Wow! It took them 240 pages to say...

[Nbadan]

You clearly didn't understand the questions you were trying to answer. All you did was bolster what I already said: Bill O'Reilly is not a reporter.

We know that, but about 60% of the country that can't differentiate the difference between News opinion and factual reporting don't, and this is what makes propagandists like O"Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh so dangerous. They lie at will to support any argument and then hide behind thin veil of it just 'being my opinion'. Yeah right.

[Nbadan]

So, again I ask, why the does Dan Rather still have a job?

Hey nitwit, Dan Rather followed all of CBS's provisions before airing these vetted do ents. If these procedures by CBS were flawed, it wasn't Dan Rathers fault, but higher-ups at CBS who were supposed to be looking after the integrity of the news. If W can claim that he has political capital after stealing another election, then Dan Rather should have integrity capital for all the stories he got right through the years.

[SpursWoman]

We know that, but about 60% of the country that can't differentiate the difference between News opinion and factual reporting don't, and this is what makes propagandists like O"Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh so dangerous. They lie at will to support any argument and then hide behind thin veil of it just 'being my opinion'. Yeah right.

*cough*andMichaelMoore*cough*

[Hook Dem]

Again, if it had been the other way around, Dan and Bandit would be calling for Rather's head on a platter and you know I'm right. This forum is nothing more than a platform to launch one's own political agenda. Agreed???????

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Um, no. I just know the difference between a reporter and an opinion journalist. You can make a list like that for any pundit.

Dan Rather REPORTED a story using unreliable sources. Bill O'Reilly gives his slant on stories that are reported by others, and his opinions are often backed by bogus claims or misinformation. But in the end, he's paid for his opinions. Rather is paid for reporting the news.

So then why do all you conservatives post crap from Ann Coulter? Is that why she can get away with all the lies she spews? What about all the conservative pundits over at FoxNews?

Yonivore is in love with Ann Coulter and she doesn't even have any credentials other than being a hateful .

[JohnnyMarzetti]

*cough*andMichaelMoore*cough*

Idiot..since when is Michael Moore a reporter? Get real.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

And speaking of lies...

Bush:

"If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him."

Bush:

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mus and VX nerve agent. In such quan ies, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

Bush:

"U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

Bush:

"From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

Bush:

"The dictator of Iraq is not disarming."

Bush:

"Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction."

Bush:

"With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region."

Bush:

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own."

Bush:

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes."

Bush:

"If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late."

Bush:

"The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured."

Bush:

"The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies."

Bush:

"Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups."



Note: The aformentioned quotes are from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.


Indeed. Now that CBS has shown some balls and gotten rid of some liars, or possibly misinformed people (as they should have) let's see if FOX News and our government have the balls to do so as well.

[SpursWoman]

Idiot..since when is Michael Moore a reporter? Get real.

Oh, bite me. Since when is Bill O'Reilly a reporter, Oh Brilliant One? Like Moore is not responsible for influencing any opinions of the less-than-astute population such as yourself. I'm sure a lot more people saw that hack-job than ever tune into news-OPINION programming.

So I guess a prerequisite of becoming an extreme liberal like yourself is to have the sense of humor sucked right out of you?

[Useruser666]

Idiot..since when is Michael Moore a reporter? Get real.

Wasn't F9/11 a do entary?

What about Bowling for Columbine?

[ClintSquint]

"Why don't you all bite me!"

[SpursWoman]

"Why don't you all bite me!"

[MannyIsGod]

It's rather simple why Dan Rather has a job, he didn't do anything wrong.

[MannyIsGod]

heh, I made a pun without realizing it.

[Hook Dem]

It's rather simple why Dan Rather has a job, he didn't do anything wrong.

[Yonivore]

And speaking of lies...

Bush:

"If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him."

How is that a lie? Isn't it exactly what the President did?

Bush:

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mus and VX nerve agent. In such quan ies, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

Exactly when did Hussein account for the chemicals and/or prove their destruction?

Bush:

"U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

Okay, two-fold...since when is relying on intelligence lying and, again, exactly when did Hussein account for the munitions or show he'd destroyed them?

Bush:

"From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them."

At least one of the defectors -- a son-in-law to Saddam Hussein -- returned and tried to make amends with the Iraqi dictator. He was quickly dispatched with a bullet to the head.

And, when did Saddam Hussein provide proof he'd destroyed his weapons?

Bush:

"The dictator of Iraq is not disarming."

The dictator of Iraq provided no PROOF, as was required in many of 17 pending UNSC resolutions, that he was disarming. The logical conclusion of his defiance is that he was no disarming.

Bush:

"Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction."

David Kay is in agreement with this statement in his final report regarding Saddam's WMD programs...

Bush:

"With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region."

That's a subjective statement about what Saddam Hussein could do and, therefore, unable to be a lie. Do you disagree he had those ambitions?

Bush:

"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own."

Again, a conclusion also reached by David Kay in his report to Congress.

Bush:

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes."

Okay, where's the lie? President Bush is making a statement with which many (me included) agree...just because you don't doesn't make it a lie.

Bush:

"If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late."

Again, where's the lie?

Bush:

"The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured."

Never heard of the Kurds, I guess...

Bush:

"The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies."

That's a statment of intent...not a lie. And, the ceasefire commenced in 1991, 12 years prior to that statement. So, again, I don't see the lie.

Bush:

"Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups."

And he did.

[Opinionater]

IMHO, that's a rather long post.

[Spurminator]

Marzetti doesn't appear to understand what's being argued.

Read again or back away.

[SpursWoman]

Wasn't F9/11 a do entary?

What about Bowling for Columbine?

You'd probably have to define what a do entary is and maybe he'll make the connection.