Boycott Bill OReilley Fox News

[Pace]

imported post

Just learned something, I didn't know!

Tomahawk wrote:

rodbender wrote:

Pace wrote:

In theory, the only case I can think of, would be like the Civil War, where people choose to leave the union, abandoned their citizenship and became enemy combatants.

Whoa is right Tomahawk. Lincoln actuallydeclared martial law and suspended habeus corpusduring the War of Northern Agression. You should ask him how that turned out. No need, I'll go ahead and tell you.

SCOTUS said it was unconstitutional. Enough said?

Correct. And the reason it was unconstitutional is because the only time the president can legally suspend habeus corpus is if there is no functioning judicial system. The judicial system was functioning just fine throughout the war.

Lincoln used his power to imprison judges who ruled against him and those who opposed him politically.

He is universally cited by statists today who hold him up as an example of how to use power, even though his actions were ruled illegal.

And for the record, I'm no CSA sympathizer. I just call it like I see it, and the way I see it, a politician was using a crisis to abuse and enlarge his power, which is exactly what happens when you give them a chance to to declare "emergencies" and ignore the law and the rights of their own citizens.

 

[1245A Defender]

imported post

for anybody to say that the gov. can do anything it wants to, and its legal until the scotus says its not, is fu<k1n unbelievable!!!:cuss::banghead::cuss::banghead::cuss:

:celebrate:celebrate 700 posts:celebrate:celebrate hope ive been worth reading!

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

This is why I love this site. For the longest time I was alone in my belief's and knowledge about Lincoln and other statist. And the fact that history is not taught properly in school. Lincoln was also a racist and a consummate liar and had a large part/support in creating Liberia (as a senator) to rid U.S. of black folk. He didn't treat native populations with much respect either.

O'rielley is a whack job. His support of government contrary to constitutional principals is direct evidence of this.

 

[buzzsaw]

imported post

Did anyone catch the weekend interview he supposedly (I didn't see it) did where he was asked whether he would be interested in being President? His response was reportedly the he had more power in his present position. Plus I suspect he wouldn't be happy with the pay cut. What a tool!!!

 

[SteveInAshand]

imported post

Ton Gresham made it clear on his show last Sunday that he does NOT like Oreilly.

Oreilly looks to have an inferiority & ego problem.


He seems to be a not very a happy man.

To me he is not very deep and it shows in his inpatients , posturing, lack of true humor, his soft ball interview with Obama and the Marxists and his unenlightened views.

I think he "acts" , I think he wants to be good but is compensating, I think he is not right in his core, there seems to be a deeper missing dimension to him that makes his words ring un-true

 

[1245A Defender]

imported post

SteveInAshand wrote:

Ton Gresham made it clear on his show last Sunday that he does NOT like Oreilly.

Oreilly looks to have an inferiority & ego problem.


He seems to be a not very a happy man.

To me he is not very deep and it shows in his inpatients , posturing, lack of true humor, his soft ball interview with Obama and the Marxists and his unenlightened views.

I think he "acts" , I think he wants to be good but is compensating, I think he is not right in his core, there seems to be a deeper missing dimension to him that makes his words ring un-true

read his novel,,,, it is about him, his experences in his news reporting proffession, then it gets ugly, with his inner sick desires to get back at the folks that have screwed him over :uhoh: in the past.
i think it showes that he has a really sick mind deep inside :what:


but of coarse we all are a little sick , but were not on the TV

 

[Summit_Ace]

imported post

Yet another reason to not listen to this guy. I stopped a long time ago.

 

[1245A Defender]

imported post

sorry to bring this thread back, but its different this time.

watching bill tonight, today was the supremes hearing mcdonald v chicago.

bill interviewed a pro and a con, and did the talking points on the 2A rights question.

he sounded like a different guy!!! his remarks, and his questions, were really slanted PRO 2A!!

i wonder what he is up to?

if someone can post a link (i dont know how) it would be great to watch again.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

sorry to bring this thread back, but its different this time.

watching bill tonight, today was the supremes hearing mcdonald v chicago.

bill interviewed a pro and a con, and did the talking points on the 2A rights question.

he sounded like a different guy!!! his remarks, and his questions, were really slanted PRO 2A!!

i wonder what he is up to?

He's full of crap. Guys like that don't have principles, at least not ones they stick to. They ratings and target audiences. Beck, Hannity, the whole bunch.

 

[Master Doug Huffman]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

He's full of crap. Guys like that don't have principles, at least not ones they stick to. They ratings and target audiences. Beck, Hannity, the whole bunch.

Don't forget the SLimbaughll. I'm done with his ignorant ass after his tsunami science rant. He'll say anything paid for by the highest bidder - a neocon whore.

The GOP is dead (Bush 41), dead (bush 43), dead (McCain) by SLimbaughll's mouth.

 

[cloudcroft]

imported post

"he sounded like a different guy!!! his remarks, and his questions, were really slanted PRO 2A!! i wonder what he is up to?" -- 1245A Defender

Maybe he's been watching too much Glenn Beck?

-- John D.


P.S. "Flip-flopping" isn't always bad. Few (if any) of us have held the same beliefs all through our lives. I used to be FORcertain things when I was younger, now I'm against them. People can change...it just has to be real to be believable.

 

[gsx1138]

imported post

Don't watch him anyway.

 

[ne1]

imported post

He did indeed have a different tone tonight, arguing FOR individual rights- perhaps he noticed a ratings blip. However, unless he recants his earlier comments to the effect that we have no rights during an "emergency", I am not convinced that he is sincere.
No need to read his books to get the impression that he is just an actor playing to an audience.

 

[1245A Defender]

imported post

No need to read his books to get the impression that he is just an actor playing to an audience.

i new he was crazy before i read it too, but it proves how sick he is inside!!

borrow the book for free at the library,,,, dont buy it!! it is a good "who done it?"

oh , and your right about the acting thing,,, fox only has so many "journalists".:shock:

 

[buster81]

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

sorry to bring this thread back, but its different this time.

watching bill tonight, today was the supremes hearing mcdonald v chicago.

bill interviewed a pro and a con, and did the talking points on the 2A rights question.

he sounded like a different guy!!! his remarks, and his questions, were really slanted PRO 2A!!

i wonder what he is up to?

if someone can post a link (i dont know how) it would be great to watch again.

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/

I just saw the talking pointsclipand the interview. Thetwo losershe interviewed both made me want to barf.Which was the pro and which was the con?

 

[zack991]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

1245A Defender wrote:

sorry to bring this thread back, but its different this time.

watching bill tonight, today was the supremes hearing mcdonald v chicago.

bill interviewed a pro and a con, and did the talking points on the 2A rights question.

he sounded like a different guy!!! his remarks, and his questions, were really slanted PRO 2A!!

i wonder what he is up to?

He's full of crap. Guys like that don't have principles, at least not ones they stick to. They ratings and target audiences. Beck, Hannity, the whole bunch.

this

 

[Theguy]

imported post

cloudcroft wrote:

P.S. "Flip-flopping" isn't always bad. Few (if any) of us have held the same beliefs all through our lives. I used to be FORcertain things when I was younger, now I'm against them. People can change...it just has to be real to be believable.

this is very true, just a few short years ago, I would have been frightened by the sight of someone OC'ing