User Profile: zapparules

zapparules

Member Since: September 24, 2012

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 9:53pm

    Oh gee… Just give it a day – or even a few minutes and a NEW stroy revealing yet more lies by O’Reilly comes out.
    The latest…
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/26/bill-oreilly-former-colleagues-la-riots-bombardment
    “Former colleagues of Bill O’Reilly … have disputed his account of surviving a bombardment of bricks and rocks while covering the 1992 riots in Los Angeles.”
    “Six people who covered the riots with O’Reilly in California for Inside Edition told the Guardian they did not recall an incident in which, as O’Reilly has claimed, “concrete was raining down on us” and “we were attacked by protesters”.

    Just admit it folks.
    YOU DON’T CARE if O’Reilly is a liar. In fact, for many of you you probably look upon such as some sort of ‘Badge of Honor’ for ole Bill’O. You all just seem to love to play the double standard game. Attack Williams for his lies. Let ole Bill’O;s slide. Heck.. Embrace them!!!

  • [3] February 26, 2015 at 9:47pm

    makingout
    Non-liberal links?
    What? Are you expecting fellow conservative media outlets to carry the ‘real’ details of O’Reilly’s lies?
    That’s funny.

    you can keep your self censored or… You could actually look at other sources for information. After all.. Isn’t that what Beck is always telling his followers?
    Check out…
    http://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2015/02/bill_oreilly_new_allegations_suicide_witness_jfk_assassination.html
    The above is about Bill’s lie of being at the door of and hearing the suicide of JFK / CIA asset.

    Or.. Regarding his lying about witnessing nuns being executed…
    http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/25/media/bill-oreilly-el-salvador-nuns/index.html
    (Yea. Like Bill meant to convey that all he saw were pictures of nuns killed. Not that he witnessed such himself. If any of you can tell me with a straight face that is what Bill meant… “When I would tell her, hey, mom, I was in El Salvador and I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head, she almost couldn’t process it,” O’Reilly said.)

    Or… Go to the source and see the questions about his ‘war cred’ – about being in a “war zone” – about being in “combat situation” — Questions O’Reilly is unwilling / unable to answer
    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/questions-bill-oreilly-falklands-david-corn

    Read up or YOU should STFU!

  • February 26, 2015 at 9:35pm

    fishmagnet
    Well you pretty much alluded to why this is important to many on the right.
    It IS all about Bill’O's credibility.
    You and I and many others know O’Reilly SHOULD have NO credibility – however… That’s not the case.
    His is the No. ! rated show on FOX. (I believe).
    THAT is one of the – if not THE real reason why FOX is standing behind him. He IS their primary money maker. Can’t let your Number One money maker go down!

    Look. You and I and many others know Bill’O is but an entertainer but… To the right… He is another trusted, important mouthpiece of conservatism. (Important because of the size of his…
    ‘microphone’ / audience.)

  • February 26, 2015 at 9:29pm

    AkaBubJr: “Geesh. Don’t we have more important things to worry about in this country?”

    Yes we do.
    Didn’t you see that other story here on TheBlaze about the perceived color of a dress.
    NOW THAT’S important!!!

  • February 26, 2015 at 9:28pm

    You might want to check into the accuracy of what you read then.

  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 9:23pm

    So why should we still have all our attention on Williams?
    Has he not already been suspended?

    You know…
    Maybe if some on the Right didn’t go after Williams so hard… Maybe some others in the media wouldn’t now be seeking to hold Bill’O to the same / similar standards applied against Williams.

    Are you suggesting that just because Williams was exposed… Others in the media who have done similar – like Bill’O, who it appears has gone well ‘above and beyond’ what Williams did… What? Bill’O (others) should be free of attention to their lies???

    Williams’ story was ‘let to slide’ for years it seems. WHY did it all of a sudden become big news?
    Looks like since it was made into such a big deal… Some others in media may have felt others in media who committed similar ‘embellishments’ (like Bill’O) might now need to have their lies no longer ‘slide’.

  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 9:18pm

    osmos102
    Could you be any more disingenuous?
    Did plavelle say ANYTHING about William being a victim?
    And if you haven’t noticed… O’Reilly indeed can be a ‘real meanie’. He has already threatened those challenging his lies.
    So instead of actually addressing the content of those challenging him, O’Reilly instead attacks and ATTEMPTS to besmirch the integrity of those challenging him.
    Its a tactic often used by some who post here – when there positions are challenged. I could personally give you dozens and dozens of such examples. But I digress. This story is about Bill’O the Big Fat Liar.

  • February 26, 2015 at 9:13pm

    Oh yea. That’s right. This is really all about Obama – NOT O’Reilly.
    Sorry. Wrong O.

  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 9:11pm

    Gertiek
    You obviously have kept yourself ignorant as to the lying assertions being made about Bill’O.
    As Beck is always telling his followers… Check it out for yourself.
    So why don’t you see what he is being challenged on.
    See the questions being asked of him regarding his ‘war cred’. His supposed time in “war zones” and “combat situations.
    And now…
    His lying about being at the door of and hearing the suicide of a JFK / CIA asset.
    And his lying about witnessing nuns being executed.

    Bill O’Reilly lies and he lies intentionally – AND… Repeatedly.
    And my guess is.. He does it out of profit motive. To further line his pockets through book sales, appearances, his show.

    What a low life.
    To not only bring your mother into your lies but… Nuns! The killing of nuns.

    Yea. You guys stand behind ole Bill there. He’s your kind of guy.

  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 9:05pm

    Monk
    Still standing behind Bill’O the Big Liar I see.

    Have you actually enlightened yourself yet Monk to the MULTIPLE lying accusations against Bill’O? Or are you intentionally keeping yourself ignorant to such? (In turn, TRY and plead ignorance to the truth.)
    ‘They’ have already found (and have reported on) LOTS.
    LOTS of examples of Bill’O lying about his ‘war cred’. Lying repeatedly about being in “war zones” or “combat situations”.
    And now, just recently pushed for clarification too are the stories of Bill’O supposedly being at the door of and hearing someone involved with the JFK assassination when that person killed himself.
    AND… Lying about witnessing nuns being executed.
    “My mother, for example, doesn’t understand evil. When I would tell her, for example, ‘Hey, I was in El Salvador and I saw nuns get shot in the back of the head,’ she almost couldn’t process it,”

    ANYONE of mental competence would take that to mean that Bill’O directly witnessed those nuns being killed. NOT what he is now contesting – which is that he was just describing how he SAW PICTURES of such.
    He is a blatant liar – even willing to go so far as to bring his own mother – and nuns! – into his web of lies.

    And is Bill’O willing to actually respond directly to the questions being raised?
    NO!
    Instead he is doing what so many TRY and do to me when I raise questions. He is attacking and threatening those that would question his lies.

    Hey. I can see why some here support – can relate to Bill’O.

    Responses (2) +
  • [-17] February 26, 2015 at 8:45pm

    Oh now, wait… I HAVE a better question.
    If 8YRSOFHELL wore this dress would he still try to make EVERYTHING a negative reference to Obama?

    Vote one for Yes

    Vote two for Yes

    Vote three for…
    It doesn’t matter. Just blame Obama.

    Responses (3) +
  • [-1] February 26, 2015 at 8:42pm

    Beck alludes to waterboarding.
    So…
    Is he saying such is / should be considered… Immoral? Illegal? What?
    If OK to do against foreign nationals who we THINK MIGHT do us harm… Well then why should not such a wonderful, supposedly effective technique be applied to our own who we THINK MIGHT do us harm???

    Sometimes (often really) some of you folks are just impossible to follow.
    With one breath many of you complain that we are not doing enough / going hard enough / treating harsh enough (via our military) – those (foreigners) who would seek us harm.
    But then in your next breath… When we are presented a story like this indicating how our ‘home’ authorities ARE doing more / going harder / treating more harshly – our own who would seek to do our other own / us harm…. Here are many of you complaining about such.

    Many of you seem to want to spend unlimited amounts of money on and give unlimited ‘power’ to our military complex – in an effort to make our nation safe / the safest BUT…
    Reveal that our police and other ‘home security’ authorities are seeking a similar ‘military-like’ approach to providing security at home and… Such seems to get your panties all in a bundle.

    Seems some of you don’t know what you want.

    Responses (1) +
  • [-2] February 26, 2015 at 8:29pm

    You guys do realize that well over 70% of the American population maintains a god belief – right?
    So just how are we becoming a nation without god?
    Or is it just that we are becoming a nation with god beliefs that some of you folks don’t agree with???

    Ok Monk-Man… If you could offer ‘one thing’ that might open the eyes of those supposedly blind to what you say… What would that be?
    Or heck. Feel free to offer us as much as you’d like. Since you seem to believe such is SO CRITICAL to the survival of our nation… Would you PLEASE identify what might be done to avert our blindness (to whatever ‘threat’ it is you contend we are being exposed to).

  • [-4] February 26, 2015 at 8:24pm

    S A R C A S M Monk-Man???

  • [-1] February 26, 2015 at 8:19pm

    808Patriot
    Care to offer links to those studies showing such?
    Quite honestly… Based on my own direct experiences / based on the relationships and marriages (and failures of marriages) that I specifically have witnessed (I come from a very large family – and know LOTS of folks married and divorced) and well… What I have witnessed myself does not support your contention – at all.

    And frankly… I do not care if a loving couple decides to get married or not.
    Honestly – for me… ‘marriage’ is but a ‘show’ a ‘ceremony’ . It is the actual ‘doing’ – the actual commitment that is the real basis / determiner of ‘value’.

    And as I have noted… I think the VERY HIGH expectation that married couples MUST remain together forever is but an unnecessary ‘burden’ on the relationship. Staying committed for life is tough enough as it is. To throw in some god / religious standard that ‘punishes’ a failure to do so…

    I have personally witnessed too many marriages that should have ended but… Because of ‘outside pressures’ to make it work… Such only seemed to make it worse.
    I understand that our lives can be VERY complex and can change DRAMATICALLY over the course of a lifetime and so… The expectation that a relationship – often established when the parties are very naive to the trials of life… The expectation that a relationship MUST remain intact regardless of the challenges and changes…
    It’s not about the “marriage”.
    It IS about the effort to make the commitment.

  • [-1] February 26, 2015 at 8:06pm

    Sojournerfortruth
    What an utterly baseless, righteous comment.

    “death style”?
    Really?
    And oh pleased do explain – if you can – “it’s devastating impact on their life and that of sociaty.”

    Do you think name-calling, personal attacks help support your position?

  • [-1] February 26, 2015 at 8:03pm

    WayTruthLife777: “If morals are not from God where do they come from?”

    Wow. Where do I begin?
    Apparently you don’t realize that each person has his/her own belief (or no belief) in a god and that each person then similarly has their own individual interpretation of ‘the word’ of their particular god.
    In other words… Let me put it in the question you used…
    Which men then get to decide which god is the right god to follow and which men then get to decide which ‘rules’ of morality are to be followed?

    Maybe you’ve seen me post this question before…
    Identify for me ONE good – one moral act, deed, characteristic that REQUIRES a god belief.

    I profess that I can teach and live ANY ‘good’ (or ‘bad’) without a god belief. I can teach the (good) value of anything – anything you can think of – without references god.

    What is good?
    Something that benefits others. Not something that just benefits yourself. That is but selfish – but rather… Does it benefit another or others?
    What is bad?
    Something that harms others. Again. Not something that just harms you but rather… Does it harm another / others?

    Now its never as easy as that but…
    A god / a god belief is NOT required to figure those things out.

    Good and bad can NOT be determined on a ‘My god is better than your god’ basis.

    “And no man has a right to stop any other man from doing anything.”
    Again….
    WOW!

  • February 26, 2015 at 7:51pm

    Yea that works

  • February 26, 2015 at 7:49pm

    jmaster67
    Does one have to be on private property to ‘effect’ those on said private property?
    And perhaps tell us why there is any need to care if its singing and praying or preaching?

  • [7] February 26, 2015 at 7:44pm

    Not evolving. Someone like Palin can’t evolve. Heck. She doesn’t believe in evolution so…
    Her position has flip-flopped.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love