Author Topic: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?  (Read 12622 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #30 on: June 12, 2009, 10:43:05 AM »
i wonder what kind of experience obbamma had in dealing with a nation like russia.  it sure as shit didn't come from his senate time.  guess this same interviewer (couric, i believe?) never asked him a question like that.

They wouldn't ask him the question because he would have answered it in some coherent and logical manner, not looked like clown, and that doesn't make for good or funny TV.

FTR, I believe at this point that Obama is a banking clan shill, but I think ANYBODY is better then Palin.  I HATE Hil-dog, but I would even pick her over Palin.  Hell, I'd rather have John Wayne Gacy as a VP over Palin.

I would put Ted Nugent at the polar opposite of Palin.  McCain should have ran Nugent as his VP.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #31 on: June 12, 2009, 08:52:33 PM »
LOL. You must have taken some kind of funny course in a University.

Sure, a few blacks died..(I'm not sure where you get Muslims from. I believe they were buying up slaves at that time in Africa.)..but I'm sorry. This country was fought for, won by, designed by, and built by white christian males. There were some slave blacks in the south who helped with agricultural work. Other than that, it was a European Christian male project. Anyone who would argue otherwise is caught up in a lying ideology created in the 70's by people who weren't satisfied with their role in American history.
You assumed where I got my information, but I won't assume where you got yours. Are you fucking kidding me? "some agricultural work?" A plantation wasn't just a cotton plant. Slaves and the slave economy built this country. They raised children of Mas'r and missus, and yes, they did the agricultural work. They spread your precious Christianity too. Not only this, but they managed. It has even been suggested that the cotton gin was built by a slave, whose owner stole the idea. Anyway I don't care about that particular point so much. What I'm more concerned with is this Fox/O'Reilly idea about white Christians and America.

It's funny. Without a black presence, what would white people, even the ones back then, ESPECIALLY the ones a century and half ago, use to affirm themselves? A free white man is only that if he's next to a black woman and child in shackles, especially if he can rape and separate her from her child. There was and is an "other" presence in the United States. We are all apart of it and we all contribute to helping it. Ignoring this fact is ignorant. Free blacks did fight for the union. And who cares whether or not they were Muslim or buddhist or worshipping Zeus?

America is a baby nation. It is evolving, despite the wing nuts who are holding us back. If this was a white christian "project" in your eyes, it doesn't dissolve the contribution of people who weren't non-white and christian males. Their project was nothing without the contribution of non-whites.

While they sat around in their fluffly clothes and wrote and read, people toiled and sacrificed. That'll never be forgotten.

I think Bill O'Reilly is just an insecure small weenied Irish geezer who SHOCKER has a temper and inferiority complex. He has to use his race to push his agenda. The cankles with flags on their 4XL night gowns wouldn't approve otherwise!

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #32 on: June 12, 2009, 09:22:42 PM »
Fry;s Girl - I don' disagree with what you are saying - but please god, don't ever work in public realtions!  There are ways of stating realities to those you know holod ohter views - and right here:

Quote
especially if he can rape and separate her from her child.

I'm sorry - but even though it happened all too often, the way you set this in context jumped the shark.

I'm just sayin'  :-*


Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #33 on: June 12, 2009, 09:35:17 PM »
Fry, I hate to break it to you..but take a map of the civilized world, then overlay a sheet of plastic on it and see where CIVILIZATIONS are versus groups of people based on religion and ethnicity. And when I say 'civilization", I don't mean mud hut/stick house villages, dudes taking 15 wives and fucking little kids to get rid of AIDS, or people running around blowing themselves up on a daily basis. They're all white, predominantly christian nations.

Almost all of the modern civilized world's technology and philosophy is Eurocentric. The only reason this nation was ever built is because white males came up with the idea of Free Speech. Allow me to reference a good article on where Free Speech (The First Amendment) was born.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/firstamendment/f/first_amendment.htm

Without Eurocentric philosophies, religion, and the enlightenment movements - we'd either still be tribal pagans/religious fanatics like the majority of the third world killing each other for sport or religion...or have already blown ourselves up due to having technology, yet not the insight to use it properly. These philosophical advances were made pretty much solely by white males, as were almost all the technological advances we enjoy today in this free society.

Also, I must remind you, the percentage of whites in the south who could afford slaves was very small. Most were too dirt poor to afford even one. Very few whites had slaves, and the ones that did were probably generally treated well. At least I'm sure they were much better treated than the slaves who were sold to the Arabs. From the way you talk, I assume you're getting information on white-on-black slavery relations from Hollywood productions like "Roots". I doubt very few people were frothing mad white devils who beat them daily. That's just silly.

So I know you don't like white christian males, Fry, but when you type bad things about them remember this: one made that little box you're typing into..and another made the calculator which made that possible...and another made the monitor you read the Dailykos on (or whatever right wing-hating site you read)...and another fathered the internet upon which you can send that message. Isn't it a little ridiculous to harbor such a narrow minded leftist view of white christian males just because of the recent disturbances between Christianity and the Muslim world? You should be better than the glass parking lot conservatives...not give into their ridiculous finger pointing and name calling.


Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #34 on: June 12, 2009, 09:52:21 PM »
Fry, I hate to break it to you..but take a map of the civilized world, then overlay a sheet of plastic on it and see where CIVILIZATIONS are versus groups of people based on religion and ethnicity. And when I say 'civilization", I don't mean mud hut/stick house villages, dudes taking 15 wives and fucking little kids to get rid of AIDS, or people running around blowing themselves up on a daily basis. They're all white, predominantly christian nations.

Almost all of the modern civilized world's technology and philosophy is Eurocentric. The only reason this nation was ever built is because white males came up with the idea of Free Speech. Allow me to reference a good article on where Free Speech (The First Amendment) was born.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/firstamendment/f/first_amendment.htm

Without Eurocentric philosophies, religion, and the enlightenment movements - we'd either still be tribal pagans/religious fanatics like the majority of the third world killing each other for sport or religion...or have already blown ourselves up due to having technology, yet not the insight to use it properly. These philosophical advances were made pretty much solely by white males, as were almost all the technological advances we enjoy today in this free society.

Also, I must remind you, the percentage of whites in the south who could afford slaves was very small. Most were too dirt poor to afford even one. Very few whites had slaves, and the ones that did were probably generally treated well. At least I'm sure they were much better treated than the slaves who were sold to the Arabs. From the way you talk, I assume you're getting information on white-on-black slavery relations from Hollywood productions like "Roots". I doubt very few people were frothing mad white devils who beat them daily. That's just silly.

So I know you don't like white christian males, Fry, but when you type bad things about them remember this: one made that little box you're typing into..and another made the calculator which made that possible...and another made the monitor you read the Dailykos on (or whatever right wing-hating site you read)...and another fathered the internet upon which you can send that message. Isn't it a little ridiculous to harbor such a narrow minded leftist view of white christian males just because of the recent disturbances between Christianity and the Muslim world? You should be better than the glass parking lot conservatives...not give into their ridiculous finger pointing and name calling.
I'm not going to get all Iranians invented the world on you, but a lot of your Eurocentric Rennaissance inventions were also brought up thanks to the scholarship of yes, Islamic (both pre-and post) Persian civilization. Thanks to the now Turkish capital, where Euros were always coming to for what else, exploitation and exchange, they picked it up too. Good for them. They did well with it.

While the Europeans were busy eating each other's skulls, we already had Shakespeare and newton. This has little to do with America's black history, but it's an analogy.

As for your favorite phrase "their place in history... yadda yadda they don't like it", it makes no sense. Who is upset? You? Because yes, a black presence went beyond the contribution you think of as "some agricultural work" and "some blacks died"??

And if you're suggesting that there's no black names on the Dec. of Independence, no one is stating otherwise, or trying to insinuate otherwise! All I'm pointing out is that "independence" was really a dependence on slave labor and trade. There was nothing genius about it. Many people are still doing it in human trafficking.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #35 on: June 12, 2009, 10:06:59 PM »
America is pretty third world too, unless you're just going by plumbing and nutrition standards?

Bloodsport for religion? Are you kidding me? We still have murders over religion here, and imagine, in the name of Christianity. The latest angry white killers are proof, but they aren't the first. What would America be without the third world? That goes for Europe too. During the time of Dickens, people were eating grass and rats, and abandoning their children, and doing very uncivilized things. I'm not sure what you're talking about, when you use this word "civilized".

None of what I'm saying takes away from how much I love this country and am willing to contribute to it. I'm not angry about my place in history, and actually, I'm proud, even if my ancestors chopped off thousand heads or didn't. But I won't deny it or frame it to make it seem like it was necessary for some reason or another. It happened and acknowledgement is the best thing to do, at least to avoid letting it happen again.

But since people are stubborn about identifying themselves and "their history" with the terms you yourself use to describe America, I doubt this would happen. We'll never overcome anything if we obsess over it. Part of that obsession stems from a lack of willingness to even agree to acknowledge what has taken place. It's happening all over. The wealth of a lot of nations including the US and England help continue that violence - I happen to come from a place like this where western agents always used leaders, and the leaders who did stand up to them ended up dead.

England is my favorite example - most of their wealth and that precious Enlightenment came from their exploitation and threatening of people/leaders in their Empire. They have entire museums full of stolen loot. The loss of that empire has turned into a lot of the empire coming back home and facing Mr. Darcy face to face. It's been rough, I'm sure, for both sides.

The same thing is happening now in America in terms of race. Lincoln said it would take several upon several generations to heal relations between black and white people in the US.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #36 on: June 12, 2009, 10:09:40 PM »
Well, by looking at Iran today I wouldn't be able to tell - but whatever, I'll take your word on it.  :P

Anyways, it's quite clear where the hate and racism in the world lies today by listening to any liberal spout off about white males and christians. Good lord, you'd think we'd blown up the moon and eat a diet of young dark-skinned children's eyeballs or something. If these are the people you listen to/read, Fry, it's no big surprise why you think the way you do of white christian culture.

Tell you what though, I'll take "ignorant hicks" over religious fanatics doing daily suicide bombings in my town ANY DAY. The Arab world may have contributed something to Euro centric philosophy in the past, but the Arab world is stuck IN the past. Put simply, we went forward, and they went assbackwards.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #37 on: June 12, 2009, 10:10:41 PM »
Quote
Without Eurocentric philosophies, religion, and the enlightenment movements - we'd either still be tribal pagans/religious fanatics like the majority of the third world killing each other for sport or religion...or have already blown ourselves up due to having technology, yet not the insight to use it properly.

Holly CRAP now YOU have jumped the shark - a FEW times!

Basic fact:  If you make the rules you always win.  OR:  The vitor write history - or in this case "defines culture."

DAMN!

And don't go on some rant about fucking babies to cure aids and how I must think that's a GOOD THING because you damned well know better.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #38 on: June 12, 2009, 10:13:02 PM »
And don't go on some rant about fucking babies to cure aids and how I must think that's a GOOD THING because you damned well know better.

Wat?

In modern Sub-Saharan Africa, many tribal leaders believe and tell their people that the cure for AIDS is to fuck a virgin...and in that region, finding a virgin over the age of 12 is rare. That's what I'm referring to. What are you talking about?

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #39 on: June 12, 2009, 10:16:39 PM »
Quote
What are you talking about?

The idea that just because I don't think a culture has to be euro-centric to ber civilized - and so on - that I must think baby-fucking is good.  I know you are telling true - but that's not the point.  The point is that we can't just say "we're large and in charge" and expect it to work on a global level - in in over two millenia (WELL over - since the Romans and Greeks started well BCE) we should have figured that out. 

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #40 on: June 12, 2009, 10:16:54 PM »
Well, by looking at Iran today I wouldn't be able to tell - but whatever, I'll take your word on it.  :P

Anyways, it's quite clear where the hate and racism in the world lies today by listening to any liberal spout off about white males and christians. Good lord, you'd think we'd blown up the moon and eat a diet of young dark-skinned children's eyeballs or something. If these are the people you listen to/read, Fry, it's no big surprise why you think the way you do of white christian culture.

Tell you what though, I'll take "ignorant hicks" over religious fanatics doing daily suicide bombings in my town ANY DAY. The Arab world may have contributed something to Euro centric philosophy in the past, but the Arab world is stuck IN the past. Put simply, we went forward, and they went assbackwards.
You're being really vague, and I don't know which "people" you think I listen to and read, but that's not what's driving my point here.

Here's a case in point - if I'm a doctor, and I move to the USA from Iran, and I become certified, I'm going to be helping the USA's medical system. The USA gets credit, rightly so. That doesn't mean that the physician, if it's me from Iran, who makes a ground breaking discovery, vaccine/vaccine system, makes the "white christian male" project more perfect. I'm sorry you see it in those terms - there's more to America than that.

Also, I never said a thing about drinking blood and eating babies. What I said is that I expect acknowledgement of the "other" presence that contributed to these wonders of what you speak. They didn't just come out of a white christian euro fantasy vacuum. Saying that shouldn't make you or any other white guy insecure and defensive.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #41 on: June 12, 2009, 10:18:01 PM »
The idea that just because I don't think a culture has to be euro-centric to ber civilized - and so on - that I must think baby-fucking is good.  I know you are telling true - but that's not the point.  The point is that we can't just say "we're large and in charge" and expect it to work on a global level - in in over two millenia (WELL over - since the Romans and Greeks started well BCE) we should have figured that out.

I think you misunderstood me...I don't think ANYONE should think baby fucking is good. Trust me, I wasn't trying to make that connection. :o

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #42 on: June 12, 2009, 10:21:01 PM »
You're being really vague, and I don't know which "people" you think I listen to and read, but that's not what's driving my point here.

Here's a case in point - if I'm a doctor, and I move to the USA from Iran, and I become certified, I'm going to be helping the USA's medical system. The USA gets credit, rightly so. That doesn't mean that the physician, if it's me from Iran, who makes a ground breaking discovery, vaccine/vaccine system, makes the "white christian male" project more perfect. I'm sorry you see it in those terms - there's more to America than that.

Also, I never said a thing about drinking blood and eating babies. What I said is that I expect acknowledgement of the "other" presence that contributed to these wonders of what you speak. They didn't just come out of a white christian euro fantasy vacuum. Saying that shouldn't make you or any other white guy insecure and defensive.

Okay, I'll acknowledge, perhaps 5% of modern technology was invented by non-whites, 15-20% of modern technology was contributed to by non-whites, and 50% was made smaller and better by Asians. Satisfied?  :P

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #43 on: June 12, 2009, 10:34:21 PM »
Okay, I'll acknowledge, perhaps 5% of modern technology was invented by non-whites, 15-20% of modern technology was contributed to by non-whites, and 50% was made smaller and better by Asians. Satisfied?  :P
DUDE: 95% of statistics are made up on the spot. My favorite white guy in fiction = The Dude. In real life, Conan O'Brien. Ode to white men. Are you satisfied?

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #44 on: June 12, 2009, 10:43:50 PM »
DUDE: 95% of statistics are made up on the spot. My favorite white guy in fiction = The Dude. In real life, Conan O'Brien. Ode to white men. Are you satisfied?

LOL. I really did just make those up. I was being facetious, really. I have no clue on the statistics. However, I doubt I'm too awful far off.

Anyways, you don't gotta have an "ode to white men". Lol. Just perhaps rethink your opinion on them. It's a rather general trait of the left to be anti white/christian these days..but you can be left and not be a retarded ass like those kind of people. I mean..Bush sucked, sure, but let's not let his 8 years of mediocre-fail redefine the founding fathers of our country, whites, Christians, or conservatism.

Like, seriously - Protip: Libertarians and Anarchists are the REAL far right-wing conservatives. Not Neo-Cons.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #45 on: June 12, 2009, 10:49:55 PM »
LOL. I really did just make those up. I was being facetious, really. I have no clue on the statistics. However, I doubt I'm too awful far off.

Anyways, you don't gotta have an "ode to white men". Lol. Just perhaps rethink your opinion on them. It's a rather general trait of the left to be anti white/christian these days..but you can be left and not be a retarded ass like those kind of people. I mean..Bush sucked, sure, but let's not let his 8 years of mediocre-fail redefine the founding fathers of our country, whites, Christians, or conservatism.

Like, seriously - Protip: Libertarians and Anarchists are the REAL far right-wing conservatives. Not Neo-Cons.
This is nice. We're at a point of agreement. Zen! Have you ever seen the Big Lebowski? Everybody's white in that too, and it's my favorite movie. I have no beef with white, christians. I don't really care about right or left. I'm not into either party. I am a registered R and i vote D from now on, mainly because I'm pro-environment. Econ and social issues are pretty much the same. I also wouldn't have minded a McCain president if he had picked a better VP candidate.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #46 on: June 12, 2009, 10:53:48 PM »
I grew up in UBER - LIBERAL (ie: if it's Caucasian and male it's bad) land.

Know what ONE life experience was strong enough to make me seriously re-consider that notion as opposed to just be iffy on it? 

I GAVE BIRTH TO A CAUCASIAN MALE ---

That said - wann hear some real and HUMOROUS insitght in to the eurocentric perspective? Rent a DVD of Jeff ***edit - Jim Gaffigan  YouTube is okay - but those clips don't give you the full range.





Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #47 on: June 12, 2009, 11:08:04 PM »
Lol, how odd. I'm a registered D and typically vote R. :P

Yeah like I'll admit, I love a lot of Japanese and Spanish film. I'm a big fan of various ethnic foods. I speak three different languages. I actually like the ideas of socialism and communism on paper. And, believe it or not, I've dated girls outside of my race...(although my parents didn't know). In fact, my last girlfriend is currently in China as we speak. I'm surprisingly quite liberal and ethnically aware, despite how my political views make me sound. I just feel the need to stick up for the white christian guys, cause they take a good smashing in so many different facets of the media these days...and other than Rush and Fox, nobody seems interested in showing the ever increasing cases of reverse racism.

Actually, I was wondering...did you happen to hear that case about the two or three black panthers intimidating voters with billy clubs and shouting racially-fueled propaganda in front of a public polling building? Well, apparently, Obama's administration doesn't see it as a crime and refuses to bring them to court, despite having clear video of the incident. Now, reverse that situation into three WHITE guys doing the same thing....well, CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS/MSNBC would be all over it. However, since it was the other way around, only Fox and Rush really talked about it. I just gotta say...that sort of thing really gets "under my skin"...(lol, punny).

BTW, I love Gaffigan, Ev. However, Zach Gilafanakis is my favorite bearded comedian. =]

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #48 on: June 12, 2009, 11:10:35 PM »
Lol, how odd. I'm a registered D and typically vote R. :P

Yeah like I'll admit, I love a lot of Japanese and Spanish film. I'm a big fan of various ethnic foods. I speak three different languages. I actually like the ideas of socialism and communism on paper. And, believe it or not, I've dated girls outside of my race...(although my parents didn't know). In fact, my last girlfriend is currently in China as we speak. I'm surprisingly quite liberal and ethnically aware, despite how my political views make me sound. I just feel the need to stick up for the white christian guys, cause they take a good smashing in so many different facets of the media these days...and other than Rush and Fox, nobody seems interested in showing the ever increasing cases of reverse racism.

Actually, I was wondering...did you happen to hear that case about the two or three black panthers intimidating voters with billy clubs and shouting racially-fueled propaganda in front of a public polling building? Well, apparently, Obama's administration doesn't see it as a crime and refuses to bring them to court, despite having clear video of the incident. Now, reverse that situation into three WHITE guys doing the same thing....well, CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS/MSNBC would be all over it. However, since it was the other way around, only Fox and Rush really talked about it. I just gotta say...that sort of thing really gets "under my skin"...(lol, punny).

BTW, I love Gaffigan, Ev. However, Zach Gilafanakis is my favorite bearded comedian. =]
Dude, the black panthers are dead. Obama isn't the black panther police. He's presiding over a fucking crisis and the black panthers are so passe. Give me a break. What those guys did is bad, but there is such a thing as have a sense of priorities! Isn't this what cops and prosecutors are for... Also, there are tons of black dudes in jail. many of them will die there. I don't think rushing to put a couple angry black panthers in jail will help. That's my easy answer.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #49 on: June 12, 2009, 11:16:59 PM »
So what you're saying is, if you went to a voting poll and see three black panthers with billy clubs shouting "IT'S TIME FOR THE BLACK MAN TO TAKE OVER, CRACKAZ" you wouldn't see that as public intimidation to keep whites and conservatives away from the booth? I dunno, to me - letting them get by with that seriously makes me wonder what Obama really thinks.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #50 on: June 13, 2009, 01:40:23 PM »
So what you're saying is, if you went to a voting poll and see three black panthers with billy clubs shouting "IT'S TIME FOR THE BLACK MAN TO TAKE OVER, CRACKAZ" you wouldn't see that as public intimidation to keep whites and conservatives away from the booth? I dunno, to me - letting them get by with that seriously makes me wonder what Obama really thinks.
I see it as a couple of morons who are nothing more than that. They might have seen Obama's election as an opportunity to feel more important than they are. Who cares? It's not a big deal, when you think of the bigger (bad) picture. I'd rather Obama spend time on calculating what can really go wrong. We have plenty of govt to take care of these people if they turn into problems. I don't think it warrants Obama's attention.

I also want to say what I left out in my earlier comments about the black contributions in american history. I forgot to highlight the very good work that white people have done to help. I think this is why you mentioned "whites eating babies". Actually, white christians, men and women, did very good works to combat the other assholes I mentioned. Even when it wasn't popular or safe to say so.

I'm thinking of John Brown and others after him. I'm thinking of people who fought Joel Parker and embarassed them. I'm talking about people who truly represented Christianity and also Quakers (thanks for the OATS!!). Werd up 2 your mothers.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #51 on: June 13, 2009, 02:33:42 PM »
Er..What? I'm confused. When did I mention "whites eating babies"?

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #52 on: June 13, 2009, 02:37:00 PM »
Er..What? I'm confused. When did I mention "whites eating babies"?
I don't know. You said something about "you'd think we sometthing something babies". or blood. Something. I'm watching the season when Scully thinks she's carrying an alien baby. Maybe it's getting to me.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #53 on: June 13, 2009, 03:00:36 PM »
By the way, if anyone really wants Iran to change, they should be happy for this outcome. here's why: Mousavi represents the people who stole billions in the 80s and murdered thousands. Do you know why Ahmadinejad won in the first election 4 years ago? He is committed to having Mousavi's possee thrown in jail - google rafsanjani. He is such a sick fuck, that even Germany won't let him on their borders.

Actually, I think he is wanted by Interpol for setting up a double assasination in the 90s in Berlin. He has never left Iran since. And Iran is the only place he can stay. Thus, it's going to be easy to prosecute him. He's screwed, I hope. What a good day. Please don't be fooled by the headlines. This is a thousand young people who have never voted before, put their heart into this, and forgot that they could lose. I'm ashamed of how they are acting over their loss. How trashy.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #54 on: June 13, 2009, 03:28:38 PM »
I think you misunderstood me...I don't think ANYONE should think baby fucking is good. Trust me, I wasn't trying to make that connection. :o


No - of course that's not what you meant!  But I've tried three times now to clarify what I was trying to say - done so badly - and firefox has crashed before I was done each time.  I'll take that as a sign from the cybergods to let this alone - at least for now.

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #55 on: June 13, 2009, 04:55:02 PM »
I don't know. You said something about "you'd think we sometthing something babies". or blood. Something. I'm watching the season when Scully thinks she's carrying an alien baby. Maybe it's getting to me.

OH, yeah. I know what you're referring to now. lol. My bad..I believe I said "The way liberals talk about white christian males, you'd think we blew up the moon and eat a steady diet of children's eyeballs."...or something to that effect.


Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #56 on: June 13, 2009, 11:12:07 PM »
I am douching so much in this thread,   ;D

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #57 on: June 14, 2009, 06:25:42 PM »
I am douching so much in this thread,   ;D
haha,
i won't ask who you're douching.

by the way, i have fixed the youtube video at the beginning of this thread.  apparently, the vid had been pulled from youtube.  found another source

Re: O'Reilly - Rock bottom?
« Reply #58 on: June 14, 2009, 06:35:28 PM »
haha,
i won't ask who you're douching.

by the way, i have fixed the youtube video at the beginning of this thread.  apparently, the vid had been pulled from youtube.  found another source
Thank you!