Bill O'Reilly is scum:

You idiots bashing O'Reilly/republicans really make me ashamed to be a leftist/liberal/demorcrat/etc. And you're busting O'Reilly's ass for being intolerant? Fuck you.

its funny how people still think there's actually a difference between democrats and republicans.

Originally posted by Guen:
hell, of course. i'm not a fan, or a republican. i don't expect any better. i'm just glad he's not putting himself out there as a serious political figure. he can cop out all he wants; it'll only show people that they can't take him too seriously.

Well, that's not exactly what I meant - I was saying it sounds like an easy way to deflect any political criticism that's on target ('hey man, it's just entertainment') whenever he's being beaten in a debate, rather than diminishing his political value in the eyes of the viewers (it's generally the former that tends to happen unfortunately). I mean this is all hypothetical - I've never seen the show, so I'm just talking about what other people are saying here

Originally posted by Mayfuck:
And you're busting O'Reilly's ass for being intolerant? Fuck you.

That's been the long running irony of most voices from the left, especially over the past 10 years--preaching tolerance but for the life of them not being able to tolerate other points of view.

Oh, and O'Reilly gets singled out specifically in talk show debates simply because he's the most popular. Here:

The O'Rudeness Factor: Study Ranks Cable Blowhards
Matt Kempner
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

You can look at it two ways:
(A) Half the nightly hosts on cable news aggressively question their guests and are upfront with their opinions.
(B)
(C) Cable news is rife with rude blowhards.
(D)
A new study of cable news ranks the most interrupting and opinion-spewing anchors and hosts on CNN, Fox News Channel and MSNBC at night.

It found that half the news personalities frequently stated their own opinions before giving guests a chance to answer questions. And about half the hosts interrupted guests with at least a third of their questions.

Tucker Carlson of CNN's "Crossfire" landed at the top --- or would that be the bottom? --- of the interrupting/opinion-spouting pile, according to the study.

The study was done for PBS' "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer." Andrew Tyndall, whose business is monitoring what's on TV news, conducted the study by analyzing a week's worth of cable news in January.

Tyndall's stats show the least opinion-sharing anchors were Brit Hume on Fox News and Aaron Brown on CNN.

MSNBC's Brian Williams was close behind.

Ranking near the top of the interruption/opinion scale was Fox News' talkmaster Bill O'Reilly. He cut off his guests with almost half his questions and stated his own opinion in 56 percent of his questions.

Viewers don't seem to mind that O'Reilly often drowns out his guests: He has the most-watched show on cable news.

CNN's Larry King landed at the other end of the scale, which makes him . . . a good listener? A wimp?

He stated his opinion 2 percent of the time and interrupted guests with 13 percent of his questions.

Neither network made King or O'Reilly available for comment. But opinion leader Carlson didn't have a problem speaking up.

"I hope I never pretend that I'm objective, because I'm not," said Carlson, who represents the conservative viewpoint on "Crossfire." But he said he doesn't intend to be impolite.

"I really don't care for rudeness," Carlson said. "If I am, I will apologize."

Originally posted by Debaser:
its funny how people still think there's actually a difference between democrats and republicans.

And thats what makes this thread so silly when you look at the polarization of the posts.

Originally posted by Mr. Restroom TP Refiller:

. I may rant, but I only do so with truth and facts.

"
allows the wealthy to become wealthy at the expense of the middle and lower classes, puts the economy into an economic tailspin once every 10 years or so, cuts back on foreign aid to 3rd world countries so that millions can starve and freeze to death, puts a price tag on every life so that when the elderly's benefits run out the hospitals can refuse them medical treatment, forcing them into a slow death, screws over future generations by putting the country trillions of dollars in debt that goes mostly into the military so that the white trash soldiers can provide for their 3 wives and 10 kids, and then tries to tell women what to do with their bodies while telling teens what kinds of drugs they can or cannot use in the privacy of their home. "


you = funny

hey retard....democratic politicians are just as rich if not more rich than republican politicians. they may SAY they are all for the poor people, but what the fuck are they doing about it?

Originally posted by bittertrance:
hey retard....democratic politicians are just as rich if not more rich than republican politicians. they may SAY they are all for the poor people, but what the fuck are they doing about it?

The official Happy Dumb Liberal answer: More than the Republicans, way less than they ought to be.

Still, as Julio has said, this O'Reilly/Republican bashing is fucking stupid. There's a difference between disagreement and stupidity and lots of Netphorians can't understand that.

I don't think Dems do any more, by way of policy, to help poor people more than Republicans. They're against vouchers, for one, which is a direct hindrance to many poor people by way of gaining votes through teachers unions and being stubborn about an educational ideal that isn't possible right now. They are all about across the board taxing so they can throw more money at riciculous programs that do not work. The Democrats aren't the party they were in the 60s, people. They're just as much about power as Republicans are--they just happen to play different social cards--like race, rich vs. poor--to polarize people into voting for them. And seeing that they haven't come up with any worthwhile, earnest policy for years, can you blame them for going to the least common denominator?

Politics is politics, and the only earnest reprentative of the poor working class right now, whether or not he dabbles in socialist ideals, is Nader.

Is this the only Earth I can live in?

------------------
http://downwardsign.homestead.com/fi...enstarssig.jpg

Originally posted by 13:
Is this the only Earth I can live in?

'fraid so.

Originally posted by Tessellation:
He's an ultraconservative jerk who refuses to let his guests put in rebuttals to his oft-unsubstantiated claims. And don't you just hate it how the only letters he puts on the air praise him?

On "Inside Edition": "We won Peabodys!"[that show has never won a Peabody]

He's not ultra conservative, Did you see his latest interview, with Ann Coulter, who wrote the book slander? She is a conservative as well, and he ripped into her.

It was great.