OReilly: Media shouldn't support candidates

[Jobber of the Week 0]

The Media Whore has struck again.

 

Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly.  Thank you for watching us tonight.

 

The culture and political wars rage on throughout the USA.  That's the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo.

 

And I thought I had it bad when some smear merchant attacked me for misidentifying a journalism award.  What I went through last summer is an ice cream stand compared to the assaults on Limbaugh and Schwarzenegger.

 

Nobody knows how Californians are going to read the Schwarzenegger attacks.  Either they will say allegations of boorish behavior against him are enough to disqualify him for the governorship, or they will punish The L.A.Times and other media partisans for the relentless campaign to destroy the actor.

 

Again, nobody knows how this is going to turn out next Tuesday, but a local poll in San Diego says 10 percent of those surveys will switch their vote away from Schwarzenegger, but 12 percent say they'll switch to him because they're so mad about the tactics.

 

Now I can't defend Schwarzenegger, as I have no idea what he did or didn't do.  I can say I cringe when I hear some woman claim a man verbally offended her 25 years ago.

 

There isn't a man on this earth who hasn't done something inappropriate in his life.  Not one.

 

Also it was obvious from the get go that The L.A.Times wanted to keep Gray Davis in power.  Do you think The Times has sent squads of reporters  rooting around the past lives of the governor or Cruz Bustamante?  Selective reporting is what this is.

 

However, as "talking points" said yesterday, California voters should not dismiss the boorish behavior situation simply because The L.A.Times is unfair and partisan.  The character of all who seek power in America must be evaluated.

 

Now on the Limbaugh front, the only thing new is that the commentator  will not discuss the drug situation yet.  Coming up if a few minutes, we'll analyze  whether or not that's a smart decision, but here's a very interesting aside.

 

One of the nation's chief character assassinations taking huge delight in Mr. Limbaugh's situation, enjoying the man's pain.  This comes as no surprise.  Any clear thinking person knows the caliber of this guy.

 

But you should remember the people who have given that guy  respectability.  And here's a personal memo to CNN.  You guys have been acting  as the smear merchant's personal publicist.  We all know it over here, and it makes you, CNN, look awful.  A person or a network or a political party can be defined by association.  Hello, Howard Dean.

 

Finally, we have now reached a low point in America, a point where partisans in the media and politics are running wild with no restraints.  Is the kind of country we want?  The only way to fight that is to speak out against it and walk away from the defamers and haters, no matter which side they are on. 

 

And that's The Memo.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99195,00.html

 

 

(EDIT: Damnit, I typed "whole" and not "hole." Curse you, 10 Minutes Past 1AM)

[Guest JMA]

Smear merchant?

 

O'Reilly is simply proving everything Franken says to be true. It's funny to see how much he's gotten under O'Reilly's skin.

[Guest MikeSC]

Smear merchant?

 

O'Reilly is simply proving everything Franken says to be true. It's funny to see how much he's gotten under O'Reilly's skin.

In regards to the recall, Bill is actually right about the Times' behavior.

-=Mike

[The Robfather 0]

Bill is right about the LA Times.

 

They are carrying water for Gray Davis.

 

I find that sad. grim. pathetic.

[Highland 0]

I have to agree with him about the L.A. Times and also with his statement that no man (or woman for that matter) has never acted inappropriately at some time or other in their life. The California electorate are a bunch of sanctimonious hypocrites if Schwarzenegger doesn't win simply because of something he said 25 years ago. Politicians are not saints, yet they must be perceived as being as such.

Pathetic.

[Vyce 0]

What's the problem here?

 

Bill is right, at least in regards to the Times.

[Ripper 0]

I think the problem that is being pointed out is the massive hypocricy in Bills little rant.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I don't know about the CNN part of his rant, but he's right on the LA Times.

 

I don't get what I'm supposed to be mad about. Sorry.

 

Oh, and OMG FAUX NEWS LOL2003!...

Edited October 7, 2003 by kkktookmybabyaway

[Ripper 0]

Oh, and OMG FAUX NEWS LOL2003!...

I'd lie if I said I wasn't waiting for that.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Oh, and OMG FAUX NEWS LOL2003!...

Yeah I knew that was going to happen, and that's what I'm talking about.

 

Has Fox taken too much flak? Sure. But for a guy on FOX NEWS CHANNEL arguing about media supporting politicians, when Fox's own lack of integrity started when Bush decided to run for office, is astounding.

 

It's like he ought to finish it up with "Oh, and good night."

 

But hey, I guess pointing this out is worthless now, since all criticism of Fox, even when obviously valid, is appearantly null and easily swept away with a sarcastic comment.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

But hey, I guess pointing this out is worthless now, since all criticism of Fox, even when obviously valid, is appearantly null and easily swept away with a sarcastic comment.

Please.

 

The FAUXNEWS... is more of, in my opinion, a running gag than anything.

 

I just don't understand where the CNN remarks came from. Is he talking about CNN being a smear merchant for Dean? I honestly don't know what he's talking about there. My guess is he's talking about James Carville, but once again I have no clue -- surely there's one or two CNN viewers here that can answer this.

 

There's nothing wrong with criticizing FNC -- if you're a terrorist...

[Ripper 0]

Really. I thought he was talking about Franken the whole time.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

This is why I didn't comment on the CNN portion of that rant -- although now after re-reading the "publicist" part it might be about Franken. That's why comment was focused solely on the LA Times...

Edited October 7, 2003 by kkktookmybabyaway

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I just don't understand where the CNN remarks came from. Is he talking about CNN being a smear merchant for Dean? I honestly don't know what he's talking about there. My guess is he's talking about James Carville, but once again I have no clue -- surely there's one or two CNN viewers here that can answer this.

Well, Carville hosts Crossfire, they've had Clark and Moore on now and then, and I've seen Dean on an episode of Inside Politics once. Al Franken and Jeneane Garafalo were the left stand-ins for a week each on Crossfire, and Tucker Carlson has had his problems with Fox as of late.

 

But that's about all I can think of. Maybe he's talking about the recall somehow, and I admit I haven't seen CNN that much recently.

[Highland 0]

I watch CNN, I don't get FoxNews so I can't compare them with any objectivity, but accusations of CNN being overly liberal are false when they have guests such as Ann Coulter appear on their shows. And the last I heard, Robert Novak and Lou Dobbs weren't liberals or Democrats.

[Vyce 0]

But hey, I guess pointing this out is worthless now, since all criticism of Fox, even when obviously valid, is appearantly null and easily swept away with a sarcastic comment.

Don't blame kkk.

 

Criticism of Fox had been so consistent and, shall I say, rampant, on this board by certain individuals that it became cliche long before he introduced his amusing little joke.

[Guest JMA]

Criticism of Fox had been so consistent and, shall I say, rampant, on this board by certain individuals that it became cliche long before he introduced his amusing little joke.

To be fair, making fun of a news network's name didn't start with Fox News. Remember when people called CNN the "Communist News Network"? There was also the "Clinton News Network." Not to mention "BSNBC." But enough of that.

 

O'Reilly is, obviously, hypocritical in his critisism of CNN. If he had any balls (which is debatable) or morals he would take a look at the network he's on. CNN, while liberal in the past, has moved much closer to the center. I dare say that out of all the big cable news channels it is the most unbiased and overall best one.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Fox still wins on objectivity based on several factors including their regular contributors coming from all over the political spectrum.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Criticism of Fox had been so consistent and, shall I say, rampant, on this board by certain individuals that it became cliche long before he introduced his amusing little joke.

Just want to say that the "FAUX" line is based on something Scotsman does at his Web site, of which I am an avid reader...

 

http://www.scotsmanality.com/article.php?s...441141#comments

[tommytomlin 0]

Fox still wins on objectivity based on several factors including their regular contributors coming from all over the political spectrum.

And then, unless the hosts agree with their comments, they cut them off and make the conservatives look like the smartest people ever and the liberals like a bunch of pot-smoking hippies.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Fox still wins on objectivity based on several factors including their regular contributors coming from all over the political spectrum.

My Dad's an old-school Republican but even he was laughing at an interview on Fox where somewone (Cavuto?) effectively went on the attack against a guest.

 

I've also heard Rita Cosby use a straw man on Jeneane Garafalo, asking her whether we conduct wars all over the middle east or "let them commit another 9/11." Garafalo replied "What we SHOULD do is focus on homela..." and only got that far before Cosby cut her off and mumbled "Okay, so we let another 9/11 happen."

 

Yes, your post is technically accurate since Fox does have people from all over the spectrum. Fox's main problem is that the JOURNALISTS are actually louder and more aggressive than the talking heads they have on as guests.

[Guest deadbeater]

I think some on the indigo side of the spectrum watch because it is funnier than just about any other channel on TV, escpecially Comedy Central.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I've also heard Rita Cosby...

Ugh, the most annoying voice this side of Anne Coulter...

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

While O'Reilly might be correct on the LA Times, he has no business criticizing CNN for pimping anyone while at the same time Hannity is blasting Tom McClintock because he won't step aside for Arnold Schwarznegger.

[Guest MikeSC]

While O'Reilly might be correct on the LA Times, he has no business criticizing CNN for pimping anyone while at the same time Hannity is blasting Tom McClintock because he won't step aside for Arnold Schwarznegger.

I won't speak for O'Reilly, but I'm not sure he has a problem with opinion shows (you could STRETCH and say Larry King qualifies, though that man hasn't had an opinion or thought in his life) pimping for candidates, but not the "news" shows.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

For those who can't get enough of the media whore, a friend says his interview on NPR tonight turns into a verbal fistfight, though he starts by being more kind and sincere than he ever is on TV.

 

http://www.freshair.com/ for an online copy.

[Firestarter 0]

"Since I'm a famous person, the threshold is a lot higher than it would be if I were an ordinary citizen."

 

Fucking amazing. O'Reilly's so taken with himself he can't even understand how utterly ridiculous he sounds.

 

"Is this what Fresh Air is... [Al Franken's book was] satire now, was it? Calling people liars and distorting their faces on the book cover, that's satire now, is it... you're easy on Franken and you challenge me. This is NPR. I think we all know what this is. I think we all know where you're going with this, don't we? Don't we... you gave Al Franken a complete pass on his defamatory book. And if you think that's fair, Terry, then you need to get in another business. I'll tell you that right now. And I'll tell your listeners if you have the courage to put this on the air. This is basically an unfair interview designed to try to trap me into saying something Harper's can use. And you know it! And you should be ashamed of yourself. And that is the end of this interview."

 

No, Bill. You're the one who should be ashamed. You're not only a bully; you've just shown that you're a coward as well. Like all bullies.

Edited October 8, 2003 by Cancer Marney

[Downhome 0]

For those who can't get enough of the media whore, a friend says his interview on NPR tonight turns into a verbal fistfight, though he starts by being more kind and sincere than he ever is on TV.

 

http://www.freshair.com/ for an online copy.

I loved that interview, thanks.

 

He also has a huge point at the very end, good for him.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Just heard a sound bite on You-Know-Who's show. I laughed.

 

I'm sure the guy hosting Fresh-Air wasn't used to someone talking above monotone level...

[Jobber of the Week 0]

No, Bill. You're the one who should be ashamed. You're not only a bully; you've just shown that you're a coward as well. Like all bullies.

Sadly, that quote from the Franken book about "I enjoyed the arguement because Bill O'Reilly bullies guests, and when they stand up for themselves he shoots them down" actually makes me want to buy the book MORE now.

 

And kkk, if you just heard the clip where he asks if she got this indepth with Franken and she says no, then you missed a lot. He starts getting snippy at around :30, getting more and more aggrivated until :51 when he really goes off.

Edited October 9, 2003 by Jobber of the Week