Time's Up O'Reilly....

Cypress

Well-known member
BILL O’REILLY, on "the surge":

"We can’t force these people to stop killing each other. They’re either going to do it or they’re not, but now they know. Now they know. They’ve got six months and that’s it." [The O’Reilly Factor, 1/24/07]
 
According to Bush a while ago we have just gotten started in Iraq....
Just another 6 months....just another six months...
sounds like a child you are trying to get to clean up his room.
 
BILL O’REILLY, on "the surge":

"We can’t force these people to stop killing each other. They’re either going to do it or they’re not, but now they know. Now they know. They’ve got six months and that’s it." [The O’Reilly Factor, 1/24/07]

Hey now old pal, don't be jumping the gun there. A lot can happen in 2 weeks. :rolleyes:

It will be interesting to see what the second biggest ego on the planet has to say in 2 weeks. My guess is that he'll be talking about Lindsay Lohan or some other utter crap.
 
He did a whole soliloquy the other day on how the apparent failure of the surge is a "victory" for far left shills of Move-on like Paul Krugman, and spent his time lambasting them for rooting against our troops and for failure.

That's always been his primary concern; he reserves very little criticism or vitriol for those who actually created this mess (against the protests & warnings of far left shills like Paul Krugman)...
 
O'Reilly, he spends a ton of time talking about how the war is a mess.. It's practically all I hear when he is on the radio on the way home from Ninjitsu...

Seriously, you are deluded if you think O'Reilly supports the mess Bush made in Iraq.
 
O'Reilly, he spends a ton of time talking about how the war is a mess.. It's practically all I hear when he is on the radio on the way home from Ninjitsu...

Seriously, you are deluded if you think O'Reilly supports the mess Bush made in Iraq.


He stops at the water's edge. Yes, he is a harsh critic, but he has yet to call for a change of course, or for any kind of withdrawal.

He also steadfastly refuses to take responsibility for supporting the war initially, or admit that it was a mistake. Instead, it was a "noble venture," and a strong decision from Bush, but failed ONLY because we were let down by the cowardly, savage Iraqis...
 
He stops at the water's edge. Yes, he is a harsh critic, but he has yet to call for a change of course, or for any kind of withdrawal.

He also steadfastly refuses to take responsibility for supporting the war initially, or admit that it was a mistake. Instead, it was a "noble venture," and a strong decision from Bush, but failed ONLY because we were let down by the cowardly, savage Iraqis...

Oh, I see. So I wonder who it was that really started that narrative. I thought it was the Democrats who originally voted for the war, and then it was picked up by the defecting Republicans. But maybe it was started on talk radio. Who knows.

It's really a morally indefensible position.
 
"It's really a morally indefensible position."

It is ALL that the cheerleaders have as a scapegoat. It would have worked...if not for those stupid Iraqis!

Maybe if they told the Iraqis "the plan" from the outset: Okay, here we go! First, we bomb your infrastructure into oblivion, and remove all governmental authority. Then, we'll dismantle your army. After that - and here's where you come in - the people rise up to take on a innumerable group of thugs who will routinely torture you & kill you in large groups.

Ready....go!
 
"It's really a morally indefensible position."

It is ALL that the cheerleaders have as a scapegoat. It would have worked...if not for those stupid Iraqis!

Maybe if they told the Iraqis "the plan" from the outset: Okay, here we go! First, we bomb your infrastructure into oblivion, and remove all governmental authority. Then, we'll dismantle your army. After that - and here's where you come in - the people rise up to take on a innumerable group of thugs who will routinely torture you & kill you in large groups.

Ready....go!


This is funny, in a really black comedy sort of way. It's exactly what they did too.
 
He stops at the water's edge. Yes, he is a harsh critic, but he has yet to call for a change of course, or for any kind of withdrawal.

He also steadfastly refuses to take responsibility for supporting the war initially, or admit that it was a mistake. Instead, it was a "noble venture," and a strong decision from Bush, but failed ONLY because we were let down by the cowardly, savage Iraqis...
He says, far more often, that we were failed by the Administration, that the war was mismanaged from the outset. Sending in a minimal force and not securing the nation from the outset has led to the current position we are in.

He constantly calls it a morass, compares it to Viet Nam and is not at all a supporter of the mess that has been made of this war.
 
Nam was over Rubber, Iraq is over oil. I guess we just fight wars over automobile related stuff now-a-days....
 
He says, far more often, that we were failed by the Administration, that the war was mismanaged from the outset. Sending in a minimal force and not securing the nation from the outset has led to the current position we are in.

He constantly calls it a morass, compares it to Viet Nam and is not at all a supporter of the mess that has been made of this war.


He says, far more often, that we were failed by the Administration, that the war was mismanaged from the outset

So NOW he agrees with what John Kerry said in 2004? That bush was mucking up the iraq war, and we needed a whole different strategy?

I remember bush fans laughing at kerry in 2004, for suggesting that.

What about Poland!
 
He says, far more often, that we were failed by the Administration, that the war was mismanaged from the outset

So NOW he agrees with what John Kerry said in 2004? That bush was mucking up the iraq war, and we needed a whole different strategy?

I remember bush fans laughing at kerry in 2004, for suggesting that.

What about Poland!
Not just "now", he's been saying it for some time. People just tend to cherry-pick any item that makes him look bad because he is on FOX. Dude has been stating this for a long time.
 
And what I laughed at Kerry about was the "new strategy" was "Whut he said, but with 10K more troops!"

Amazingly the people promoting that as a "new" plan during the election now say that it is a "splurge", etc.
 
" People just tend to cherry-pick any item that makes him look bad because he is on FOX."

No. He looks bad because he looks bad, from the 1st year of cheerleading this war, to the gloat festival after the fall of Saddam's statue & subsequent elections, to the infinitely greater emphasis he has put on demonizing opponents of the war instead of those who actually got us there. This is the guy who led the boycott against France, who - as it turned out - were completely RIGHT not to go to Iraq with us. Will O'Reilly ever admit that? Will he ever admit invasion was a mistake? Will he keep extending his imaginary timeline for withdrawal another 6 months, every 6 months or so?

The guy is a train wreck. It's not because he's on FOX. He'd be a train wreck anywhere.
 
" People just tend to cherry-pick any item that makes him look bad because he is on FOX."

No. He looks bad because he looks bad, from the 1st year of cheerleading this war, to the gloat festival after the fall of Saddam's statue & subsequent elections, to the infinitely greater emphasis he has put on demonizing opponents of the war instead of those who actually got us there. This is the guy who led the boycott against France, who - as it turned out - were completely RIGHT not to go to Iraq with us. Will O'Reilly ever admit that? Will he ever admit invasion was a mistake? Will he keep extending his imaginary timeline for withdrawal another 6 months, every 6 months or so?

The guy is a train wreck. It's not because he's on FOX. He'd be a train wreck anywhere.
Yet you have so far promoted that he "spends more time" on something that he doesn't spend more time on, have shown you don't listen, called him a cheerleader for a war he doesn't cheerlead and have basically shown your total ignorance of his opinion.

It's all good though, if you repeat it again it will make it "true" for many people on the left who desperately want to believe what you say about somebody you clearly know nothing about.
 
Yet you have so far promoted that he "spends more time" on something that he doesn't spend more time on, have shown you don't listen, called him a cheerleader for a war he doesn't cheerlead and have basically shown your total ignorance of his opinion.

It's all good though, if you repeat it again it will make it "true" for many people on the left who desperately want to believe what you say about somebody you clearly know nothing about.


That's laughable. I hate to admit this, but I actually watch the Factor, pretty much every day. Everything I have said is completely accurate. The guy is completely obsessed with the opposition to the war on the left. 3 out of 5 talking points per week, on average, are dedicated to some aspect of this, and that's a conservative estimate.

And are you kidding about the cheerleading for this war? This is one of the guys who was in the forefront. You're assertions about him are absurd, absolutely absurd.
 
O'Reilly is not a cheerleader for the war. He's an apologist for the war.
See? Wash, rinse, repeat.

He is not. I constantly hear him talking about how, (paraphrasing) "It should have never gotten here, but they fouled it up"

his "they know that they have six months and it's over" remark followed the previous paraphrased statement along with a diatribe of how screwed up the war has been.

But you don't listen and you just repeat the regular line, and take one line from several hours of show to "promote" your opinion.

It just shows a total ignorance of the man's opinion on this subject and an urge to continue repeating how much you "know".
 
That's laughable. I hate to admit this, but I actually watch the Factor, pretty much every day. Everything I have said is completely accurate. The guy is completely obsessed with the opposition to the war on the left. 3 out of 5 talking points per week, on average, are dedicated to some aspect of this, and that's a conservative estimate.

And are you kidding about the cheerleading for this war? This is one of the guys who was in the forefront. You're assertions about him are absurd, absolutely absurd.
No, the assertion that he promotes the current war as it is going is absurd, and if you did watch it you would know it was. However, the line quoted to start this thread was from his radio show, and I actually was listening. I do three times a week on the way home from Ninjitsu because it is on the regular talk radio channel I listen to.

He does say that it was a "good cause", that is true, but he certainly is no "Bush Cheerleader" when he states how foolishly Bush has run the war.

Your assertions are colored by opinion.
 
Back
Top