RE: Let the Truth be Told
At the top, let me say I have no intention of defending Bill O'Reilly, who is the Mick Jagger of tabloid punditry, so any ensuing replies that try to take me there will be ignored.
"So can we assume that Bill is admitting that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are a bunch of partisan hacks, who LIED about a decorated war veteran & that "swiftboating" would have to include deception?"
You're trying to make this into the wife-beater question and it just doesn't fit, sorry to ruin your fun. O'Reilly is indicating that the term is doubly misleading because neither he nor the swift boat vets lied. As I recall, O'Reilly wasn't much of a fan of the swift boat vets in the first place, so your attempt to insert an admission in his words is pretty silly. Finally, please don't make the mistake of believing that O'Reilly is some sort of revered spokesman for the right. He is a tabloid "journalist," roughly on a par with the hosts of Entertainment Tonight, nothing more, nothing less.
"So Ms. Sheehan is a radical lefty for telling the truth?"
There is not a true word in any part of her statement. In fact, her statement is completely devoid of content and is simply intended to evoke an emotional response. Who is this "America" to whom she refers? This is not a thinking person. This is a human tape recorder. She is doing nothing but regurgitating agit-prop and if pressed, I'd bet real money she couldn't defend a single word she said. But our wonderful media isn't bothering to press her, are they? She is a radical lefty because she is acting like a radical lefty. It's the duck test, remember? She vomits the hate America, anti-military, anti-American, anti-Bush bombast like the good little trained monkey she is.
"...but we did have to kill a few hundred million Native Americans to get it. Often times, it seems our hubris allows us to forget this little factoid."
I am really hoping someone mislead you into writing this kind of crap out where God and everybody can see it. I can think of a couple of likely suspects. Hubris, indeed. It is such a stupid statement it embarrasses me to see it written by you. First, the so-called "Native Americans" were killing one another in droves before a single European ever arrived here. I hate to burst your bubble, but your sainted "Native Americans" were killing each other over territory, pride, nationalism, and women and doing it in particularly savage ways. Second, I don't know who you mean by "we," but I didn't kill anyone. And lastly, Europeans directly accounted for several hundred thousand deaths of pre-Columbus indigents at most. There haven't ever been "several hundred million" of them extant. In any case, the vast majority of territorial expansion by Europeans (some of them were even non-Caucasian, **GASP**) was accomplished by a combination of con-artistry and diplomacy. Whoever painted that nice picture of Europeans making a slaughterhouse of the American West was lying to you.
"She might be a total nut (I don't know the woman) but at least she's not a liar."
Maybe not, but she is dishonest, disingenuous, and not very bright.
"So can we assume that Bill is admitting that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are a bunch of partisan hacks, who LIED about a decorated war veteran & that "swiftboating" would have to include deception?"
You're trying to make this into the wife-beater question and it just doesn't fit, sorry to ruin your fun. O'Reilly is indicating that the term is doubly misleading because neither he nor the swift boat vets lied. As I recall, O'Reilly wasn't much of a fan of the swift boat vets in the first place, so your attempt to insert an admission in his words is pretty silly. Finally, please don't make the mistake of believing that O'Reilly is some sort of revered spokesman for the right. He is a tabloid "journalist," roughly on a par with the hosts of Entertainment Tonight, nothing more, nothing less.
"So Ms. Sheehan is a radical lefty for telling the truth?"
There is not a true word in any part of her statement. In fact, her statement is completely devoid of content and is simply intended to evoke an emotional response. Who is this "America" to whom she refers? This is not a thinking person. This is a human tape recorder. She is doing nothing but regurgitating agit-prop and if pressed, I'd bet real money she couldn't defend a single word she said. But our wonderful media isn't bothering to press her, are they? She is a radical lefty because she is acting like a radical lefty. It's the duck test, remember? She vomits the hate America, anti-military, anti-American, anti-Bush bombast like the good little trained monkey she is.
"...but we did have to kill a few hundred million Native Americans to get it. Often times, it seems our hubris allows us to forget this little factoid."
I am really hoping someone mislead you into writing this kind of crap out where God and everybody can see it. I can think of a couple of likely suspects. Hubris, indeed. It is such a stupid statement it embarrasses me to see it written by you. First, the so-called "Native Americans" were killing one another in droves before a single European ever arrived here. I hate to burst your bubble, but your sainted "Native Americans" were killing each other over territory, pride, nationalism, and women and doing it in particularly savage ways. Second, I don't know who you mean by "we," but I didn't kill anyone. And lastly, Europeans directly accounted for several hundred thousand deaths of pre-Columbus indigents at most. There haven't ever been "several hundred million" of them extant. In any case, the vast majority of territorial expansion by Europeans (some of them were even non-Caucasian, **GASP**) was accomplished by a combination of con-artistry and diplomacy. Whoever painted that nice picture of Europeans making a slaughterhouse of the American West was lying to you.
"She might be a total nut (I don't know the woman) but at least she's not a liar."
Maybe not, but she is dishonest, disingenuous, and not very bright.
posted by Anonymous | 8:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home