Boycott French Products?

[CEDeoudes59]

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: Now for the lead story tonight, two differing points of view.

Joining us now from Washington, David Bossie, president of the Citizens United, a conservative group. And from New York, Tony Smith, president of the French-American Foundation.

Mr. Smith, where am I going wrong here?

TONY SMITH, FRENCH-AMERICAN FOUNDATION: Well, I don't favor a boycott for three reasons. First of all -- excuse me -- it won't work. It won't be effective. It won't change French policy. Might even make the reprisals against us.

Secondly, with regard to Iraq, we're going to need Iraq. Sorry. We're going to need France in the short-term in Iraq. Not for the war, which we can handle by ourselves, but we're going to need all the support we can muster for the after war, the period of occupation.

We don't want to do that alone. We want our friends and allies with us to help us share the costs and to help us administer the occupation.

And the third and final reason is a more long-term one. France has been our ally for 200 years. It's in our best interest to maintain a continuous, close relationship with the French. They're the only country with which we've never fought a major war, and they've been with us in every major crisis during the Cold War period.

O'REILLY: Look, they're all logical reasons, and I can't -- I mean, I reject the French help after Saddam is removed. If I were President Bush, I wouldn't let the French near Iraq, all right? They're out of the equation. They're gone. They don't get any oil subsidies, they get nothing. All right?

But you say that they have been our friend and we're going to need them and all this. Over the last 40 years I have not seen much friendship on the part of France, and the Libya thing really struck home. You know, they wouldn't let us fly over their airspace to take reprisal against Gadhafi after he blew up that Berlin disco, targeting Americans and all of that.

How can you justify that, Mr. Smith? How can you justify that?

SMITH: There's a lot of cooperation going on right now...

O'REILLY: You're not answering my question, Mr. Smith. This is the no-spin zone. Libya, air space and France. How can you do it?

SMITH: I'm not here to defend French policy. I'm here to say that I think the boycott would be a bad idea.

O'REILLY: All right. You can't answer that question, sir, because it was a hostile act towards the United States.

Mr. Bossie, how do you see it?

You know, Bill, I have to agree with you completely. Look, this -- the French government needs to understand that actions have consequences, and by the American people speaking with their wallets and saying enough is enough, we can have a voice.

And we can tell the French and the Germans and anybody else through speaking with our wallets that this is the time that they need to pay very close attention to their economies because they're going to tank.

O'REILLY: All right. Now, Mr. Smith, you said that you don't think it will work. I submit to you, sir, that if a boycott of French goods in America takes place -- and I believe it will, believe me. I think most Americans see this for what it is. The French being anti-U.S.

Their economy is growing at a rate of 1 percent a year. If Americans cut back 50 percent buying French products, we put them into a recession, sir. Mr. Smith?

SMITH: Yes. Well, I think it would simply lead to reprisals.

O'REILLY: Like what? What kind of reprisals?

SMITH: They would retaliate against American goods.

O'REILLY: We don't need them.

SMITH: We export quite a few goods over there, as well. But beyond that, I think for the policy reasons, it's a bad idea. I have already explained what they are both with regard to Iraq and in the long-term.

O'REILLY: All right, Mr. Bossie, go ahead.

DAVID BOSSIE, PRESIDENT, CITIZENS UNITED: Look, we're not asking, at least Citizens United is not asking, for government intervention from the United States government. This is a people-to-people campaign. These are individuals all across the country, that I have never seen before, just stepping up and saying, "we're going to pour French wine down the gutter, we're going to bash a car. We're not going to, you know, not support these companies or these products."

And I've got to tell you, I've never seen just any -- at any time in American history -- and I've been paying close attention to this all through the '70s, '80s and '90s. And I've got to tell you, this is not something that's been seen before. The French are going to feel this, and they need to feel it.

O'REILLY: Now what did you say about the car, Mr. Bossie? Pour French wine, and I don't think I'd do that. If I had it, I'd just put it in the basement. But go ahead.

BOSSIE: There was an auto dealer in Nashville, Tennessee, that gave people a chance to destroy a brand new...

O'REILLY: I don't want to do any of that. Because I agree with Mr. Smith, I mean...

BOSSIE: No, no. It's a message. That's all...

O'REILLY: We want to send a message and we want to send it in a principled, disciplined way. We, Americans, are soldiers in a war on terror. Mr. Smith, you would agree with that, right? You would agree with that, wouldn't you?

SMITH: I would agree with that, and may I say also that there is an enormous amount of cooperation going on right now in the campaign against terrorism. The intelligence services and the police work cooperating between France and the United States has been very, very helpful.

O'REILLY: All right, and that's true. And I'm glad you pointed that out, because we want be fair.

But Mr. Smith, let me ask you this. Germany, Russia, and China are all against removing Saddam as well, mostly for economic reasons, but they want to see the USA weakened, as well. But they haven't sent emissaries to Africa, sir, to try to embarrass us. And that, to me, is over the line.

You can say, I don't believe a word Jacques Chirac says. I think he's a phony and he's playing to the home field crowd. But I may be wrong...

But when this guy sends his people down to Africa and says if you don't vote, OK, for the United States, because we'll reward you in economic ways. This is a hostile, then, act against the United States, sir, is it not?

SMITH: I don't defend French policy, and I think, in fact, they've gone too far with this. My position is that they will be important allies to us in the near-term.

O'REILLY: So you're appeasing them?

SMITH: No.

O'REILLY: Mr. Smith, yes, you are. You're not supporting them -- If you think their policy has gone too far and you're not supporting them, but you tell us not to do what we can, which means buy their products, you're appeasing them. You're letting them get away with it, Mr. Smith.

SMITH: No, I'm taking exactly the same position as George W. Bush, who said in his press conference that France is our ally and will continue to be so.

O'REILLY: Yes, but he also said if they veto, it will be considered, quote, "an unfriendly act," unquote.

Mr. Bossie, the last word on it. Go ahead.

BOSSIE: Look, the French have not been our ally since 1966, when they pulled out of the NATO integrated military structure, and they have not been our friends, and, Bill, you pointed out the 1980's throughout the Cold War they were up against Ronald Reagan every chance when he was trying to counter Soviet missile threats during the Libyan bombing fiasco, where it cost two American pilots' lives because of the French policy.

O'REILLY: Yes.

BOSSIE: So the French have not been our friends.

O'REILLY: It's time. It's time for the United States people, the American people, to say, "OK, France, you want to do this, then we do what we can."

Gentlemen, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

 

[Sheesh]

Nice discussion post there bro....

I don't know if we should boycott or not. Of course we want the French to change their minds regarding war, but we don't want them to be one of our enemies either...

 

[Biggs]

good discussion, I like that show pretty well too... but I think a "French boycott" will accomplish jack diddly, no matter how much we'd like to kick the collective shin of the French people.

 

[pogue]

"I ain't eatin no kinda French food, no french toast and no french fries! That'll show them frenchies whos boss. Oh yea, and if another Hitler ever comes back round to Europe, well they can just forget it."

Example of the kind of ignorant redneck stuff I hear in Texas.

 

[Biggs]

lol not much different in Oklahoma Pogue

 

[CEDeoudes59]

The poll on Fox News was 93% yes - 7% no

 

[ex_banana-eater]

you guys will probably just end up hurting yourselves, since the french probably have branch plants in the states or something

BTW keep on buying bombardier's.. theyre canadian

 

[dez/null]

Heres a lil tidbit for all of you to munch on.

We elect our congressmen to control our everyday lives.

Here in Washington State. 90% of the people voted for action in Iraq. But the senator voted agenst it. Now shouldnt the senator do what is right for the people or what he believes in.
this is not cool in my book. And insted of fixing the problem with what the **** is wrong with "french fries" why the **** won't fix our fucked up econamy and drop those fries to a 99 cents. Politics fucking suck.

 

[Scottyo]

Its nice to see the United States is now trying to FORCE everyone to agree with them rather than debate or show proof for why they support a course of action. France is a sovereign nation, their government has the right to its own actions and should follow the beliefs of its people. This boycott is over a matter of opinion, how ridiculous is that when we won't even boycott China anymore over human rights violations.
Now my own college caf has even decided to go along with the "Freedom Fries". What the hell. Whether your for or against war, this is a joke.

 

[Bean]

The joke ended sir when France and German citizens began open protests and rallies against AMERICAN CITIZENS. French and Germany are anti-american; and if they don't wanna be friends then thats fine... they can go **** themselves into economic hell.

 

[Scottyo]

I disagree, the joke ended when the United States continually tried to "persuade" the rest of the UN Security Council to an action they did not want to do. Added to this, the fact that the French and German governments don't want to happen to them what Tony Blair is currently dealing with. Is there inherently anything wrong with protests and rallies, as long as they are peaceful? If we let up in our efforts in foreign relations, maybe we would stop supplying fodder to anti-american activities. I am as patriotic as the next, and if my country drafted me to war I would go like it is my duty. If you live in a country you in the end have to either abide by its rules, break them and face the consequences or (peaceably) change them. Yet when one country economically threatens enough due to political opinions, that is wrong. Just my 2 cents.

 

[pogue]

I'm glad some countries can stand up to Bush's tyranny. At least there are some people out there that are willing to speak up to such an obvious captalist war and who aren't reliant on our blood money and the WTO to speak out against this travesty.

 

[John Benz]

The joke ended sir when France and German citizens began open protests and rallies against AMERICAN CITIZENS. French and Germany are anti-american; and if they don't wanna be friends then thats fine... they can go **** themselves into economic hell.

Very well said, Bean. Most loyal Americans agree 100%. Who gives a **** about the liberal left-wing pansies, anyway?

 

[pogue]

lib·er·al
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

I guess that would be the opposite of closed minded, intolerant and self serving.

The typical attitude of the oil loving government trusting American:

 

[windwords7]

Bull Crap pogue, that's the farthest from the truth definition of what a liberal is that I have ever heard.

 

[Bean]

liberal does not mean open-minded...

to me if its stretched to far it becomes foolish and idealistic... like most of the students at the war rallies... a lot of things get out of hand when stretched to far... you actually think the rest of the world hates the US? stop listening to the television... there's more info out there by unbiased sources...

its called ICC... Idealistic College Crap... and everyone goes through that phase... i was there at one point... eventually people grow up and realize the world is real and not some dream of a visionary...real **** happens and there is always more than one reason for doing something... real **** is there and there's not a damn thing you can do about it as an individual...

i find myself at a happy medium between liberal and conservative... but i find nothing about this war politically balanced... i think Saddam should be taken out... i've read his biography... seen the **** that he's done; the effect he's had on his people... the ego trips he's on... and YES i think he needs to go... you think France and Germany and those that oppose the war don't have other reasons? economic reasons perhaps? its all about the ICC, assuming the US government is evil and everyone else is good...

but implying that your opinion on the war effort has ANYTHING to do with political opinion... well thats just idealistic and foolish again...

 

[John Benz]

lib·er·al
Favoring proposals for reform,

Like getting rid of a murderous dictator.

open to new ideas for progress,

Like giving sadam way too much time already to satisfy the crybabies of the world.

and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

Excepting behavior which includes practicing mass murder and atrocities on neighboring peoples and threatening every American's way of life if there are indeed nuclear weapons.

I guess liberal doesn't mean what it used to, eh? As used today, the term liberal stands for cowardice and anarchy.... and other things
:gore:

 

[pogue]

Bull Crap pogue, that's the farthest from the truth definition of what a liberal is that I have ever heard.

Meridian Webster dictionary.

 

[windwords7]

Dont care where it comes from, it absolute crap!

 

[pogue]

Think again. Now is not the time nor the place.

SO ARE ANARCHISTS OPPOSED TO WAR?

Most anarchists are not pacifists, although some Christain anarchists (like Leo Tolstoy, who inspired Ghandi, who inspired King) reject all foms of violence. Like any form of struggle, war is sometimes necessary, even when what you're fighting for is not perfect. Some anarchists might consider World War II such a war, because even though in the end the victors were American, British and other capitalists, the alternative of Nazi Fascism was much worse. Many anarchists have fought in wars of independence from colonialism, even though the new nationalist governments were still corrupt.

Anarchists believe in waging a class war - fighting for the rights of the working class against the wealthy classes who exploit their labor for profit, and ultimately fighting for a society where class does not exist. Most of the time, this is not a literal war and does not involve physical violence, but rather involves other forms of actions and ideas. However, when a war of revolution is the olny way left to defeat the ruling class and establish or preserve a free society, anarchists are prepared to take up arms and fight.

GREAT, LET'S GO TO WAR THEN.

Not so fast! Anarchists believe SOME wars may be justified - especially wars of revolution to overthrow oppressors. Many anarchists have fought prominently in wars, like the Mexican Revolution of 1910, the Russian Revolution of 1917, and hundreds of thousands of anarchists in the Spanish Civil War of 1936.

However, anarchists recognize that most wars are fought by the ruling elites of nations for their own economic and political interests, without regard for the interests of the civilians on either side. Thoughout the years, American soldiers have been sent abroad to protect dubious political or economic interests (as in Haiti or Iraq), or engage in plain old imperialism (Vietnam, the Philippines, Grenada - to protect as one former Special Forces agent wryly put it, the strategic nutmeg supply from the communists - Laos, Puerto Rico, most of Latin America - you get the idea).

AMERICAN TROOPS FOUGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOMS, YOU TRAITOR!

While this may be true in some degree (e.g., the freedom to burn more oil and consume more resources per capita than any other nation on the planet, largely responsible for the much-vaunted American prosperity), mostly the American military has been used to fight against the freedom of other people around the world (and thereby ensuring American wealth, also known as American freedom). The School of the Americas (SOA) in Ft. Benning, Georgia, has for years trained Latin American dictators and their henchmen on methods of torture and repression, and have birthed some of the most evil paramilitaries the world has ever seen. Green Berets and Special Forces work regularly alongside such agents, training them in techniques of torture and repression. A military that creates such despots can have no honest motives of preserving freedom in the world.

The freedoms that exist in America were fought for and won, rather, by ordinary people. Starting from the Bill of Rights, which would not have been included in the Constitution (they're amendments!) if popular outcry had not necessitated it.

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=01/11/01/8600281

 

[windwords7]

LMAO! The media is the liberal voice of the liberal political movement in this country. Biased, pathetic, and slanted, the media brainwashed the modern masses with propaganda, not facts.

 

[John Benz]

Think again. Now is not the time nor the place.
SO ARE ANARCHISTS OPPOSED TO WAR?

....

ROFLMAO! That was some truly funny ****! Not intentional, but funny, nonetheless. Only two types of people would believe that steaming pile of manure you posted in all seriousness. A halfwit or a brain-dead liberal, living in a sea of delusion and kept afloat by his own self-righteousness. Sheeeezze. Liberals.
:saw:

 

[msclbldrguy]

Meridian Webster dictionary.

that may be how webster defines it....but it is certainly not what is practiced. The in your face attitude about abortion, when a liberal finds out you believe in God they immediately try and convince you otherwise...those are just two examples I've had personal experience with where liberals are concerned. It would be nice if we could live in some kind of utopian world on this earth but that just isnt gonna happen. I wish liberal would practice what they preach....but thats only for those of us who are more conservative in nature.

 

[ex_banana-eater]

I have a question.. from what I understand if there were 9 votes of "no" then permanent voters who vote "no" automatically become a veto vote. Correct??? Since there is a majority of UN members supporting peace (voting no) then it would make france's vote turn into a veto. France is opposed to war so they can't vote yes. There are opposed to war so they are going to vote "no" and veto the resolution put forward by US, UK, and Spain. Isn't this not truly France's fault, but the fault of all nations voting "no" and therefore economic action solely on France is futile?

Sorry if i got the vote system screwed up, I was learning it from a guy with a heavy accent.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I disagree, the joke ended when the United States continually tried to "persuade" the rest of the UN Security Council to an action they did not want to do. Added to this, the fact that the French and German governments don't want to happen to them what Tony Blair is currently dealing with. Is there inherently anything wrong with protests and rallies, as long as they are peaceful? If we let up in our efforts in foreign relations, maybe we would stop supplying fodder to anti-american activities. I am as patriotic as the next, and if my country drafted me to war I would go like it is my duty. If you live in a country you in the end have to either abide by its rules, break them and face the consequences or (peaceably) change them. Yet when one country economically threatens enough due to political opinions, that is wrong. Just my 2 cents.

The problem with your argument is you left oil the UN oil for food scandal out of the equation. They were getting kick backs from Iraq. I do agree with you on China though.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

lib?er?al
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

I guess that would be the opposite of closed minded, intolerant and self serving.

Your right liberals are for reform. They want to reform taxes. They tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others unless you disagree with them. They have a name for anyone who disagrees with them. If your against affirmative action your a racist. If you against the radical homosexual agenda your a hetrocentric homophobic bigot. If your against raising taxes you hate children. Liberals are the most tolerant people on the planet.
Most importantly they open to new ideas for progress such as raising taxes, increasing government programs, taking merit out of our educational system, taking merit out of job promotion, and incrementally trying to covertly implement socialism.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Anarchists believe in waging a class war - fighting for the rights of the working class against the wealthy classes who exploit their labor for profit, and ultimately fighting for a society where class does not exist.

That is socialism not anarchism. Democrats......I mean socialist are for waging class wars and are against capitalism or as you put it exploiting labor for profit. Anarchist believe in no government.

 

[Mancolt]

Your right liberals are for reform. They want to reform taxes. They tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others unless you disagree with them. They have a name for anyone who disagrees with them. If your against affirmative action your a racist. If you against the radical homosexual agenda your a hetrocentric homophobic bigot. If your against raising taxes you hate children. Liberals are the most tolerant people on the planet.
Most importantly they open to new ideas for progress such as raising taxes, increasing government programs, taking merit out of our educational system, taking merit out of job promotion, and incrementally trying to covertly implement socialism.

Well said!!

 

[CEDeoudes59]

just beat the liberals at the voting booth and all they will control is the media.

 

[jboogie]

Ah, Bill O'Reilly, the Michael Moore of conservative drivel, how I would enjoy seeing you burn in hell, if only there was one. You kids carefully read this over while I push my radical homosexual agenda into the schools and churches.

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]I don't want to -- I don't want to debate world politics with you.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, why not? This is about politics!

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Because, number one: I don't really care what you think.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, okay.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]You're -- you're -- you're... uh... I want, I want --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]But you do care, because... the reason why you care is --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]No, I don't.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]-- you evoke 9-11 --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Here's why I care --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]-- to rationalize --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Here's why I care --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Let me finish. You evoke 9-11 to rationalize everything from domestic plunder to imperialist aggression worldwide. You evoke, you evoke sympathy --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Okay, that's a bunch...

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]-- with the 9-11 families.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]That's a bunch of crap. I've done more for the 9-11 families by their own admission -- I've done more for them than you will ever hope to do.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Okay.[/size]​

Then a tiny corner of Bill's brain says Hm, what an odd response. Totally unemotional. Let's try again.

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]So you keep your mouth shut when you accuse me of exploiting those people.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, you're not representing me. You're not representing me.[/size]​

Is that him getting angry? Let's keep pushing.

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]I know. And I'd never represent you. You know why?

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Why?

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Because you have a warped view of this world and a warped view of this country.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, explain that. Let me give you an example of a parallel --[/size]​

Now things are starting to get creepy for Bill. He thinks, Does this guy have ice water in his veins, or what?

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]No, I'm not going to debate this with you, all right?

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, let me give you an example of parallel experience.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]No, I won't.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]On September 14th --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Here's, here's, here's, here's --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]On September 14th --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Here's the record, all right?

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Okay.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]You didn't support the action against Afghanistan to remove the Taliban. You were against it, okay?

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Why would I want to brutalize and further punish the people in Afghanistan --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Who killed your father!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]The people in Afghanistan --

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Who killed your father!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]-- didn't kill my father.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Sure they did! The al Qaeda people were trained there!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]The al Qaeda people? What about the Afghani people?

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]See! I'm more angry about it than you are!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]So, what about George Bush?

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]What about George Bush? He had NOTHING to do with it!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]The Director -- senior -- as Director of the CIA.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]He had NOTHING to DO with it!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]So the people that trained a hundred thousand Mujahadeen who were...[/size]​

Now O'Reilly realizes that he's in trouble. The guy isn't taking any of the bait and keeps spewing these pesky facts. So he tries to throw a little dirt in Glick's eyes:

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Man, I hope your mom isn't watching this.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Well, I hope she is.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]I hope your mother is not watching this because you... That's it, I'm not going to say any more.

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Okay.[/size]​

Now things are getting worse, and O'Reilly knows it. Glick hasn't taken the bait about his mother. So Bill tries to piss him off by invoking the guy's dead father:

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]In respect for your father --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]On September 14th, do you want to know what I'm doing?[/size]​

Now Bill realizes -- to his horror -- that there's just no way to distract this guy. He's unfazable. Here he starts grasping at straws:

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Shut up! -- Shut up!

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]Oh, please don't tell me to shut up.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]As respect -- as respect -- in respect for your father, who was a Port Authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by barbarians --

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]By radical extremists who were trained by this government...

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Fine. Out of respect for him...

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]... not the people of America.

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]... I'm not going to...

[/size] [size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]... The people of the ruling class, the small minority.[/size]​

Nothing's working... this Glick guy is obviously inhuman! Finally, Bill has no other recourse but throw in the towel and pretend to claim victory:

[size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]Cut his mic. [/size] [size=-1]I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of respect for your father.
We will be back in a moment with more of The Factor.

[/size]

[size=-1]GLICK:[/size] [size=-1]That means we're done?

[/size] [size=-1]O'REILLY:[/size] [size=-1]We're done.

[/size]​

According to Glick, after the interview Bill completely lost his ****. He slammed his fist on the table and shouted "Get out! Get out of my studio before I tear you to fucking pieces!" In a radio interview, Glick later explained the lesson that Al Franken and innumerable other O'Reilly Factor guests would have benefited greatly from:

[size=-1]"O'Reilly's not there to debate. He's there to intimidate, he's there to bait his [guests]. And that's why, when he said that stuff about my Dad, the reason why I was calm is not because that wasn't hurtful or outrageous, it was because that's exactly what he wants to do. He wants to push your buttons."


[/size]

​

 

[VanillaGorilla]

You left out the beginning of the debate where click said ,"If you think about it, our current president, who I feel and many feel is in this position illegitimately by neglecting the voices of Afro-Americans in the Florida coup." One that is simply not true and second is a bunch of liberal propaganda. You also left out that Glick signed an anti war advertisement that accused America of terrorism after 9-11. Glick is obviosly to the far left and him mentioning Al Frakin doesn't exactly help. I don't know what your trying to show with this.

 

[jjjd]

iirc, it was also the french who refused to let us use their air space when we were bombing libya.

libya, the former head of the UN civil rights commission

if that isn't ironic, nothing is.

boycott is a legitimate form of speech, expression, etc.

and the french policies SUCK

the simpsons put it best: "cheese eating surrender monkeys"

 

[VanillaGorilla]

iirc, it was also the french who refused to let us use their air space when we were bombing libya.

libya, the former head of the UN civil rights commission

if that isn't ironic, nothing is.

boycott is a legitimate form of speech, expression, etc.

and the french policies SUCK

the simpsons put it best: "cheese eating surrender monkeys"

We need to start realizing that the french and the UN are no longer our allies. All they want is to usurp american soviergnty.

 

[Bean]

they want a piece of the pie; we go through a recession so quickly and come out just fine; they get jealous

the social programs from the french make me sick; i didnt even realize that the government owned Renault the automobile manufacturer, which in turn owns the majority of Nissan

 

[Meerschaum]

I'm glad some countries can stand up to Bush's tyranny. At least there are some people out there that are willing to speak up to such an obvious captalist war and who aren't reliant on our blood money and the WTO to speak out against this travesty.

IMHO the leftwing in this country has painted itself into the proverbial corner by continually pushing the envolope with extreme social agendas they call 'reforms', to me this is neither right or wrong, it simply is. There used to be what was called a 'conservative democrat' and the south was their base, they have continually alienated these ppl until the south is virtually solid republican and the 'middle ground' (conservative) democrat base dried up. I also think that the democratic party was given a virtual dose of speed by the baby boomers who believed in the ideas/agendas/etc of the leftwing in gigantic numbers and created a paranormal voting block that transcended geography and demographics, but today with many generations stacking up beneath the idealistic baby boomers the democratic base is dwindling. The generations that came after the baby boomers had to deal with the fallout rather than the benefits of the reforms and agendas that have been the liberal trademark for over a quarter century and thus dont share the idealistic ferver that many elder democrats are still fueled with. I am of the opinon that the democratic party is going to continue to either shrink or its going to alter its persona to appeal to less partisan and more 'middle of the road' people.

BTW: I am a libertarian so you tree huggers play nice now!

EDIT: And I still call my french fries French! with pride

 

[jjjd]

why not call them pommes frites, adopt a french accent, stop wearing deodorant and using soap.

the conversion will be complete.

i'm almost embarassed to admit i speak fluent french

 

[CDB]

Believe in the war or not, the French deserve to be dipped in hot oil. How many Americans are buried in that country surrounded by those smellyu pricks? How many Americans died to save their collaborating, appeasing asses from having to speak German? I don't care about their position on the war, it's the way it was expressed that pisses me off. Gratitude doesn't require you to agree all the time, but it should do something to dictate the manner of the disagreement.

 

[aristotle]

One has to simply look at history and world politics to understand that this two idiots were trying to unify Europe to establish a counterbalance of power against the US. The thing that fucked them up was that some European contries basically split themselves from this bullshit and allied with the US. In simple terms those two clowns would of and have been opposing everything the US wants to do. The Iraq war was never about WMD's or liberating people, those were just assumptions made for going to war. The Iraq war is a strategic one, have the U.S. in the middle of where the action is, in the middle east to go after AL Qaeda or any country aiding them. From Iraq the US can keep Syra, Lybia, Iran, and most importantly Saudi Arabia, who are not allies of this country or the administration, in check. India keeps Pakistan in check with nuclear threat, and then the US can go about their business of fucking up AL Qaeda. By cutting funding of the Saudi's, the intelligence by the Pakistanis and safe haven from the Saudis, Pakistanis and Iran, the US strategic thinking should work out, the only problem is sending enough troops to Iraq to calm the **** out there, but that would stretch the military forces even further, this is why there has been a continuous talk about opening up a draft.

 

[bandit_193]

The Iraq war is a strategic one, have the U.S. in the middle of where the action is, in the middle east to go after AL Qaeda or any country aiding them. From Iraq the US can keep Syra, Lybia, Iran, and most importantly Saudi Arabia, who are not allies of this country or the administration, in check. India keeps Pakistan in check with nuclear threat, and then the US can go about their business of fucking up AL Qaeda.

I've been saying this since the beginning...

 

[spitboy2000]

France is an enemy

**** the French. We should invade the country and take their women.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

I'm glad some countries can stand up to Bush's tyranny.

Bush's "tyranny" is about the only thing in his admin that I agree with, except for this "weak" SS reform.

I think it's necessary to get the theological whack-jobs out of the Muslim states b/c they are our biggest threat. Now, these dictator's, etc, will not just stop being dictators and teaching radical state-sponsored religious views that promote hate if we "ask them" or hold a "summit". They have to be bitch slapped out of their position. Plain and simple. Look what's happening in Egypt, Lebannon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc. They're all making voluntary reforms that agree with western democratic philosophy. Do you think it's simply a coincidence that it just happened during Bush's 2nd term in office? I sure don't, that would be ridiculous.

Aside from that, don't get me started on Bush. I don't like to listen to him talk, I don't like much to look at him, and he frankly bothers me. But, his resolve on reform in the middle east is enough for my support.

The people and countries, like France, who are "standing up the Bush' tyranny" are jokes. The EU is in trouble. Germany and France are takign big ass falls. Hell, Germany's unemployment is up to like 12.6% now and the state is literally forcing people into prostitution if they want to keep their benifits. Point == France, Germany, rest of EU = Joke.

 

[x_muscle]

Bush is total moran, you cant just go against the world and start a war based on false prediction (Iraq had WMDs)!!!
war is sucking US people tax money, time, and lives of many soldiers on a hopless effort. you cant bring democracy in Iraq or Middle east by force. And democracy is not best solution in all cases. As soon as US pulls out of Iraq, the people will go back to to Islamic rule, because that what they believe in. Another Islamic country 10x worst than Sadams rule, he wasnt considered a religous muslim. Just look at the results of so called elections in Iraq, most of people chosen are right wing conservative muslims.

boy cot France because they wanted to disagree, i thought we live in free world!! Americans are full of themselves, as soon as some one disagrees with them, they want to invade them, destry them, and boycott them, then they claim they believe in freedom of speech and opinion. Go ahead change French fries to Liberty fries and we will see who will laugh at the end.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

Man this thread is old....freggin' somebody needs to close the polll so it stops getting bumped.

 

[LCSULLA]

Bump. Screw the French. HAven't had a backbone since Nepoleon.

 

[The Experiment]

Louis XIV and Napoleon are rolling in their graves for how bad France has turned out to be.

The problem I have with the French is not the French at all. They are arrogant assholes who think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. The problem here is the liberal media who takes France's opinions as fact because they're too blind or dumb to see how Nationalist Frenchmen are. France hates everyone. France hates Britain, Spain, Italy, and Germany. In fact, Parisians hate non Parisians and vice versa. The French are not the open minded of people. When people take this as gospel, then there are problems.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

boy cot France because they wanted to disagree, i thought we live in free world!! Americans are full of themselves, as soon as some one disagrees with them, they want to invade them, destry them, and boycott them, then they claim they believe in freedom of speech and opinion. Go ahead change French fries to Liberty fries and we will see who will laugh at the end.

Or it could be because Sadam was paying France off with the UN. That might have had some thing to do with it.

 

[TrainTilUDrop]

Well I will add to this that I do boycot as many French products as I can. They were never nice to me when I went to the UK and ever since then I have been bitter. Now all this BS. Evian water and all that other crap that comes out of the country I refuse to buy.