Bill O'Reilly gets OWNED

[trueshotaura]

i'd love to be Bill O[Reily just be straight ignorant and yell at the %*@!@

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by swizzc

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by swizzc

I completely agree.� Taking someone's life is wrong to me no matter the circumstances, let them face their consequences when they come face to face with the man upstairs.� I can see how someone could make a case that his life should be taken, but I don't agree with it.

You can see how someone can make a case for killing a man doing something that was legal??????

Yes, you can make a case for pretty much anything. Once again, I'm not saying I agree with that case at all, I'm saying that I can see how one could be made (although not in my mind justifiable).

lol, essential beat me to it....

no, you cannot justify taking his life....

if he was a deranged gunman shooting up a jewish museum, you can make that argument and justify taking his life...

dude was a doctor....and got murdered for performing medicine.

regardless of if you think it's morally wrong or not...

cause guess what, that's YOUR opinion...

everyone has an opinion...yours is no more special, moral, or "right" than anyone else's...

i LOVE how people, especially men, take it upon themselves to dictate what does and doesnt take place in a woman's body.

it's her body...the fetus, regardless of how old is it, has absolutely NO RIGHT to its mother's body....at all.

if she decides she wants to go to a concert so she no longer wants to grant the fetus use of her body, then so be it..

it's not your body to control...period....end of story.

if the fetus had a right to life, it would exercise it's right independent of the woman's body..

period.

now, whether you agree with the work he was doing or not, you're on pretty shaky ground, morally, trying to justify his murder

end of story

it's not open for discussion.

actually it is quite open for discussion. you voiced your opinion, one that's been stated and re-stated by millions of people. many have heard it an remain strongly opposed to abortion.

,

woah, you got me, guy....

except, the topic that isn't open for debate isn't the age-old abortion topic, genius, it's the fact that the doctor being murdered is wrong....

but keep quoting me, one day you might luck up...

(why is it that so many americans are so pompous they aren't happy following their own beliefs and ideas...they HAVE TO force others to subscribe to whatthey personally feel and believe.....abortion, religion, same-sex marriage, the list goes on and on....lemme guess, i'm such a liberal for thinking thatpeople shouldnt force their personal beliefs on others?

)

 

[swizzc]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by swizzc

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by swizzc

I completely agree.� Taking someone's life is wrong to me no matter the circumstances, let them face their consequences when they come face to face with the man upstairs.� I can see how someone could make a case that his life should be taken, but I don't agree with it.

You can see how someone can make a case for killing a man doing something that was legal??????

Yes, you can make a case for pretty much anything. Once again, I'm not saying I agree with that case at all, I'm saying that I can see how one could be made (although not in my mind justifiable).

lol, essential beat me to it....

no, you cannot justify taking his life....

if he was a deranged gunman shooting up a jewish museum, you can make that argument and justify taking his life...

dude was a doctor....and got murdered for performing medicine.

regardless of if you think it's morally wrong or not...

cause guess what, that's YOUR opinion...

everyone has an opinion...yours is no more special, moral, or "right" than anyone else's...

i LOVE how people, especially men, take it upon themselves to dictate what does and doesnt take place in a woman's body.

it's her body...the fetus, regardless of how old is it, has absolutely NO RIGHT to its mother's body....at all.

if she decides she wants to go to a concert so she no longer wants to grant the fetus use of her body, then so be it..

it's not your body to control...period....end of story.

if the fetus had a right to life, it would exercise it's right independent of the woman's body..

period.

now, whether you agree with the work he was doing or not, you're on pretty shaky ground, morally, trying to justify his murder

end of story

it's not open for discussion.

actually it is quite open for discussion. you voiced your opinion, one that's been stated and re-stated by millions of people. many have heard it an remain strongly opposed to abortion.
what he's saying is that the "killing a doctor is OK b/c it's abortion" argument is not open for discussion.

 

[miketysonthekiller]

i love these threads. They're full of lulz.

 

[joseph camel jr]

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by swizzc

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by swizzc

I completely agree.� Taking someone's life is wrong to me no matter the circumstances, let them face their consequences when they come face to face with the man upstairs.� I can see how someone could make a case that his life should be taken, but I don't agree with it.

You can see how someone can make a case for killing a man doing something that was legal??????

Yes, you can make a case for pretty much anything. Once again, I'm not saying I agree with that case at all, I'm saying that I can see how one could be made (although not in my mind justifiable).

lol, essential beat me to it....

no, you cannot justify taking his life....

if he was a deranged gunman shooting up a jewish museum, you can make that argument and justify taking his life...

dude was a doctor....and got murdered for performing medicine.

regardless of if you think it's morally wrong or not...

cause guess what, that's YOUR opinion...

everyone has an opinion...yours is no more special, moral, or "right" than anyone else's...

i LOVE how people, especially men, take it upon themselves to dictate what does and doesnt take place in a woman's body.

it's her body...the fetus, regardless of how old is it, has absolutely NO RIGHT to its mother's body....at all.

if she decides she wants to go to a concert so she no longer wants to grant the fetus use of her body, then so be it..

it's not your body to control...period....end of story.

if the fetus had a right to life, it would exercise it's right independent of the woman's body..

period.

now, whether you agree with the work he was doing or not, you're on pretty shaky ground, morally, trying to justify his murder

end of story

it's not open for discussion.

actually it is quite open for discussion. you voiced your opinion, one that's been stated and re-stated by millions of people. many have heard it an remain strongly opposed to abortion.

,

woah, you got me, guy....

except, the topic that isn't open for debate isn't the age-old abortion topic, genius, it's the fact that the doctor being murdered is wrong....

but keep quoting me, one day you might luck up...

(why is it that so many americans are so pompous they aren't happy following their own beliefs and ideas...they HAVE TO force others to subscribe to what they personally feel and believe.....abortion, religion, same-sex marriage, the list goes on and on....lemme guess, i'm such a liberal for thinking that people shouldnt force their personal beliefs on others?

)



calm down big guy. murder is wrong. thanks for stating the obvious. was talking about abortion, which is a complete moral grey area.

 

[dirtylicious]

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

 

[Master Zik]

I like how he didn't answer the question and ended the show.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying youunderstand the motives of the killer.

 

[joseph camel jr]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying you understand the motives of the killer.

i don't agree with his death and i am COMPLETELY on the fence about abortion.

but if i was a firm believe in "abortion is murder" why the hell wouldn't i be a little happy about his murder? in my eyes, his death would savehundreds of lives. sure, murder is still wrong, but in this case, for certain people, wouldn't it be for the greater good?

yes, i understand the greater implications of it, namely that regardless of what you believe in you have to respect the laws, otherwise they are meaningless.not to mention taking a life is still taking a life, etc. etc.

 

[5thgearidah]

Originally Posted by Fede DPT

Originally Posted by eNPHAN


so you're justifying his cold-blooded murder?

CONSERVATIVES WIN AGAIN!

(i like how all of you people are so ridiculous, you take it upon yourself to judge people.....not only that, but justify wrongdoings with quotes and paragraphs of texts written by other nutjobs like yourself....he was murdered...period. it was wrong...no information you're going to post will change those facts.)

p.s. i dunno why you nutjobs are up-in-arms, anyway.....i mean, it's not like he was aborting kittens...

Where did I say I was justifying his murder? Most of you don't even know what the whole debate was about, that clip is second of 2 parts. The women was making claims on something she didn't even know about, because she CAN'T, due to "informed consent".

and Tiller was found NOT GUILTY of those charges that were brought to him.� After the inital charges were dropped.

Of course he was found "not guilty" he gave a very high amount of campaign contributions to the Gov. at the time, who is now head of the HHC.

And if you think a woman got an abortion to go to a concert your a fool.


How do you know? Did you read the medical records? Did you just skim over the part where a former employee of his admitted to falsifying medical records?

Why is it so hard to understand that these abortions are for women who discovered late in pregnancy that their fetuses had severe or fatal birth defects?

Again, you don't know this for a FACT, because you cant. You cant look at medical records without informed consent. I'm going to reiterate, former employees of his have admitted to falsifying medical records.

In the state of Kansas, they had what was called "Established standards of care" which would have prevented falsifying medical records because it requires to take a copy of the sonogram, Gov. Sebelius vetoed that bill.




a former employee that is prolife.
again I ask....what are women that have sever problems later on in their pregnancy supposed to do? Only about 1.5% of abortions are late term...this is neveran easy decision for women, and for others to say what they can and cannot do is wrong. Its not up to you to decide whats wrong for someone else.

Are you willing to adopt a child? there are thousands of unwanted children up for adoption in this country, but I dont see prolifers taking care of thesekids.

 

[dirtylicious]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying you understand the motives of the killer.

i don't agree with his death and i am COMPLETELY on the fence about abortion.

but if i was a firm believe in "abortion is murder" why the hell wouldn't i be a little happy about his murder? in my eyes, his death would save hundreds of lives. sure, murder is still wrong, but in this case, for certain people, wouldn't it be for the greater good?

yes, i understand the greater implications of it, namely that regardless of what you believe in you have to respect the laws, otherwise they are meaningless. not to mention taking a life is still taking a life, etc. etc.

1. you object to abortion on moral grounds...most likely rooted in religion, no?
2. those same morals should dictate that no man has the right to take matters into their own hands

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying you understand the motives of the killer.

i don't agree with his death and i am COMPLETELY on the fence about abortion.

but if i was a firm believe in "abortion is murder" why the hell wouldn't i be a little happy about his murder? in my eyes, his death would save hundreds of lives. sure, murder is still wrong, but in this case, for certain people, wouldn't it be for the greater good?

yes, i understand the greater implications of it, namely that regardless of what you believe in you have to respect the laws, otherwise they are meaningless. not to mention taking a life is still taking a life, etc. etc.

I understand dude. But if you were of the "abortion is murder" persuasion surely you would understand "murder is murder." Ithink by saying "BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___" you (not you personally, obviously) are advocating his death morethan you are speaking out against murder.

 

[mo matik]

George Tiller was first discussed on The O'Reilly Factoron February 25, 2005. Subsequently Tiller was discussed in at least 28 episodes before his death. On the show he was sometimes described as "Tiller the Baby Killer". Though O'Reilly claims that he did not come up with the nickname, as he was just reporting what activists said. Host Bill O'Reilly also warned of Tiller's "judgment day".[sup][23][/sup]

On November 3, 2006, O'Reilly featured an exclusive segment on his The O'Reilly Factor, saying that he had an "inside source" with official clinic documentation indicating that George Tiller performed late-term abortions to alleviate "temporary depression" in the pregnant woman.[sup][24][/sup] Tiller responded to O'Reilly's statements by demanding an investigation into the "inside source" through which the information was leaked, suggesting that Phill Kline, then the Kansas Attorney General, was responsible. Kline denied the charge. O'Reilly also interviewed a woman who allegedly got pregnant when she was 13 and received an abortion from Tiller.[sup][25][/sup]


[sup]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller#cite_note-24[/sup]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller

It's a very strong possibility that O'Reilly truly does have blood on his hands.

 

[emmanuel goldstein]

lmao ...

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

George Tiller was first discussed on The O'Reilly Factoron February 25, 2005. Subsequently Tiller was discussed in at least 28 episodes before his death. On the show he was sometimes described as "Tiller the Baby Killer". Though O'Reilly claims that he did not come up with the nickname, as he was just reporting what activists said. Host Bill O'Reilly also warned of Tiller's "judgment day".[sup][23][/sup]

On November 3, 2006, O'Reilly featured an exclusive segment on his The O'Reilly Factor, saying that he had an "inside source" with official clinic documentation indicating that George Tiller performed late-term abortions to alleviate "temporary depression" in the pregnant woman.[sup][24][/sup] Tiller responded to O'Reilly's statements by demanding an investigation into the "inside source" through which the information was leaked, suggesting that Phill Kline, then the Kansas Attorney General, was responsible. Kline denied the charge. O'Reilly also interviewed a woman who allegedly got pregnant when she was 13 and received an abortion from Tiller.[sup][25][/sup]

[sup]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller#cite_note-24[/sup]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller

It's a very strong possibility that O'Reilly truly does have blood on his hands.


dude, you can't go saying that stuff. What is the difference between Bill-O saying that and accusing Bill-O of the same thing? Leave the nuttiness to thoserationalizing his death.

 

[joseph camel jr]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying you understand the motives of the killer.

i don't agree with his death and i am COMPLETELY on the fence about abortion.

but if i was a firm believe in "abortion is murder" why the hell wouldn't i be a little happy about his murder? in my eyes, his death would save hundreds of lives. sure, murder is still wrong, but in this case, for certain people, wouldn't it be for the greater good?

yes, i understand the greater implications of it, namely that regardless of what you believe in you have to respect the laws, otherwise they are meaningless. not to mention taking a life is still taking a life, etc. etc.

I understand dude. But if you were of the "abortion is murder" persuasion surely you would understand "murder is murder." I think by saying "BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___" you (not you personally, obviously) are advocating his death more than you are speaking out against murder.

i already said i understood that. you don't seem to really have thought about what i'm saying. in the eyes of a hardline pro-lifer, murder is murder ismurder. this means abortion = killing a man. both are equally wrong. would you rather have one act of murder occur, the killing of this doctor, or thousands ashe continues to practice?

the only compelling arguments against this logic are ones regarding legality, not morality. i don't believe in pro-life or pro-choice agendas, i amcompletely undecided to be honest.

 

[dirtylicious]

the only compelling arguments against this logic are ones regarding legality, not morality.
....

From the 10 commandments...
You shall not murder

....if you are a true believer... God is the only one that can deliver final judgement

 

[nextel cup]

Democrats and Republicans, they are all the same anyways.

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Joseph Camel Jr

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

why social conservatives get behind the rationale for advocating this guy's murder is beyond me.

"murder is wrong, BUT....I understand _(insert anti-abortion rationale here)___"

really?... what kind of a message is that sending?

I agree. It's a half-hearted attempt at showing they don't advocate killing. I don't really understand what is to gain by saying you understand the motives of the killer.

i don't agree with his death and i am COMPLETELY on the fence about abortion.

but if i was a firm believe in "abortion is murder" why the hell wouldn't i be a little happy about his murder? in my eyes, his death would save hundreds of lives. sure, murder is still wrong, but in this case, for certain people, wouldn't it be for the greater good?

yes, i understand the greater implications of it, namely that regardless of what you believe in you have to respect the laws, otherwise they are meaningless. not to mention taking a life is still taking a life, etc. etc.

if someone would have just taken bush jr.'s life before we invaded iraq.........so many lives would have been saved...

if we would just take rush limbaugh's life, so much bigotry and hate will be abolished...

if we would just take...

you want me to continue?

you can see the rationale behind murdering an innocent man?

then, certainly, you can see the rationale behind a woman "murdering" a fetus that has no right to use her body, right?

senseless murder will never be for "the greater good"

as much as i hate rush limbaugh and wish he was off the air, i couldn't condone someone murdering him...i mean, he's soulless, but he has a family andsuch....(i think)

you explain to this doctor's family how murdering him is for the greater good....

and while abortion is a major moral grey area, imo, if you don't have a uterus, you have no place in the argument....

which is why i turn the decision over to women, completely...

im not pro-abortion, i'm pro-choice, because, i think a woman should be able to have control over her own body...period....whether she wants to abort thebaby or not...

why must anti-abortionists force their belief, based on religion, upon others?

it's legalized....it's up to the individual whether to abort or not...the moral decision is left up to the individual...

anti-abortionists would rather force their values and views upon the rest of the population, BY FORCE...

you think it's wrong? cool, don't get em...

but you have no authority or right to infringe upon the next woman's decision....

PERIOD.

 

[phillypg1]

Originally Posted by DatZNasty

Don't Republicans ever get mad that their main representation is hateful, irrational douches like O'Reilly, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, Ingram, Coulter, etc. akin to how some black people hate like Flava Flav type characters, under the assumption "they're making us all look bad?"

Hey you leave Sean out of this,he is the only one I like out of the group you mentioned.

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

the only compelling arguments against this logic are ones regarding legality, not morality.

....

From the 10 commandments...
You shall not murder

....if you are a true believer... God is the only one that can deliver final judgement

tell these backwards bible-thumpers the drill, dirty...

who are you to judge this man and punish him for his supposed sins?

i don't understand the rationale behind "MURDER IS SO WRONG, LETS MURDER THIS GUY!"

i mean, unless we're talking about capital punishment....

 

[mo matik]

dude, you can't go saying that stuff. What is the difference between Bill-O saying that and accusing Bill-O of the same thing? Leave the nuttiness to those rationalizing his death.


I said it's a possibility.

While I understand your point, considering the amount of viewers he has, and the fact that he discussed it 26 times on different shows, it's hard to arguethat he probably DIDN'T have an influence on the violence against Dr. Tiller.

I'm not saying he is to blame, but the media (Both liberal AND conservative) does not take into consideration the true amount of influence they have on thepublic.

Actually, they might have an understanding of the influence they have, but they choose to exploit that influence. Either way, it's wrong.

 

[38816]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by Mo Matik

George Tiller was first discussed on The O'Reilly Factoron February 25, 2005. Subsequently Tiller was discussed in at least 28 episodes before his death. On the show he was sometimes described as "Tiller the Baby Killer". Though O'Reilly claims that he did not come up with the nickname, as he was just reporting what activists said. Host Bill O'Reilly also warned of Tiller's "judgment day".[sup][23][/sup]

On November 3, 2006, O'Reilly featured an exclusive segment on his The O'Reilly Factor, saying that he had an "inside source" with official clinic documentation indicating that George Tiller performed late-term abortions to alleviate "temporary depression" in the pregnant woman.[sup][24][/sup] Tiller responded to O'Reilly's statements by demanding an investigation into the "inside source" through which the information was leaked, suggesting that Phill Kline, then the Kansas Attorney General, was responsible. Kline denied the charge. O'Reilly also interviewed a woman who allegedly got pregnant when she was 13 and received an abortion from Tiller.[sup][25][/sup]

[sup]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller#cite_note-24[/sup]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller

It's a very strong possibility that O'Reilly truly does have blood on his hands.

dude, you can't go saying that stuff. What is the difference between Bill-O saying that and accusing Bill-O of the same thing? Leave the nuttiness to those rationalizing his death.

what's the difference between a major media talking head calling for a "baby killer's" "justice" on his syndicatedtime slot and a NTer suggesting that maybe bill's threats have something to do with the doc's death?

did you really just ask that?

you expect a serious, non-condescending response, as well?

sorry, i can't provide that.

 

[Jordan8]

Now someone needs to get at Hannity an ya boy with the butch haircut forgot his name

 

[skip2mylou23]

He didn't get owned but she definitely spoke and represented herself very well.