Quake3World

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/04.html#a6571

questions?

full clip on CBS's site
http://www.cbs.com/latenight/lateshow/d ... player.php

This calls for a...

hahahahah he called the MI6 ( http://www.mi6.gov.uk ) the M16. What an idiot.

so oreilly isn't going to call someone that blows up women and children a freedom fighter on his show and the crowd goes nuts....irony?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

only thing Dave owned was himself.

"I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap."

"Um, I don't know wtf I'm talking about. I just spurt out something to disagree with you, then as soon as you shut me down I can only interrupt you and say you are full of crap."

dave is saying he is stoopid but even he know oreilly is full of crap...thats ownage...ur a moron...

MidnightQ4 wrote:only thing Dave owned was himself.

"I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap."

"Um, I don't know wtf I'm talking about. I just spurt out something to disagree with you, then as soon as you shut me down I can only interrupt you and say you are full of crap."

That's a pretty good O'Reilly impersonation you got going on. :icon14:

MidnightQ4 wrote:only thing Dave owned was himself.

"I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this, but I have the feeling about 60% of what you say is crap."

"Um, I don't know wtf I'm talking about. I just spurt out something to disagree with you, then as soon as you shut me down I can only interrupt you and say you are full of crap."

wow

I dont know. Letterman got it handed to him a few times. From an objective standpoint he sounded like a left-wing blowhard who didnt have enough on O'reilly to properly attack him. He had one or two points that were easily debated by O'Reilly, and he didnt properly counter the points O'Reilly made. When he just attacked O'Reilly out of the blue I was waiting for some evidence just as O'Reilly challenged from him, but he stepped aside and seemed to hopefully rely on those remarks being so bold that he wouldnt need to confront a challenge.

Canis wrote:I dont know. Letterman got it handed to him a few times. From an objective standpoint he sounded like a left-wing blowhard who didnt have enough on O'reilly to properly attack him. He had one or two points that were easily debated by O'Reilly, and he didnt properly counter the points O'Reilly made. When he just attacked O'Reilly out of the blue I was waiting for some evidence just as O'Reilly challenged from him, but he stepped aside and seemed to hopefully rely on those remarks being so bold that he wouldnt need to confront a challenge.

MORON ALERT!!!...

Its ok...you're a naive little man.

Canis wrote:...a left-wing blowhard...

i'm endlessly amused by what americans consider "left-wing"...

seriously dave should know better than to take on bill at his own game. what an idiot. he reduced dave to saying "your full of crap". gg.

seremtan wrote:

Canis wrote:...a left-wing blowhard...

i'm endlessly amused by what americans consider "left-wing"...

ok...

I think your generalization is a bit odd.

I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

You're blind to reality, so you have no valid input.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

no way, he's far too analytical.

seremtan wrote:

Canis wrote:...a left-wing blowhard...

i'm endlessly amused by what americans consider "left-wing"...

here's how it breaks down:


Right wingers:

Think we should "do the right thing" even if it will be unpopular with some pussies out there.

Think people should help themselves and not expect handouts.

Find the best solution to a problem at the time, and then take action.

Realize you can always find fault with something in hindsight if you look hard enough, but that is no reason to sit by and do nothing for fear of failing.


Left wingers:

Refuse to give viable options to a situation until they can use hindsight to point out what "should have been" done.

Don't feel that the end goal (i.e. protecting our longterm security) should come with any sacrafice.

Do not feel responsibilty for the future, but instead prefer a course of inaction.

Expect everyone to be taken care of by the government.

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

no way, he's far too analytical.

he's not analytical when it comes to the USA. When it comes to the homeland he's in major denial

in many other ways he seems like a normal human

ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID?

edit: that was for the moron

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

no way, he's far too analytical.

he's not analytical when it comes to the USA. When it comes to the homeland he's in major denial

in many other ways he seems like a normal human

my country is filled with people that don't know themselves. i think canis knows who he is...whether you approve or not.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

no way, he's far too analytical.

he's not analytical when it comes to the USA. When it comes to the homeland he's in major denial

in many other ways he seems like a normal human

Like I said, you have absolutely no grasp on reality. As long as you keep viewing the world from your little shell of an existance you'll never get anywhere.

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I think Canis epitomizes the average American.

no way, he's far too analytical.

Hah!

maybe he is evil and not ignorant. if that's the case then you're right i don't approve.