Video: ‘Wrong’ Rosie won’t voice support for US victory in Iraq (Update: KP defends Elizabeth)
posted at 12:34 pm on October 18, 2006 by Ian
Share on Facebook | regular view
Bill O’Reilly was on this morning’s “The View” to discuss his book, “traditionalists” and “secular progressives”, and a variety of other issues.
Before Bill O came out with the gals, Rosie introduced “Disagree” and “Wrong” signs she plans to use with the upcoming interview. Sort of like Olympic judges, I guess, with the East German model of impartiality. Later in the interview those signs come back and bite her you know where.
When explaining the difference between a traditionalist and a secular progressive, Mr. Bill names Joe Lieberman as a liberal who is a tradtionalist. Rosie doesn’t take kindly, interrupts, and voices her support for Ned Lamont. To the surprise of, well, no one.
O’Reilly goes after Oprah for the overwhelming number of secular progressive guests on her show compared to the number of traditionalists she has on the show. Rosie jumps in and says Oprah has more traditionalists than secular progressives on his show. Bill O stops Rosie there, asks for her silly sign, points and yells “You’re wrong!”
Near the end of the interview, Rosie–probably wishing that she didn’t bring up something that would come back and bite her–brings up the war. Mr. Bill turns it back on her and wants to know if she wants a US victory in Iraq. Rosie declines to give a direct answer. I guess it’s safe to put her in the Ted Turner “undecided” column.
Update: KP writes:
Why does Elizabeth Hasselbeck even show up for work? Every time I see a clip of this insipid show, Hasselbeck tries to say something and she is drowned out by the shrieks of Rosie. I didn’t even support going to war in Iraq, but I certainly want a victory. That Rosie can’t even say that is pathetic.
Indeed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
So when does “The Vent” get national syndication?
E L Frederick on October 18, 2006 at 12:39 PM
We need a rap spliced with that “you’re wrong” clip over and over.
And Elizabeth is exactly right. If a person is a soldier, it is because that person is an adult who made a decision. It’s impossible for a parent to “send” their child to Iraq.
But I guess she’s saying that she would prevent her child/ren (does she just have one, or more than one?) from choosing to serve in a war?
Any good parent should support their child’s decision even if they disagree with it.
I don’t have children yet, but I would support my ficticious children if they decided they wanted to fight in Iraq. I wouldn’t want them to leave me and wouldn’t want them in harm’s way, but I wouldn’t stand in their way.
Esthier on October 18, 2006 at 12:44 PM
“Do you want America to win in Iraq?”
What does that mean? Without any clear objective, is “victory” even possible?
GregH on October 18, 2006 at 12:45 PM
Rosie oughta spend a week over there, put on a burka, shop for for (and a LOT of it) at an outdoor market etc etc then come back (if she survives) and tell us what we the sheeple are to think about Iraq.
I’ll pitch in for the price of her (one-way) ticket.
Tony737 on October 18, 2006 at 12:50 PM
I had an interesting discussion with a conservative-leaning friend who doubted that liberals were anti-American, and sided with the terrorists. “Why would they want the terrorist to win?” he asked. I think it is quite simple.
First, the left is still enamored by Marxist/Stalinist socialism. This is why they embrace Castro, Chavez, Kim, ad nauseum. I know this is different than Islamo-fascism, but hang in there, I’m getting there…
Second, left-wing extremists hate our free society. They do not appreciate hearing viewpoints that disagree with heir own. They believe that they already have all the answers, and any conflicting arguments are counter-productive at best.
Third, they believe their socialist ideal is achievable, but only after the current capitalistic, democratic republic is eliminated. Therefore, they see the Islamo-fascist sabotage of our country as an opportnity for their takeover. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. They believe that after they can take over our country only after:
1. Islamists nuke Washington DC and the US Government fails, or
2. The democrats win both houses of congress and vote to surrender to the Islamo-fascists, or
3. The democrats win both houses of congress and vote to weaken our defenses to the extent that #1 or #2 occur.
Then the fun happens. The constitution will be re-written to change “rights” to “demands”. Free speech will be replaced by “correct” speach. Religion will be outlawed. Private property will be eliminated, and a system whereby income taxes will rise to 100%, with the government deciding how much money to distribute. We have seen this pattern before.
Of course, the Islamo-fascits have no special love for leftists, either. They will not be satisfied with nuking one US city. They have made their case quite clear…they intend to eradicate us “devils”. Even a leftist attempt to placate the Islamo-fascists by offering American Jews to them will not satisfy their hunger for western deaths.
This is the snapshot view of my opinion of the leftists’ motivations to our current problems. Not that people like Rosie have thought this out…the leftists in power have provided her with the talking points, and she’s merely parroting them.
stonemeister on October 18, 2006 at 12:51 PM
Ian, I didn’t think Bill went after Oprah, I think Barbara tried to make it an issue. O was but 1 example and Babs kept saying “but you attacked O”. Well he didn’t attack her, he used her as an example and he stated that he is to be on her show next week..As for Rosie..she doesn’t even have the intelligence level of a highschool Junior, with regards to pertinent subjects. She just looks ignorant everytime a serious subject arises…
Pam on October 18, 2006 at 12:51 PM
I watched for the fun of seeing Bill vs. Rosie, and I am surprised at how composed and rational Bill actually sounded. (Of course, when going against Rosie, almost anyone will sound intelligent and reasoned.)
She waited for the applause when she announced a Ned Lamont victory, and only about 2 boobs clapped (probably show producers encouraging applause.)
Of course, she and Joy both fell back on the liberal mantra “Would you send your child to Iraq?”. When Elizabeth was finally allowed to speak, she put Rosie in her place by stating the obvious: a soldier is an adult who makes a choice. “But what if there was a draft?”
So predictable!
BlueStateBlues on October 18, 2006 at 12:56 PM
If it is or isn’t, is that really the issue? I mean my husband knows the Texans aren’t very good at football, but they’re the home team (well, we moved but still), so he wants them to win anyway.
All the good Texans (all three of them or whatever) were taken before he could pick one for fantasy football, so when the Texans play, he usually has a guy on the other team playing.
But he still cheers on the Texans.
To quote South Park (though maybe not perfectly), “If you’re not cheering for the hometeam, get out of the stadium.”
Do you Hot Air people have that clip, the one where they went to Afganistan with the goats?
Esthier on October 18, 2006 at 12:57 PM
Rosie and the libs want America out of Iraq, no matter the consequences, more than they want America to win. If they admit or state they want America to win, then they have to commit to finishing the job, which is counter to their “cut and run” philosophy. Also, wanting America to win is indirect support for President Bush and his policies. They would rather see a disaster from a pull out than any smidgen of credit to the President.
Victory in Iraq is when the current democratic government can defend itself against insurgency and terrorism without being overthrown or disintegrating into chaos. Is progress being made? Yes, albeit not at the rate of the libs’ sitcom “everything-is-resolved-in-30-minutes” mentality.
Mallard T. Drake on October 18, 2006 at 1:00 PM
I refuse to watch that fat bloated cow and her attempts to be funny when she is not funny, has never been funny and never will be funny. She’s just stupid.
marianpaul on October 18, 2006 at 1:03 PM
Anothter thought: Rosie and the libs know that they can’t say “no” when asked if they want America to win the war. If they are honest, they know it will be all over for them in the court of public opinion, and rightly so. So they evade the question and answer a different question. They won’t even say ‘Yes I want America to win, but….’ If they don’t answer the question, they can’t be called Anti-American and held accountable.
Man, she disgusts me.
Mallard T. Drake on October 18, 2006 at 1:04 PM
Ok, GregH, how do you define your clear objective?
A) Leaving Iraq now, so we have no more lost American lives?
B) Leaving Iraq at a time when she can defend herself and her people?
E L Frederick on October 18, 2006 at 1:08 PM
O’Reilly was actually very nice about Oprah. He commented on her incredible success from such humble beginnings. She is a remarkable woman who has done very well for herself. His issue was about the guests on her show—no personal attacks whatsoever.
As for Rosie, look how she sits there with her nose up in the air the whole time. Every time she spoke, it was to the audience, not Bill. She was antagonistic from the very beginning. Nice way to have a civilized debate.
And another thing, if Bill has more conservative guests, it’s only because the pansy liberals are too afraid to appear on his show. How many times has he said “Mr. X, we’d love to hear your side of the story”? They always turn him down. Is it because they know they don’t have an argument? They’d rather sit on a stage (like Streisand) and make their “argument” to people who already agree with them.
CookeyD on October 18, 2006 at 1:10 PM
I believe the stated goals are to create a stable, self-sufficient, self-governing country, that can be an ally in the War on Terror. Frankly, I want America to succeed in doing this. Can you answer that question? Nevermind the arguments of whether we should be there or not, whether we’re winning or not, or what it’s costing us, etc. Do you, GregH, wish for American to succeed in Iraq? Yes or No
DakRoland on October 18, 2006 at 1:11 PM
Rosie O’Donnel again! Ick!
I AM SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING THIS SAME STUPID, CRAP STATEMENT FROM LIBERALS: “WOULD YOU SEND YOUR CHILD TO WAR?”
That is such a ridiculous statement. It’s a liberal ploy to use an invalid question to create a catch-22. If you answer “yes” to this question, then you’re a heartless tyrant, and if you answer “no” then you can’t support the war on terror and be consistent in your beliefs. What a load of crap!
NO ONE who loves their child would send them to war…BUT THAT’S NOT THE D*MN POINT!
If you’re the President of the United States your duty and obligation is to protect the U.S. from all enemies, foreign and domestic, not to make sure that the Armed Forces of the U.S., which is composed of other people’s children, don’t get put in harm’s way. I DON’T WANT a president that considers the U.S. Armed Forces his children, because then the U.S. would be ripe for invasion. We would never send our soldiers to fight because they could get killed, and the ultimate result would be the destruction of America and sharia rule of the world.
Imagine a scene where the president has decided not to use the military because they are “someone’s children”: Let’s see, Cuba has invaded and taken Florida, the new California governor, who is an illegal immigrant, has declared secession and joined Mexico, and the new French-Islamic forces have destroyed New York City and are moving on to neighboring states. Hmm. I guess I better not send our soldiers in because they could get hurt, and those are people’s children.
LIBERAL: Won’t somebody please think of the children!
Boo-freakin-hoo. Let’s think of the children…the millions that are being protected by our brave men and women in uniform, you pansy.
Lone Star on October 18, 2006 at 1:14 PM
Apparently after Rosie jumped the shark, she ate it as well.
JammieWearingFool on October 18, 2006 at 1:15 PM
Most on the left cant really answer this question with a simple ‘yes or no’ If they say ‘no’
. If they say ‘yes’ then they lose credibility with their lefty/socialist friends.
vcferlita on October 18, 2006 at 1:25 PM
Oh. I have a question: Was there anybody who actually watched that and thought Rosie O’Donnell would keep that enormous trap shut and just use signs?
I didn’t. Her mouth is like a baby’s butt…It’s never seems to stop spewing crap!
Lone Star on October 18, 2006 at 1:27 PM
As much as Mr. Reilly et al would like promulgate the concept, I don’t believe that it’s a simple yes or no.
That’s an unattainable goal (though it makes for a nice sound bite), and as such I wouldn’t be willing to sacrifice additional lives in it’s pursuit.
GregH on October 18, 2006 at 1:29 PM
Again, GregH, whether it is attainable or not is hardly the issue. The question is whether or not you’re cheering for the US.
It shouldn’t be a brain teaser.
Esthier on October 18, 2006 at 1:36 PM
“That’s an unattainable goal (though it makes for a nice sound bite), and as such I wouldn’t be willing to sacrifice additional lives in it’s pursuit.
GregH on October 18, 2006 at 1:29 PM”
And you, being the expert in foreign affairs and wartime strategy, would obviously know this.
EEprom on October 18, 2006 at 1:38 PM
Uh, GregH, just because something isn’t obvious to you – and I suspect that there is much when it comes to military geopolitical strategy, operational art and tactics that is not obvious to you – doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
You need to work your brain a little harder. Your reasoning faculties are flabby, and it shows. Slogans, canards and cliches may work just fine at some of the other places you may post at, where sophomoric stabs at “wit” pass as “wisdom,” but they don’t pass muster here.
You want objectives? OK, let’s consider a few:
Objective I: Remove Saddam Hussein from power and ensure that his demon seed sons don’t take his place. Secondary objectives: A. Eliminate Iraq’s financial support for suicide bombers in Israel and its encouragement of and training of Middle Eastern terrorists in general; B. Eliminate the Iraqi Baathist Party’s stranglehold of fear over the Iraqi people and give them a shot at representative government; C. Eliminate a major source of regional wars and political instability in the Middle East; D. Eliminate the prospect of Saddam or his sons ever reviving their nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs.
Objective II: Take the offensive in the GWOT by taking the war to the enemy’s front yard, instead of siting around in a bunker mentality, waiting for them to hit us again here.
Objective III: Adopt a new strategy in the Middle East that no longer relies on propping up an assortment of corrupt “royal families” who repay us by oppressing their peoples and redirecting their resentment and anger at us and Israel; instead, create conditions supporting the long-term spread of representative governments beyond Iraq’s borders as a way of lifting that oppression and turning that anger into hope for a better future.
Objective IV: Demonstrate to nations that harbor terrorists, sponsor terrorists, develop or proliferate nuclear weapons or which in other ways wish to threaten America that contemplating such a course of action is unwise, and that following through on it can lead to severe consequences.
These are just four objectives that come to mind immediately to anyone paying attention – instead of just making ignorant wisecracks and thinking he’s being cute by doing so. You can debate the wisdom of those objectives; you can debate our success in achieving them; but to just smarmily deny that they exist is reflective not on the Bush Administration. It says a great deal about you, though.
Spurius Ligustinus on October 18, 2006 at 1:42 PM
You’re not answering the question, unless you mean you don’t want America to succeed. The point of the question is to see where your heart is. I don’t say I want America to succeed because I know it’s easy and attainable. Nothing that was worth doing was ever easy. I want America to succeed because it’s the right thing. When our country was founded, it was paid for by the sacrifice of thousands, the blood of our forefathers was spilled for a simple idea, freedom. If your statement of not wanting to sacrifice additional lives was used back then, would we have a United States today? Back then they realized that some must be sacrificed for the greater good. It was a sacrifice made willingly. The men who go to Iraq, the overwhelming majority, feel it is a mission worth completing. Because they believe in it, I believe in it. If my daughter decided to join the Military with the possibility of fighting terrorists over there, I would support her decision. I would constantly worry about her, but I would support her.
So, putting asside whether you believe it is an attainable goal or not, would you like to see American succeed in Iraq? Yes or No
DakRoland on October 18, 2006 at 1:45 PM
Nothing is unattainable GregH.
Note, the Free Iraq government is still very new and needs our help to grow as a free society. It might end up being a religious dominated government, which isn’t exactly what we want, but would be better than a terrorist state.
Kini on October 18, 2006 at 1:50 PM
“No, but I’d threaten to send him there if he didn’t eat his brussels sprouts.”
What an absurd question.
RD on October 18, 2006 at 1:56 PM
Rosie is an idiot. As is Bill O’Reilly. This couldn’t have gone well!!
PS, Have you read his book Culture Warrior? What a heap of crap–all platitudes and self aggrandizement and self pity. Have to give him a bit of credit, getting a whole book out of such a tired and illogical notion.
honora on October 18, 2006 at 1:57 PM
Every time I see Rosie – the same terrible image creeps in my mind – that scene HotAir posted from “Nip Tuck”.
Eaauuuu!!!!
Dr. Gecko on October 18, 2006 at 2:00 PM
No sir. When did you get done with it?
RD on October 18, 2006 at 2:02 PM
Please provides some examples.
JammieWearingFool on October 18, 2006 at 2:03 PM
When those on the right are asked whether or not we want the troops home, the answer is ‘yes, of course we want the troops to come home and be safe. But, they have a job to do and we want them to complete their mission and be successful before returning.’
However, the libs cannot say ‘Yes we want America to win. But, there are too many problems and it is not worth the effort, etc.’ They are afraid to show their support for this country, because such a concept is too “nuanced” for their way of thinking.
Mallard T. Drake on October 18, 2006 at 2:04 PM
Great points Esthier (though, being a Steeler fan, I do feel sorry for your hubby :-)
GregH, let me ask you a question… yes or no… Do you want us to win in Iraq? Not “will we probably”, not “should we or shouldn’t we”… Do you want us to win in Iraq? Simple question GregH, give us a simple answer.
dalewalt on October 18, 2006 at 2:08 PM
What a liberal concept using signs is! No discussion, no reasoning, just a stupid sign.
SouthernGent on October 18, 2006 at 2:09 PM
Well, at least we were all spared an update by Ms. O’Donnell regarding her O’Reilly induced bowel insurgency.
rw on October 18, 2006 at 2:16 PM
With Rosie onboard ‘The View’ is on the same level as Jerry Springer trash TV. Knowing the morons in audience are allowed to vote is downright scary.
infidel4life on October 18, 2006 at 2:38 PM
I think you summed your view up nicely GregH
You simply aren’t willing to do what it is going to take to win. That’s ok. Your allowed that opinion.
However this is a serious issue, and we need serious people who are willing to make the hard decisions for the good of this country and Iraq.
Be glad you aren’t in that position.
E L Frederick on October 18, 2006 at 2:47 PM
The real tragedy is his love of baseball, which he values much more than football. Watching the Astros finally make it to the World Series last season was a dream for him, but watching them get swept, heartbreaking.
Esthier on October 18, 2006 at 2:48 PM
The jihadists don’t have a hard time answering the question of whether they want America to win or not. They answer it every day and there is no nuance, no explanation, no concern for “context”. They have a simple definition of winning too. Total withdrawal of the infidel crusaders from the center of the caliphate. That would be coalition forces out of Iraq. Period
To this day they take credit for driving the US out of Lebanon by bombing the Marine barracks in Beirut, and out of Somalia downing a helicopter in Mogadishu.
LakeRuins on October 18, 2006 at 2:55 PM
I haven’t seen the clip; however, it seems that Conservative need to learn to operate in sound bites and then in sound bites that resonate with liberals/commies.
“WOULD YOU SEND YOUR CHILD TO WAR?”
– They may choose to go to war – it’s all volunteer. Globally, many countries force people into miltary service however the USA does not.
ar_basin on October 18, 2006 at 3:05 PM
Thats whats wrong with the left, the monologue-ists never listen and say the dumbest frickin things possible, maybe ever. You would’ve said the same thing about Japan in 1942, Germany in 1944, Italy, shall I go on? You dumb f*%ks, look around you and see what good hearted people with honorable intentions can do. Freedom, democracy, great countries achieving wonderful things, countries that were once the worst torturers and murderers on the planet.
As you might have no honor, nor good intentions, this could be quite a stretch, but if something gets thru that thick skull of yours, you might even enjoy life for a change. or not.
How many of you are driving Toyotas? or Subaru’s from the company that designed the Zero?
shooter on October 18, 2006 at 3:06 PM
I think that’s the gist of what most of us were trying to get at. The question is ridiculous on it’s face because parent’s can’t choose to send their child off to war. If their child is old enough and voluntarily joins the US Military, then they are choosing for themselves.
DakRoland on October 18, 2006 at 3:09 PM
Sorry, shooter, but Subaru is a different car company. Mitsubishi manufactured the Zero.
Gottafang on October 18, 2006 at 3:11 PM
Better look back thru the history of the Subaru Gottafang.
shooter on October 18, 2006 at 3:12 PM
Typo (I think)
I think in the second to last sentence you meant to say “O’Rielly” not “Oprah”, so it would read Rosie jumps in and says
OprahO’Rielly has more traditionalists than secular progressives on his show.RightWinged on October 18, 2006 at 3:21 PM
I like the Do Not Enter signs clamped over her ears.
Jim Treacher on October 18, 2006 at 3:25 PM
Still waiting for some examples. But actually, I doubt you read the book.
JammieWearingFool on October 18, 2006 at 3:40 PM
The only thing I see is that Subaru is part of the Fuji Heavy Industries Group that was formed from the merger of five Japanese companies in 1953, including the Nakajima Aircraft Company, which didn’t make the Zero, but did make several other fighter and bomber aircraft. Check here.
But according to Wikipedia, both the Imperial Japanese Navy sent aircraft specs to both Nakajima and Mitsubishi. When the Navy sent out new specs, Nakajima thought they were ridiculous and pulled out of the bidding.
So am I mising something?
And I used to drive a Toyota. Owned two, in fact. But I turned the last one in after the lease was up. Now I drive an Olds Cutlass Supreme that I bought from a friend of my dad’s.
Anyway. . .that Rosie, eh? Whatta pushy broad. Took McCall’s, a fine magazine with a long publishing history, rebranded it with her name to coincide with her crummy daytime show, then ditched it.
Gottafang on October 18, 2006 at 3:46 PM
Ah. . .but a later model used a Nakajima engine!!
So I stand corrected.
Gottafang on October 18, 2006 at 3:49 PM
McCalls is gone? I remember seeing my moms copies laying around in the 60’s. And rosie ruined it? wow. Not that I read it but it seemed to be a bit of Americana.
shooter on October 18, 2006 at 3:57 PM
Later in the interview those signs come back and bite her you know where.
It would have had to be one biiiiiig bite to have any kind of noticeable impact on her “you know where.”
Tom Blumer on October 18, 2006 at 4:14 PM
Rosie O Must have been juiced up. She wasn’t near
as civil as she was when on O’Reillys show.
What a dork. . . Sorry dorks
Texyank on October 18, 2006 at 4:17 PM
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country, but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”
- Thomas Paine, “The Crisis”
Tony737 on October 18, 2006 at 4:52 PM
GreH doesn’t want America to win in Iraq because he’s a “card carrying” member of the traitor-left. His blog is the proof.
Now, about that old self-rightous platitude: “Would I send my child off to war.”
Got news for you liberals. My son joined the Marines at age 18. A legal adult, making an informed choice, based upon his research on the Corps and his desire to serve his country. He joined AFTER 9/11/01, with the full knowledge that America was at war and that he would almost certainly be fighting.
AMERICANS do not send their children to war, especially with the volunteer military. AMERICANS, of legal age, volunteer to join the military and to fight for their country when called upon to do so.
I emphasise the word AMERICANS because I do not consider the anti-war left to be fellow citizens of mine. They may share the same continent with me, and they may have been born here, but they do not share my values, and they openly work against my country’s interests.
And yes, I am questioning GregH’s patriotism.
georgej on October 18, 2006 at 5:01 PM
Rosie is a pig. She acts like a child who thinks they know it all. Making little signs to put up while someone is talking about serious issues? Mature Rosie, so mature.
dynospectrum on October 18, 2006 at 5:53 PM
Well I did watch this today (the first time in a number of years) just to see what Rosie would do. Signs-how childish. It is scary that those in the audience vote. I feel for Elisabeth and wonder how long she’ll be around with that crew. I would like to see the Ladies of the Vent in that time slot. They may not agree on everything but they are respectful, professional & have much more class then Rosie, Joy, or even Barbara does for that matter.
Catie96706 on October 18, 2006 at 6:07 PM
I’m slowly dying from these Rosie posts. Dying. Dying. Why won’t she go away?
PRCalDude on October 18, 2006 at 6:41 PM
i also question GregH patriotism as well.
Starblazer on October 18, 2006 at 6:57 PM
In le grande derrière. Ugly, ignorant and the antithesis of charming. Merciless creator.
Entelechy on October 18, 2006 at 7:33 PM
Do they offer burkas in size “Orca”?
Hening on October 18, 2006 at 9:12 PM
O’Reilly always surprises me. He’s just not that good in a debate; on his own show he gets pegged as many times as he pegs. But when he’s out and about, he always seems to do extremely well. I still remember Letterman.
Ann Coulter needs to debunk that “Every question is irreducibly complex” rhetorical device too, when she gets a minute.
I think she just hates him :) Look at her sitting all stony and sour in the clip. She can’t fight that feeling anymore.
Axe on October 18, 2006 at 9:30 PM
Isn’t that Rosie’s two favorite lolipops? Disagree and Wrong?
Kokonut on October 18, 2006 at 9:47 PM
Rosie is nothng more than…
“A FAT, PIGFACED, BAG OF RAT GUTS………” Robert Blake
Soothsayer on October 18, 2006 at 9:49 PM
Katie Couric’s ratings have taken a dive.
CBS take note.
She could be your Next New Anchor.
Texyank on October 18, 2006 at 10:01 PM
Her mouth is like a baby’s butt…It’s never seems to stop spewing crap!
Lone Star on October 18, 2006 at 1:27 PM
AND
Do they offer burkas in size “Orca”?
Hening on October 18, 2006 at 9:12 PM
YOU GOTTA LOVE THESE REMARKS. HOPE SHE READS THEM AND GETS HER BOXERS IN A WAD.
tormod on October 18, 2006 at 10:30 PM
Her mouth is like a baby’s butt…It’s never seems to stop spewing crap!
Lone Star on October 18, 2006 at 1:27 PM
AND
Do they offer burkas in size “Orca”?
Hening on October 18, 2006 at 9:12 PM
You gotta love these remarks. I hope she reads this and gets her boxers in a wad.
tormod on October 18, 2006 at 10:39 PM
My friends and I have a betting pool about when Rosie will no longer be on the view. My date is November 8th, the day after Election Day. (I live in Chicago, and we had liberal DJ on WLS radio who stormed out of the studio the day after Election Day in 2004. Management fired him. That’s where I got the idea.)
Anyway, I want to suggest a replacement for Rosie: Caroline Rhea. LOL!! After all, it worked out so well the last time Caroline replaced Rosie!!!
While I’m thinking of it, about ten years ago, I was reprimanded by a gay Republican e-mail discussion group for saying “Rosie O’ Donnell is a fat pig.” I was reacting to her guns comments on her show. Geez! RINOs are really touchy! My lesson: never join an e-mail chat group with Andrew Sullivan.
Lothar on October 18, 2006 at 10:39 PM
HAHAHAHAHA!!
Theworldisnotenough on October 18, 2006 at 10:43 PM
Seriously though as much as I dislike Rosie (and still dislike, Bill should have asked her what do we do after the “troops come home”, the result squaking mindlessly, liberals have plenty of emotionallly based ‘logic’ and no plans) we should have left along time ago. Talley amendment anyone? Let them have their civil war. *shrug* So what. We need to secure a Kurdish state. They love us. Very rare that the people and the government actually like the U.S. Lets make friends there. That gives us a presence but we do not have to waste any more money.
Theworldisnotenough on October 18, 2006 at 10:48 PM
Of course it is possible.
It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘victory’ is.
I can find victories even where I do not know other peoples’ objectives. The long lines of voters in the national elections was a victory. It was not a victory for Saddam or al Qaeda who opposed the vote.
However, I am pretty sure Bush spelled out his objectives. You must have missed those speeches.
entagor on October 18, 2006 at 10:51 PM
This entry on Hot Air confirms why I don’t even consider watching The View – or O’Donnell – except here.
O’Donnell impresses me every time she opens that ugly mouth of hers as a stupid, ignorant, ill informed, defeatocrat that is ugly, fat, and without any redeming qualities or positive appeal.
Watching the View gives you a clear view of the biggest weakness the United States has – it’s own left.
omegaram on October 18, 2006 at 11:47 PM
I love it when Democraps force semi-pro-American comments over their forked tongues and fain support for the troops and our nation. They are so transparent that it really pushes the bile to the back of my throat. If that gastro-pod could press a button and blow up the US or the terrorist she would undoubtedly do the former.
x95b10 on October 19, 2006 at 2:36 AM
Does anyone have a complete, unedited version of the video? I can only find clipped versions, but I’d love to see the whole thing.
WesternActor on October 19, 2006 at 7:22 AM
Watched O’Reilly last night to see what he would say about the View appearance. At the end of his show, in the viewer mail segment the best of the night………..
“Dear Bill, I watched the View today just because you were on. Please don’t make me do it again.”
ROFL
BacaDog on October 19, 2006 at 8:54 AM
Honestly I don’t know how anyone watches that show. It is tv’s equivalent of a tripe & cheese sandwich.
BillLalor on October 19, 2006 at 10:01 AM
The only come back that is ever needed to shut Rosie up is: “I can not force my child into being a Soldier any more than I can force them to be Straight. It was something they thought and felt was right, correct, moral and just.”
Lurking_Canuck on October 19, 2006 at 10:57 AM
To the left, the Question ‘Do you want to win in Iraq’ is a ‘begging the question’.
Consider the famous begged question: “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
To the secular progressive mind, we’re assuming things that they don’t believe to be true, that is, 1. American should exist 2. America ever wins 3. Winning is a good thing for America (etc.)
Bring on the stupid!
RiverCocytus on October 19, 2006 at 11:31 AM
It is pretty obvious that Rosie wants us to fail.
Hilts on October 19, 2006 at 12:05 PM
What is so sad about “The View” is that so many Americans spend their time exposing themselves to their shrieky group think. Rosie hasn’t a clue about what a traditionist is. We don’t have to “bomb Mecca” (what new commentators had to vow they would not promote) to improve our chances against Islamofascism. Just push the “off-button” on these rabidly immoral populist hucksters.
gfmucci on October 19, 2006 at 1:01 PM
I wonder if Rosie will read Bill’s new book. She might become aware of her subconscious treason. She is dangerously stupid. Why does our culture encourage entertainers to spew their political opinions? Who cares what someone who chases the limelight ‘thinks’?
bridget on October 19, 2006 at 1:12 PM
Signs…. What an original idea for someone who is incapable of an intelligent debate.
“I’ll just hold up signs and my followers will think, ‘How witty that Rosie is’….”
This is our society’s “elite”? Our society’s “thinkers”? There was a time this was left to those such as Aristotle,
Fargus on October 19, 2006 at 1:17 PM
Rosie parrots Michael Moore’s talking points and the studio crowd goes wild. What’s the Moonbat translation for “idiot”?
Black Adam on October 19, 2006 at 1:43 PM
I gotta wonder. Would the goal be so “unattainable” if we didn’t have almost half the country trying to stop us from achieving that goal?
EWTHeckman on October 19, 2006 at 2:07 PM
I’m with you Stonemeister. As a former CUG (Commie Until Graduation–UMich ‘81), my question to the “tolerant” types who shouted down the Minuteman speech at Columbia would be, “Is the what the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ is supposed to look like?” I so agree; there is a direct line betw the suppression of speech in Cuba, and the way in which the liberal knee always jerks toward censorship. I remember how I used to rail against Ronald Reagan (oh, the shame, the shame), and how I really wanted bad things to happen to the United States. It is a pathology, but ideas, spefically, Marx/Lenin, et al, are lurking at the core of it.
smellthecoffee on October 19, 2006 at 2:32 PM
I am looking forward to the day when the libs decide they can come clean and admit publicly that they want us to lose the war against Islamofascism. They are almost there, and can barely contain themselves. It will be good for everyone when they cease with their nonsense about not wishing for an American defeat. It’s couldn’t be more obvious that that’s exactly what they want, and what is behind their whole ridiculous “anit-war” movement. They were a little more open about it when the struggle was against communism, but they’re more squeamish now about allying with a fascist enemy, but the psychology behind it all is the same. I wonder how much longer America will have to endure the Vietnam syndrome…
Halley on October 19, 2006 at 2:39 PM
We would have finished in Iraq, Iran, and Noko today if we had the full support of the “americans” from the left from the outset of the WOT. Instead the jihadists and the lefties are talking the same points today. Treason, plain and simple. …….^o^
aflyonthewall on October 19, 2006 at 3:06 PM
Walters looks like she is plotzing in her pants…I cant see her allowing this loudmouth lunatic to stay. Behar looks utterly lost. Elizabeth is the only sane one there. Jones was a loon, but nothing compared to the raving leftard Rosie
Doctorted on October 19, 2006 at 3:07 PM
I for one would be willing to chip in and buy Rosie one of these along with an airline ticket to Iran and an interview with the state-run television execs.
One size fits all.
janewest on October 19, 2006 at 3:15 PM
It was like hearing the noise coming from the HEN HOUSE when the rooster comes in.
Other than “Cackle” out some snide remarks Rosie didn’t answer the questions.
So much for a clear exchange of views…
trobles on October 19, 2006 at 3:25 PM
Rosie is such a tool (fool?). “Peace and harmony can come”. Rosie, Rosie, Rosie; tell that to the beheaders from the “Cult of Death”. You know what answer you will get? A quick and decisive blow to the neck from a saber-wielding cultist. Rosie has not one ounce of understanding/knowledge of whom we are dealing with. Just what color is the sky in her world?
She’s nothing more than a “useful idiot” for the islamofascists who wish only death/destruction and dhimmitude for us infidels. The goofy little signs she made “at home” are her best attempts at debate? How silly she looks in her childish attempts to be “knowledgeable of world events.
NotaSlickFan on October 19, 2006 at 3:49 PM
Michelle, you and your vent group would do well and interview Bill O. you only need to bring a couple of green signs saying “truth” and “agree”
As always good work!
dread pirate roberts on October 19, 2006 at 4:48 PM
Rosie is struggling to hide her ignorance. Among other tidbits she refered to MLK as an example of a secular progressive who made great strides for humanity.
That’s just how “out of touch” and ignorant of history these folks are. Retarded screechers with audiences of millions may just be succesful in re-shaping history to suit their agendas. The days of conservative Democrats are gone forever. Dr. King was surely rolling in his grave.
Griz on October 19, 2006 at 6:12 PM
I think that Bill should have shown up with a burka for Rosie… They do make them that big, don‘t they???
Oh yeah, and what draft?
RalphyBoy on October 22, 2006 at 9:53 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »