nelms Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Kinda like those people (you) who get all their information from the drudge report...Anyone who gets all their info from "The Daily Show" is retarded.... I may have accessed the Drudge report site a maximum of 5 times in my life. But, I guess it sounds good for you to put me in that box. You see, you don't really know me. I don't listen to Rush or Hannity or any of the other radio or TV blowhards. I get my information from various newspapers, magazines, and books. And then form my own opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NattyLight Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Eh, he's a little to pretty punch; but I'd serve him up with an open-handed pimp slap for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Tucker Carlson reminds me of a lot of the guys that were in Beta Theta Pi: liked to wear pink and/or as WASPy clothing as possible, condescend, and remind people of their wealth. I don't find him compelling or his viewpoints interesting or thought provoking. He's just kind of lame. and that is exactly why CNN hired him. That was easy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 and that is exactly why CNN hired him. That was easy... They hired Glenn Beck too, only he keeps calling them "headline news" and not CNN cause it might hurt his liberal media arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 They hired Glenn Beck too, only he keeps calling them "headline news" and not CNN cause it might hurt his liberal media arguments. I guess you didn't understand that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I think you are wrong in just about every way imaginable. You are living in a fantasy land of "could have" and "should have" instead of the world of "is". The guy in the election who knows he can't win can speak freely whereas the guy who can actually compete has to keep his true thoughts to himself[/b] because the out-of-context soundbite media (crossfire, AM radio, FOX news) will jump on your every word and twist it however they choose. I have never seen a Presidential candidate who was less scripted and spoke more freely than George W. Bush. He was so unscripted that he said things that made no sense at all. What does he get for trying to be himself? He gets mocked by the media and every democrat on the planet. Either you are free and real when you talk, or you are very well-thought and articulate. Very few people are both (besides me). Argumentative political shows are counter-productive. Stewert said it's "hurting America" and I agree. Discussion/fact-finding oriented shows like "hard ball" and "meet the press" are good. I think Chris Mathews on FOX news is respectable but most others are not. Again, it's counter-productive. Isn't Matthews on MSNBC? Isn't Tucker Carlson on MSNBC, too? Regardless, the news stations are already trying to do what you are asking of them. The idea of a Hannity and Colmes or Meet the Press is that both sides of the political spectrum are represented and both are given fair opportunity to state their peice. Every person on every show has already made up their mind on the issue that they are talking about. They are not trying to persuade each other, they are trying to reach the audience, the TV watchers. Stewert basically said Comedy central is not a news channel. Nobody gets their news from Stewert. Plenty of people get their news from The Daily Show. To pretend otherwise is ignorant. Plently of people get their news from Rush Limbaugh, the local newspaper, or the nightly news on TV. Don't underestimate the stupidity of the general population. Stewert says some in the media don't hold politician's feet to the fire. I agree. Some Politicians go on show after show and never answer a question (George Allen) they wait for the first question to be asked and then launch into their prepared talking points. How exactly would Stewart stop this from happening? Politicians only go on shows that are friendly to their political view. When somebody is grilled, how can you force them into a non-canned response? You can't and you won't and you might as well not worry about trying. Stewert's overall point, that they are hurting America with their divisive attitudes, is correct IMO. Stewart is an absolute brown-noser to people who agree with his cause. He rips those he disagrees with politically. For him to hide behind the "it's only comedy central" idea is a joke. It doesn't matter where you place the message, it matters what message you place. Stewarts true point is that democrats are good and republicans are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drums and skins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Oh, and here is Stewart addressing his Crossfire appearance on the Daily Show: Video Sure, Jon Stewart came out a little shaky, but thats not uncommon when making a bold confrontation....on national television. And it makes it even tougher when there are 2 other guys trying to take control of the discussion. Crossfire is more like Cluster****. Not much of a controlled atmosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I was reading your post and I totally disagree with what you are saying about O'Reilly and Carlson. O'Reilly basically works for the Bush administration. I can't believe you buy into his claims of being independant. O'Reilly campaigned for Bush on his show everyday leading up to the 2004 election. Your misguided opinion is confirmed by what you say about Scarborough. No doubt you are saying this because you mistakenly think MSNBC is a partisan left wing channel- When I saw Scarborough last week you couldn't say enough great things about Hilary Clinton running for president. I know that the far-right say that CNN is a liberal network, but I have no idea what MSNBC and CNBC are considered. I thought they were mostly shows about money. O'Reilly is not a schill for the far right. Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage are right wing schills. If Bush started eating dead babies for dinner, Sean Hannity would declare him The Great Recycler. Bill O'Reilly is nowhere in that ballpark. He claims conservative values in most every topic. A good majority of his topics are not big media stories and aren't political if many ways. He crusades against judges who are too lenient on rapists and murderers. Does that make him a Bush parrot? No, it's a person who sees rapists go free and repeat the offense and he tries to do something about it. He also harped on immigration control for years before it came into the news again recently. O'Reilly is like a Pat Buchanann. He generally believes what conservative republicans believe, but he doesn't let a political party make his decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 If Bush started eating dead babies for dinner, Sean Hannity would declare him The Great Recycler. :laugh: Bill O'Reilly is nowhere in that ballpark. He claims conservative values in most every topic. A good majority of his topics are not big media stories and aren't political if many ways. He crusades against judges who are too lenient on rapists and murderers. No... Bill O'Reilly has become a master at taking the most obscure and irrelevent news stories of the day and making them a lightning rod for his audience who are all convinced that the country is collapsing Bubba Ray in Piggsknuckle Arkansas denied a job at McDonald's because of affirmative action? Don't worry, OReilly will be on the scene with Al Sharpton as his guest. :doh: Some guy in Grand Forks ND ( ) says Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas? Never fear, OReilly will invite Pat Robertson to sit with a panel of atheist nutjobs and discuss the moral decline in this country Saying this is, quite simply, intellectually dishonest. No, it's a person who sees rapists go free and repeat the offense and he tries to do something about it. He also harped on immigration control for years before it came into the news again recently. Although I will agree with the main thrust of your argument that he is not a Bush patsy. A blowhard with all the answers who takes every opportunity he can to remind people that he went to Harvard ( :jerk: )? Definitely. But not necessarily a Bush patsy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 He looked like an idiot because he didn't know what he was even trying to say. While it looked like he was trying to be amusing, it was interesting. When it was obvious he was serious, it got frightening how inarticulate he was. He didn't get on Crossfire for not asking the tough questions. He got on them apparently for being a debate show with a person who believes one thing and another who believes another, suggesting they only argued based on partisanship rather than viewpoint. It was totally inane. A debate often requires believers on each side. Else, there's no debate. I was surprised at just how out of it he seemed to be. I don't watch him on CC, so, maybe that's his routine and I just missed it, but, it sure looked like he was a pretty dumb guy trying to sound intelligent and failed miserably. I'm late coming back to this thread, but I think the counterpoint to your argument has been made sufficiently, Art. I guess we just have to agree to disagree about this, unless you've seen the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 No... Bill O'Reilly has become a master at taking the most obscure and irrelevent news stories of the day and making them a lightning rod for his audience who are all convinced that the country is collapsing I agree with this 100%. The Happy Holidays thing was particularly annoying because nobody cared but him. O'Reilly is a blowhard and a loudmouth, but he doesn't let other people pick his fights for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fight_on_til_you_have_won Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I agree with this 100%. The Happy Holidays thing was particularly annoying because nobody cared but him. O'Reilly is a blowhard and a loudmouth, but he doesn't let other people pick his fights for him. Exactly. The Happy Holidays was ridiculous because people have been saying Happy Holidays in lieu of Merry Christmas for years now. And besides, we're talking about a guy who books the most pathetic pushover guests in the world so he can destroy them. His guest list reads like the Florida Gators' non-conference football schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I'm late coming back to this thread, but I think the counterpoint to your argument has been made sufficiently, Art. I guess we just have to agree to disagree about this, unless you've seen the light. Art would never ever ever ever ever in a million years ever admit that he has seen the light on anything, was wrong on anything. If he has been effectively rebutted on the main point, and is unable to change the subject through linguistic hairsplitting, he simply stops posting in that thread. Of course, I shouldn't harp on this too much, since I have trouble admitting that I'm wrong too. We all do. Especially Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 His guest list reads like the Florida Gators' non-conference football schedule. good stuff :laugh: .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Wow, I can't believe the three of you think O'Reilly is not in Bush's pocket. Props to the image consultants at FOX news. O'Reilly campaigned for Bush in 2004 and he was rewarded with an exclusive interview with the President and the first lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Wow, I can't believe the three of you think O'Reilly is not in Bush's pocket. Props to the image consultants at FOX news. O'Reilly campaigned for Bush in 2004 and he was rewarded with an exclusive interview with the President and the first lady. No denying that he chose Bush over Kerry. That doesn't make him in Bush's pocket. O'Reilly usually talks about different things that the talking heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 No denying that he chose Bush over Kerry. Actually, O'Reilly himself denied that he was choosing Bush over Kerry at the time. He was pretending to be undecided just like he pretends to be independant. I don't mind for a news man to have an opinion, it's the deceptiveness that annoys me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.