take THAT lyingliar.com
Well, i'm off to Montreal!!! :D!!1!!111!!1one!!11!eleventyone!1!!1
Name: Caleb
Age: 20
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
I would like to rebute your claims about the first, and only article I read; the one about O'Reilly and Franken.
"Last time Al saw Bill O'Reilly in person, Mr. Franken by Websters definition was being an idiot and tried to cut bill off while he was speaking - which was met with a prompt "shut up". Both will be elaborated on later, although unless there was some kind of audio filtering on the tape released, O'Reillys "shut up" was a 'scolding' or a 'yell' - not a 'scream'. A more honest opener would be "Last time I saw Bill O'Reilly in person, I called him a liar for telling the truth and then then interrupted him when it was his turn to rebut what I'd said." Franken mischaracterizes reality and deprives you of context from the first sentence..."
Oh no, it's terrible that he uses a bit of the writer's craft. And honestly, have you actually seen this interview on C-SPAN? And your whole 'liar for telling the truth' since it has not been proved that he is lying or telling the truth, you're being a hypocrite for putting increased emphasis to prove your point, as Franken did.
"Why would Franken have to 'suppose?' Is Franken denying that he's especially vicious??"
Nit-picking. Christ, he IS a comedian.
"[LIE] - They were both there to 'promote', but - Bill was 'hawking' and Franken was back to 'promoting'. The dishonest use of subtle language helps Franken rewrite history so you see it through Franken-goggles. In reality, the word 'hawking' means 'to peddle goods aggressively, especially by calling out' which is a totally inaccurate description of O'Reilly's behavior during the event as he was not aggressive with his product in the lest bit and called no one out. What O'Reilly was doing was 'promoting', or - 'attempting to sell or popularize by advertising or publicity'"
Again. Did you see this? Again you condemn Franken for the same tactics you use: dramatification.
"His notoriously short fuse for liars. And as you will see - Franken's claim that O'Reilly is a liar is in fact an intricately woven tapestry of lies itself."
Not if i prove you wrong. See? isn't leading fun?
"This is one of those areas where the 'satire' line fogs the truth in that all evidence would suggest that Franken is just being cute with the comment - but right there mixed in with what he is presenting as perfectly factually accurate recollections is this line that could very well be passed off as truth. "
Well, what if he was? But frankly, he can put up any damn picture he wants. You have a 'bad' picture of Franken, but I guess you don't care, because your hypocracies are not as bad as Frankens.
"Ah, the subtle references to O'Reilly the bully begin. Franken doesn't say "O'Reilly confronted my publicist for doctoring a photo involved in my publicity while we were in the green room" because the truth is too plain and not useful to the smear. O'Reilly 'charged' into the green room, wasn't man enough to go to Franken...- but instead 'accused' the female employee who's just a meager 109 pound little thing. Pah-leezz."
OH NO!!! TRYING TO MAKE THINGS ENTERTAINING!!!! AARRGGHH!!
" (who apparently photoshopped the picture himself) "
and you know this....how?
"And it continues. What probably was a movement of no more than a couple inches in body posture is described as "leaning his six-foot-four frame toward her" - oooooooh! Who knows what "jabbing his finger menacingly" was, but it's pretty obvious Franken is beefing up the situation."
...and you beef up yours. But what if he actually was? Were you there? No.
"[MANIPULATION] - Stupid. He wasn't saying "I'm Bill O'Reilly, a FOX News television host, best selling author and syndicated columnist" he said "This is what I look like". In other words, Franken is mocking O'Reilly for saying "This is what I look like" because duh -- they're familiar with WHO he is, but that obviously wasn't the point of the point. The issue was whether or not O'Reilly has big ugly liver spots blotting his face when NOT in make up (like he is for The Factor each night) or not, and that's what O'Reilly was pointing out. "
I guess O'Reilly has some identity problems when he truly believes that he has no liver spots.
But 'mocking' O'Reilly? Boohoo, i'm sure he can take it, he's a big boy, and franken IS a comedian, as I have already pointed out.
"Again - we have no idea if this is serious or not. If it's a joke - it's a terribly lame one. If it's not...it HAS to be a joke."
why does it HAVE to be a joke? Were you there? No. I'm starting to see a repeating pattern. Are YOU in fact lying?
"FORTY pounds? A hefty 3 year old child weighs forty pounds... But more importantly - what is the point here? It's all but obvious Franken ordered the picture distortion and Franken says it was overtly obvious that O'Reilly was cheesed off about it. So...what planet is he living on where it's a mood lightener to patronize someone's serious objection? Certainly this can't be conduct that Franken approves of. Franken condemns Rush Limbaugh for the exact same thing (making fun of things someone else feels is important, which ultimately demeans their position), only Limbaugh by all accounts shows respect to actual challenges from a person face to face. In this case, Franken is worse than a hypocrite, he's a weasel."
Forty pounds = it's a JOKE. Comedian, remember?
Distortion? He does have liver spots, it's hardly a distortion.
Hey hypocrite, you're in no position to call other's that.
"Franken actually expects you to believe that he is ignorant of the North American cultural staple of calling someone a liar NOT being a polite thing. Mocking someone's honesty and spitting on their integrity with a smirk is no way to lighten a mood. In western civilization, we call that being obnoxious and rude."
yea, ok, i'll give you that one. But honestly, O'Reilly is a big boy, and can fight his own battle, thanks.
"[MANIPULATION] - After Franken's display in the green room by countering O'Reilly's obvious objection to being featured in a distorted picture on a book cover with the word 'Liar' in it by childishly mocking and patronizing him, Franken had no intention of holding a 'high-minded' or 'civilized exchange of contrasting views'"
And you having bad pictures of Al Franken with LIAR all around it isn't? Hypocrite, or are you a 'weasel' now?
But what if he decided to put that all away and have a high-minhded discussion? You weren't there, you don't know.
"[MANIPULATION] - No he didn't. He didn't talk about Franken's book at all. He made one comment on Franken's style of harsh personal attacks on people he doesn't like. One comment is hardly 'beginning to talk about' Franken's book since it begins and ends with one sentence. This is intellectual dishonesty dropped in, probably to justify Franken's unfair focus on O'Reilly."
You were there?
"And WOW, it it a great story...of how stupid Franken is. Watch ladies and gentleman - as Al Franken pulls out his big gun against Bill O'Reilly and shoots the loudest blanks ever heard in the book world..."
if it's such a great story of how stupid franken is, why don't you refute it?
Your sir, did not challenge a single one of Franken's arguments agaist O'Reilly. You ended up doing absolutely nothing than (failing to) destroy Franken's character in order to satisfy your paradigm.
You're set in your views, political opinions are rare to change, but you have to realize that sometimes the people you believe in are wrong. Sorry, but that's the truth of it. Your political beliefs are just as valid as mine, but I do not let it clot my judgement of who is lying. If I, a simple-minded high-school graduate could refute every single claim that you made on a page I randomly selected, I believe that your webpage infact has a myriad of lies, hypocracies, distortions, and falsifications.
I challenge you to put this up on your website, in whole. Show that you are the bigger man and can take criticism.
-Caleb.
Name: Caleb
Age: 20
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
I would like to rebute your claims about the first, and only article I read; the one about O'Reilly and Franken.
"Last time Al saw Bill O'Reilly in person, Mr. Franken by Websters definition was being an idiot and tried to cut bill off while he was speaking - which was met with a prompt "shut up". Both will be elaborated on later, although unless there was some kind of audio filtering on the tape released, O'Reillys "shut up" was a 'scolding' or a 'yell' - not a 'scream'. A more honest opener would be "Last time I saw Bill O'Reilly in person, I called him a liar for telling the truth and then then interrupted him when it was his turn to rebut what I'd said." Franken mischaracterizes reality and deprives you of context from the first sentence..."
Oh no, it's terrible that he uses a bit of the writer's craft. And honestly, have you actually seen this interview on C-SPAN? And your whole 'liar for telling the truth' since it has not been proved that he is lying or telling the truth, you're being a hypocrite for putting increased emphasis to prove your point, as Franken did.
"Why would Franken have to 'suppose?' Is Franken denying that he's especially vicious??"
Nit-picking. Christ, he IS a comedian.
"[LIE] - They were both there to 'promote', but - Bill was 'hawking' and Franken was back to 'promoting'. The dishonest use of subtle language helps Franken rewrite history so you see it through Franken-goggles. In reality, the word 'hawking' means 'to peddle goods aggressively, especially by calling out' which is a totally inaccurate description of O'Reilly's behavior during the event as he was not aggressive with his product in the lest bit and called no one out. What O'Reilly was doing was 'promoting', or - 'attempting to sell or popularize by advertising or publicity'"
Again. Did you see this? Again you condemn Franken for the same tactics you use: dramatification.
"His notoriously short fuse for liars. And as you will see - Franken's claim that O'Reilly is a liar is in fact an intricately woven tapestry of lies itself."
Not if i prove you wrong. See? isn't leading fun?
"This is one of those areas where the 'satire' line fogs the truth in that all evidence would suggest that Franken is just being cute with the comment - but right there mixed in with what he is presenting as perfectly factually accurate recollections is this line that could very well be passed off as truth. "
Well, what if he was? But frankly, he can put up any damn picture he wants. You have a 'bad' picture of Franken, but I guess you don't care, because your hypocracies are not as bad as Frankens.
"Ah, the subtle references to O'Reilly the bully begin. Franken doesn't say "O'Reilly confronted my publicist for doctoring a photo involved in my publicity while we were in the green room" because the truth is too plain and not useful to the smear. O'Reilly 'charged' into the green room, wasn't man enough to go to Franken...- but instead 'accused' the female employee who's just a meager 109 pound little thing. Pah-leezz."
OH NO!!! TRYING TO MAKE THINGS ENTERTAINING!!!! AARRGGHH!!
" (who apparently photoshopped the picture himself) "
and you know this....how?
"And it continues. What probably was a movement of no more than a couple inches in body posture is described as "leaning his six-foot-four frame toward her" - oooooooh! Who knows what "jabbing his finger menacingly" was, but it's pretty obvious Franken is beefing up the situation."
...and you beef up yours. But what if he actually was? Were you there? No.
"[MANIPULATION] - Stupid. He wasn't saying "I'm Bill O'Reilly, a FOX News television host, best selling author and syndicated columnist" he said "This is what I look like". In other words, Franken is mocking O'Reilly for saying "This is what I look like" because duh -- they're familiar with WHO he is, but that obviously wasn't the point of the point. The issue was whether or not O'Reilly has big ugly liver spots blotting his face when NOT in make up (like he is for The Factor each night) or not, and that's what O'Reilly was pointing out. "
I guess O'Reilly has some identity problems when he truly believes that he has no liver spots.
But 'mocking' O'Reilly? Boohoo, i'm sure he can take it, he's a big boy, and franken IS a comedian, as I have already pointed out.
"Again - we have no idea if this is serious or not. If it's a joke - it's a terribly lame one. If it's not...it HAS to be a joke."
why does it HAVE to be a joke? Were you there? No. I'm starting to see a repeating pattern. Are YOU in fact lying?
"FORTY pounds? A hefty 3 year old child weighs forty pounds... But more importantly - what is the point here? It's all but obvious Franken ordered the picture distortion and Franken says it was overtly obvious that O'Reilly was cheesed off about it. So...what planet is he living on where it's a mood lightener to patronize someone's serious objection? Certainly this can't be conduct that Franken approves of. Franken condemns Rush Limbaugh for the exact same thing (making fun of things someone else feels is important, which ultimately demeans their position), only Limbaugh by all accounts shows respect to actual challenges from a person face to face. In this case, Franken is worse than a hypocrite, he's a weasel."
Forty pounds = it's a JOKE. Comedian, remember?
Distortion? He does have liver spots, it's hardly a distortion.
Hey hypocrite, you're in no position to call other's that.
"Franken actually expects you to believe that he is ignorant of the North American cultural staple of calling someone a liar NOT being a polite thing. Mocking someone's honesty and spitting on their integrity with a smirk is no way to lighten a mood. In western civilization, we call that being obnoxious and rude."
yea, ok, i'll give you that one. But honestly, O'Reilly is a big boy, and can fight his own battle, thanks.
"[MANIPULATION] - After Franken's display in the green room by countering O'Reilly's obvious objection to being featured in a distorted picture on a book cover with the word 'Liar' in it by childishly mocking and patronizing him, Franken had no intention of holding a 'high-minded' or 'civilized exchange of contrasting views'"
And you having bad pictures of Al Franken with LIAR all around it isn't? Hypocrite, or are you a 'weasel' now?
But what if he decided to put that all away and have a high-minhded discussion? You weren't there, you don't know.
"[MANIPULATION] - No he didn't. He didn't talk about Franken's book at all. He made one comment on Franken's style of harsh personal attacks on people he doesn't like. One comment is hardly 'beginning to talk about' Franken's book since it begins and ends with one sentence. This is intellectual dishonesty dropped in, probably to justify Franken's unfair focus on O'Reilly."
You were there?
"And WOW, it it a great story...of how stupid Franken is. Watch ladies and gentleman - as Al Franken pulls out his big gun against Bill O'Reilly and shoots the loudest blanks ever heard in the book world..."
if it's such a great story of how stupid franken is, why don't you refute it?
Your sir, did not challenge a single one of Franken's arguments agaist O'Reilly. You ended up doing absolutely nothing than (failing to) destroy Franken's character in order to satisfy your paradigm.
You're set in your views, political opinions are rare to change, but you have to realize that sometimes the people you believe in are wrong. Sorry, but that's the truth of it. Your political beliefs are just as valid as mine, but I do not let it clot my judgement of who is lying. If I, a simple-minded high-school graduate could refute every single claim that you made on a page I randomly selected, I believe that your webpage infact has a myriad of lies, hypocracies, distortions, and falsifications.
I challenge you to put this up on your website, in whole. Show that you are the bigger man and can take criticism.
-Caleb.