Stupid kid get's owned on Fox News

[Fit of Rage]

Sean Hannity is a tool anyway.

[Troll King]

I'm wondering what he expected to accomplish by appearing on Fox News anyways. It's like when your girlfriend says she wants you to appear on Jerry Springer with her; you just don't do it. If their intent was to discredit this guy, then why bother bringing him on in the first place. I mean, it's clear the kid is in way over his head and his belief is at best misdirected, but I don't see how he's newsworthy enough to be interviewed (read, attacked) in the first place.

I like how the second guy came in and said "I'm not going to insult you here", after the first commentator spent pretty much 3 minutes doing that. At least that second guy can actually ask questions like a journalist is supposed to do.

[Subjugation]

Sean Hannity is a tool anyway.

^^

[GuruMeditation]

Good grief ... Michael Crook is a tool.

He can't handle a debate yet took up an issue that needs strong resolve and arguments to defend and the anchormen ripped him apart.

[Fit of Rage]

The fact that his last name is Crook doesn't help his case.

[GuruMeditation]

Apparently he changed his name.

Looked around some sites linked here and there on him. Does anyone here read therant.us ? I have no qualms with adding Crook to their hall of shame but there are some serious wackos on there.

Liberal logic says if we had fewer guns, we would also have fewer crimes.

Therefore, from this we must conclude Liberal logic also dictates the following.

Fewer eating utensils would soon lead to less obesity. Fewer restaurants would also lead to less obesity, as would fewer cattle. After all cows give milk, and milk can be fattening. Cattle also give us beef, which can also make us fat.

Tone or Telcat did you write this?

[Dameon Angell]

Ha ... I saw that live, that kid has problems.

[Zabuza]

ROFL OMFG OFMGF OWENE WEDONEW QWEONW EONW EOWN ONEWD OWNED OMFG THAT BITCH NEWB OWNED OMFG GO BACK TO DSB MR. CROOK NEWB HAHAHA OWNED EZ BITCH GG!!!!!!



afk :fear:

[Exotic]

zabuza you are one wild and crazy guy

[Golden_Aim]

Rofl Sonned

[Ephemeral]

I'm wondering what he expected to accomplish by appearing on Fox News anyways. It's like when your girlfriend says she wants you to appear on Jerry Springer with her; you just don't do it. If their intent was to discredit this guy, then why bother bringing him on in the first place. I mean, it's clear the kid is in way over his head and his belief is at best misdirected, but I don't see how he's newsworthy enough to be interviewed (read, attacked) in the first place.

I like how the second guy came in and said "I'm not going to insult you here", after the first commentator spent pretty much 3 minutes doing that. At least that second guy can actually ask questions like a journalist is supposed to do.

I guess, like the talking head said, they just wanted to show everyone just how stupid people can be. 'Misdirected'? More like delusional. Like you pointed out, what was he thinking? It was like coming out against puppies, apple pie, and Sister Teresa.

I dislike personal attacks myself, but as I sat watching this I was reminded of the saying, "I'll start being nicer when you start being smarter."

[Mr. Peanuts]

He didn't get much of a chance to speak. The first interviewer was an ass and just interrupted before he could finish.

Not that I agree with him.

[Stabwound]

Actually that guys's website was taken down.

He has another one at www.michaelcrooktalks.com - looks like he just tries to offend as many people as possible. If you read his replies to comments it's pretty funny. Guess it's easier to act like a complete prick with the anonymity of the internet than it is when you're doing it face to face on live TV.

He also faked his death a few months ago, then went crazy and laughed when everyone believed it.

Anyway he is apparently married and has a kid. Either that or he's lying. :P

[GuruMeditation]

He didn't get much of a chance to speak. The first interviewer was an ass and just interrupted before he could finish.

Not that I agree with him.

The kid had no backbone and the interviewer took advantage of it. If you're going to go on live national TV on a debate program you'd better stand up for what you believe in. Plus the fact they always interrupt each other on there.

[Hero*]

The kid had no backbone and the interviewer took advantage of it. If you're going to go on live national TV on a debate program you'd better stand up for what you believe in. Plus the fact they always interrupt each other on there.

That's not much of a debate in my opinion. What I learned in Law is totally different. I know its not structured like a debate but at least give the guy a moment to speak, wasn't that the reason they wanted him on?