In a troll thread by a newbie (not that there is anything wrong with being a newbie), some nut was ranting about how the IRS doesn’t hassel Jesse Jackson blah, blah, blah and how he/she/it heard it all on The O’Reilly Factor.
Bill O’Reilly is the biggest debating coward on the planet, worse than Rush Limbaugh. He loudly interrupts any person who has a thought of more than one simple declarative sentence, refuses to allow people to introduce new facts into discussions after his lead in, and then proclaims himself “fair and balanced” and a “no spin” zone. Even Rush Limbaugh admits he is a conservative spokesman.
Michael, glad to see you are sporting the sig again!
I think the post makes clear why I think O’Reilly is full of bunk: he doesn’t allow opposing views. For conservatives, I like William F. Buckley and Charles Kraulthammer. They can hold their own in a debate. O’Reilly (and guys like Chris Matthews too for that matter) are bullies who couldn’t be persuasive in an argument unless they made all the rules in their favor as they go along, which they do.
In fairness to O’Reilly, Jesse Jackson really is scum who abuses the non-profit status of the Rainbow/PUSH coalition for his own benefit. But that doesn’t make O’Reilly any less of an asshole.
My question continues to be why do any rational persons go on his show. They have to know of his stunts and how loaded against them the program is.
One of my favorite stunts of his is when the non-conservative person he has on the show makes a point and O’Reilly dismisses it, by saying, “Everybody knows that’s just silly. You’ve got to admit that’s silly.”
When that guest doesn’t admit that it is “silly,” O’Reilly will usually turn to some other guest on the show (usually a fellow conservative) and say, “Don’t you think that is silly?” And surprise, that person agrees with him.
And yet, much of his written work seems fairly thoughtful and reasoned. He’s an intelligent person, but he’s doing a schtick. Look, the TV show isn’t news or discussion, it’s entertainment. It’s targeted at a particular demographic that likes that sort of thing, and generally thinks it’s an adequate substitute for thought and insight.
If his broadcast work seems simple-minded, demonizing, and hatred-filled, that’s because it’s aimed at an audience that doesn’t read.
At work I watch a lot of TV (it’s allowed) and the “O’Reilly Factor” is part of my routine. And God Forbid I change my routine. I sometimes glaze over while his show is on, but other times I actually listen to him. And sometimes he actually gives his guests time to talk, and to discuss the issues. Really! Just last night he surprised me by ending up being supportive to a woman who wants to start a movement to get the taxpayers to help compensate some of the innocent victims in Afghanistan. It seemed like he was going to get off on a tangent of “Why should the taxpayers pay for this?” but after listening to the woman, he said that he applauded what she was trying to do, and put up her website on the screen. Frankly, I was a little surprised. (Of course, I was not 100% listening to everything in the discussion…) But sometimes, O’Reilly just suprises me.
I don’t watch O’Reilly regularly – or even often, for that matter – but there is one admirable thing I’ve noticed about him: he appears to hold no truck with the American Family Association/Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson/Dr. Dobson crowd, and nearly always takes a position contrary to them on his show. For someone appearing on a largely conservative network and appealing to the conservative demographics, I think that’s pretty cool.
Something else he holds no truck with is the guest trying to answer another question besides the one that was actually asked. Thus the “no spin” mantra for his show. You’ll notice that a lot of politicos think that so long as they’re uttering something, anything, they’re answering the question. Just ain’t so & O’Reilly doesn’t allow it on his show.
I guess I’m in the minority here but I’m a fan of OReilly and his show. In my opinion he’s only an asshole when one of the guests tries to tap dance his way out of difficult or challenging question or give some self serving bullshit comment. I could care less if he’s conservative or democratic. He’s the only news analyst who will take on the “scandelous issues” Jessie Jackson being only one of them.
For those of you who think that he is not fair and balanced and will allow no opposing views on his program I would like to hear an example. I’m not being facecious here, I seriously am interested.
I like O’Reilly because he will get flat out in someone’s face and tell them to either answer the question asked of them or shut up. No dodging, ever, on his show. He’ll rip to shreds the Falwell/Robertson/Religious Right should be the only law in the world crowd just as much as the extreme left wing people who think killing an animal to eat it is as morally reprehensible as genocide.
And it’s not like he just tells pepole to shut up if they’re a liberal. His interview with Rosie O’Donnell was absolutely fantastic because he let her talk, he was totally with her on gay adoptions, and though he asked some tough questions he didn’t overshout her as she voiced her opinions on gun control. He took it pretty well when she said she was kind of emotional about Columbine and made some statments that were, to her, as a mother, what she was feeling at the time, but logically weren’t gonna float politically.
I don’t always agree with the guy, but he’s doin a fairly good job keeping things toward the middle of the road and avoiding ‘spin’.
I like O’Reilly because he will get flat out in someone’s face and tell them to either answer the question asked of them or shut up. No dodging, ever, on his show. He’ll rip to shreds the Falwell/Robertson/Religious Right should be the only law in the world crowd just as much as the extreme left wing people who think killing an animal to eat it is as morally reprehensible as genocide.
And it’s not like he just tells pepole to shut up if they’re a liberal. His interview with Rosie O’Donnell was absolutely fantastic because he let her talk, he was totally with her on gay adoptions, and though he asked some tough questions he didn’t overshout her as she voiced her opinions on gun control. He took it pretty well when she said she was kind of emotional about Columbine and made some statments that were, to her, as a mother, what she was feeling at the time, but logically weren’t gonna float politically.
I don’t always agree with the guy, but he’s doin a fairly good job keeping things toward the middle of the road and avoiding ‘spin’.
I had forgotten about the Rosie interview. I came away from that interview with a renewed respect for O’Donnell. I thought she was kind of a ditz before, but she was quite articulate, and likable in that interview. The fact that O’Reilly was her interviewer was not insignificant in my mind.
O’Donnell said that her "people’ (managers, etc.) begged (BEGGED) her not to do the interview, but she wanted to do it. And it turned out incredibly well, I think. I believe that a lot of people who would not ordinarily listen to her (and her opinions on gay adoptions) had their eyes opened.