|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,766 Year: 4,023/9,624 Month: 894/974 Week: 221/286 Day: 28/109 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Let's discuss Bill O'Reilly | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
What the hell are you on about? 99.9%? Well founded and honest?
LMAO
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 862 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
IAJ writes: Your example's veracity and context is unknown to me, but on the surface it appears Bill is wrong here. But this does not allign with anything else in your post. Here is the documentation of both O'Reilly's lies along with the lack of an apology when caught and Fox's coverup of the transcripts. Watch the videoclip: http://onegoodmove.org/...chive/2006/06/bill_oreilly_sc.html
One who has power merits some authority - this is unavoidable. It must be compared with other entities with power, and if they are equivalent. Here, the example of Stalin fails. Might makes Right is the authoritarian anthem. Feed the poor, heal the sick and turn the other cheek are considered stupid beliefs for weaklings by the authoritarian. As one who implies unqualified support, is that your position?
O'riely is not a traitor when it is compared with those who's resume against terrorism is blank - or worse. Foxnews succeeded because it clearly made a mockery of CNN, and more power to Bill. O'Reilly remains unapologetic in favoring the morals, or lack thereof, of Nazi SS troops over American GIs. As one who implies unqualified support, is that also your position? Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3317 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
I don't know what you're smoking, but watch the following Olbermann clip about O'reilly. Foxnews, specially O'Rielly, is the world's most successful News medium - in record time. 99.9% of all he says, happens to be well founded and honest, as opposed trendy correct, and its antithesis based on a wish list of destruction and chaos if it was accepted and incurred.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grizz Member (Idle past 5497 days) Posts: 318 Joined: |
I don't know what you're smoking, but watch the following Olbermann clip about O'reilly. Interesting clip. O'reilly probably welcomes such controversy as it generates higher ratings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
quote: Except CNN still regularly beats Fox. Fox's audience is composed pretty much of the same two million people. They watch early and they watch often. CNN, however, has a larger audience. They don't watch for as long, but they turn to CNN before they turn to Fox. And in the current election cycle, CNN has been whipping Fox's ass. This is pretty much the same thing that happened back in 2003 during the coverage of the invasion of Iraq: When people want actual news, they turn to CNN, not Fox. Even among Fox's constituency, self-described "very conservative" viewers, they turn to CNN for news. They only watch Fox to listen to the shouting. Of course, there's a bigger problem: Those who watch Fox tend to come away believing things that are demonstrably untrue. And, of course, the network news shows blow all the cable shows away. O'Reilly would kill to have the viewership of the CBS Evening News, the worst-watched network news show on television. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3317 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Unfortunately, it'd generate higher ratings among the wrong kind of people... people who have no conscience.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
I think these pictures are used as a whip to hide from reality. While such actions are bad, it should not overshadow the real bad - and that is what the Libo's and Dems do - that is why they have *BLANK* resumes against the real baddies.
Strangely, CNN never caused such interviews and deliberations of 1000s of hostages, crimes of Sadaam and some 700,000 Iraqi corpses unearthed by non-Dems. Here, a sub-plot is used to hide the main issue. The war on terror - not militants - is that-a-way from CNN.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
IamJoseph writes:
quote: Ahem. Who do you think was in charge of the administration during WWII? Ooh! That's right! The liberals! The Democrats! And we won that one while maintaining the New Deal. We raised taxes to pay for it. And we ushered in economic prosperity, too. By the way: Just who do you think "the real baddies" are? It certainly isn't Iraq. When was the last time Fox had any segment regarding bin Laden and his continued presence in Afghanistan/Pakistan? When was the last time Fox covered the expansion of Al Qaeda, which is now a larger organization than they were before we invaded Iraq? Why is it that the conservative Republicans have cut off funding to try and find bin Laden and bring down Al Qaeda? Are you saying they aren't the "real baddies"?
quote: So why was it everybody tuned to CNN when we invaded Iraq? Why was it everyone tuned to CNN to watch the towers fall. In the world of cable, CNN is the channel people turn to for news, not Fox. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
FliesOnly Member (Idle past 4171 days) Posts: 797 From: Michigan Joined: |
IamJoseph writes: You're not seriously trying to convince people at THIS site that Bill Orally was the only person to speak out against such a stupid accusation...are you? I have a better one. How about the one which says 9/11 was an american and/or zionist plot? Here, Bill, not CNN, took up the issue. All Dems played the silent game. How cheap is that? If so, you really need to watch some other station(s), dude. Fox Noise is perhaps the worst place on TV to get factual, accurate, unbiased news. They provide biased, far-right conservative OPINIONS, and Bill O is one of their leading bullshit spewing orators.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
teen4christ Member (Idle past 5825 days) Posts: 238 Joined: |
IamJoseph, I noticed that you didn't address what some people have pointed out about O'reilly making the mistake several times and refusing to apologize. Instead of addressing this issue, you just ignored it and diverted attention to something else. Now, from what I've read you said in the past, I'm quite convinced that you're not going to let this go like this. You are one of those that will argue to the world's end even if it is blatently clear that you've lost the high ground. I'm just curious as to how you're going to defend O'reilly on this one. This should be good.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: I did so, pointing out in that instant he appears wrong. But I quickly returned to issue # 1.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Yes. Critical mass applies. Very little by CNN: loads of glorifying murderers. Depends what one sees as the primary factor.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
The Libs 50 years ago and today are two different animals. The recent actions cannot be sideswept by such deflections. A blank resume against the war on terror today - a 100 stories about some poor actions in a prison.
Better you examine what other countries did to their prisoners if you want to retreat 50 years, or what would be done today if caperbility was at hand. US has that caperbility but has shown great restraint. If you know history, 9/11 was a 100 times worse than 12/7 - and Bush showed unbelievable restraint. CNN has made every unbelievable excuse to whitewash real mass crimes and obsess over almost meaningless improvisations. In many countries, this broadcaster would be banned and be on trial.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: We did not invade Iraq. The past 30 years not invading Iraq was the crime. You forgot to say the UN issued 17 Resos, the issue was WMD [and no - it was not a false alarm for invading if your looking for excuses - ala CNN!]. That France and many European states hid under its bunkers again, due to the oil scandal, was a crime those countries also perpertrated with not going to Vietnam against Stalinist communism - which began in Europe's doorstep, not US: it was primarilly Europe's war and responsibility. CNN should highlight US contributions of democrasy and brave actions against tyranny - if this can be fitted between all the newstories of how bad she is. Your statement of ridicule US *INVADED* Iraq exposes only a one-eyed-jack distortion which is beyond ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: CNN has great access in terror regime states, and 80% backed by oil $. And if you think this does not come with conditions attached, you are not fooling me. If you forgot which channel exposed 50 sleeper cells in US - you are not fooling anyone but yourself. None have given any posts here on issue # 1 - you can tell who watches CNN and who's resumes on it are BLANK.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024