Wednesday, July 28, 2004

Bill O'Reilly interviewed Michael Moore last night
and though it wasn't as "explosive" as promised, it was enlightening. Moore refuses to take any position besides BUSH LIED!!! In fact, Bush may actually have believed that there really were WMD in Iraq, but that's just the sign of a criminal mind:
O'REILLY: Just the issues.  You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, U.S. intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, “he lied.”  This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious –
MOORE: Well, that’s almost pathological – I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test –
O'REILLY: Alright, now you’re dancing around a question –
MOORE: No I’m not, there’s no dancing
O'REILLY: He didn’t lie
MOORE: He said something that wasn’t true.

Alright, to extend an example O'Reilly tried to use earlier in the interview, let's say you're standing out on the street in front of the convention, you're looking over the official convention schedule and see that Ted Kennedy is scheduled to speak that night. Someone comes to you and asks you who's speaking, and you say Kennedy is one of the speakers. In the meantime, it turns out Kennedy is unable to make it - perhaps he got stuck in traffic, whatever. So, you were definitely wrong, but did you lie?

O'Reilly made his own mistakes:
MOORE: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.
O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself—
MOORE: Your child—Its Bush sending the children there.
O'REILLY: I would sacrifice myself.
MOORE: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old—
O'REILLY: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.
MOORE: Say ‘I Bill O’Reilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah’
O'REILLY: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous
MOORE: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?

These soldiers aren't children - the U.S. is not sending 12-year-olds into combat - they are adults, adults that volunteered for duty while knowing what personal risks that entails. At a minimum, O'Reilly should have at least have said something simple like "If my son [or daughter, I don't know what children he has] chose to server in the military, to go to Iraq, I would support him and his decision."

Monday, July 26, 2004

The consequences of socialism:
Lazy Norwegians. My theory on the increase in disability claims comes from over-indulging in lutefisk.