Quote:
Originally posted by TheCommodoreAfro+Sep 4 2004, 08:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (TheCommodoreAfro @ Sep 4 2004, 08:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan@Sep 4 2004, 12:18 PM
Ah, you diminished a great retort with the comment that calf highlighted IMO.# Bringing up the war just clouds all of the other issues that you mentioned.
Why do that?
After the war comment it just seems like another anti-war rant.
A shame in my opinion.
|
But O'Reilley has been on Canada since we went to the "dark side". He spearheaded the effort to "boycott Canada" like his effort to boycott France, he claimed, was very effective. He quoted a magazine called the Paris Business Review as to how damaged the economy was because of the US's withdrawl, but no such magazine exists and Franco/'Merican trade actually was up slightly.
Daradon pointed out the true source of O'Reilley's displeasure, IMHO and what is clouding HIS judgement when he made the statements.
Oh, and by the way, those totals are incorrect. Becky Scott's bronze was upgraded to a gold and Russia lost a gold and a silver, so we're actually in fourth officially.
Click on the Medal Count Tab, then resend to Bill O'Reilly [/b][/quote]
Much more effective, to me, if you leave that out of it. Daradon is speaking from a more informed point of view than O'Reilly. He has initmate knowledge and an affinity for both societies.
What matters is NOT O'Reiily's motivation in expressing this stuff, what matters is that Daradon is pure in his motivation for disputing it. Otherwise, you've just got a big arguemnt of the war and why Chretien and Howard chose opposite in supporting it.
What good is that? You can find that anywhere. Making O'Reilly look like a fool with his own words is much more effective and worthwhile.