Aug
23
23
Oh. My. God.
This video, via Crooks & Liars, is the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in my entire life. You simply cannot have a discussion with people who are utterly unreasonable and refuse to confront reality.
Adz Networkz
Hall of Flame
- World O'Crap
- Syndication:
arb said,
August 23, 2005 at 4:40
Jesus Christ, and then O’Donnell goes “let me get your response, Colleen — what Cindy Sheehan is advocating is ‘cut and run’ — is that what you’re advocating?” — in this real accusatory “hard-hitting journalist” tone. Un-fucking-believable.
And I used to think she was hot (Norah OD that is) …
Yosef said,
August 23, 2005 at 4:48
I couldn’t watch it (cpu’s about to die so I couldn’t downlaod the essentials to watch the video.) Is it that much worse than the transcript?
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 4:54
Yosef- Yes. Actually hearing that sack of shit say those thing on live television will make you incredibly angry. I personally want to gouge out his eyes and take a shit in his sockets.
Vladi G said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:02
What a fucking moron O’Donnell is. Hey America, over 50% of you are extremists! I wonder if she even knows what that term means.
Yosef said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:26
That’s why I don’t watch the news shows anymore. I actually even took a 2 year hiatus from reading the letters to the editor in my local paper because I couldn’t stand it (there’s actually more balance there now. Liberals are either getting their stuff printed finally or are finally speaking out!) Charlotte.com if you want to check it out. There’s still some crazy winger shit in there, but it’s not how it was 2-3 years ago.
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:27
That’s why I don’t watch the news shows anymore. I actually even took a 2 year hiatus from reading the letters to the editor in my local paper because I couldn’t stand it
That’s Judson Cox’s outfit, right? ;-)
Ben said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:29
I hardly listened to any of Williams. O’Donnell was enough to put me off my feed. Her throwing down the “antiwar extremist” gauntlet was a clear case of taking sides. The dumber side, in terms of her two guests.
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:31
Her throwing down the “antiwar extremist” gauntlet was a clear case of taking sides.
Yeah. I mean, the Weather Underground… THOSE were anti-war extremists. Until Cindy Sheehan starts planting pipe bombs in crowded buildings, I don’t think she’s quite on the same level.
Hemlock Echo said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:32
“And it’s no mistake that the lion’s share of violence is in and around Baghdad. That’s where there are more Western news cameras per capita than probably any other city on the planet earth. When they see this kind of division they use it as a fundraiser and a recruiting tool.”
(Let me think about this)
So… there are lots of cameras in Baghdad… that the terrorists use to… watch Cindy Sheehan protesting… but wait, the cameras are in Baghdad, and Cindy is in… maybe the cameras stole parts of Cindy’s soul (Muslims believe that right?)… and watching a mother mourning the loss of her son… makes them want to… kill more people?
Ok, I get it now. Hey Justin, when you’re done with MJ, pass the corndogs.
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:35
Look, Hemlock, you’re noot thinking about this in the right frame of mind. Terrorists are all attention hogs- they just love strutting their IEDs and RPGs in front of the cameras. In other words, they’re just like Chuck Hagel- they’ll do anything to please the MSM, especially if it means hurting the troops.
Yosef said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:37
That’s Judson Cox’s outfit, right? ;-)
Sadly, No! I’ve never even seen a copy of that laying around anywhere, and it’s been pissing me off! I need to get a copy of the NC Conservative!!!!
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:40
Sadly, No! I’ve never even seen a copy of that laying around anywhere, and it’s been pissing me off! I need to get a copy of the NC Conservative!!!!
Goddammit, it’s got a circulation of 300,000 and you can’t even find ONE?!!!? ;-)
Brad R. said,
August 23, 2005 at 5:42
BTW, the NC Conservative is finally being published on the prestigious Internet:
http://www.northcarolinaconservative.com/
Pinko Punko said,
August 23, 2005 at 7:24
I am constantly talking about this- the g*d damn insurgents are not 12 year old girls with self-esteem problems. There morale is not like the plastic bag in American Beauty dancing around on little puffs of wind out of American’s mouths. They are willing to blow themselves up and they already rape and kill and torture, and these douchebags are worried that insurgents will get more inner strength from some woman’s comments? Jesus, they are not Oprah watching robots that need a personal trainer to stop eating Ding Dongs or buying handbags. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That is like Ben Stein dumb.
Anne said,
August 23, 2005 at 13:11
God, I am so sick of hearing “cut and run.”
Mal de mer said,
August 23, 2005 at 16:38
Anti-war extremists (as if being anti-war, in particular, THIS war, is an extreme position)…Aiding and abetting the enemy (Right, which is a crime, no?)…It’s like words no longer have meaning to these people. Just pick any word you want, throw it out there, and man’s, that’s mighty fine communicatin’.
So, when this outrage is finally over, are there any ideas for re-education camps for these people? I’d be willing to donate a set of flash cards I have from my youth: COW…C-O-W…this is a picture of it…no, it’s not a ferocious, herbivorous velociraptor…it’s a COW! Now, again…
Dan Someone said,
August 23, 2005 at 16:50
So this guy says “We’re not supporting the war, we’re just supproting the troops.” Fine. But if we have to allow him to make this distinction, then why doesn’t he have to allow the Cindy Sheehans of the world to make the distinction between opposing the war (which they do) and opposing the troops (which they do not)?
Tapio said,
August 23, 2005 at 18:24
I just did a trendline of the US casualties in Iraq. The slope is positive. What we have now isn’t working.
I’m ashamed to admit I supported the President in the run up to the war. All I can plead is youthful ignorance in trusting that our CoC would tell the truth. I won’t repeat that mistake.
In Vietnam, people talked about continuing the war so that the dead servicemen and women wouldn’t have died for nothing. Sorry, that doesn’t cut it. Those who are already dead will remain dead. In economics, it’s called a sunk cost. The past is gone: you can only evaluate your options for the future.
What we’re doing now isn’t working. We need to either fully equip our fighting forces to succeed or we need to leave.
poop ruiz said,
August 23, 2005 at 18:42
Clearly you can’t have a discussion with lunatics like that. And I don’t think Rowley responded the way she should have.
When someone’s pouring out hate-filled verbal diarrhea, what is the best response?
If I were in her shoes I’d be tempted to respond thusly,”Listen, you overcaffeinated loudmouth. Things aren’t as simple in the real world as they are in your tiny brain. If we stay in Iraq, and things stay their course, the US military will be wrecked within a year. So, Mr Williams, do I have you down as wanting to ruin the US military?”
Of course, I’m not convinced that would be the right way to respond either.
Mal de mer said,
August 23, 2005 at 19:07
That’s exactly how I would have responded (more or less). But I wouldn’t even have addressed any issues of content; I simply would have stated that I’m not continuing this conversation until my interlocutor calms down and regains his self-control. Then I would have sat there, mute, until that twit of an anchor regained control of the moderation. Which might have been never, but what would I have cared? Besting this idiot, in the grand scheme of things, would have resulted in absolutely nothing.
Dan Someone said,
August 23, 2005 at 19:38
I think Rowley responded appropriately, if a little weakly. When someone on the other side of an argument is veering into road-rage, fist-shaking, frothing-at-the-mouth territory, and there is an audience watching, you are much better off maintaining a moderate tone. Rowley could have been a little better in the substance of her response — the contrast in tone only gets you so far with an audience — but it would have been far worse, IMO, if she had gone into the red zone herself.
Capt. Trollypants said,
August 23, 2005 at 20:39
Oh Tapio. Don’t you knwo that if you keep putting money into the slot machine, you’ll eventually win, and your chances will get better?
Pinko Punko said,
August 23, 2005 at 20:41
No, Capt. – the chances of winning on any pull are always the same- yes, you have a greater chance of winning because you play more, but do not increase the chances of winning on any one pull.
Hey, Enron’s stock kept just sinking- but I’d already spent so much money on it- what is the solution? Just spend MORE money, so those dollars were not spent in vain!
Jim said,
August 23, 2005 at 22:18
Nope, sorry, my Outrage meter was fried long ago, there’s nothing left in the tank. I mean, after all that’s happened in the last 5 years, it’s impossible to create a hierarchy of outrage.
Oh, FTLOG said,
August 23, 2005 at 23:01
Wow! That guy was all but foaming at the mouth! I can’t say I’d have the same restraint if I were Rowley.
And, hey, Nora, say it with me…”Mark, shut the fuck up!” Five syllables. Come on, give it a try, you can do it…you stupid little twit!
tito said,
August 29, 2005 at 1:07
no mundo para desagradecidos inconformes agrecion