Posted on 07/28/2004 1:19:49 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Some of the most heated political rhetoric televised on Tuesday came not from a speech made at the Democratic National Convention, but from a FOX News studio.
After running into one another outside of the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Michael Moore finally agreed to step into the ring with Bill O'Reilly for the first time since the release of his controversial documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11."
Left-wing rabble-rouser Moore and right-wing conservative O'Reilly sparred on FOX News' "The O'Reilly Factor" on Tuesday in an unedited interview taped on Monday. During the 12-minute interview, the two debated heated topics including President Bush's motivation for going to war, whether the United States should pull out of Iraq, and how to bring democracy to a dictatorship.
O'Reilly kick-started the interview, telling Moore that many politicians believe Bush was misinformed about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and that he was not lying. "You want to apologize to the president now or later?" O'Reilly asked.
"Actually," Moore countered, "it's President Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11."
During the interview, O'Reilly referred to Moore as "President Moore" and called him Saddam Hussein's "biggest defender in the media." Each discussion hit a brick wall over issues of semantics. "It's not a lie if you believe it to be true," O'Reilly said.
"Bill, I can't think of a worse thing to do than to lie to a country to take them to war," Moore insisted. "He did not tell the truth."
Moore continuously asked O'Reilly the question he posed to a series of senators in "Fahrenheit 9/11": whether he would sacrifice his own child for the Iraqi city of Fallujah.
"I would sacrifice myself," O'Reilly said.
The question was revisited several times during the interview, and each time, O'Reilly explained that he would send himself, but did not say whether he would send his child.
Concluding a meandering discussion on how to properly introduce democracy to a dictatorship, O'Reilly began to close the discussion, saying he was glad they had the interview, and discovered that they see the world in different ways.
"Right," Moore said. "I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and ... you would?"
"I would sacrifice myself," O'Reilly said.
"Where can we sign him up?" Moore exclaimed, to which O'Reilly responded, "You'd love to get rid of me."
"No," Moore said softly, extending his hand slightly across the table. "I want you to live. I want you to live."
I saw it. Unfortunately O'Rielly had his a** handed to him. He lost. Hands down. I thought he could have done better than that against Moore. Oh well.
Hmmm...odd. Why isn't it "Left-wing LIBERAL Moore and right-wing conservative..."
Still afraid of that "liberal" stigma? Why oh why?
As a right-wing conservative, I resent O'Reilly being characterized as such.
no one "sends their child" to war. its a volunteer military made up of adults.
most liberals wouldn't "send their child" to war for any reason whatsover - even if the enemy were at their front door, they would try and negotiate, or just go quietly.
ditto. Last night on the radio O'Reilly was saying how he agreed with Hillary on stem cell research. I suppose you could call it "right wing" but you have to be facing the other way.
They're both loosers.
Why do you think the terrorists in Iraq will win? Why do you think Americans are the dumbest people on the planet? If there wasn't a terrorist threat in America then who attacked the WTC twice? These are just some of the questions I would have asked MM.
I'm still amazed that someone saw fit to bear Moore's children.
I'm sure they're both losers, too. ;)
O'Loud Mouth should go back to hosting the tabloid Inside Edition.
Those who admire such a person likely suffer similar self image afflictions.
O'Reilly's an embarrassment.
I'm still amazed that someone saw fit to bear Moore's children.
I don't know how Moore could find his device to make children!
Agreed. Most liberals do not believe there is anything worth dying for.
and his radio broadcast is getting to be intolerable. DO you know how many times he says "ALL RIGHT" and "OK".
[Sigh...] I'm surprised Moore didn't slip into that quote that Bush also called an attack from Iraq "imminent." Is Michael Moore the biggest, fattest, liar on the planet, or is he simply delusional?
I guess it's just me, but I wasn't upset with O'Reilly. I was amazed at what a sloppy thinker Moore is. I guess what you see on the outside is what you get on the inside with this character. If Moore ever went to college, he should have his diploma revoked.
I thought it was even, you could tell Moore was a mental midget.
O'Reilly could have cut him off at the knees.
As a 26 year old son of a veteran (who signed up to serve when he was 19). I take a lot of offense to the whole "sending your children off to die" rhetoric. A lot of those guys dying over there are my age and I'm not a f***ing child.
Saying that likens the war to some type of children's crusade, which it isn't.
God forbid somebody in their twenties decides to sign up under their own volition to defend America and its ideals.
As for the reservists in Moore's film who were bitching about joining for the benefits and then being sent to war, although I have to respect them as soldires, I really can't feel any sympathy. The benefits offered under the GI bill is part of a contract, if you sign up to serve then you may be called into duty - maybe not.
Well, he's certainly found a niche market for the slop he sells. He's intentionally deceitful to the consciously deluded.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.