O'Reilly.


OHH WHY ARE YOU SENDING THE CHILDREN TO WAR YOU EVIL EVIL MAN DONT SEND THE CHILDREN SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN


You idiot, these are VOLUNTEERS, they KNEW the risks, they are not CHILDREN anymore, they are adults who make their own decisions.

that's half the reason why they join the army anyways. "I want to blow up some ragheads!!!! Lemme at 'em!"

Plus they are poor as hell..Not like some kid who lives in the suburbs will sign up to get shot at for anything less then a milllion bucks..To these kids this is a very good paying job and they gotta take the risk to make the money.

Yeah, thats called being a mercenary. Killing people and gettign paid. Whats sad is that people believe money is greater than a human life.