"There was really no need on your part to hint otherwise as you did earlier, unless you're ashamed to admit so in our presence, which you shouldn't be. If you enjoy listening to him, who are we to demean you for it?"

That's funny for so many reasons.  Sometimes you make good points, sometimes you're more comic relief.  

BTW - Does the Rev Al do a disclaimer??

"I haven't paid my taxes and this isn't a news show?"

Joyce, a U.S.-born British citizen raised in Ireland, was a teenaged snitch to British forces regarding IRA activities during the Anglo-Irish War (1919-22). He and his family, Irish Catholics who had remained loyal to the Crown, moved to London in the wake of Irish independence. A devout anti-Semite, William eventually gravitated to and became a member of Sir Oswald Moseley's British Union of Fascists.

As relations between the British Empire and Nazi Germany rapidly deteriorated in late summer of 1939 over the then-looming German invasion of Poland, Joyce and his wife Margaret -- who was also a staunch fascist -- fled England to avoid their political internment. They quickly made their way to the Third Reich, whch granted them both citizenship in May 1940. The Reich Ministry of Entertainment and Propaganda soon made efficient use of this convenient and all-too-willing tool.

People in Great Britain, and also across the Atlantic in Canada and the United States (via short-wave radio), would regularly listen to Joyce's near-nightly propaganda broadcasts, because they often provided the only information that was available regarding Allied soldiers and airmen who might have been captured and were possibly being held behind enemy lines. "Lord Haw-Haw" would regularly read the names of Allied POWs aloud on the air, imploring his listeners to pressure their respective governments to seek peace with the Third Reich so that their loved ones could come home.

When the British 2nd Army overran Hamburg in May 1945, William Joyce was personally (and quite ironically) taken into custody by Lt. Geoffrey Perry, who as a child had been a Jewish refugee from Germany formerly known as Horst Pinschewer. Following his recovery from gunshot wounds incurred during his capture, "Lord Haw-Haw" was quickly repatriated against his will to Britain, where he was formally indicted in September 1945 with high treason against the Crown, a charge which carried a mandatory death sentence upon conviction.

Joyce was quickly convicted after a three-day trial, and after several perfunctory appeals were rejected in turn, he was subsequently hanged at London's Wandsworth Prison on the morning of January 3, 1946. He remained thoroughly unrepentant about his anti-Semitic and Nazi sympathies to the very end and quite fittingly, his last words were reportedly:

"In death as in life, I defy the Jews who caused this last war, and I defy the powers of darkness which they represent."

"Lord Haw-Haw" remains the very last person to ever be executed for high treason in the United Kingdom.

What we have here is a conversation by an atheist who has volunteered to be a victim of O'Reilly's scorn. As part of the discussion O'Reilly says, "Tide goes in. Tide goes out." And then he adds that the atheist can't explain that. And he  doesn't although this  link gives a very good explanation of how to measure and the theory.

".....The Theory of General Relativity has adapted as new technologies and new evidence have expanded our view of the universe."
" So when we are scientifically discussing gravity, we can talk about the law that describes the attraction between two objects, and we can also talk about the theory that describes why the objects attract each other."

O'Reilly's point, when taken in context is you can measure but you can't explain the theory without acknowledging that "something/something created everything. Christians say God did. Your partial quote left that out because it weakens your attack on O'Reilly.  And if you want to claim that a belief in God makes people stupid, be my guest.

Scott, sorry but sometimes life interferes with my blogging. But I see that you didn't respond to my pointing out your inconsistency regarding "hackery."

Donald, I am so sorry to have hurt your feelings. Please accept my apologies and reward us with such 200 word posts on such important information as Lord Haw Haw and George Putnman... The things I do learn.

Yman, no. But I do want links to the sources.  And I didn't ask jondee for his source. In fact I didn't dispute it in anyway. So why are you rushing in where most would not go? Just have to snark, eh??

Mordiggan  a theory is a theory is a theory. Let us know when MMGW meets the requirement of being a Scientific Theory. Now it is a "small t" theory. You are welcome to accept it on faith just as O'Reilly and I accept God on faith. In the meantime we've got more "global sleet and ....oopps! I meant...warming on the way.

BTW - I Googled part of the quote and got a Wiki site that used another site by an atheist who had dozens of partial quotes.

I remain unimpressed.

Donald, what McBain said:

That's funny for so many reasons.  Sometimes you make good points, sometimes you're more comic relief.  

Except I'd make that 1%-99%.

GA, no. I said that O'Reilly is an entertainer. You say that O'Reilly bills his show as news program. Of course anyone watching O'Reilly immediately knows it is an opinion show...and it is the Bill O'Reilly show. Not the Bill O'Reilly News Show.

NBC News bills itself as NBC News.

Scott, yes. O'Reilly discusses current news. So do the folks on CNN and MSNBC. What should happen is that the channels label the opinion shows opinion.

But they don't. So hackery is hackery unless it is hackery about your pet network.

As I said, especially after all the caterwauling about Karl Rove and the US Attorney firing scandal.

Link

But this story looks even worse if you transport yourself back to early 2009, when Clinton first became of Secretary of State and, according to this story, initially refused to use a governmental account. The Bush administration had just left office weeks earlier under the shadow of, among other things, a major ongoing scandal concerning officials who used personal email addresses to conduct business, and thus avoid scrutiny.

The scandal began in June 2007, as part of a Congressional oversight committee investigation into allegations that the White House had fired US Attorneys for political reasons. The oversight committee asked for Bush administration officials to turn over relevant emails, but it turned out the administration had conducted millions of emails' worth of business on private email addresses, the archives of which had been deleted.

The effect was that investigators couldn't access millions of internal messages that might have incriminated the White House. The practice, used by White House officials as senior as Karl Rove, certainly seemed designed to avoid federal oversight requirements and make investigation into any shady dealings more difficult. Oversight committee chairman Henry Waxman accused the Bush administration of "using nongovernmental accounts specifically to avoid creating a record of the communications."

That scandal unfolded well into the final year of Bush's presidency, then overlapped with another email secrecy scandal, over official emails that got improperly logged and then deleted, which itself dragged well into Obama's first year in office. There is simply no way that, when Clinton decided to use her personal email address as Secretary of State, she was unaware of the national scandal that Bush officials had created by doing the same.

what was requested

Have the folks who requested, indicated they feel it was incomplete?

The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007 during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an email server not controlled by the federal government.

The issue has been in the public eye, so there is no way Clinton didn't know that she shouldn't be doing it.  I don't really care beyond security of communications through the state department.

Also, republicans need to realize she is doing what Bush & Co. did, but they did it on a far larger scale.

Can we stop with the hotmail/gamil/yahoo or whatever sevice mail is more secure that .gov, I mean seriously.

When did .gov get hacked, whose emails ?

Not who did the CIA spy on, that is absurd to think they can get into .gov and not her email, and since she is communicating with .gov, finding it would be relatively easy.