Comments on: David Letterman Versus Bill O’Reilly http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/ An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right Wed, 30 May 2012 22:30:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Doug619 http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-322 Doug619 Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:38:23 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-322 An agenda, ... do I see how harmful that is? Why yes, I do. Agendas are evil. HEY, you have an agenda too, you wrote that post to try and convince someone to agree with your point of view. I guess you’re evil. Crap, I'm refuting you, I guess everyone who cares enough to get involved in ... well anything is evil. I think Kant would agree that the notion of agendas being evil could not be a categorical imperative. But then again Kant died a virgin. The ACLU does not bill themselves as the fourth branch of the government, they joke about it. And, if they every did bill themselves (seriously) as the fourth branch of government, they would be pretty damn stupid; which I'm not claiming they aren't anyway. The point they were trying to make, is that they want to be a check on the governments abusing civil liberties, and minority rights. With THIS mindset they defend all small minorities whose rights are being trampled because they are obscure, too small, or just plain unpopular (sometimes that includes the ignorant and evil, the KKK and NAMBLA). The majority has other recourses in the system like, I don't know VOTING. Should people be allowed to freely come together in peaceful associations regardless of their political or moral views? The ACLU says yes and I tend to agree with them. I don't defend NAMBLA, on the other hand I wish they would go away, but it is a principal of this country that they be allowed to say and think whatever they want, and even share those opinions with others no matter how sick. So, criminal activity is illegal. I never looked at it that way, thanks. A student of constitutional law would know that there are two forms speech, one illegal and the other protected by the constitution. I can write that we should all ignore quotas when hiring employees. That’s inciting illegal behavior. I can not write that someone should be killed. Then again, Pat Robertson seems to be able to do so with no consequences just fine. Killing people and suggesting to kill people is illegal, not protected free speech and that is a distinction that is left up to the courts to draw, and in every court case someone needs to defend the losing side, often times that is the ACLU. You seem to be missing the point of courts, they decide on technical and theoretical points, the argument presented, not the circumstances around the case. That’s why the courts sometimes allow a killer to go free because the police did not have a warrant to search the murders property. The belief is that the SYSTEM is what counts, not the individuals in the case. Also, I still see no difference between what Tom Cruise does and O'Reilly/ Coulter do. Especially Coulter. An agenda, … do I see how harmful that is? Why yes, I do. Agendas are evil. HEY, you have an agenda too, you wrote that post to try and convince someone to agree with your point of view. I guess you’re evil. Crap, I’m refuting you, I guess everyone who cares enough to get involved in … well anything is evil. I think Kant would agree that the notion of agendas being evil could not be a categorical imperative. But then again Kant died a virgin. The ACLU does not bill themselves as the fourth branch of the government, they joke about it. And, if they every did bill themselves (seriously) as the fourth branch of government, they would be pretty damn stupid; which I’m not claiming they aren’t anyway. The point they were trying to make, is that they want to be a check on the governments abusing civil liberties, and minority rights. With THIS mindset they defend all small minorities whose rights are being trampled because they are obscure, too small, or just plain unpopular (sometimes that includes the ignorant and evil, the KKK and NAMBLA). The majority has other recourses in the system like, I don’t know VOTING. Should people be allowed to freely come together in peaceful associations regardless of their political or moral views? The ACLU says yes and I tend to agree with them. I don’t defend NAMBLA, on the other hand I wish they would go away, but it is a principal of this country that they be allowed to say and think whatever they want, and even share those opinions with others no matter how sick. So, criminal activity is illegal. I never looked at it that way, thanks. A student of constitutional law would know that there are two forms speech, one illegal and the other protected by the constitution. I can write that we should all ignore quotas when hiring employees. That’s inciting illegal behavior. I can not write that someone should be killed. Then again, Pat Robertson seems to be able to do so with no consequences just fine. Killing people and suggesting to kill people is illegal, not protected free speech and that is a distinction that is left up to the courts to draw, and in every court case someone needs to defend the losing side, often times that is the ACLU. You seem to be missing the point of courts, they decide on technical and theoretical points, the argument presented, not the circumstances around the case. That’s why the courts sometimes allow a killer to go free because the police did not have a warrant to search the murders property. The belief is that the SYSTEM is what counts, not the individuals in the case. Also, I still see no difference between what Tom Cruise does and O’Reilly/ Coulter do. Especially Coulter.

]]> By: Elstudez http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Elstudez Tue, 10 Jan 2006 09:11:39 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-321 There is a difference between doing research and forming an opinion afterwards and forming an opinion and then doing research to back your opinion. So there is a huge difference between Bill O' Reilly/Anne Coulter and Tom Cruise. Secondly, the ACLU is a business. The ACLU's intentions are not to protect freedom. Otherwise, they would at least take cases to protect the rights of oh let's say... the majority of Americans. The ACLU has billed themselves as the unofficial fourth branch of the government. Now with that mindset, don't you think they should be more responsible in whom they choose to represent? By defending such organizations as the KKK and NAMBLA are they not alienating a vast majority of Americans? They say they are the fourth branch of the government, don't they have an obligation to the majority of Americans? But they don't. Which means one thing... if the ACLU thinks they are part of the government and act in a way that is harmful to most of society.... that would make them... FASCISTS. You see, the speech put forth by NAMBLA promotes criminal activity, which in fact is illegal. The KKK, if they were advocating violence, it would be illegal. The fact of the matter is, is that the non-elected ACLU is trying to rewrite the laws of this country through litigation. THEY HAVE AN AGENDA. Do you see how harmful that is? There is a difference between doing research and forming an opinion afterwards and forming an opinion and then doing research to back your opinion. So there is a huge difference between Bill O’ Reilly/Anne Coulter and Tom Cruise. Secondly, the ACLU is a business. The ACLU’s intentions are not to protect freedom. Otherwise, they would at least take cases to protect the rights of oh let’s say… the majority of Americans. The ACLU has billed themselves as the unofficial fourth branch of the government. Now with that mindset, don’t you think they should be more responsible in whom they choose to represent? By defending such organizations as the KKK and NAMBLA are they not alienating a vast majority of Americans? They say they are the fourth branch of the government, don’t they have an obligation to the majority of Americans? But they don’t. Which means one thing… if the ACLU thinks they are part of the government and act in a way that is harmful to most of society…. that would make them… FASCISTS. You see, the speech put forth by NAMBLA promotes criminal activity, which in fact is illegal. The KKK, if they were advocating violence, it would be illegal. The fact of the matter is, is that the non-elected ACLU is trying to rewrite the laws of this country through litigation. THEY HAVE AN AGENDA. Do you see how harmful that is?

]]> By: Doug619 http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-320 Doug619 Mon, 09 Jan 2006 08:12:57 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-320 If You knew anything, it would probably be your sex. I say this because barring any other knowledge about NAMBLA or the ACLU you would probably still know your sex. I mean, I didn't know the ACLU defended NAMBLA but when I woke up today I sure has hell did notice my penis. So lets only get pissy with each other for not knowing something if that something is your sex. Not knowing that would definitely make you stupid. I do know that the ACLU also defended the KKK's right to hold public, non-violent meetings. So are the ACLU pro racism and child pornography, ... OR are they instead in favor of fervently defending freedom of speech, no matter what form that takes. To call them terrorists, at least I think, is quite ignorant. No scratch that, lets introduce a new word, its jackassery. By the way, just because you do research doesn't mean you’re not an idiot, look at Tom Cruise, who "researched" psychiatry and still comes off as cruise-azy. Also on the subject, O'Reilly does not do research, he gets outlines of arguments from such think tanks as the heritage foundation and the family institute, both of which (as do their liberal counterparts) twist statistics and data to fit their arguments. He probably doesn't even realize the information he spues out is spun half the time. A good book on the subject is Freakonomics. You may know it as that book that claimed that abortions lower crime rates. But, actually reading the book would show that it is just used to prove the point that statistics can be very misleading. Some harvard graduates (like Ann Coulter) have manipulated the books message and claim that it is instead proof that liberals think that killing black people lowers crime rates. She is not stupid, but she sure does think that we are and that’s what O'Reilly does, if only to a much less dramatic degree. If You knew anything, it would probably be your sex. I say this because barring any other knowledge about NAMBLA or the ACLU you would probably still know your sex. I mean, I didn’t know the ACLU defended NAMBLA but when I woke up today I sure has hell did notice my penis. So lets only get pissy with each other for not knowing something if that something is your sex. Not knowing that would definitely make you stupid. I do know that the ACLU also defended the KKK’s right to hold public, non-violent meetings. So are the ACLU pro racism and child pornography, … OR are they instead in favor of fervently defending freedom of speech, no matter what form that takes. To call them terrorists, at least I think, is quite ignorant. No scratch that, lets introduce a new word, its jackassery. By the way, just because you do research doesn’t mean you’re not an idiot, look at Tom Cruise, who “researched” psychiatry and still comes off as cruise-azy. Also on the subject, O’Reilly does not do research, he gets outlines of arguments from such think tanks as the heritage foundation and the family institute, both of which (as do their liberal counterparts) twist statistics and data to fit their arguments. He probably doesn’t even realize the information he spues out is spun half the time. A good book on the subject is Freakonomics. You may know it as that book that claimed that abortions lower crime rates. But, actually reading the book would show that it is just used to prove the point that statistics can be very misleading. Some harvard graduates (like Ann Coulter) have manipulated the books message and claim that it is instead proof that liberals think that killing black people lowers crime rates. She is not stupid, but she sure does think that we are and that’s what O’Reilly does, if only to a much less dramatic degree.

]]> By: Elstudez http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Elstudez Mon, 09 Jan 2006 06:33:09 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-319 No K: You are mis-informed. If you knew anything, you would know that the ACLU has represented NAMBLA on many occasions, fighting for NAMBLA's "civil liberty" to promote the molestation of young boys. The ACLU is in fact a bigger threat to the United States than any terrorist organization. No K: You are mis-informed. If you knew anything, you would know that the ACLU has represented NAMBLA on many occasions, fighting for NAMBLA’s “civil liberty” to promote the molestation of young boys. The ACLU is in fact a bigger threat to the United States than any terrorist organization.

]]> By: k http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-318 k Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:37:13 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-318 Really? You would connect ACLU and NAMBLA at the same level?? LOL!!! You should really check your facts and do some research. You clearly are misinformed. Really? You would connect ACLU and NAMBLA at the same level?? LOL!!! You should really check your facts and do some research. You clearly are misinformed.

]]> By: Elstudez http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-317 Elstudez Sun, 08 Jan 2006 11:36:47 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-317 David Letterman is a mumbling fool. I just love how there are all these blogs stating "Letterman schooled O'Reilly." It's incredible. It really is. Saying Letterman "schooled" O'Reilly is just like saying Bush decimated Kerry in the presidential debates. O'Reilly is a man that usually does his research before he takes a stance on any issue. In other words, he's not dumb. There are many people out there whom consider O'Reilly the ayatollah of the conservatives, and they are overwhelmed with joy that he was confronted by Letterman, albeit with the intelligence of the CIA. Letterman says the war on Christmas is made up, then again he probably wouldn't go to Target to shop. Because you see, Target banned the Salvation Army bell ringers from standing outside of their stores during Christmas because...hold your breath... they are a evil Christian organization. It doesn't matter that the Salvation Army is a charity that feeds and clothes many needy and poor peoples. Oh no... the fact that they are Christians outweighs the fact that they are probably one of the largest charities in the United States. What an evil charity.... In fact, I can recall going to Target and the bell-ringer was stationed outside a dollar store nearby, because as O'reilly said... Target thought the bell-ringers would be offensive to it's multi-cultural customers. What a shame. Now before you want to label me a conservative, please analyze and scrutinize my words carefully... I say this because I know how liberals are: Morons... even more so then conservatives. David Letterman is a mumbling fool. I just love how there are all these blogs stating “Letterman schooled O’Reilly.” It’s incredible. It really is. Saying Letterman “schooled” O’Reilly is just like saying Bush decimated Kerry in the presidential debates. O’Reilly is a man that usually does his research before he takes a stance on any issue. In other words, he’s not dumb. There are many people out there whom consider O’Reilly the ayatollah of the conservatives, and they are overwhelmed with joy that he was confronted by Letterman, albeit with the intelligence of the CIA. Letterman says the war on Christmas is made up, then again he probably wouldn’t go to Target to shop. Because you see, Target banned the Salvation Army bell ringers from standing outside of their stores during Christmas because…hold your breath… they are a evil Christian organization. It doesn’t matter that the Salvation Army is a charity that feeds and clothes many needy and poor peoples. Oh no… the fact that they are Christians outweighs the fact that they are probably one of the largest charities in the United States. What an evil charity…. In fact, I can recall going to Target and the bell-ringer was stationed outside a dollar store nearby, because as O’reilly said… Target thought the bell-ringers would be offensive to it’s multi-cultural customers. What a shame. Now before you want to label me a conservative, please analyze and scrutinize my words carefully… I say this because I know how liberals are: Morons… even more so then conservatives.

]]> By: lover-not-a-fighter0788 http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-316 lover-not-a-fighter0788 Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:45:25 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-316 I know i spelled pray wrong. chill out i'm only human. I know people who have made bigger mistakes...George W. Bush? I know i spelled pray wrong. chill out i’m only human. I know people who have made bigger mistakes…George W. Bush?

]]> By: lover-not-a-fighter0788 http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-315 lover-not-a-fighter0788 Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:39:32 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-315 Everybody listen to Dahgrostabphri. this guy is so right and all you out there who love O'Reilly so much why don't cha marry him? He's a pervert and is probably into that kind of stuff. Peace in Iraq no...America. bi-atches of the white house prey I never come up in that piece! Everybody listen to Dahgrostabphri. this guy is so right and all you out there who love O’Reilly so much why don’t cha marry him? He’s a pervert and is probably into that kind of stuff. Peace in Iraq no…America. bi-atches of the white house prey I never come up in that piece!

]]> By: choocho http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-314 choocho Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:59:23 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-314 they never have any good arguments. their leaders have nothing rational, only a bogus idea of what reality might be on another planet. war will never end. deal with it as it has been here since the beginning. and the bombs are getting bigger ... better to adopt an ideology of survival, both in the world and in this country. I dread the day my babies are alive in the same world that allows the scum organizations and secular perverts (aclu-nambla other filth) to abuse them. they are the devil in desguise, civil liberties??? for child molesters and terrorists ... oh what a world. they never have any good arguments. their leaders have nothing rational, only a bogus idea of what reality might be on another planet. war will never end. deal with it as it has been here since the beginning. and the bombs are getting bigger …
better to adopt an ideology of survival, both in the world and in this country. I dread the day my
babies are alive in the same world that allows the scum organizations and secular perverts (aclu-nambla other filth) to abuse them. they are the devil in desguise, civil liberties??? for child
molesters and terrorists … oh what a world.

]]> By: Dahgrostabphri http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-313 Dahgrostabphri Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:30:47 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-313 and before you point it out, Yes I realize I missspelled Liar...so I'm a dumb ass too, but at least I'm telling the truth!!! and before you point it out, Yes I realize I missspelled Liar…so I’m a dumb ass too, but at least I’m telling the truth!!!

]]> By: Dahgrostabphri http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-312 Dahgrostabphri Sat, 07 Jan 2006 12:28:31 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-312 I have to add, that Bill O'Riley isn't a dumbs ass, he is a lier, and it takes a fairly clever person to lie without getting caught, however O'Riley isn't a clever person which is why only the dumbest Americans (Fox viewers) can't see through the lies. But to say Letterman was 'pompous' is to have missed the fact that Letterman clearly hates people like O'Riley. I'm not talking right-wingers, I'm talking about liers and people who choose party loyalty over an alligiance to their country (<i>if you remember taking the pledge in school it was to the flag and country and not to any politcal party or a single amendment</i>) and people who promote propaganda...well I'll be...I am talking about the right-wing. You can say what you want, but supporting the republican party is the most anti-American position you can hold. They shit on our troops and then wipe their ass's on our Constitution and then flush our civil liberties. If that's what you support, I'm sure their room for your kind in China, or Saudi Arabia...please take the inititave and go there. Signed a Proud American <b>who wants his country back!</b> I have to add, that Bill O’Riley isn’t a dumbs ass, he is a lier, and it takes a fairly clever person to lie without getting caught, however O’Riley isn’t a clever person which is why only the dumbest Americans (Fox viewers) can’t see through the lies. But to say Letterman was ‘pompous’ is to have missed the fact that Letterman clearly hates people like O’Riley. I’m not talking right-wingers, I’m talking about liers and people who choose party loyalty over an alligiance to their country (if you remember taking the pledge in school it was to the flag and country and not to any politcal party or a single amendment) and people who promote propaganda…well I’ll be…I am talking about the right-wing. You can say what you want, but supporting the republican party is the most anti-American position you can hold. They shit on our troops and then wipe their ass’s on our Constitution and then flush our civil liberties. If that’s what you support, I’m sure their room for your kind in China, or Saudi Arabia…please take the inititave and go there. Signed a Proud American who wants his country back!

]]> By: SM http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-311 SM Sat, 07 Jan 2006 07:48:34 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-311 <blockquote> O'Reilly isn't an idiot, he is just a unethical piece of shit. He knows exactly what he is doing when he lies and uses bogus made up statistics to justify his claims. </blockquote> In response to this particular subject and your response <i></i>Disenfranchised Voter<i></i>, I'd like to make clear that the only "bogus made up" statistic of the interview was when Letterman (who admitted he has never watched the O'Reilly Factor) said that 60% of what O'Reilly says is "crap." Remember that I DON'T AGREE WITH HIM, but regardless, I have never seen or heard O'Reilly use any statistics that were "made up." Show me an example and convincing evidence against statistics O'Reilly has used to support his arguments. I'd love to know that I'm wrong on this issue. Point me in the right direction, please.

O’Reilly isn’t an idiot, he is just a unethical piece of shit.

He knows exactly what he is doing when he lies and uses bogus made up statistics to justify his claims.

In response to this particular subject and your response Disenfranchised Voter, I’d like to make clear that the only “bogus made up” statistic of the interview was when Letterman (who admitted he has never watched the O’Reilly Factor) said that 60% of what O’Reilly says is “crap.”

Remember that I DON’T AGREE WITH HIM, but regardless, I have never seen or heard O’Reilly use any statistics that were “made up.” Show me an example and convincing evidence against statistics O’Reilly has used to support his arguments. I’d love to know that I’m wrong on this issue. Point me in the right direction, please.

]]> By: The Disenfranchised Voter http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-310 The Disenfranchised Voter Sat, 07 Jan 2006 03:21:09 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-310 O'Reilly isn't an idiot, he is just a unethical piece of shit. He knows exactly what he is doing when he lies and uses bogus made up statistics to justify his claims. O’Reilly isn’t an idiot, he is just a unethical piece of shit.

He knows exactly what he is doing when he lies and uses bogus made up statistics to justify his claims.

]]> By: SM http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-309 SM Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:05:05 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-309 Although I hardly ever agree with him, I'd like to point out that Bill O'Reilly is not an idiot. He has two Master's degrees (one from Harvard), and over two decades of experience as a journalist with reputable, national broadcasting companies. While you may disagree with his opinions, the way he presents his show, or the topics he choses to address, juvenille name-calling to prove your point does nothing but suggest YOUR "idioce" [sic]. You need evidence to back your arguments. O'Reilly does, but the conclusions he draws are often very different than mine. I wish people would stop making claims about things they have neither researched nor analyzed. It's like a complete stranger claiming you are an idiot for not knowing how to spell "Fascism." Before agreeing or disagreeing, a person has the obligation to research and analyze compelling facts to back his or her argument. Although I hardly ever agree with him, I’d like to point out that Bill O’Reilly is not an idiot. He has two Master’s degrees (one from Harvard), and over two decades of experience as a journalist with reputable, national broadcasting companies. While you may disagree with his opinions, the way he presents his show, or the topics he choses to address, juvenille name-calling to prove your point does nothing but suggest YOUR “idioce” [sic]. You need evidence to back your arguments. O’Reilly does, but the conclusions he draws are often very different than mine. I wish people would stop making claims about things they have neither researched nor analyzed. It’s like a complete stranger claiming you are an idiot for not knowing how to spell “Fascism.” Before agreeing or disagreeing, a person has the obligation to research and analyze compelling facts to back his or her argument.

]]> By: Bob619 http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-308 Bob619 Fri, 06 Jan 2006 10:29:32 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-308 Anyone else notice that the random postings by the proponents of faschism have declined significantly in the last five years .... they've been replaced with new world order believers that call anyone with a dissent a prop of a liberal media. I have watched O'Reilly, he's an idiot, he has never been fair and balanced, and the changed lyrics in that elementary christmas show, were a part of a 1988 Christmas play written by a Presbyterain Minister to better reflect the sorrow of a chirstmas tree that was going to waste as kindling (stupid plot I know, but maybe thats why its for an elementary school play). Is this really the best evidence of a "WAR" on anything? Iraq is a war, not school plays. P.S. - Thanks to religious zealots backed by O'Reilly's idioce, the play was ruined as kids were "FORCED" to sing silent night as well as other more pro-christian hyms, in the middle of a play about a damn tree. Anyone else notice that the random postings by the proponents of faschism have declined significantly in the last five years …. they’ve been replaced with new world order believers that call anyone with a dissent a prop of a liberal media. I have watched O’Reilly, he’s an idiot, he has never been fair and balanced, and the changed lyrics in that elementary christmas show, were a part of a 1988 Christmas play written by a Presbyterain Minister to better reflect the sorrow of a chirstmas tree that was going to waste as kindling (stupid plot I know, but maybe thats why its for an elementary school play). Is this really the best evidence of a “WAR” on anything? Iraq is a war, not school plays.
P.S. – Thanks to religious zealots backed by O’Reilly’s idioce, the play was ruined as kids were “FORCED” to sing silent night as well as other more pro-christian hyms, in the middle of a play about a damn tree.

]]> By: BrianOfAtlanta http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-307 BrianOfAtlanta Fri, 06 Jan 2006 03:32:54 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-307 I especially loved Letterman's admission that he had never actually <i>watched</i> O'Reilly. Not that I've ever watched O'Reilly, either, but Letterman came across like a pompous jerk. I especially loved Letterman’s admission that he had never actually watched O’Reilly.

Not that I’ve ever watched O’Reilly, either, but Letterman came across like a pompous jerk.

]]> By: The Disenfranchised Voter http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-306 The Disenfranchised Voter Thu, 05 Jan 2006 19:02:37 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-306 O'Reilly got owned. Though the 60% comment does show Dave's stupidity--the figure is <b>at least</b> 80%. Heh. O’Reilly got owned.

Though the 60% comment does show Dave’s stupidity–the figure is at least 80%.

Heh.

]]> By: DougJ http://themoderatevoice.com/5498/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/comment-page-1/#comment-305 DougJ Thu, 05 Jan 2006 05:41:19 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/2006/01/05/uncategorized/david-letterman-versus-bill-oreilly/#comment-305 Letterman is letting his leftist sympathies show. Why doesn't he get it over with and have Cindy Sheenan join the staff? CBS should have cancelled him and his loony left agit prop years ago. Letterman is letting his leftist sympathies show. Why doesn’t he get it over with and have Cindy Sheenan join the staff? CBS should have cancelled him and his loony left agit prop years ago.

]]>