AURaptor 1,126 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 " I intend to " . Leaves some wiggle room there, if you ask me. He didn't flatly declare " I will, I am, or I defiantly will do that... " , but " I intend to ". Well, we'll see, then. I think he will, but, he IS still a republican so you never know. He might be a brand of Republican ( though the GOP does donate more to the troop s0 , but he's defiantly NOT a conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 " I intend to " . Leaves some wiggle room there, if you ask me. He didn't flatly declare " I will, I am, or I defiantly will do that... " , but " I intend to ". Well, we'll see, then. I think he will, but, he IS still a republican so you never know. He might be a brand of Republican, but he's defiantly NOT a conservative. Nor is his former administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,511 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 " I intend to " . Leaves some wiggle room there, if you ask me. He didn't flatly declare " I will, I am, or I defiantly will do that... " , but " I intend to ". But what about this biased, Left wing reporting by Tim Russert ? Calling McClellan " part of the propaganda " ?? WTF ??? How the hell do you explain the 17 UN resolutions, LIL RUS'?? Where's the call for The Clinton Administration's " propaganda " over the 10 yrs of phony UN inspections?? Why phony ? They'd HAVE to be phony if Saddam and Iraq were 100 % scott free innocent, right ? ******* DUMBA$$ TRAITORS. Talk about Corporate Media! It's the FAR FAR LEFT WING media that's in control of the news here. The George Soros, moveon.org gang. Could you translate this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,126 Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 " I intend to " . Leaves some wiggle room there, if you ask me. He didn't flatly declare " I will, I am, or I defiantly will do that... " , but " I intend to ". But what about this biased, Left wing reporting by Tim Russert ? Calling McClellan " part of the propaganda " ?? WTF ??? How the hell do you explain the 17 UN resolutions, LIL RUS'?? Where's the call for The Clinton Administration's " propaganda " over the 10 yrs of phony UN inspections?? Why phony ? They'd HAVE to be phony if Saddam and Iraq were 100 % scott free innocent, right ? ******* DUMBA$$ TRAITORS. Talk about Corporate Media! It's the FAR FAR LEFT WING media that's in control of the news here. The George Soros, moveon.org gang. Could you translate this? Watch the video, read my words. Not much to translate. It's all right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 But what about this biased, Left wing reporting by Tim Russert ? Calling McClellan " part of the propaganda " ?? WTF ??? How the hell do you explain the 17 UN resolutions, LIL RUS'?? Where's the call for The Clinton Administration's " propaganda " over the 10 yrs of phony UN inspections?? Why phony ? They'd HAVE to be phony if Saddam and Iraq were 100 % scott free innocent, right ? ******* DUMBA$$ TRAITORS. Talk about Corporate Media! It's the FAR FAR LEFT WING media that's in control of the news here. The George Soros, moveon.org gang. Stop the madness, Raptor. Really. Stop the madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnaldoabru 11 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 But what about this biased, Left wing reporting by Tim Russert ? Calling McClellan " part of the propaganda " ?? WTF ??? How the hell do you explain the 17 UN resolutions, LIL RUS'?? Where's the call for The Clinton Administration's " propaganda " over the 10 yrs of phony UN inspections?? Why phony ? They'd HAVE to be phony if Saddam and Iraq were 100 % scott free innocent, right ? ******* DUMBA$$ TRAITORS. Talk about Corporate Media! It's the FAR FAR LEFT WING media that's in control of the news here. The George Soros, moveon.org gang. Stop the madness, Raptor. Really. Stop the madness. This guy gets on to my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 McClellan is on O'Reilly tonight I think. McClellan held his own. O'reilly was terrible. He asked one or two questions about the book. The rest of the time was spent badgering in his usual manner; ask a leading question, interrupt during the first sentence with another leading question, interrupt again, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,492 Posted June 3, 2008 Author Share Posted June 3, 2008 McClellan is on O'Reilly tonight I think. McClellan held his own. O'reilly was terrible. He asked one or two questions about the book. The rest of the time was spent badgering in his usual manner; ask a leading question, interrupt during the first sentence with another leading question, interrupt again, etc. Believe it or not, I really used to like O'Reilly. But his past few big interviews have been worse than terrible. Just really really bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnaldoabru 11 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 McClellan is on O'Reilly tonight I think. McClellan held his own. O'reilly was terrible. He asked one or two questions about the book. The rest of the time was spent badgering in his usual manner; ask a leading question, interrupt during the first sentence with another leading question, interrupt again, etc. Believe it or not, I really used to like O'Reilly. But his past few big interviews have been worse than terrible. Just really really bad. Why did O'Reilly spend 30 minutes shouting at the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 McClellan is on O'Reilly tonight I think. McClellan held his own. O'reilly was terrible. He asked one or two questions about the book. The rest of the time was spent badgering in his usual manner; ask a leading question, interrupt during the first sentence with another leading question, interrupt again, etc. O'Reilly is ok at times to me, annoying at others. Like most talk guys he is full of himself and I can definitely take him or leave him. I thought the parts of the interview I watched were very fair. He did interrupt some and let mclellan interrupt some as well. I thought both sides presented their case well. Still think mclellan is a backstabbing loser who is full of it. Wants to change the world blah blah blah my a$$. O'Reilly did nail him on one point about the book which i have already mentioned here. It is mostly opinion and supposition. To me that is what makes it such a backstab/sour grapes/whatever sort of thing. Most of the interview was about the book or about subjects contained in the book. O'Reilly catches a lot of flak for his style which to me is bs. It's his freaking show and no one has to go on there. Those who do know what they are in for and get a chance to state their case and go toe to toe with him. He may have a slight edge but it is his show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 3, 2008 Share Posted June 3, 2008 It is mostly opinion and supposition. To me that is what makes it such a backstab/sour grapes/whatever sort of thing. Other than that, does it read pretty well? Are the transitions from Iraq to Plame to Katrina pretty smooth or does he present it differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 It is mostly opinion and supposition. To me that is what makes it such a backstab/sour grapes/whatever sort of thing. Other than that, does it read pretty well? Are the transitions from Iraq to Plame to Katrina pretty smooth or does he present it differently? tiger88? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 It is mostly opinion and supposition. To me that is what makes it such a backstab/sour grapes/whatever sort of thing. Other than that, does it read pretty well? Are the transitions from Iraq to Plame to Katrina pretty smooth or does he present it differently? tiger88? Have been away for a day or two. Haven't read the book and have no need to. Have read several direct quotes from it that were full of some of the zingers used to generate buzz and that is what I am referring to. Also watched a good bit of the interview on O'Reilly. The guy is following in his dads footsteps with this book. I'm sure he planned it all along. Keeping his mouth shut so he could drop the big "bombshell" he knew was coming. The opinion/supposition in it is disgusting to me. Disgusting in a minimal sort of way. Someone like this isn't really worth getting upset about and that is evident by the minimal buzz that has come around since the initial burst from the release of the book. You go ahead and read away and keep that anti-bush stiffie up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Haven't read the book... Thanks. That's all I needed to know. Usually when someone critiques a book, it lends a bit of credibility to have actually READ it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger88 934 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Haven't read the book... Thanks. That's all I needed to know. Usually when someone critiques a book, it lends a bit of credibility to have actually READ it. Actually, you need to know a lot more. Good luck with that. The book is like a movie with bad trailers for me. I have more accurately criticized the snippets of the book that I have read which as stated are full of opinion and supposition. So you just read away and keep the tissues handy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.