[UB355]

link bad

www.billoreilly.com

[RLK]

Answer: Yes, but I'm not going to get it.

[tuna_battle_slight_return]

O'Reilly just went over this five minutes ago. He was shocked at the results. He believes Bush does owe an explanation if WMD are not found.

[billbears]

bump. I may even have to watch O'Reilly to see the results. Haven't watched the man for months. He is irritating.

[ReaganRevolution]

Please. He only owes an explanation if we leave Iraq without finding anything. I fully expect in the weeks and months ahead that the military will find plenty.

[Alberta's Child]

Does President Bush owe you an explanation about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

In a word, YES.

[OldFriend]

O'Reilly is running a close second to Geraldo for the most annoying, self aggradizing person on FNC.

[Political Junkie Too]

I'll accept evidence of chemical dumpings, if not the chemicals themselves.

Some questions that I have:

1. Why did we find so many empty barrels? Could the contents have been dumped in the Euphrates? And why so many chemical suits and masks?

2. Why did we hear so many initial reports of field tests indicating the presence of chemicals in empty barrels and shells but later lab tests denied those reports? How could we be so precise with our missile technology yet 100% wrong with our parts per million devices in the field? Or maybe the labs are downplaying something?

-PJ

[hgro]

O'Reilly spent a lot of time ranting about an all white prom in a mixed race high school in Alabama (?). It may not have been a good thing to do but O'Reilly wanted Governor Perdue to come on O'Reilly's program and apologize for it happening.

O'Reilly is out after ratings and nothing else and he obviously doesn't care how he gets them.

[fight_truth_decay]

25269*
No 71%

Yes 29%

[Mark Felton]

yes, eventually.

[MinuteGal]

Bill O'Reilly made me almost physically ill tonight. He was in a subtly threatening mode several times, intimating that he would use his air wave power over those who don't think like he does. He was ranting so much that his guests, except for Cuomo, hardly got a word in edgewise.

I don't even want to get into his ravings to the Southwest Legal Foundation guy who became completely cowed even though he had a more legitimate position than Bill.

I'm taking a vacation from O'Reilly for a while. I had enough tonight to last me for a week or so till I cool off. I finally switched over to one of my all-time favorite silent movies, "Metropolis".

Alas, there's an egotistical tyrant featured in that production, also.

Leni

[cake_crumb]

LOL...I didn't take the survey, but no he doesn't.

[cake_crumb]

Insecticides, even undiluted ones, are not dangerous to people, even if delivered in warheads. That is ONE reaon why President Bush does not owe me an explaination.

[I still care]

I think what Bill may be missing is that many of us (this is my personal opinion) never really believed the ONLY reason for the war was WMD, OR oil, or any of the reasons popularly given.

It was about that it is time the rest of the world realizes that we WILL defend ourselves, and if you harm our citizens, you will get payback. Iraq was the message we sent to the world, that America was not going to be pushed around anymore, like a big stupid puppy. And the message was read and understood, by North Korea, by Syria, and by many others.

When Bill says "the war was sold on WMD", what did he expect the White House to say? We were going to kick the crap out of Iraq so the world would finally get it? This is not Clinton's USA anymore, thank God.

God Bless the leadership of President Bush.

[William Terrell]

I say he does. I'm willing to wait six months of weapon hunt, then, if there are none of significance found, I want to hear an explanation.

The reason is that I was for this war in Iraq was because of the WMD, and Saddam's probable willing dispersal of them among terrorists who have the same, or greater, hatred of the US as, or than, he does. I did not condone the US doing this as an attack dog for the UN. The idea disgusts me.

[thepitts]

Yes.

[Dan from Michigan]

No, I care only about Al Queida(Sp) operatives there. WMDS were not a good enough reason for me to support the war to begin with. Bin Laden ties were.

[bigeasy_70118]

This is the stupidest poll I have ever read. Bush is an elected leader, the easy answer is yes. He is accountable under the Constitution and will be held so in an election in 2004, regardless of whether WMDs are found and whether or not he gives the American people an explanation. Of course, Ramsey Clark could impeach him first, so this could all be moot.

But the question presumes that WMDs were the sole reason that we took out Saddam Hussein. And Dubya made it clear that Hussein has committed atrocities against his own people, the Kuwaitis and Americans. We're smarter than O'Reilly gives us credit for. April 9 was all the explanation anyone needed for the war w/ Iraq.

[Consort]

Bill takes that fair and balanced stuff too seriously.