View Full Version : Dunkie is on O'Reilly
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:23 PM
He of course is getting all kinds of uninterrupted time to speak.
Of course, under his name, the banner says "GOP Presidential Candidate". grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!
Sorry, I goofed. I shouldn't have put this post in this area of the forum.
ghemminger
09-11-2007, 06:26 PM
Dunkie Donuts???
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:28 PM
Duncan Hunter. LOL
JosephTheLibertarian
09-11-2007, 06:30 PM
Duncan Hunter is SO FUCKING ANNOYING. I hope he gets lost and wanders onto oncoming traffic.
ScotTX
09-11-2007, 06:34 PM
It's great to see the contrast between the Hunter interview and the Ron Paul interview. Billo basically let Hunter have the floor for 5 minutes while Ron Paul could barely get a word in edgewise, let alone finish a thought. Further proof that Bill and Fox are anything BUT fair and balanced.
JosephTheLibertarian
09-11-2007, 06:38 PM
Hunter needs to get pimp slapped
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:39 PM
You're missing it...
They're now talking about rights.
Did you guys know we had a right to be "safe and secure". ;)
theblatanttruth
09-11-2007, 06:41 PM
Man, those two hot chicks are schooling the hell out of Bill O... ouch
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:41 PM
I also just found out that the Patriot Act trumps the Constitution. Man, I'm gettin' an edumacation here on O'Reilly. :)
Bossobass
09-11-2007, 06:41 PM
You're missing it...
They're now talking about rights.
Did you guys know we had a right to be "safe and secure". ;)
Yeah, the most expensive 'right' in history.
Funny, I don't feel safer ;)
Bosso
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:42 PM
Man, those two hot chicks are schooling the hell out of Bill O... ouch
That one on the left is an IDIOT.
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:43 PM
Yeah, the most expensive 'right' in history.
Funny, I don't feel safer ;)
Bosso
You know it's strange. I don't remember the right to be "safe and secure" anywhere in the Bill of Rights. I guess I should ask Bill to point it out for me. :p
Did you notice what they did? They throw in little buzz phrases like "personal responsibility" to make conservatives think they are one of them, but then brainwash them that just because Congress passes a law, everything is hunky dorey. No need to concern your little heads that it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS ALL HELL!!!!
theblatanttruth
09-11-2007, 06:44 PM
That one on the left is an IDIOT.
I just caught the patriot act part and both women seemed very well armed and articulate, but thats all I seen :p
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 06:49 PM
I just caught the patriot act part and both women seemed very well armed and articulate, but thats all I seen :p
The one on the left thought that it was fine for the feds to do warrantless wiretapping etc., if they themselves thought they had probable cause. No need to go to the FISA court. She even said something stupid like... well, you wouldn't want to warn the bad guys that you were going to wiretap them. :rolleyes: Yeah, like the FISA court would just announce it. Right.
theblatanttruth
09-11-2007, 06:51 PM
The one on the left thought that it was fine for the feds to do warrantless wiretapping etc., if they themselves thought they had probable cause. No need to go to the FISA court. She even said something stupid like... well, you wouldn't want to warn the bad guys that you were going to wiretap them. :rolleyes: Yeah, like the FISA court would just announce it. Right.
Hmm, I seemed to have heard the exact opposite... must not have been paying adequate attention!
The mail he red regarding Paul was mostly negative.... some guy even wrote that our foreign policy had nothing to do with terrorism.
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 07:08 PM
Hmm, I seemed to have heard the exact opposite... must not have been paying adequate attention!
Yeah, I'm pretty sure. The one on the right tried to correct her and tell her that it WAS important, but she wasn't given much time.
LibertyEagle
09-11-2007, 07:12 PM
The mail he red regarding Paul was mostly negative.... some guy even wrote that our foreign policy had nothing to do with terrorism.
Yeah, did you catch O'Reilly saying that Dr. Paul dodged the questions and went into a history lesson and that was why he interrupted him? I don't agree on that point of the so-called history lesson, because you have to understand history to know what is going on, but I hate it when someone is questioning Dr. Paul about Iran and then Dr. Paul switches over to saying... well, what are you going to do about Pakistan? To the general audience, he is dodging. He does this switching often. He needs to stop doing this. He really does. He needs to stay with the point and make it, without going off on something else. I don't understand why his advisers are not telling him how things like this come off.
Proemio
09-11-2007, 07:17 PM
The one on the left thought that it was fine for the feds to do warrantless wiretapping etc., if they themselves thought they had probable cause. No need to go to the FISA court. She even said something stupid like... well, you wouldn't want to warn the bad guys that you were going to wiretap them. :rolleyes: Yeah, like the FISA court would just announce it. Right.
Maybe they know something about the "appointed" FISA court judges.
Theoretically, the bad guys being listened to could be sitting in Congress or even the White House - strictly theoretical, of course...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.