erynthered Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 it's becoming more obvious by the minute that this man and his empire have slapped much of western civilization in the face repeatedly for many decades and yet you find it reprehensible that someone mashes foam in his face? seems that the scale of things is a bit distorted. :lol: Thats some funny shiit right there.
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 it's becoming more obvious by the minute that this man and his empire have slapped much of western civilization in the face repeatedly for many decades and yet you find it reprehensible that someone mashes foam in his face? seems that the scale of things is a bit distorted. How? Do you have a list of trangressions?
GG Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 it's becoming more obvious by the minute that this man and his empire have slapped much of western civilization in the face repeatedly for many decades and yet you find it reprehensible that someone mashes foam in his face? seems that the scale of things is a bit distorted. And how exactly has the empire slapped an entire civilization? I'm also guessing that the reason the Chinese are supporting Wendi Deng is that the eastern civilization hasn't been slapped by Murdoch?
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 And how exactly has the empire slapped an entire civilization? "Herman's Head," for starters...
erynthered Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 How? Do you have a list of trangressions? Its been 20 minutes since his post. Western civilization continues to crumble by the minute. NOT. MUCH. TIME. LEFT.
birdog1960 Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 How? Do you have a list of trangressions? um...besides the transgressions that caused him to be dragged in front of parliament? how bout the ones that have prompted an inquiry in the US. and i suppose you could call it really bad taste rather than a transgression, but there's the whole fox thing and his employing of so many propagandists.
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 um...besides the transgressions that caused him to be dragged in front of parliament? how bout the ones that have prompted an inquiry in the US. and i suppose you could call it really bad taste rather than a transgression, but there's the whole fox thing and his employing of so many propagandists. And those transgressions are...?
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Herman's Head You've got to admit, that was a pretty bad one.
IDBillzFan Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 um...besides the transgressions that caused him to be dragged in front of parliament? how bout the ones that have prompted an inquiry in the US. and i suppose you could call it really bad taste rather than a transgression, but there's the whole fox thing and his employing of so many propagandists. Oh, "the whole fox thing." Why didn't you say so? That explains everything. Carry on.
Buftex Posted July 20, 2011 Author Posted July 20, 2011 That is absolutely correct. It is his company/conglomerate/whatever and at the end of the day, it IS his responsibility. I was surprised to hear him make that statement. That was stupid, unless it was urged by his legal team for whatever reason. Murdoch has retained Ken Lay and Seargent Schultz as his defense team...
Joe Miner Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 it's becoming more obvious by the minute that this man and his empire have slapped much of western civilization in the face repeatedly for many decades and yet you find it reprehensible that someone mashes foam in his face? seems that the scale of things is a bit distorted. Are you !@#$ing retarded?
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 um...besides the transgressions that caused him to be dragged in front of parliament? how bout the ones that have prompted an inquiry in the US. and i suppose you could call it really bad taste rather than a transgression, but there's the whole fox thing and his employing of so many propagandists. I had no idea the left hated fox this much. Good job
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Are you !@#$ing retarded? Not until he argues "But that's different!" when someone points out that, by his argument, Bill Clinton deserves a pie in the face because he didn't go to jail for Ruby Ridge.
erynthered Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 Are you !@#$ing retarded? He's HAS to be a Proctologist. How else can that post be explained?
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 um...besides the transgressions that caused him to be dragged in front of parliament? how bout the ones that have prompted an inquiry in the US. and i suppose you could call it really bad taste rather than a transgression, but there's the whole fox thing and his employing of so many propagandists. Even granting you the possibility that someone in one of his companies pulled some illegal crap, what makes you think it's been going on for decades? Stating that it was ok for the guy to hit him in the face with a pie smacks of vigilantism.
birdog1960 Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 And those transgressions are...? you don't know yet you defend him from a pie in the face? i'd have had no problem with clinton getting a pie in the face for several of his transgressions (only after leaving the presidency so as to not disrespect the office).
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 you don't know yet you defend him from a pie in the face? i'd have had no problem with clinton getting a pie in the face for several of his transgressions (only after leaving the presidency so as to not disrespect the office). What would you think of Obama getting a pie in the face once he left office?
/dev/null Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 i'd have had no problem with clinton getting a pie in the face for several of his transgressions (only after leaving the presidency so as to not disrespect the office). Why wait until he was out of office? While he was in office I'm sure he had no problem cream pieing Monica in the face
Joe Miner Posted July 20, 2011 Posted July 20, 2011 you don't know yet you defend him from a pie in the face? i'd have had no problem with clinton getting a pie in the face for several of his transgressions (only after leaving the presidency so as to not disrespect the office). A pie in the face? Not only are you !@#$ing retarded, but you're apparently 12 and infatuated with the Looney Toons justice system. What's the ratio and scale of the number and severity of transgressions to the number of pies, and the where those pies hit a person?
Recommended Posts