Forums

Welcome Guest 

Show/Hide Header

Welcome Guest, posting in this forum requires registration.





Pages: First << 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Author Topic: Bill OReilly
Timothy-
Lane
Moderator
Posts: 226
Permalink
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 11, 2017, 10:42
Quote

Jazz Shaw at Hot Air has an interesting piece explaining why no one should assume Moore's guilt or innocence, but also in essence pointing out the reason for skepticism. In terms of assault, there is one accusation (the other 3 involve romantic offers, not forcing himself), and no suspicion of such behavior over decades of controversial political life. Combined with the interesting timing, this is good ground for skepticism -- as long as one realizes that we really will probably know for sure.

Brad-
Nelson
Administrator
Posts: 451
Permalink
Brad Nelson
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 11, 2017, 11:21
Quote

Here’s that John Shaw article: If You Think Roy Moore Did It Or You Think He Didn’t, You’re Doing It Wrong.

Ha! Didn’t know the Leftist degenerate, George Takei, had gotten swept up in the tidal wave of accusations. Sorry…but I’m of the mind now that it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

Yeah, I guess that article stakes a good place between the two opposing pitchfork crowds: the mob who says “an accusation is a good as the truth because women never lie about these things, especially if it’s a Republican” and the NRO pansy-boys (with Trident-style, god-constructed pitchforks, I guess) who say, “How dare anyone support a candidate who isn’t as pure as the driven snow even if “impure” is to be defined by our political enemies.”

A pox on all their houses.

Kung Fu Zu
Moderator
Posts: 128
Permalink
Kung Fu Zu
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 11, 2017, 12:53
Quote

The NRO is controlled by and does the bidding of Wall Street and hedge funds types. They are fundamentally materialists thinking man is an economic animal. Anything which is published by them must be read in this light.

Timothy-
Lane
Moderator
Posts: 226
Permalink
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 11, 2017, 13:43
Quote

From the beginning they had no use for Judge Moore -- not their type. So it was easy for them to assume guilt.

Brad-
Nelson
Administrator
Posts: 451
Permalink
Brad Nelson
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 11, 2017, 14:31
Quote

You may have nailed it, Timothy. Let's imagine that these same accusations were thrown at Jeb Bush.

pst4usa
Contributor
Posts: 59
Permalink
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 13, 2017, 12:38
Quote

I really missed out on all of this hoop-la, but from the moment I heard this I was skeptical, the timing just seems strange. I am not defending the Judge, and I do not condemn him either without some actual facts coming out; and since I do not believe anything the MSM has to say anymore, I may never know. Mike Huckabee would be another GOP lacky it would be interesting to see just how they would react to the same accusations. He claims to be holier than thou, but tows the party line much better than the Judge.

Kung Fu Zu
Moderator
Posts: 128
Permalink
Kung Fu Zu
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 13, 2017, 13:31
Quote

About seven years ago, when I did some substitute teaching, I occasionally taught 14 and 15 year old students. When I first started, I was somewhat surprised at the whorish attire some of the girls wore to school. I commented on this to one of the regular teachers, saying that I thought the girls must not understand what type of message such attire sent. To which this old veteran of the school wars said something like, "Oh, I think they know very well what type of message they are sending."

Not all young women are naive' and/or virtuous.

Brad-
Nelson
Administrator
Posts: 451
Permalink
Brad Nelson
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 13, 2017, 13:57
Quote

I do not believe anything the MSM has to say anymore

I agree, Pat. You don’t have to be a blinkered partisan hack to have skepticism regarding reporters. It’s therefore disconcerting to see so many of the partisan hacks at National Review jump to judgment regarding those who are withholding their own judgment, and for reasons that ought to be completely obvious, starting with Dan Rather’s invented story about George W. Bush. Instead, they’ve characterized them as just mindless partisan hacks.

Selwyn Duke’s latest article on the subject puts this into perspective. Even if these chargers from 40 years ago are true (and he’s been a good-guy since), how would that tip the balance against what this deceptive and evil Democrat is for now?

Brad-
Nelson
Administrator
Posts: 451
Permalink
Brad Nelson
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 13, 2017, 14:00
Quote

Mr. Kung, you bring up a good point. Parents are allowed their very young daughters to dress like de facto hookers. And then everyone is surprised if someone (including myself) looks at them as you might an 18-year-old? Get real.

But that is, again, feminism. We will shove our pink-hat vaginas in your faces and woe to those who point out the abnormalcy of it.

Timothy-
Lane
Moderator
Posts: 226
Permalink
Post Re: Bill OReilly
on: November 13, 2017, 14:08
Quote

One problem with complaining about the whorish appearance of many young girls today is that the accusations against Judge Moore are around 35 years old. I doubt many Alabama girls dressed that way back then. Nor, of course, does it justify sexual assault. But it does make hebephilia a lot less wicked than it was back when some degree of normalcy reigned.

Pages: First << 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Mingle Forum by cartpauj
Version: 1.0.34 ; Page loaded in: 0.116 seconds.