This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me
goosebumps watching loudmouth O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Cheers!
Marvie
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
.
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
23 Sep 2005 05:32:30 PM |
|
|
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvin@galaxy.com> wrote in message
news:1127473673.abb7098471c282f2a6ed134c8258a287@teranews...
This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me goosebumps watching loudmouth
O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Two acted headless chickens flailing about in front of the camera would've been more entertaining.
They certainly deserve each other. I'd rather be subjected to an hour of chinese water torture than
45 seconds (which is how long it lasted on my set) of that clusterfuck. Kudos to you if you made it
through the entire segment.
Cheers!
Marvie
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 01:57:38 PM |
|
|
"dreamwalker" <backfromthe@dead.com> wrote in message
news:e6add$43348285$407628fa$25602@powerweb.allthenewsgroups.com...
"Marvin The Paranoid Android" <marvin@galaxy.com> wrote in message
news:1127473673.abb7098471c282f2a6ed134c8258a287@teranews...
This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me
goosebumps watching loudmouth
O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Two acted headless chickens flailing about in front of the camera would've
been more entertaining.
They certainly deserve each other. I'd rather be subjected to an hour of
chinese water torture than
45 seconds (which is how long it lasted on my set) of that clusterfuck.
Kudos to you if you made it
through the entire segment.
Possibly the only time I'll come close to agreeing with you...
Cheers!
Marvie
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 12:47:22 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me
goosebumps watching loudmouth O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Cheers!
Marvie
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
Ah yes...saw your post during the week Marv but had to wait until I
came home to see what you meant. Yep just looked at it. O' Reilly got
the ***** kicked right outa him. What a wanker. O'reilly is a fuckin'
dope if ever there was one. Some of my mates in the south of Sweden
have actually said, long before this of course, that they'de love to
have o' reilly come to Malm=F6 and sit at Sir Toby's, our local, and
debate with us. We'de wipe the fuckin' floor with the stupid *****.
He's such a *****!
WH
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
23 Sep 2005 02:29:34 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me
goosebumps watching loudmouth O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Cheers!
Marvie
Uh ... *do* watch this if you've got hi-speed access to the internet. It
is worth it.
I've never seen O'Reilly prior to this. He's a *very* poor
representative for the rightwing cause, without a doubt, and I'm pretty
sure most of the posters here of that political leaning will agree. He's
condescending, yells and shouts to try and intimidate guests, points and
jabs repeatedly with his finger while yelling and is generally just an
all-around *****.
Why he chose Phil Donahue to try and intimidate is beyond me. Donahue
brings an almost literal meaning to the phrase 'ripping an opponent a
new *****'.
In the end he even has O'Reilly stating 'The Iraq War is not something I
embrace. It absolutely could be a tactical error.'
This clip is highly recommended. O'Reilly apparently went on air today
to try and respin the live broadcast. It is that good.
For those without hi-speed, here's the transcript.
Cheers!
------------------------------
O'REILLY: In the past Miss [Cindy] Sheehan has criticized Israel, saying
it is occupying Palestine, has called Iraqi insurgents "freedom
fighters," has accused Americans of killing people ever since we stepped
on this continent, has threatened Hillary Clinton with the loss her job
unless she calls for a pullout of US troops from Iraq and has called the
US action against Afghanistan a failure. Quite a resume and with us now
is Phil Donahue, who supports Miss Sheehan's "dissent."
So, I'm assuming you don't - you don't support all her positions that I
just chronicled.
DONAHUE: Let's understand what's happening here. Once again we have a
woman who got to be just a little too famous for the people who support
this war, a minority of the American population, by the way, and so the
effort to marginalize this woman is underway and you're helping out.
O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!
DONAHUE: You're suggesting ...
O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!
DONAHUE: First of all, Cindy Sheehan is one tough mother and nothing you
say or anyone else is gonna slow her down.
O'REILLY: That's fine. She has a right to ...
DONAHUE: You can't hurt her. She's already taken the biggest punch in
the nose that a woman can take.
O'REILLY: How?!
DONAHUE: She lost a son.
O'REILLY: Oh. OK.
DONAHUE: She's lost a child.
O'REILLY: But look - I'm not puttin' words in her mouth ...
DONAHUE: And by the way, she is going to be at the center of one of the
largest rallies since the Vietnam War. Proud, patriotic Americans who
will show up in Washington this week for one of the most massive,
largest demonstrations - protest demonstrations ...
O'REILLY: OK. And we'll cover it.
DONAHUE: ... right outside the President's window.
O'REILLY: And we'll cover it.
DONAHUE: And FOX is in the business of saying that this woman is somehow
saying un-American things - hyperbole.
O'REILLY (getting angry): No. No. No. No.
DONAHUE: Listen to what she's saying.
O'REILLY (checking his notes): Nobody said she said anything
un-American. We say that her positions are radical. And they are radical!
DONAHUE: Let me tell you what's radical. (getting a little angry
himself) What's radical is to send more Americans to die in this war,
which is a monumental blunder by a President ...
O'REILLY (under his breath): Alright.
DONAHUE: ... who swaggered us into it with - by the way - the at least
tacit approval of the Democratic Party.
O'REILLY (shifts in his chair, upset): You know what's radical ...
DONAHUE: There's a lot of sin to go around here!
O'REILLY (angry, wags finger at Donahue): What's radical for this -
DONAHUE (won't let O'Reilly finish sentence): Do you want to send more
people to this war?
O'REILY: Hey listen ...
DONAHUE: Is that your postiion?
O'REILLY: If we cut and run outta there, like you wanna do, we would be
putting every American in a thousand times more jeopardy than they're in
now.
DONAHUE (forcefully): We're going to cut and run anyway, Bill.
O'REILLY: Well, that's your opinion. I don't think we are.
DONAHUE: It's not my opinion. American military leaders have said we're
gonna draw down beginning next year. The reason they've said that ...
O'REILLY(angry now): There's a difference between drawin' down and
cuttin' and runnin'!
DONAHUE: Alright....
O'REILLY (angry, jabs finger at Donahue): You're a cut and run guy and I
don't want my family in danger because of you ...
DONAHUE: You wanna stay the course, don't ya'?
O'REILLY: Look.
DONAHUE: You don't ...
O'REILLY (getting angrier): Here's what I want to do. I want to give the
Iraqis a chance to train their army so they can defeat these people who
are tryin' to turn it into a terror state.
DONAHUE (calmly): Bill
O'REILLY: That's what I want to do! Go!
DONAHUE: Bill. This - Iraq was not a terrorist state.
O'REILLY (exasperated): Oh, no!
DONAHUE: I hope I don't patronize you for saying ...
O'REILLY (dismissive hand gesture) : Saddam was a swell guy!!
DONAUME: Saddam ...
O'REILLY (loudly, sarcastically): He was just a great guy!!
DONAHUE (louder): Saddam - Saddam was a *****, but he was our *****!!
O'REILLY: He wasn't anybody's ...
DONAHUE: Donald Rumsfeld shook his hand in the 80s.
O'REILLY: Alright. Well that's great.
DONAHUE: You saw the pictures! (reasonable tone of voice) Now listen -
listen. You wouldn't send your children to this war, Bill.
O'REILLY (very angry, pointing): My nephew just enlisted in the Army.
You don't know what the hell you're talkin' about!!!
DONAHUE: Very good. Very good. Congratulations! You should be proud ..
O'REILLY (starts to lose it, shouting, pointing finger, hand shaking):
And he's a patriot, so don't denigrate his service or I'll boot you
right off the set!!!
DONAHUE: I'm not ... I'm not ...
O'REILLY (very, very loud): That boy made a decision to serve his
country!!! Do not denigrate him or you're outta here!!!
DONAHUE (calmly): I'm not Jeremy Glick, Billy.
O'REILLY: That's right!!
DONAHUE: You can't intimidate me!!
O'REILLY: You're a little bit more intelligent that he is!!
DONAHUE: I'm not somebody you can come and just spew all your ...
O'REILLY: Don't tell me I wouldn't send my kids.
DONAHUE: Loud doesn't mean right!
O'REILLY: My nephew just enlisted. You don't know what you're talkin'
about!!
DONAHUE: Your nephew is not your kid. You are like ...
O'REILLY: He's my blood!
DONAHUE: You are part of a loud group of people who wanna prove they're
tough ...
O'REILLY (shifts angrily in his chair, under his breath): Aw fer ...
DONAHUE: ... and send other people's kids to war to make the case.
O'REILLY (very loud): You have no clue ...
DONAHUE: This ..
O'REILLY: ... about how to fight a war on terror or how to defend your
country. You are clueless! So is Miss Sheehan and for Miss Sheehan to
say that the insurgents have a right to kill Americans and you're
shakin' her hand! You oughta just walk away.
DONHUE (quieter): How many more young men and women are you gonna send
to have their arms and legs blown off ...
O'REILY: Hey, this is a war on terror!
DONAHUE: ... so that you can be tough (points his finger at O'Reilly)
and point at people in a kind of cowardly way..
O'REILLY (disgusted, under his breath): Oh, yeah.
DONHUE: Take people like Jeremy Glick who comes on to - in memory of his
parents ...
O'REILLY: Oh bull.
DONAHUE: ... and you go off on him.
O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick accu ...
DONAHUE: ... like a big bully.
O'REILLY: Hey!
DOAHUE: Billy, you hafta be - you hafta feel sorry ...
O'REILLY: Mr. Donahue, with all due respect ...
DONAHUE: Have you apologized to him for that?
O'REILLY: Baloney!
DONAHUE: Do you know ...
O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick came on this program ...
DONAHUE: Do you know what I'm talking about?
O'REILLY: ... and accused the President of the United States ...
DONAHUE (sarcastically): Oh, and you had to ..
O'REILLY: ... of orchestrating 9/11. That's what he did. Right after
9/11!! Do you know what the pain that brought the families who lost
people in 9/11?
DONAHUE: This war ...
O'REILLY: You buy into left-wing propaganda ...
DONAHUE: This war ..
O'REILLY: ... and you're a mouthpiece for it. (shifts in seat, clenched
mouth) Go ahead.
DONAHUE: This war is not fair to the American troops. This war is
unconstitutional. This war turned its back on the people who framed the
most fabulous document in the history of civilization. I speak of the
United States Constitution.
O'REILLY: Alright. Why ...
DONAHUE: This ... By the way ...
O'REILLY: Why isn't the Democratic party speaking that way?
DONAHUE: I'm sorry that it isn't. I am. But let's understand something ...
O'REILLY: Are we all ...
DONAHUE: Excuse me.
O'REILLY: Are well so misguided ...
DONAHUE: Excuse me. Twenty-one Democrats in the Senate voted against
this war as well as Jeffords, an Independent, and- may the Lord shine
His blessings down upon Lincoln Chaffee ...
O'REILLY: Alright. I'm gonna say something and I'm gonna ...
DONAHUE (louder, refuses to be stopped): I'm almost finished, Billy!!
O'REILLY: I'm gonna give ya' the last word.
DONAHUE: I'm almost finished!
O'REILLY: Alright.
DONAHUE: Lincoln Chaffee, the only Republican in the Senate to vote
against this war. We should be building statues to all these people.
October 2002 ...
O'REILLY: Alright;
DONAHUE: ... they stood up to as President and they knew that, first of
all, only Congress can declare war. Why is that unimportant to you, Billy?
O'REILLY: Listen. It's not - I'm not ...
DONAHUE: Become the patriot that your loud voice proclaims you to be ...
O'REILLY: The loud voice ...
DONAHUE: ... and stand behind the Constitution and insist that we never
go to war again without the approval and the consent of the United
States Congress.
O'REILLY: Alright . That's why we have the Congress. If they want to
take action, they can take action. Now I'm gonna say somethin' then I'll
give you the last word. The Iraq War is not something I embrace.
DONAHUE makes surprised sound.
O'REILLY: It absolutely could be a tactical error.
DONAHUE: Well you should ...
O'REILLY (louder): Just listen.
DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.
O'REILLY (louder): Listen ta' me ..
DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.
O'REILLY: ... and I'll give you the last word. Not something they
embrace. Could be a tactical error and we have not waged it the way I
had hoped we would wage it.
DONAHUE: But, what?
O'REILLY: But ,,,
DONAHUE: You want to send more kids ...
O'REILLY: The war on terror ...
DONAHUE: ... to die.
O'REILLY: We're in a war on terror. Our cause is noble.
DONAHUE: It has nothing to do with the war on terror.
O'REILLY (louder again): Yes, it does. And if you don't understand
geopolitics, if you don't understand Iraq would be a terrorist state if
we pulled outta there...
DONAHUE (loudly): It's a mistake.
O'REILLY: ... then you don't know anything. Go ahead.
DONAHUE: It was poorly planned ...
O'REILLY: Go ahead.
DONAHUE: ... and poorly executed but Bill O'Reilly wants to send more
kids to fight and die. We've already had two thou - almost thousand -
(gestures for O'Reilly to hold off) - just let me have the last word. In
the last year two things have doubled. The number of dead American
troops in Iraq has doubled and you know what else doubled, Billy? The
price of Halliburton stock.
O'REILLY (upset): Alright.
DONAHUE: From $33 to $66. That doesn't shame you? That doesn't make you
wonder ...
O'REILLY: I'm not upset by Halliburton stock.
DONAHUE: ... whether this is an enterprise that is worth the support of
the American people. We need you at this rally on Saturday, Billy..
O'REILLY: OK. I'm not gonna be at your rally.
DONAHUE: We need you out there in front of it to protest.
O'REILLY: I'm not gonna be at your rally.
DONAHUE: There is no democracy without dissent.
O'REILLY: I'm not gonna protest.
DONHUE: You should be proud of people who stand up and dissent.
O'REILLY: I am. I respect your ...
DONAHUE: A lot of fine men died to give me that freedom.
O'REILLY: You got. You got it. I respect your dissent. I think you're
way off in your analysis of the war on terror.
DONAHUE: You want to send more people to die? Is that your position?
O'REILLY: I wanna win the war in Iraq.
DONABHUE: Win. What does "win" mean?
O'REILLY: Means ...
DONAHUE: Tell me what "win" means?
O'REILLY: Means those people have a chance at democracy.
DOPNAHUE: How long's that gonna take.
O'REILLY: I gotta go. I gotta go.
DONAHUE: How long's that gonna take?
O'REILLY: Those people deserve a chance at freedom.
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
23 Sep 2005 10:18:36 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
This is really devastating and it's great to watch ... gave me
goosebumps watching loudmouth O'Reilly get shouted down.
*Well* worth the watch and download (it's approx 9 Mbyte file).
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055
Cheers!
Marvie
Uh ... *do* watch this if you've got hi-speed access to the internet. It
is worth it.
I've never seen O'Reilly prior to this. He's a *very* poor
representative for the rightwing cause, without a doubt, and I'm pretty
sure most of the posters here of that political leaning will agree. He's
condescending, yells and shouts to try and intimidate guests, points and
jabs repeatedly with his finger while yelling and is generally just an
all-around *****.
Why he chose Phil Donahue to try and intimidate is beyond me. Donahue
brings an almost literal meaning to the phrase 'ripping an opponent a
new *****'.
In the end he even has O'Reilly stating 'The Iraq War is not something I
embrace. It absolutely could be a tactical error.'
This clip is highly recommended. O'Reilly apparently went on air today
to try and respin the live broadcast. It is that good.
For those without hi-speed, here's the transcript.
Cheers!
------------------------------
O'REILLY: In the past Miss [Cindy] Sheehan has criticized Israel, saying
it is occupying Palestine, has called Iraqi insurgents "freedom
fighters," has accused Americans of killing people ever since we stepped
on this continent, has threatened Hillary Clinton with the loss her job
unless she calls for a pullout of US troops from Iraq and has called the
US action against Afghanistan a failure. Quite a resume and with us now
is Phil Donahue, who supports Miss Sheehan's "dissent."
So, I'm assuming you don't - you don't support all her positions that I
just chronicled.
DONAHUE: Let's understand what's happening here. Once again we have a
woman who got to be just a little too famous for the people who support
this war, a minority of the American population, by the way, and so the
effort to marginalize this woman is underway and you're helping out.
O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!
DONAHUE: You're suggesting ...
O'REILLY: I'm the leader of the pack!
DONAHUE: First of all, Cindy Sheehan is one tough mother and nothing you
say or anyone else is gonna slow her down.
O'REILLY: That's fine. She has a right to ...
DONAHUE: You can't hurt her. She's already taken the biggest punch in
the nose that a woman can take.
O'REILLY: How?!
DONAHUE: She lost a son.
O'REILLY: Oh. OK.
DONAHUE: She's lost a child.
O'REILLY: But look - I'm not puttin' words in her mouth ...
DONAHUE: And by the way, she is going to be at the center of one of the
largest rallies since the Vietnam War. Proud, patriotic Americans who
will show up in Washington this week for one of the most massive,
largest demonstrations - protest demonstrations ...
O'REILLY: OK. And we'll cover it.
DONAHUE: ... right outside the President's window.
O'REILLY: And we'll cover it.
DONAHUE: And FOX is in the business of saying that this woman is somehow
saying un-American things - hyperbole.
O'REILLY (getting angry): No. No. No. No.
DONAHUE: Listen to what she's saying.
O'REILLY (checking his notes): Nobody said she said anything
un-American. We say that her positions are radical. And they are radical!
DONAHUE: Let me tell you what's radical. (getting a little angry
himself) What's radical is to send more Americans to die in this war,
which is a monumental blunder by a President ...
O'REILLY (under his breath): Alright.
DONAHUE: ... who swaggered us into it with - by the way - the at least
tacit approval of the Democratic Party.
O'REILLY (shifts in his chair, upset): You know what's radical ...
DONAHUE: There's a lot of sin to go around here!
O'REILLY (angry, wags finger at Donahue): What's radical for this -
DONAHUE (won't let O'Reilly finish sentence): Do you want to send more
people to this war?
O'REILY: Hey listen ...
DONAHUE: Is that your postiion?
O'REILLY: If we cut and run outta there, like you wanna do, we would be
putting every American in a thousand times more jeopardy than they're in
now.
DONAHUE (forcefully): We're going to cut and run anyway, Bill.
O'REILLY: Well, that's your opinion. I don't think we are.
DONAHUE: It's not my opinion. American military leaders have said we're
gonna draw down beginning next year. The reason they've said that ...
O'REILLY(angry now): There's a difference between drawin' down and
cuttin' and runnin'!
DONAHUE: Alright....
O'REILLY (angry, jabs finger at Donahue): You're a cut and run guy and I
don't want my family in danger because of you ...
DONAHUE: You wanna stay the course, don't ya'?
O'REILLY: Look.
DONAHUE: You don't ...
O'REILLY (getting angrier): Here's what I want to do. I want to give the
Iraqis a chance to train their army so they can defeat these people who
are tryin' to turn it into a terror state.
DONAHUE (calmly): Bill
O'REILLY: That's what I want to do! Go!
DONAHUE: Bill. This - Iraq was not a terrorist state.
O'REILLY (exasperated): Oh, no!
DONAHUE: I hope I don't patronize you for saying ...
O'REILLY (dismissive hand gesture) : Saddam was a swell guy!!
DONAUME: Saddam ...
O'REILLY (loudly, sarcastically): He was just a great guy!!
DONAHUE (louder): Saddam - Saddam was a *****, but he was our *****!!
O'REILLY: He wasn't anybody's ...
DONAHUE: Donald Rumsfeld shook his hand in the 80s.
O'REILLY: Alright. Well that's great.
DONAHUE: You saw the pictures! (reasonable tone of voice) Now listen -
listen. You wouldn't send your children to this war, Bill.
O'REILLY (very angry, pointing): My nephew just enlisted in the Army.
You don't know what the hell you're talkin' about!!!
DONAHUE: Very good. Very good. Congratulations! You should be proud ..
O'REILLY (starts to lose it, shouting, pointing finger, hand shaking):
And he's a patriot, so don't denigrate his service or I'll boot you
right off the set!!!
DONAHUE: I'm not ... I'm not ...
O'REILLY (very, very loud): That boy made a decision to serve his
country!!! Do not denigrate him or you're outta here!!!
DONAHUE (calmly): I'm not Jeremy Glick, Billy.
O'REILLY: That's right!!
DONAHUE: You can't intimidate me!!
O'REILLY: You're a little bit more intelligent that he is!!
DONAHUE: I'm not somebody you can come and just spew all your ...
O'REILLY: Don't tell me I wouldn't send my kids.
DONAHUE: Loud doesn't mean right!
O'REILLY: My nephew just enlisted. You don't know what you're talkin'
about!!
DONAHUE: Your nephew is not your kid. You are like ...
O'REILLY: He's my blood!
DONAHUE: You are part of a loud group of people who wanna prove they're
tough ...
O'REILLY (shifts angrily in his chair, under his breath): Aw fer ...
DONAHUE: ... and send other people's kids to war to make the case.
O'REILLY (very loud): You have no clue ...
DONAHUE: This ..
O'REILLY: ... about how to fight a war on terror or how to defend your
country. You are clueless! So is Miss Sheehan and for Miss Sheehan to
say that the insurgents have a right to kill Americans and you're
shakin' her hand! You oughta just walk away.
DONHUE (quieter): How many more young men and women are you gonna send
to have their arms and legs blown off ...
O'REILY: Hey, this is a war on terror!
DONAHUE: ... so that you can be tough (points his finger at O'Reilly)
and point at people in a kind of cowardly way..
O'REILLY (disgusted, under his breath): Oh, yeah.
DONHUE: Take people like Jeremy Glick who comes on to - in memory of his
parents ...
O'REILLY: Oh bull.
DONAHUE: ... and you go off on him.
O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick accu ...
DONAHUE: ... like a big bully.
O'REILLY: Hey!
DOAHUE: Billy, you hafta be - you hafta feel sorry ...
O'REILLY: Mr. Donahue, with all due respect ...
DONAHUE: Have you apologized to him for that?
O'REILLY: Baloney!
DONAHUE: Do you know ...
O'REILLY: Jeremy Glick came on this program ...
DONAHUE: Do you know what I'm talking about?
O'REILLY: ... and accused the President of the United States ...
DONAHUE (sarcastically): Oh, and you had to ..
O'REILLY: ... of orchestrating 9/11. That's what he did. Right after
9/11!! Do you know what the pain that brought the families who lost
people in 9/11?
DONAHUE: This war ...
O'REILLY: You buy into left-wing propaganda ...
DONAHUE: This war ..
O'REILLY: ... and you're a mouthpiece for it. (shifts in seat, clenched
mouth) Go ahead.
DONAHUE: This war is not fair to the American troops. This war is
unconstitutional. This war turned its back on the people who framed the
most fabulous document in the history of civilization. I speak of the
United States Constitution.
O'REILLY: Alright. Why ...
DONAHUE: This ... By the way ...
O'REILLY: Why isn't the Democratic party speaking that way?
DONAHUE: I'm sorry that it isn't. I am. But let's understand something ...
O'REILLY: Are we all ...
DONAHUE: Excuse me.
O'REILLY: Are well so misguided ...
DONAHUE: Excuse me. Twenty-one Democrats in the Senate voted against
this war as well as Jeffords, an Independent, and- may the Lord shine
His blessings down upon Lincoln Chaffee ...
O'REILLY: Alright. I'm gonna say something and I'm gonna ...
DONAHUE (louder, refuses to be stopped): I'm almost finished, Billy!!
O'REILLY: I'm gonna give ya' the last word.
DONAHUE: I'm almost finished!
O'REILLY: Alright.
DONAHUE: Lincoln Chaffee, the only Republican in the Senate to vote
against this war. We should be building statues to all these people.
October 2002 ...
O'REILLY: Alright;
DONAHUE: ... they stood up to as President and they knew that, first of
all, only Congress can declare war. Why is that unimportant to you, Billy?
O'REILLY: Listen. It's not - I'm not ...
DONAHUE: Become the patriot that your loud voice proclaims you to be ...
O'REILLY: The loud voice ...
DONAHUE: ... and stand behind the Constitution and insist that we never
go to war again without the approval and the consent of the United
States Congress.
O'REILLY: Alright . That's why we have the Congress. If they want to
take action, they can take action. Now I'm gonna say somethin' then I'll
give you the last word. The Iraq War is not something I embrace.
DONAHUE makes surprised sound.
O'REILLY: It absolutely could be a tactical error.
DONAHUE: Well you should ...
O'REILLY (louder): Just listen.
DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.
O'REILLY (louder): Listen ta' me ..
DONAHUE: It's hard to know this.
O'REILLY: ... and I'll give you the last word. Not something they
embrace. Could be a tactical error and we have not waged it the way I
had hoped we would wage it.
DONAHUE: But, what?
O'REILLY: But ,,,
DONAHUE: You want to send more kids ...
O'REILLY: The war on terror ...
DONAHUE: ... to die.
O'REILLY: We're in a war on terror. Our cause is noble.
DONAHUE: It has nothing to do with the war on terror.
O'REILLY (louder again): Yes, it does. And if you don't understand
geopolitics, if you don't understand Iraq would be a terrorist state if
we pulled outta there...
DONAHUE (loudly): It's a mistake.
O'REILLY: ... then you don't know anything. Go ahead.
DONAHUE: It was poorly planned ...
O'REILLY: Go ahead.
DONAHUE: ... and poorly executed but Bill O'Reilly wants to send more
kids to fight and die. We've already had two thou - almost thousand -
(gestures for O'Reilly to hold off) - just let me have the last word. In
the last year two things have doubled. The number of dead American
troops in Iraq has doubled and you know what else doubled, Billy? The
price of Halliburton stock.
O'REILLY (upset): Alright.
DONAHUE: From $33 to $66. That doesn't shame you? That doesn't make you
wonder ...
O'REILLY: I'm not upset by Halliburton stock.
DONAHUE: ... whether this is an enterprise that is worth the support of
the American people. We need you at this rally on Saturday, Billy..
O'REILLY: OK. I'm not gonna be at your rally.
DONAHUE: We need you out there in front of it to protest.
O'REILLY: I'm not gonna be at your rally.
DONAHUE: There is no democracy without dissent.
O'REILLY: I'm not gonna protest.
DONHUE: You should be proud of people who stand up and dissent.
O'REILLY: I am. I respect your ...
DONAHUE: A lot of fine men died to give me that freedom.
O'REILLY: You got. You got it. I respect your dissent. I think you're
way off in your analysis of the war on terror.
DONAHUE: You want to send more people to die? Is that your position?
O'REILLY: I wanna win the war in Iraq.
DONABHUE: Win. What does "win" mean?
O'REILLY: Means ...
DONAHUE: Tell me what "win" means?
O'REILLY: Means those people have a chance at democracy.
DOPNAHUE: How long's that gonna take.
O'REILLY: I gotta go. I gotta go.
DONAHUE: How long's that gonna take?
O'REILLY: Those people deserve a chance at freedom.
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members. Must be okay with conservatives to have their
media people do drugs and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 12:34:15 AM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 11:03:34 AM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reilly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. It was
her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded the better
lawyers?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 08:15:47 PM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reilly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. It was
her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded the better
lawyers?
I think he wanted the whole mess put away and out of the limelight.
What bothers me about the woman who filed the lawsuit is why she left
Fox for CNN, and then came back a few months later and sent a friend an
email telling her how happy she was to be home ... the alleged sexual
harassment had supposedly started BEFORE she left Fox, and she
continued to have contact with O'Reilly while she was gone. Then she
voluntarily came back, and went to the trouble of making alleged tape
recordings to use in her alleged extortion attempt ... why didn't she
just stay away from Fox if she was so upset by his words?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 02:39:09 AM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127610947.255072.144150@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer
themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they
both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reilly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. It
was
her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded the
better
lawyers?
I think he wanted the whole mess put away and out of the limelight.
LOL! Does he really seem like the sort of guy that wants to stay out of the
limelight?! He woul have LOVED to have taken her to court and exposed her as
a liar, yet it's fairly obvious that for some reason or another he didn't
feel confident it woudl go his way...
What bothers me about the woman who filed the lawsuit is why she left
Fox for CNN, and then came back a few months later and sent a friend an
email telling her how happy she was to be home ... the alleged sexual
harassment had supposedly started BEFORE she left Fox, and she
continued to have contact with O'Reilly while she was gone.
So you think Bill's a pervert who can't help himself and she was
blackmailing him? Taking advantage of his poor, fallible human weaknesses? A
possibility certainly, but one which sort of contradicts your "how do you
know the allegations are true?" opening gambit.
Then she voluntarily came back, and went to the trouble of making alleged
tape
recordings to use in her alleged extortion attempt ... why didn't she
just stay away from Fox if she was so upset by his words?
Yeah, I mean, why don't rape victims just stay at home, if getting raped is
such a horrible experience for them?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 10:57:16 AM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127610947.255072.144150@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reilly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. It
was her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded
the better lawyers?
I think he wanted the whole mess put away and out of the limelight.
LOL! Does he really seem like the sort of guy that wants to stay out of the
limelight?!
I said he wanted the "whole mess" out of the limelight. Actually, it
appears his ratings went up as a result of the "whole mess" (at the
point where it stopped), but it might have hurt him to have all those
allegations flying around in court and the media.
He woul have LOVED to have taken her to court and exposed her as
a liar, yet it's fairly obvious that for some reason or another he didn't
feel confident it woudl go his way...
I think he had a chance to prevail, because of what I wrote below:
What bothers me about the woman who filed the lawsuit is why she left
Fox for CNN, and then came back a few months later and sent a friend an
email telling her how happy she was to be home ... the alleged sexual
harassment had supposedly started BEFORE she left Fox, and she
continued to have contact with O'Reilly while she was gone.
So you think Bill's a pervert who can't help himself and she was
blackmailing him? Taking advantage of his poor, fallible human weaknesses? A
possibility certainly, but one which sort of contradicts your "how do you
know the allegations are true?" opening gambit.
I'm not a big O'Reilly fan by any means, and I didn't bother to follow
this situation closely while it was happening. I think he did a pretty
good job of putting the "whole mess" away without much damage to his
public profile. Now that I've looked into this more than I ever wanted
to, there probably was something going on between them -- WORDS going
on between them -- and she never complained, apparently did not tell
him to stop, came back to work for him after having left (and kept in
contact with him while she was gone), then apparently continued to
welcome his phone calls instead of hanging up or telling him to stop --
and in welcoming his phone calls, allowed herself the opportunity to
make the alleged tape recordings so that she could use them in her
attempt to extract large amounts of dollars from him.
Then she voluntarily came back, and went to the trouble of making alleged
tape recordings to use in her alleged extortion attempt ... why didn't she
just stay away from Fox if she was so upset by his words?
Yeah, I mean, why don't rape victims just stay at home, if getting raped is
such a horrible experience for them?
WORDS, not rape. She was not raped. She was not even touched. She
apparently listened to WORDS, and never complained to anyone.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 12:11:33 PM |
|
|
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127610947.255072.144150@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reilly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. It was
her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded the better
lawyers?
I think he wanted the whole mess put away and out of the limelight.
What bothers me about the woman who filed the lawsuit is why she left
Fox for CNN, and then came back a few months later and sent a friend an
email telling her how happy she was to be home ... the alleged sexual
harassment had supposedly started BEFORE she left Fox, and she
continued to have contact with O'Reilly while she was gone. Then she
voluntarily came back, and went to the trouble of making alleged tape
recordings to use in her alleged extortion attempt ... why didn't she
just stay away from Fox if she was so upset by his words?
She set him up. The phone calls and harrasment began before she left Fox. She came back to get proof
by tape recording. They're both slime. Either way, no actual tapes surfaced. Solid proof like a
stained blue dress. I find it rather amusing how liberals indirectly compare O'Reilly to Clinton. I
guess they feel a president should be held only to the same moral standards as those of a whacked
entertainer.
I did enjoy O'Reilly's interview with George Gallaway. More or less a battle of the assholes. He
chopped up George into little pieces.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 01:59:29 PM |
|
|
They may both be slime but I certainly believe there are tapes since
there's no way Mackriss could have been that detailed in her transcript
of their conversations.
And releasing the tapes at this point would not be detrimental to her
receiving any money from the agreement. They're probably locked up in a
safe at her attorney's office - a nice bit of evidence that'll keep
O'Reilly at bay from harassing her or talking about it further.
And the reason it's so fun to watch Donahue/O'Reilly debates is because
it's like two animals, thrown in a cage, trying to devour each other
with words and gestures.
Otherwise we'd be discussin Stutterin Greta.
grav
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 03:04:18 PM |
|
|
wrote:
They may both be slime but I certainly believe there are tapes since
there's no way Mackriss could have been that detailed in her transcript
of their conversations.
And releasing the tapes at this point would not be detrimental to her
receiving any money from the agreement. They're probably locked up in a
safe at her attorney's office - a nice bit of evidence that'll keep
O'Reilly at bay from harassing her or talking about it further.
I would imagine that there would be some kind of verbiage written into
the contract that would preclude her from publishing her evidence - so
long as O'Reilly leaves her alone. In such a case, she would
essentially lose all rights to the settlement to which she agreed, and
she could be sued for breach of contract.
Woods
And the reason it's so fun to watch Donahue/O'Reilly debates is because
it's like two animals, thrown in a cage, trying to devour each other
with words and gestures.
Otherwise we'd be discussin Stutterin Greta.
grav
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 08:58:54 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127610947.255072.144150@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Tom wrote:
"Steven Douglas" <dsteven@flashmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127540055.821308.55200@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die =
so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer thems=
elves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they b=
oth
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual?
Well there must have been a few facts in it, judging by the way O'Reil=
ly
behaved.. filing a counter suit then agreeing to settle out of court?!
Fishy...If , as you say, he had no prior behaviour in a similar vein, =
he
could have EASILY taken her to court and squashed her like cockroach. =
It was
her word against his, and who do you think could have afforded the be=
tter
lawyers?
I think he wanted the whole mess put away and out of the limelight.
What bothers me about the woman who filed the lawsuit is why she left
Fox for CNN, and then came back a few months later and sent a friend an
email telling her how happy she was to be home ... the alleged sexual
harassment had supposedly started BEFORE she left Fox, and she
continued to have contact with O'Reilly while she was gone. Then she
voluntarily came back, and went to the trouble of making alleged tape
recordings to use in her alleged extortion attempt ... why didn't she
just stay away from Fox if she was so upset by his words?
She set him up.
Yes, and I believe if it had gone to trial, an impartial jury would
have come to that conclusion.
The phone calls and harrasment began before she left Fox. She came
back to get proof by tape recording.
And by consciously doing that, she had made his calls welcome rather
than unwelcome. I believe O'Reilly could have won that case, but it
would have been too costly for his public image. So he handled it the
best way he could under the circumstances.
Here's an excerpt, written before the settlement, by a columnist who
doesn't like O'Reilly:
From the Washington Post
The Nonsense Factor, by Richard Cohen
Thursday, October 21, 2004
[excerpt] Still, she did not fear him so much that, after she had left
O'Reilly's Fox News Channel show and gone to work at CNN, she wouldn't
go to dinner with him. This happened after repeated episodes of the
rawest sexual harassment, Mackris says. Yet, on April 13, 2004,
"Defendant Bill O'Reilly asked Plaintiff Andrea Mackris to come watch
the President's press conference on the television in his hotel room,"
Mackris's lawsuit says. And how did she respond? Mind you, she wasn't
even working for O'Reilly at the time. She said, sure -- and went to
the hotel room. "They watched the press conference without incident,"
the lawsuit says, and later Mackris returned to Fox and O'Reilly's show
.. . . for more money.
In fact, in her telling of the tale, she got both a choice assignment
and a salary increase because she was the object of O'Reilly's sexual
fantasies. She is saying that a quid pro quo existed. It was not merely
her manifest talents as a booker that won her that raise and that
choice assignment.
Let us dispense with the boilerplate denunciation of O'Reilly as an
alleged pig and even more boilerplate about him being the all-powerful
man and Mackris being the totally powerless woman. All of that could be
true. It also seems true, though, that Mackris either skipped classes
in common sense when she was at Columbia University's Graduate School
of Journalism or was playing O'Reilly like the proverbial violin.
Whether Mackris was aware of her power is impossible for me to say. But
I can say that she never went to Fox's human resources department to
complain about O'Reilly. She never seemed to realize that by not
complaining and, more specifically, by going to dinner with him, to his
hotel room and then, upon returning to Fox News, accepting assignments
and a salary increase not given to others, she was hardly telling
O'Reilly that she found his behavior thoroughly repugnant, as she says
in her lawsuit. I almost pity O'Reilly. Off camera, he must be a bit
slow.
Initially, I gleefully read about O'Reilly's troubles because, among
other things, the man has taken my name in vain -- and inaccurately.
But it was a young female television producer who suggested I write
about this because, if I may paraphrase, lawsuits such as Mackris's
infantilize women. They portray women totally as victims, without
recourse or remedy at their disposal. It insults common sense. It
rewrites nature.
I can understand the rage of women subjected to the sort of sewer
O'Reilly allegedly opened up on Mackris. If he did it, it is wrong --
just plain wrong. But it is also wrong for a woman to be even a bit
complicit and then act as if she played no role whatsoever in the
oldest game known to mankind. [end excerpt]
=A9 2004 The Washington Post Company
Read the complete article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50050-2004Oct20.html?sub=3DAR
They're both slime. Either way, no actual tapes surfaced. Solid proof lik=
e a
stained blue dress. I find it rather amusing how liberals indirectly comp=
are O'Reilly to Clinton. I
guess they feel a president should be held only to the same moral standar=
ds as those of a whacked
entertainer.
One difference is that there was a pattern of behavior with Clinton. Of
course he was easily excused by the same people who'd love to humiliate
O'Reilly. I don't know why they bother with the guy. I wonder why these
people allow him to dominate a single waking moment?
I did enjoy O'Reilly's interview with George Gallaway. More or less a bat=
tle of the assholes. He
chopped up George into little pieces.
O'Reilly does have his positive moments.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin The Paranoid Android" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 03:30:23 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
He settled out of court.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7578-2004Oct28.html
O'Reilly's an *****. Just my humble opinion, but if you bother to
watch the creep in action, I'm sure you conclude the same.
Cheers!
--
The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely.
-Carl Jung
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 08:02:26 PM |
|
|
Marvin The Paranoid Android wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
He settled out of court.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7578-2004Oct28.html
O'Reilly's an *****.
So is Donahue. Actually, they're very much alike.
Just my humble opinion, but if you bother to watch the creep in
action, I'm sure you conclude the same.
I don't particularly like him, and I very rarely watch him on
television, but I do hear him occasionally on the radio. I actually
heard about the Donahue debate while listening to another talk radio
show, which played clips from the debate. So then I listened to
O'Reilly talk about it on the radio.
Cheers!
Cheers!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 09:23:21 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
No, but *I* do when I'm poking fun at hypocritical morons & their
equally moronic audience.
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
O'Reilly & Fox settled just before the case went to court, for lots of
money. If there was no case, they wouldn't have settled, as they
certainly have the money to pay for the attorneys to keep Fox &
O'Reilly's name clear. O'Reilly dropped *everything* once it came out
that she had tapes of his converstations.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
Limbaugh had absolutely no compassion or mercy for addicts, so he gets none.
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
Sucks to be you, I guess.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
24 Sep 2005 08:11:35 PM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
No, but *I* do when I'm poking fun at hypocritical morons & their
equally moronic audience.
Oh, okay ... but what does the accent have to do with anything?
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
O'Reilly & Fox settled just before the case went to court, for lots of
money.
Really? How much money? And please cite your source that shows the
exact amount of money that exchanged hands.
From Associated Press=A0
Bill O'Reilly, plaintiff settle harassment suit
[excerpt] O'Reilly's lawyer, Ronald Green, issued a statement Thursday
saying both sides "regret that this matter has caused tremendous pain,
and they have agreed to settle. All cases and claims have been
withdrawn, and all parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing
whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel,
Benedict P. Morelli & Associates."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.=A0=A0
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-10-28-oreilly-settles_x.h=
tm
If there was no case, they wouldn't have settled, as they
certainly have the money to pay for the attorneys to keep Fox &
O'Reilly's name clear.
Oh there may have been some case, which would have been a mess in
court. O'Reilly got the whole ridiculous situation put away, with each
side agreeing that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the other
side. I think that's a better way to go than fighting it out in court.
Before she filed her lawsuit, the woman and her lawyer approached
O'Reilly and offered to make the whole messy situation go away quietly
in exchange for hush money. That's when O'Reilly filed the extortion
lawsuit, and she immeidately filed her lawsuit AFTER O'Reilly had filed
his suit.
O'Reilly dropped *everything* once it came out that she had tapes of
his converstations.
Not true, which is usual for you. The woman and her lawyer told
O'Reilly about the tapes before she filed her suit. That's what she was
using to try to get hush money out of him. That's why he filed his
extortion lawsuit against her and her lawyer.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
Limbaugh had absolutely no compassion or mercy for addicts, so he gets no=
ne.
I see. You don't like the way he behaved, so your response is to model
your own behavior after his. Good one, Woods. Are you Christian? You
didn't answer my questions -- do you believe in redemption? Do you
believe in forgiveness? Apparently only if the person in question is a
liberal.
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
Sucks to be you, I guess.
Yeah, well ... I know you have the ability to be reasonable at times
..=2E. but apparently that's only when your radical liberal politics don't
blind you to reason. So I suppose I should lower my expectations about
your ability to be reasonable, and then I won't have to be
disappointed. And then it won't suck to be me anymore.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 07:23:12 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
No, but *I* do when I'm poking fun at hypocritical morons & their
equally moronic audience.
Oh, okay ... but what does the accent have to do with anything?
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
O'Reilly & Fox settled just before the case went to court, for lots of
money.
Really? How much money? And please cite your source that shows the
exact amount of money that exchanged hands.
LOL! Of course I don't have "the exact amount of money", but she did
purchase an $800,000+ condo immediately after the settlement. We also
know that it was O'Reilly & Fox who caved.
From Associated Press�
Bill O'Reilly, plaintiff settle harassment suit
[excerpt] O'Reilly's lawyer, Ronald Green, issued a statement Thursday
saying both sides "regret that this matter has caused tremendous pain,
and they have agreed to settle. All cases and claims have been
withdrawn, and all parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing
whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel,
Benedict P. Morelli & Associates."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.��
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-10-28-oreilly-settles_x.htm
Um ... so? Standard legalese for an out-of-court settlement. Don't you
know anything about the way tort cases work?
If there was no case, they wouldn't have settled, as they
certainly have the money to pay for the attorneys to keep Fox &
O'Reilly's name clear.
Oh there may have been some case, which would have been a mess in
court. O'Reilly got the whole ridiculous situation put away, with each
side agreeing that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the other
side. I think that's a better way to go than fighting it out in court.
Actually, he *didn't* get the whole situation out of the way, since
people are still talking about it. And they will continue to do so.
The only way for him to have put the whole situation behind him was to
win the case and have her fired.
Before she filed her lawsuit, the woman and her lawyer approached
O'Reilly and offered to make the whole messy situation go away quietly
in exchange for hush money. That's when O'Reilly filed the extortion
lawsuit, and she immeidately filed her lawsuit AFTER O'Reilly had filed
his suit.
That was spin, silly. It's *standard* for any attorney about to file a
lawsuit to first approach the person being sued. Again, don't you know
anything about the way tort works?
O'Reilly dropped *everything* once it came out that she had tapes of
his converstations.
Not true, which is usual for you. The woman and her lawyer told
O'Reilly about the tapes before she filed her suit. That's what she was
using to try to get hush money out of him. That's why he filed his
extortion lawsuit against her and her lawyer.
The "extortion" case was bogus. There is no extortion when an attorney
is offering to settle prior to filing a lawsuit. Again, don't you know
anything about how the tort system works?
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
Limbaugh had absolutely no compassion or mercy for addicts, so he gets none.
I see. You don't like the way he behaved, so your response is to model
your own behavior after his. Good one, Woods. Are you Christian? You
didn't answer my questions -- do you believe in redemption? Do you
believe in forgiveness? Apparently only if the person in question is a
liberal.
I have no use for hypocrites. And, as I keep telling you, I'm no
"liberal", so don't look for a bleeding heart from me.
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
Sucks to be you, I guess.
Yeah, well ... I know you have the ability to be reasonable at times
.... but apparently that's only when your radical liberal politics don't
blind you to reason. So I suppose I should lower my expectations about
your ability to be reasonable, and then I won't have to be
disappointed. And then it won't suck to be me anymore.
You aren't much of an endorsement for the neoCons, yourself. You know
nothing about the law and sit there trying to carry forth the spin based
on absolutely nothing because of your lack of knowledge.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 11:05:31 AM |
|
|
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
No, but *I* do when I'm poking fun at hypocritical morons & their
equally moronic audience.
Oh, okay ... but what does the accent have to do with anything?
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
O'Reilly & Fox settled just before the case went to court, for lots of
money.
Really? How much money? And please cite your source that shows the
exact amount of money that exchanged hands.
LOL! Of course I don't have "the exact amount of money", but she did
purchase an $800,000+ condo immediately after the settlement.
Did she? I didn't see that in the news, but then I must not have been
following the whole sordid affair as closely as you obviously were. So
she hit the jackpot, did she? After leaving Fox, then coming back
(after having kept in contact with O'Reilly whle she was gone), then
going to the trouble of making alleged tape recordings instead of just
telling him to shut up and complaining to her superiors BEFORE she left
Fox in the first place.
We also know that it was O'Reilly & Fox who caved.
Probably a better way to go than having the whole sordid mess dragged
out in the media. You'd have loved that, wouldn't you?
From Associated Press
Bill O'Reilly, plaintiff settle harassment suit
[excerpt] O'Reilly's lawyer, Ronald Green, issued a statement Thursday
saying both sides "regret that this matter has caused tremendous pain,
and they have agreed to settle. All cases and claims have been
withdrawn, and all parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing
whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel,
Benedict P. Morelli & Associates."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-10-28-oreilly-settles_x.htm
Um ... so? Standard legalese for an out-of-court settlement. Don't you
know anything about the way tort cases work?
Yes, and I also think it is poor form to publicly gossip on how much
(if any) money changed hands. But apparently, from reading some of your
posts, gossip is standard fare for you.
If there was no case, they wouldn't have settled, as they
certainly have the money to pay for the attorneys to keep Fox &
O'Reilly's name clear.
Oh there may have been some case, which would have been a mess in
court. O'Reilly got the whole ridiculous situation put away, with each
side agreeing that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the other
side. I think that's a better way to go than fighting it out in court.
Actually, he *didn't* get the whole situation out of the way, since
people are still talking about it.
No, YOU are still talking about it. I had forgotten about the whole
sordid mess until you raised it again. Apparently you've been sitting
around simmering about Limbaugh and O'Reilly still having audiences. To
the people who like those guys, they are human and capable of making
errors in judgement. Now if they were to exhibit a pattern of such
behavior, that would be a different story I'm sure.
And they will continue to do so. The only way for him to have put the
whole situation behind him was to win the case and have her fired.
And he probably could have done that, but it would have damaged him to
have the whole sordid mess dragged out in court and media. As it is,
his ratings have gone UP since the whole sordid mess was put away.
Before she filed her lawsuit, the woman and her lawyer approached
O'Reilly and offered to make the whole messy situation go away quietly
in exchange for hush money. That's when O'Reilly filed the extortion
lawsuit, and she immeidately filed her lawsuit AFTER O'Reilly had filed
his suit.
That was spin, silly. It's *standard* for any attorney about to file a
lawsuit to first approach the person being sued. Again, don't you know
anything about the way tort works?
It depends on how it's done. It is one thing to give a pre-lawsuit
notification, which opens the door for negotiations prior to the suit
being file. It is quite another to demand hush money in exchange for
keeping the whole sordid mess out of the public eye. That was the basis
for O'Reilly's extortion lawsuit.
O'Reilly dropped *everything* once it came out that she had tapes of
his converstations.
Not true, which is usual for you. The woman and her lawyer told
O'Reilly about the tapes before she filed her suit. That's what she was
using to try to get hush money out of him. That's why he filed his
extortion lawsuit against her and her lawyer.
The "extortion" case was bogus. There is no extortion when an attorney
is offering to settle prior to filing a lawsuit. Again, don't you know
anything about how the tort system works?
Under New York law, O'Reilly could make a case that an extortion
attempt was made.
Must be okay with conservatives to have their media people do drugs
No it's not. Do you understand addiction? Have you ever known someone
who fell into an addiction? Limbaugh had chronic back pain, and became
addicted to those pills. It happens to a lot of people. Do you believe
in redemption? Do you believe in forgiveness? I'm sure you do if it's a
liberal in question, but not if it's a conservative. Right?
Limbaugh had absolutely no compassion or mercy for addicts, so he gets none.
I see. You don't like the way he behaved, so your response is to model
your own behavior after his. Good one, Woods. Are you Christian? You
didn't answer my questions -- do you believe in redemption? Do you
believe in forgiveness? Apparently only if the person in question is a
liberal.
I have no use for hypocrites. And, as I keep telling you, I'm no
"liberal", so don't look for a bleeding heart from me.
It's true, you're not a liberal. You're too extreme to be a liberal.
Many modern "liberals" are cold, cynical extremists like you.
and harass women .... just can't anyone else do that)
You really disappoint me sometimes, Woods.
Sucks to be you, I guess.
Yeah, well ... I know you have the ability to be reasonable at times
.... but apparently that's only when your radical liberal politics don't
blind you to reason. So I suppose I should lower my expectations about
your ability to be reasonable, and then I won't have to be
disappointed. And then it won't suck to be me anymore.
You aren't much of an endorsement for the neoCons, yourself. You know
nothing about the law and sit there trying to carry forth the spin based
on absolutely nothing because of your lack of knowledge.
Much as I never wanted to, I've been reading up on this O'Reilly
situation. And I concede that you must have soaked up every bit of
information you could find, while I barely paid attention to it until
now.
And by the way, what is the significance of capitalizing the "C" in
your version of "neoCons"? I do not belong to any Conservative Party.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Phil Donahue Vs. Bill O'Reilly |
25 Sep 2005 11:54:58 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Woodswun wrote:
Well, make up yer mind Bill. Are ya lookin' fer Amerikuns to die so
Iraqis can have freedom they ain't got the guts to fight fer themselves,
or are you jes' confoozin' Iraq with Al qaeda on account uh they both
got a "q" in 'em?
What's with the accent? O'Reilly doesn't speak that way.
No, but *I* do when I'm poking fun at hypocritical morons & their
equally moronic audience.
Oh, okay ... but what does the accent have to do with anything?
(Actually, I'm surprised he still has an audience after sexually
harassing staff members.
Really? Why do you assume the allegation was factual? O'Reilly
responded by filing a lawsuit claiming extortion by the staff member
you're so eager to believe. Does O'Reilly have a pattern of behavior
that suggests the allegation was true? Do you care? When someone makes
a claim against a person who has no pattern of behavior to back up the
claim, I first tend to give the person being attacked the benefit of
the doubt. Apparently you feel just the opposite.
O'Reilly & Fox settled just before the case went to court, for lots of
money.
Really? How much money? And please cite your source that shows the
exact amount of money that exchanged hands.
LOL! Of course I don't have "the exact amount of money", but she did
purchase an $800,000+ condo immediately after the settlement.
Did she? I didn't see that in the news, but then I must not have been
following the whole sordid affair as closely as you obviously were. So
she hit the jackpot, did she? After leaving Fox, then coming back
(after having kept in contact with O'Reilly whle she was gone), then
going to the trouble of making alleged tape recordings instead of just
telling him to shut up and complaining to her superiors BEFORE she left
Fox in the first place.
We also know that it was O'Reilly & Fox who caved.
Probably a better way to go than having the whole sordid mess dragged
out in the media. You'd have loved that, wouldn't you?
From Associated Press
Bill O'Reilly, plaintiff settle harassment suit
[excerpt] O'Reilly's lawyer, Ronald Green, issued a statement Thursday
saying both sides "regret that this matter has caused tremendous pain,
and they have agreed to settle. All cases and claims have been
withdrawn, and all parties have agreed that there was no wrongdoing
whatsoever by Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Mackris, or Ms. Mackris' counsel,
Benedict P. Morelli & Associates."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2004-10-28-oreilly-settles_x.htm
Um ... so? Standard legalese for an out-of-court settlement. Don't you
know anything about the way tort cases work?
Yes, and I also think it is poor form to publicly gossip on how much
(if any) money changed hands. But apparently, from reading some of your
posts, gossip is standard fare for you.
If there was no case, they wouldn't have settled, as they
certainly have the money to pay for the attorneys to keep Fox &
O'Reilly's name clear.
Oh there may have been some case, which would have been a mess in
court. O'Reilly got the whole ridiculous situation put away, with each
side agreeing that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the other
side. I think that's a better way to go than fighting it out in court.
Actually, he *didn't* get the whole situation out of the way, since
people are still talking about it.
No, YOU are still talking about it. I had forgotten about the whole
sordid mess until you raised it again. Apparently you've been sitting
around simmering about Limbaugh and O'Reilly still having audiences. To
the people who like those guys, they are human and capable of making
errors in judgement. Now if they were to exhibit a pattern of such
behavior, that would be a different story I'm sure.
And they will continue to do so. The only way for him to have put the
whole situation behind him was to win the case and have her fired.
And he probably could have done that, but it would have damaged him to
have the whole sordid mess dragged out in court and media. As it is,
his ratings have gone UP since the whole sordid mess was put away.
Before she filed her lawsuit, the woman and her lawyer approached
O'Reilly and offered to make the whole messy situation go away quietly
in exchange for hush money. That's when O'Reilly filed the extortion
lawsuit, and she immeidately filed her lawsuit AFTER O'Reilly had filed
his suit.
That was spin, silly. It's *standard* for any attorney about to file a
lawsuit to first approach the person being sued. Again, don't you know
anything about the way tort works?
It depends on how it's done. It is one thing to give a pre-lawsuit
notification, which opens the door for negotiations prior to the suit
being file. It is quite another to demand hush money in exchange for
keeping the whole sordid mess out of the public eye. That was the basis
for O'Reilly's extortion lawsuit.
O'Reilly dropped *everything* once it came out that she had tapes of
his converstations.
Not true, which is usual for you. The woman and her lawyer told
O'Reilly about the tapes before she filed her suit. That's what she was
using to try to get hush money out of him. That's why he filed his
extortion lawsuit against her and her lawyer.
The "extortion" case was bogus. There is no extortion when an attorney
is offering to settle prior to filing a lawsuit. Again, don't you know
anything about how the tort system works?
Under New York law, O'Reilly could make a case that an extortion
attempt was made.
No, he could not - you gobble up the spin like a true neoCon. If the
offer to settle prior to suing came from her attorney, there was, by
definition, no attempt at extortion - it was, in fact, good manners on
the part of her attorney to make an offer prior to filing a publicly
available | | | | | | | | |
