<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>

From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
Krugman vs. O'Reilly -- my clips

August 10, 2004 8:59 AM

Last night, O'Reilly delivered his highlight reel of Saturday's showdown with Paul Krugman, but he left out some of his better material.

So I made my own highlight reel, and added in a few facts to, uh, clarify things. Available in Quicktime (56k, 200k)

More from the archive in Bill O'Reilly, Lies and Deceit, Outfoxed.

Krugman vs. O'Reilly -- my clips (08.10.2004)

Next Entry: KGNU radio interview (08.10.2004)
Previous Entry: "well-orchestrated campaign" ... "a newly forming alliance" (08.10.2004)

Read the 136 comments.

Anonymous:

HOWARD DEAN NO SCREAM IN CABLE DEBUT;

In his talk show debut on CNBC, Howard Dean bombed with just 133,000 viewers at 8pm on Sunday night but still did better than Tina Brown normally does with the tanking Topic A .

Even though he only averaged a paltry 68,000 in the 25-54 demo, Dean is still up sharply over Brown's awful numbers from the week prior and over July when she averaged 22,000 in 25-54, 2,000 in 18-34 and 15,000 in 18-49, just making the Nielsen minimum reporting standards.

And he wanted to be the leader of the free world?

Tue Aug 10 2004 12:55 PM


Vigla:

Give the guy a break. It wasn't like it was highly advertised that he was going to be on. The show itself was tanking and keep in mind that this IS CNBC we're talking about...

I thought Dean was very insightful and the show quite informative. Most importantly, it wasn't a typical, ANGRY conservative spin show...

Tue Aug 10 2004 1:38 PM


Paul Stone:

I happened to catch Dean's debut, and he did a pretty good job. He was positive and asked interesting questions, rather than same old same old. Particularly interesting was his interview with John Stewart of The Daily Show. He played a few clips and kept trying to give John credit for changing media and bringing out the truth, but John kept insisting that The Daily Show is all about comedy, and that it's all about being funny.

Dean showed a clip of the Martha Stuart trial, where some women came running out of the courthouse waving colored scarves to indicate the verdict to the waiting news services at the earliest possible moment, since cameras were forbidden in the courtroom. Stewart said that he likes to delve into the area between what the media is trying to present and what we see.

This is something which mainstream media likes to ignore, and which most Americans would be very interested to know more about, cynical as we all are about the media and politics.

Although Dean's content was excellent, I would say that his delivery was a little slow. If he can learn the rhythm of television, I think he could be quite good at this.

Tue Aug 10 2004 2:20 PM


Tom from Madison:

Maybe progressives could pioneer a new type of broadcast journalism: honest opinion. This would stand in stark contrast to Fox's constant, deliberate confusion of bias with editorial content. O'Reilly's standard defense is to hide behind the "analyst" label. This is generally an excuse to cherry-pick facts and/or just make stuff up to suit his pre-determined agenda.

Maybe this approach could be marketed as "news analysis for grown-ups" or "opinions with a real factual basis". One big challenge would be to find a charismatic host who could make this entertaining on a weekly basis while still being true to the concept. There is also the time factor. "Analysts" like O'Reilly are always trying to get in front of stories so as change how the "news" is actually reported. It might take a while to get an audience used to hearing better reasoning a day or two later. Still, it seems to work for Bill Moyers.

Tue Aug 10 2004 6:58 PM


tony:

Jim, that was incredible.

you just fisked o'reilly on via quicktime.

that has to be a first of some sort.

the only thing i was hoping for was for on the clip was for you to include those 40 seconds or so of o'reilly first saying that he only told one guest ever to shut up, followed by him rifling off the nice long stream of "shut ups".

it was my favorite part of the movie.

Tue Aug 10 2004 9:35 PM


Jim Gilliam:

that's in the works, Tony!

glad you liked the video clip...maybe i'll keep doing it. kinda like a cable news version of mst3k!

Tue Aug 10 2004 10:07 PM


Terry:

Nice job on that clip. I really think Al Franken's right, and that O'Reilly's gonna blow one of these days, i.e., aneurism. His voice sounded like it cracked when he yelled, "MEDIA Matters!!!!"

Tue Aug 10 2004 10:10 PM


kenneth:

hey good stuff jeff. damn that bastard o'reilly. i swear these bastards must be big time dabblers in the occult because they come off so defensive and are so brazen and matter of factly when challenged. nothing drives me more crazy than some conservative dick with a penchant for interuption and intimidation.

Tue Aug 10 2004 10:42 PM


Traditionalist Warrior:

Jim, I find your editing techniques very intersting! Did you just happen to leave out all of O'Reilly's triumphs over Krugman. If you guys want not to be labeled as "propagandists", then I propsose that you show the whole clip. Even the parts that cause your hero Krugman to hold his hand b/c of his uncontrollable shaking.

Tue Aug 10 2004 11:29 PM


Jim Gilliam:

That was the whole point, Traditionalist Warrior! I was really disappointed that O'Reilly didn't include his biggest slam dunks on Krugman. He really walloped him on not doing his own research. And that bit about the klan? That shit's meant for primetime!

Tue Aug 10 2004 11:32 PM


Al Rodgers:

I don't know if the “Bombed” reference was a joke or not, and morality and ethics may be absolute, but ratings are all about relativism.

For example today’s top rated broadcast show wouldn’t compare to the ratings of a top show in the 70s, when there were only a hand full of channels and now remotes.

As standard rule, you compare talk/info cable to other shows. And if you triple the ratings of the prior week/month, that’s usually impressive.

As for Dean, I remember seeing him in the early 1990s on Crossfire, long before this election season, and coming away impressed with how charismatic and articulate his performances were.

Wed Aug 11 2004 1:39 AM


nitro:

O'Riley needs to be stopped. I mean how can he be concidered a professional with all the hate he tries to spew. If someone on the left gets a quote from another person on the left it is a lazy ass job of propaganda pushing. If someone on the right lives by their talking points, its just sticking to the facts.

Wed Aug 11 2004 9:11 AM


Dan H:

Talk about HATE RADIO take a look at what the democrats call humor.

The United States "is on the slippery slope to theocratic fascism." "The Catholic Church has been secretly encouraging oral sex for years."
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "ought to be tortured."

President Bush should be taken out and shot.

Two attempts at humor were offensive. In his "oy, oy show," set to Israeli music, a sidekick reads news reports - in this case, the murder of the Russian-backed president of Chechnya. Franken's role is to pipe up with a lighthearted "oy, oy, oy." Yep, nothing tickles the ribs like assassination.

All in a single day's airing on Air America. Makes O'Riley seem benign.

Wed Aug 11 2004 1:47 PM


Anonymous:

And then there are the peace lovers from the left to terroize the New York populace wwith the following:

San Francisco Bay Area leftists are heading to New York to protest the Republican National Convention. Some organizers are the infamous "Black Bloc" guerilla group with the following tactics being publicized on the Internet in advance of the GOP convention, including these:

"Go to a rifle, pistol or skeet shooting range, spend an hour shooting to saturate clothing with smell of gunpowder, go directly to a New Jersey Transit, LIRR or subway train headed for Penn Station.
"Try to have at least two people on a train in different locations, sit or stand near the doors as the train approaches the station, try to get near police and dogs, loiter as long as possible around the dog, try to pet it if possible.

"If the dog alerts on your scent, do not leave or resist; the situation will cause a major disruption of the train schedule. ... If there is more than one person on the train that causes a dog to alert, you can bet that the train will not be going anywhere for a long time ... neither will any trains behind it.

"It is important that the police call in all possible resources to investigate the situation. ... This will result in the maximum disruption. ... With any luck, Madison Square Garden will be evacuated.


Ain't "free speech" grand?

Wed Aug 11 2004 2:07 PM


kenneth:

yikes!
http://vernonrobinson.com/media/twilight.mov

Wed Aug 11 2004 3:16 PM


david:

Why can't I run the .mov Something about codec error?

Fri Aug 13 2004 2:07 AM


Forest:

I'm registered 'decline to state,' simply because I'm not represented by the parties.
I had to stop watching television news because they don't report news, just a brief rundown of the headlines combined with opinion.
I don't like the idea of voting for a member of the Skull & Bones, but this season the choice is between a bonesman who can't eat a pretzel while simultaneously breathing and a bonesman who is unable to generate excitement in a party already excited.

The people who have the real power over the lives and futures of Americans cannot be elected out of office, or even held responsible for the opression and toxification of our world, because they're protected by limited liability carter and extreme wealth.

O'Reilly is a blowhard bully, who uses volume and phisical intimidation combined with blatant lies about statements he's made in order to silence anyone who has the nerve to point out his bullshit, just like the current executive branch.

O'Reilly isn't the problem, though. If he wasn't in his position, the owners of the company he works for would have someone else doing the job.

It's been the same simple problem in all societies for thousands of years. It was explained long ago in simple words, but has since become distorted because it's almost always misquoted.

"Love of money is the root of all evil."

That's it. Greed. Of the sort displayed by Enron, Kellog-Brown-&-Root, Halliburton, and Neil Bush's Silverado Bank and Trust (remember that?)

I could rant all night... but I won't. I'll just say this: try to have some compassion, try to share what wealth you have with those who are not in need, and try to forgive your enemies so that they may become your friends.

-Forest

"Those who have studied history are doomed to watch those who didn't make the same mistakes all over again..."

Sat Aug 14 2004 11:16 PM


Ryan:

At work I listen to a local (Detroit) talk radio station, they run everything from Stern in the A.m. to O'reilly late at night. I am no fan of Mr. Oreilly but because rock radio has become well... pathetic I choose to listen to talk instead. So anyway, I got to hear O'reilly's version of what happen on Russert's show a couple of days before I actually saw the interview, replayed last night Aug.14 on CNBC. In typical O'reilly fashion he boasted about moping the floor with this guy Krugman, and how this puppy dog eyed wimp couldn't even look him in the eye and then even went as far as to have female callers call in to say who they would rather sleep with, Krugman or himself(poor little fella needed a shot of self esteem I guess). So I had an interesting perspective coming into this. I was expecting to see something that resembled an early Tyson fight, but instead saw a tired old prize fighter making a pathetic attempt at a comeback (Tyson circa 2004 if you wish). O'reilly was clearly out of his eliment and it was interesting to watch him squirm. Krugman put it best with the line "you can't cut my mike here" and Russert just stayed out of it for the most part and let them go at it. Why on earth would O'reilly even agree to do this interview, or any interview for that matter. He comes out looking like a fool every time (remember the Terry Gross, Fresh Air interview for example). It was uncomfortable to watch, I actually felt bad for the guy. I don't know why I did, he certainly desearved it, but I did. I was embarrassed for him I guess. Night after night I hear people calling into his show kissing his ass, but he needs to realize he is preaching to the choir and can do no wrong with these people and I think he is starting to get a false sense of security from this. Outside of the Fox news bubble where real world people think for themselves he's "dead meat" and when he is confronted with this fact he acts in typical school yard bully fashion and just starts pointing and yelling. Way to go Bill, always taking the high road.

Sun Aug 15 2004 6:17 AM


Wally Bray:

Amen Forest. I'm a recovering televisionholic. Been sober now for three months. I too am sick of all the bullshit television dishes out. I think it's time to starve news-talk-entertainment. When they call on us for our opinion, just say no!

Sun Aug 15 2004 7:13 PM


Jamie:

Awesome stuff :) What you did kindof reminded me of Pop-Up Videos! Remember that show?

Sun Aug 15 2004 8:48 PM


Jerry:

I'm a big fan of Paul Krugman's column. Faithful reader for years. He is obviously bright and well-researched. The arguments he lays out in his columns are insightful and logical. However, I can see why he is a writer and not a debater. While he may have great arguments, he looked like a nebbish child trying to argue with his overbearing grandfather. So many places to put Bill O'Reilly in his place that he let go by (Monday morning quaterbacking, maybe, but still...). Shaking hands, shifting, drinking water like he's on the stand. Mr. O'Reilly is better at arguing and ran all over him. You could tell he could sense it and just made it a point to bully Mr. Krugman. That, in itself, showed that Mr. O'Reilly is just an a-hole. He didn't have the better argument, just the louder one. He actually got upset because Mr. Krugman pulled a clip of him from Media Matters. No argument about clip itself. Just where he got it from. Who cares where it came from if its O'reilly verbatim?! They guy is an obvious jerk. The real problem is: Where is someone who is bright and can make stable arguments so loudmouths like Mr. O'Reilly (and Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Hannity and...) can be exposed? I enjoy Mr. Krugman's writing; he just doesn't seem to be cut out for prime time, hand to hand debating. Its painful to think that Mr. O'Reilly and his minions think he won it going away, and will now be further emboldened, after an hour of loud, illogical and baseless arguments that weren't exposed by a worthy debater. The pen truly is mightier than the sword...until you really need a sword.

Mon Aug 16 2004 2:15 PM


Jasper:

Jim, please keep making these videos! The more information people have the better.
-----
So Krugman pulls out this quote from Oreilly and rather than discussing the quote or elaborating on what he meant Oreilly equates Media Matters with the KKK. First, he's dodging the question and following up with a textbook case of Ad-hominem attack.

Furthermore, he tells Krugman to do his own research as if the quote has no value because it wasn't personally transcribed. Once again, he's calling Krugmans character into question rather than talking about his own statement.

My biggest frustration is that people put up with this bullsh*t. Winning a debate is not measured by who shouts the loudest or makes the most references to Nazis, Hezbollah or something unequivocably bad. Probably the biggest problem here is Russert who just lets OReilly go on rather than forcing him to reply TO THE QUOTE. The web allows Jim Gilliam and all of us (including Traditionalist Warrior!) to step in when Russert dropped the ball.

I say screw television, start a blog and participate in media.

Here's the link on wikipedia that describes Ad Hominem far better than I
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

If you're into something a little more thorough check out Mission Critical.
http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/main.html

"When you want to turn your mind on, you go to your computer. When you
want to turn your mind off, you go to your television."
- Steve Jobs

Mon Aug 16 2004 9:01 PM


justakid:

yea im kinda off the subject but ppl need to know about this i saw the movie farinhite nine 11 and when they go around with the recruiter showing what kind of ppl they try to recruit i didnt belive it untill today.... im just 15 years old and was aproched by a recruiter when i told him i was only 15 he said that dosnt matter do i know any one else who is old enough to join i said know i dont agree with the war that is goin on and either do my freinds he still wouldnt leave me alone i explained to him that my dad had served in veitenam and my brother was about to go to iraq or kuait or some were he still wouldnt leave me alone so i just walked away he fallowed me 2 blocks still telling me i should take his card what has hapend when a recruiter has to try and get kids he knows are to young to take his card i was laghing at the man by the end of it and he finaly took a hint a got in his car and drove off i am from portland oregon

Tue Aug 17 2004 4:35 PM


Tammy:

TV/Cable news has followed the path as Jerry Springer, Geraldo, Rickie Lake, etc. The more outrageous the pundit, the better the ratings.
I think viewers like to see O'Riley bully those poor suckers who go on his show thinking he will discuss facts rationally.

Change the rules a bit and O'Riley loses,i.e. no screaming, no interrupting, no name calling, require him to have facts to back up his claims. I bet he'd never go for it either - he's bogus and he knows it.

It's all about the ratings (and poor taste) - Fox thinks O'Riley's screaming is appealing. And to some it is. But a better approach is Al Franken's which combines humor/satire w/ facts. In the end, I think that will win out.

Tue Aug 17 2004 5:54 PM


Michael:

The conservative radio talk show hosts have amped up their game and are likely to keep amping it up through the election.
Hannady will cut off anyone who is a Kerry supporter by saying 'well this is a waste of time' and cutting his mike. The anti Kerry rhetoric is getting nastier and nastier. Bush is made out to be a teflon president. Nothing is his fault. Its all lies from the left and patriotism from the right. Bush was supposed to be a moderate president due to the close vote but once he got in, it was no looking back for he and his cronies. Imagine what he will do if he gets in again with no more elections to worry about. Its like living in a society that is controlled by conservative pundits on loud speakers telling us what we should think and believe, or be outcast by the society. Its like psychological facism. Doesn't anyone think this has gone too far??

These republicans just love to have someone like their daddy take charge. Their campaign adds should read Who's your daddy?

Wed Aug 18 2004 7:47 AM


Claude J Gregoire:

I am so glad to see that there are people who are out there trying to reveal the truth. I hope that there is never a day that people like yourself will be sensored. Please keep up the good work.

Wed Aug 18 2004 9:28 AM


Jude (Iddybud):

Geez, turn down your speakers when O'Reilly bellows from the depths of his echoing "traditionalist" body cavern at the mention of "Media Matters". Ear plugs may be required.
I recommend ear plugs for most of O'Reilly's rantings. He fantasizes that if you don't agree with him you're a Commie elitist or a soft wimp or some other bullcrap generalization.
I watch him with the same expectations I'd have watching WWF. If someone chooses to enter his wrestling ring, they set themselves up for an anti-intellectual body-slamming, which only sates the bloodthirsty crowd.
I often wonder why any self-respecting liberal would grace his entertainment show and why Russert would even bother to give him the status he doesn't deserve by asking him to debate someone like Krugman. It's like watching Popeye debate Einstein. All Popeye's got is his can o'spinach. What fun is that?

Wed Aug 18 2004 10:57 AM


Anita from Victorian Cinci.:

I'm a Krugman fan,loved how he cleaned O'Reilly's clock. Russert didn't come off well,at all. He's been a Right shill all along. In the end it was "MEDIA MATTERS" the new star. I'm old enough to remember Jack Benny's dismay over being caught out by some "lesser" like Rochester. He turns to the audience (the camera) and shouts "Media Matters-mediamatters!!! (It's only a couple months old- I hope Brock is thrilled.)Cincinnatians, like W they're not inquisitive. They're workaholics who have't been hit much by outsourcing except P&G last year and GE in '92. They don't use the WEB. It's always "I read it in the Enquirer." (ALL RIIIIGHT)I sure hope the rest of Ohio will carry KERRY.

Wed Aug 18 2004 12:29 PM


rlaustin:

What amazes me about O'Reilly is how deflects the attention from his lie about Michael Moore when Krugman confronts him with the direct quote. He yells "Media Matters" and disparges the website instead of answering Paul Krugman!!! Typical characteristic of a narscasitic character disorder!! This tactic takes people by surprise so it is often unaddressed in debate.

Thu Aug 19 2004 8:42 AM


Anonymous:

dedicate yourself to getting bush out of office if you wish. it's too bad too see such a blind elitist like youself. it would have been nice to see you add comments and "facts" for both the left and right side in the o'rielly interview with krugman. it was also interesting to see that you deleated the scene in which they discussed F911 out of the interview. maybe, and i'm pretty sure not, that you yourself may see michael moore as the blowhard idiot that he actually is. i have a feeling that he is a hero in your one sided eyes. rtyson21@yahoo.com i feel that you should have the right to defend yourself even if i don't agree.

Thu Aug 19 2004 8:36 PM


rlaustin:

The point is that Bill O'Reilly lied about what Michael Moore said. Michael Moore did not say America was evil. Krugman had O'Reilly's direct quote and Bill O'Reilly defelcted the attention from his lie to Media Matters instead of saying he misspoke. O'Reilly is a liar and has a character disorder and he is on TV pontificating everyday and people are being misled and lied to. This is not about Michael Moore. It about O'Reilly lying!

Fri Aug 20 2004 6:29 AM


David:

Just saw the clip. First, I am disappointed in Tim Russert. He let O'Reilly bully Krugman without playing the moderator. On PBS it would be argument vs. argument, and we could see who had the better positions. There would be less shouting on the News Hour, which is obviously superior to what I have just seen from Tim Russert.
Second: I don't know what to think here about Krugman's performance. O'Reilly outshouted him; this, of course is what O'Reilly does. Krugman is the superior writer and thinker, but apparently not the superior shouter. At times I wanted Krugman to tell O'Reilly where to spend eternity. However, that would have weakened Krugman's position.

Finally: O'Reilly is an obvious psycho. It saddens me that he is this popular.

P.S. Why do people on our side bother with this psycho. I know there is the hope that someone within O'Reilly's vast audience might be open to our side. However, it just seems fruitless. Again, O'Reilly is a psycho and a bully. Why give him any attention. At first he would probably taunt our side, once he realized he was being ignored. In the end, he would start to fade, since having no guests from the left means no chance for this juvenile to rant and rant and rant.

Screw him, I say!

Fri Aug 20 2004 6:37 PM


cj:

You focus on bill O, but you dont think that the other news media outlets e.g. cnn, cbs, abc, nbc ,cnbc are not liberally/democratically bias!!! you should do a little work to expose the slant in that direction that has been going on since the bolcheviks tried to take over Russia! to the socialist in this country to the preasant.
I know why you dont! you are like a lot of my hippie, yippie leftist friends and I have a lot. You have never have had to work physically hard in your entire life. I can prove it. lets get together and we will do some physically challanging charity work my socialist froen.

yours trully,

chasestudio1@aol.com

Sun Aug 22 2004 8:41 AM


David:

Personally I'm going to vote for Bush, just to let you know up front. The O'Reilly clip was very good at showing the streching O'Reilly does and how much he's a jerk, really. But I think you do yourself a discredit to intersperse the annotated titles with snide comments. It makes the clip seem less believable, in my opinion. Logically it doesn't make it less credible but it comes off as negatively as O'Reilly does. Just my opinion! Other than the snide comments, the video was well done. I also liked how the clips were long, not just short snippets.

Sun Aug 22 2004 11:20 PM


Michael:

From:
http://www.lonbud.com


I Just Have To Say

Apparently the Sunday talk shows this week were all atwitter with discussion of John Kerry's tour of duty in Vietnam over 35 years ago. Now, I wouldn't know about that personally, because I have a four year-old. If his pals aren't talking about it on the playground or it's not on the Cartoon Network, I can be a little out-of-the-loop. But I did catch a story in the New York Times referring to continuing discussion about advertisements paid for by an organization known as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, in which Mr. Kerry is being called a liar and a coward, and the validity of medals he earned in service to his country is being called into question.

Anything to avoid talking about real issues, I guess.

I don't give a rat's ass about whether or not John Kerry chased down a wounded kid fighting for the Viet Cong and shot him in the back on some sweltering day in the Mekong Delta half a lifetime ago, and it matters not one iota (in the context of this presidential election we have coming up, presumably, in less than three months) whether his boat was under enemy fire when he turned it around to rescue one of his men who'd been jarred off it moments before.

To be fair, I also don't care whether or not George W. Bush's daddy got him a cush assignment with the Texas Air National Guard to keep him out of Vietnam during those heady days in the twilight of the Great Society. It would be nice to know for sure whether he actually served in his unit or was, as some have alleged, AWOL for significant portions of his tour, but in the context of what we must decide as a nation today, that too is immaterial.

In fact, with respect to either man's military service, insofar as it may have any bearing on the choices he might make tomorrow as President, it is germane that Mr. Kerry's experience in Vietnam led him to return to the United States and call that misadventure what it was: an illegal, un-winnable war that was costing our country unconscionably in lives and resources. And that he launched his career in public service on an effort to put a stop to that war.

Mr. Bush, we have already seen, has a dangerous propensity to commit American lives and resources to an atrocious endeavor not unlike Vietnam, and to lie repeatedly to the American public trying to justify his bellicosity. He also appears to lack any capacity to recognize a quagmire when he sees one, and just may be so infused with hubris that he won't hesitate to destroy additional lives and resources on his journey to Armageddon.

Between the two men, Mr. Kerry seems far more fit to lead a nation, whether it's one at war or one desirous of peace.

That the choice between Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry seems so clear-cut begs the real question, however, one that neither candidate, none of the mainstream media, and very few citizens in the public square seem willing to address: once elected, what is it that we really expect our President to do? What is the American idea of government here at the dawn of the 21st Century? How do we reconcile the 'self-evident' truths contained in our Declaration of Independence with the fact that we do not hold them to apply even to every American, let alone to everyone within our borders or everyone on the planet?

A friend and I were speaking last week about how the political conversation in this country has become harder to understand over the onslaught of propaganda churned out by special, largely moneyed interests at both ends of the spectrum. The very terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' seem to have lost their meaning and are now mere labels used to champion or despoil the ideas put forth by anyone with the temerity to seek public office.

What is conservative, for example, about a government that produces deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars? What is conservative about a government that re-writes its environmental laws to permit wholesale degradation of the nation's air, water, and natural resources in the service of increasing short-term profits for a few corporations? What is conservative about a government that seeks to abdicate all control of the public airways, transportation, and communication systems, trusting in the blind hand of 'free market' competition to produce what is best for people?

And yet, Republicans, and the current Republican president call themselves conservative.

Lewis Lapham, editor of Harper's Magazine, writes in a long piece in the September issue about how the 'Conservative Message Machine' has been grinding out for the last forty years the news that "all government is bad, and that the word 'public,' in all its uses and declensions (public service, citizenship, public health, community, public park, commonwealth, public school, etc.), connotes inefficiency and waste." He writes that it is no surprise both candidates in this year's presidential election present themselves as embodiments of what they call 'values' rather than as proponents of an idea, and asks,
How does one reconcile the demand for small government with the desire for an imperial army, apply the phrases "personal initiative" and "self reliance" to corporation presidents utterly dependent on federal subsidies to the banking, communication, and weapons industries, square the talk of "civility" with the strong-arm methods of Kenneth Starr and Tom DeLay, match the warm-hearted currencies of "conservative compassion" with the cold cruelty of "the unfettered free market," know that human life must be saved from abortionists in Boston but not from cruise missiles in Baghdad?

As the election approaches we can count on the candidates to continue seeking votes with talk of values. We can count on the pundits and talking heads in the media to continue endlessly debating the irrelevant minutiae of topics like the candidates' hair, or how often they hug people, or the likely impact of their wives on the women's movement.

Regardless who wins in November, it will be past time to ask questions like those posed by Mr. Lapham, past time to begin demanding a government willing to address them.

Mon Aug 23 2004 8:42 PM


Chad:

Dean has a talk show? This is the first I've heard about it.

Tue Aug 24 2004 11:22 AM


M Grimmer:

I don't check out a lot of stuff on the internet so i'm not sure if this is common, but i saw your clip of o'reilly and Paul Krugman. I think that the graphical addition of facts to the clip is a good idea. Like 'pop-up videos' only with politicos. like 'talk-soup' but with news shows. there may be a market for that type of thing. i would watch it.

Tue Aug 24 2004 11:26 AM


favian:

i dont understand why krugman stayed shut for most of this debate. He let o'reiley take most of the spotlight for most of the debate, which gives the liar the most voice. Do you think krugman was intimidated o'reiley? He had so many opportunities to 'shut' o'reiley up, but he didnt.

Tue Aug 24 2004 12:42 PM


robertplattbell:

Thought you might find this as funny as I did. Fox obtained a Federal Trademark Registration back in 1998 for the slogan "Fair and Balanced" (which the Examiner apparently did not think was generic for some reason).

The classification? "Entertainment services". Apparently even FOX realizes they are not to be taken seriously.

FOX NEWS - the professional wrestling of news shows. Everybody knows its fake, but some folks watch it anyway....

From www.uspto.gov :

Trademark Electronic Search System(Tess)

TESS was last updated on Tue Aug 24 04:28:46 EDT 2004


Please logout when you are done to release system resources allocated for you.
List At: OR to record: Record 2 out of 2


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(TARR contains current status, correspondence address and attorney of record for this mark. Use the "Back" button of the Internet Browser to return to TESS)
Typed Drawing


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Word Mark FAIR & BALANCED
Goods and Services IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: entertainment services in the nature of production and distribution of television news programs. FIRST USE: 19961007. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19961007
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 75280027
Filing Date April 23, 1997
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition March 3, 1998
Registration Number 2213427
Registration Date December 22, 1998
Owner (REGISTRANT) Fox News Network, LLC CORPORATION DELAWARE 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York NEW YORK 10036
Attorney of Record DAPHNE GRONICH
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOME | INDEX | SEARCH | SYSTEM ALERTS | BUSINESS CENTER | NEWS&NOTICES |
CONTACT US | PRIVACY STATEMENT

Tue Aug 24 2004 1:54 PM


Will:

Living in the world as we do today, it's nice to see an alternate point of view that actually makes some since as opposed to the rampant ramblings that dominate the airways both on radio as well as TV is a pleasant change to it all. Your site as well as a host of others really shed light on the principles, values, and overall reckless behavior of the Bush administration and it's affiliates. I mean with current agenda's being geared strongly toward war it seems that a change in administrations is the only clear and logical solution. But even then what good will it do? If Bush does come out of office then the next administration is left to clean up the enormous mess that he left behind. With all the damage done in the middle east (especially Iraq) what can we really do to get out of it all? What will we do with our troops who are stuck in Iraq fighting a war in which we never should have started in the first place? We can't just pull them out; the moment we invaded, we committed ourselves with the moral responsibility to rebuild everything with which we destroyed. If the troops stay however, they will be subjected to more fighting simply because they are sleeping on ground where they are not welcome to sleep. Not to mention the fact that all this unwelcomed fighting overseas will undoubtably draw more attention to our shores from terrorists whom WILL seek revenge for the treatment of Iraq. All i'm saying is that the next (if there is a next) administration will definately have it's hands full, and whichever the case we will be obligated to watch our backs so as not to become the victims of our governments short comings....

Tue Aug 24 2004 9:35 PM


backell:

I don't watch O'Reilly much, who can stomach it? The man is a lying bully, and that is obvious. Did you see how much he was jamming his finger in Krugman's face to get him to stop talking? He also seems to use the favorite tactic of the right of yelling over his adversary whenever the facts come out. He is a big guy who uses his size to intimidate and bully home his point because he can't make it with substance.

Wed Aug 25 2004 5:15 AM


JT:

This is actually a great topic. Krugman did a good job at not loosing his cool during the Tim R. show. Bill totally lost it at times. The main question I have for dicussion is why Bill O'Reilly and FNC has the best ratings in cable news? It doesn't make sense? Curious to know what you guys think?

Thu Aug 26 2004 9:57 PM


steven miller:

All you Liberals make me sick. all I hear is we need more money from the government or bush is the Devil. all you guys are complete tools you sit around all day and complain about whats wrong with this country you never can say anything good about America. I have more respect for the terrorist than I do for you because at least the terrorist are honest about what they are trying to do. you guys claim you care about this country when you never even seen what it means to defend this country. I lost my left leg from the knee down in Vietnam do to small arms fire. and I never complained about it in fact I was proud that I could give something for a country that gave so much to me and when I got back to my hometown people spit at me they called me a baby-killer and a rapist. I am ashamed that I shed my blood for people like you who would piss on the memory veterans who served with honor.

Fri Aug 27 2004 11:37 PM


Michael:

Kiss my but Miller.
Last thing I want are butheads like you telling me what I should think.
Stuff it.
Your the terrorist.
People can think what they want. You signed up for duty to serve your country so people could think what they want and I hope to preserve the peace in the world.

You got your limb blown off and now your the big martyr.
Sorry to be harsh on you buddy but you chose your life.

Hey, no one believes that you guys were baby killers and rapists and they are idiots if they said that. War is war and Viet Nam was one of the worst, a war which we were not commited to win.

You guys did the honorable thing by serving your country.
But if I think the buttheads that made the decision to send you guys there are wrong, well I'm going to say so even if you do take it personally.

Sat Aug 28 2004 12:00 AM


Will:

I gotta say I am in total agreeance with Michael. I mean my dad served in Veitnam so I don't know personally the horrors experianced there or back here at home by the soldiers who took part. And second of all it's not like we don't have anything good to say about America, we don't attack america. We have nothing good to say about those who are incharge of running America.
Steve i'm proud that you did your duty and served American intrests in Veitnam. What i'm not proud of are the American interest's in Veitnam. Simple fact is we should not have been over there. Same as in Iraq. Yeah Saddam is an evil man and yes it is in the best interest of his people that he not be in power. But he posed no threat to us whatsoever. U.N. sanctions were working. He did not have a Nuclear bomb and was several years away from being able to have one.
The decision to remove him from power should not have been our decision. Where in history has a revolution been started by another countries troops coming in and doing all the work for them. Steve you obviously slept through history class, of all the times that this has happened it has been labled invasion and been strongly shunned upon. Especially by the one's who have been conquered...

Sat Aug 28 2004 10:11 AM


Nathan:


As A Veteran myself, I can speak of the typical
closed mind-set of a lot of vets. In the U.S.
military, you have many people making their'
careers. These people are relying on the gov
to house, feed, and pay them. They would be
bagging groceries if it weren't for the service.
Where else can you get a 20 year pension for
doing nothing more than your told by a bunch
of elitist officers. This sort of reliance means
a conflict of interests, for those that actually
have an opinion.
Military men have an excess of bravado, so
many are afraid to express any opinion contrary
to w's policies.
Can you imagine Rush's experience of going
through DTs. He must have felt as if HE was
the one being persecuted. Screams of "liberals,
liberals, liberals!" must have emanated from
his room. Wouldn't it be quite ironic if the
ACLU protected the invasion of his personal
medical records?
And, if one doesn't agree with either
candidates agenda, just vote for the person
that doesn't look and act like a bufoon, an
idiot out of his element,a puppet of big business
and the out of touch religious right, and the
bastard step child of Charlie McCarthy.
Just remember, this current batch of republicans
are the bad guys, Darth Vaders all around.
The number of republicans that are good, fair
people can be counted on a blind butchers hand.

emphyrio99@yahoo.com

Sat Aug 28 2004 4:09 PM


Not News to Me:

O'Reilly really missed his calling, he should have been involved with professional wrestling. His "act" is all show, no substance and anyone watching and believing they are seeing an interview should invest in the Brooklyn Bridge.

Why would anyone as bright as Krugman even bother talking to such a thuggish, rabid interviewer? Who is he appealing to anyway? What happened to asking a question and actually listening to the answer, instead of twisting it to fit a predetermined political agenda? Give me Tim Russert. If you want "fair & balanced" he's the man.

The only thing worth watching on the FOX network is the Simpson's, but unfortunately, the Itchy & Scratchy bits remind me of O'Reilly!

Sun Aug 29 2004 9:26 PM


Stephanie:

My take on Fox News: I find it hillarious and remarkable that there is so much anger directed at FNC. I mean, have you SEEN the ratings for this channel's shows? Has it occurred to anyone that there is obviously a market for these views? You may not agree with it, but it apparently strikes a chord with millions of Americans. I find it refreshing that they express biased views from BOTH sides - don't you? Greta and Alan Colmes are no conservatives, and daily, all day long, there are reps from both sides of the aisle voicing their opinions.

You would think that libs would encourage the ACLU to protect FNC's right to be aired.

You would think that a peace-loving party would advocate against intentional harm being brought against the GOP convention-goers, NYC citizens, and cops living and dying to protect.

You would think that there would be less hatred and name-calling from a party that prides itself on its tolerance of all views.

If dealing with these issues brings you to a boiling point where your only recourse is to name-call and hate others, you really should consider leaving America. Go find a better place to live. For all its faults, America is the best home, and I am personally grateful to Steven Miller for being a part of why its such a great place.

Mon Aug 30 2004 9:40 AM


David:

Stephanie,

"Love it or leave it" is just so old, and really does not contribute to a productive discussion. And most liberals would not give two hoots about Fox if it would simply acknowledge that it is an outlet for the Republican party.

Mon Aug 30 2004 8:06 PM


Josh:

Anyone who states that Krugman "whipped" O'Reilly is simply a blind left-wing idealogue who either didn't watch the full interview or is so entrenched in anti-Fox, anti-O'Reilly camp that they can't see the light of day. If anyone of us was attacked as much as O'Reilly is by the New York Times you might come across as angry too.

And news flash - O'Reilly gets accused of being anti-Bush as much as he gets bashed for being a conservative. When you hit the middle, lots of people aren't happy.

You know what bothers me the most about all of this? That no matter whose show you watch or listen to, the guests refuse to answer any of the questions. They duck and weave to their talking points and we never get a straight answer from either side.

Tue Aug 31 2004 12:12 PM


John:

I don't see how anyone can view FNC as a wing of the republican party. On almost every issue they bring out people from both sides - republican and democrat. Alan Colmes is one of the leading liberal voices in the media and he chooses to be on FNC ... hmmm - it doesn't seem that FNC would want to give prime time air to an intelligent, thoughtful liberal if it were so right-wing.

Oh wait - I get it now. It seems that when debating most of the issues, the liberals can't seem to make a decent argument supported by real facts, and therefore when the discussions end with the conservative point of view "winning" they feel that FNC has a conservative slant.

This is the same problem with Air America ... I hear ranting and raving but almost no facts to support any of the arguments, some of which I agree with.

Get the liberal talking heads to take some pointers from Colmes so we can have some honest debating. Don't blame FNC for the failures of the liberal media leadership.

Tue Aug 31 2004 2:39 PM


Paul:

"Hey, no one believes that you guys were baby killers and rapists and they are idiots if they said that."

This statement is false. While many American soldiers served with honor and distinction in Vietnam, there were many serious atrocities committed.

More information:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=Toledo+Blade+tiger+force&btnG=Google+Search

Tue Aug 31 2004 4:03 PM


Paul:

I'm not saying that steven miller or anyone else engaged in atroticities in Vietnam. I'm saying that they occurred.

Tue Aug 31 2004 4:11 PM


David:

Me thinks some rabid defenders of Fox are simply hearing and seeing what they want to hear or see. In the world outside of Fox, Alam Colmes is NOT seen as one of the leading liberal voices in this country. I guess in the world according to Fox, Bill O'Reilly is a centrist. Fascinating. Now can we get real?

Tue Aug 31 2004 5:27 PM


Tony Prentakis:


O'Reilly: Professor Einstein, is the photon a particle or a wave? The folks have a right to know. Which is it, professor?

Einstein: Well, that depends ...

O'Reilly: Come on, Professor. This is the No Spin Zone, as you know. My job is to get people like you to give straight answers, okay? Now answer the question: is the photon a particle or a wave?

Einstein: It's not one or the other, really ...

O'Reilly: What do you mean, "really"? Are you one of these relativists?? Listen up, professor: the folks are traditionalists, okay? Like I am. All right? We want a straight answer to a straight question.

Einstein: Then you should ask better questions.

O'Reilly: With all due respect, professor, you sound just like all the other left wing secularists on every college faculty in the country. How much simpler can I make it for you? Wave? Or particle? It's not even multiple choice, professor. But you can't even answer it, so you make a personal attack on me. Have you been taking lessons from Stewart Smalley?

Einstein: Who? I ...

O'Reilly: Don't give me that, professor. You accuse me of asking stupid questions, and you expect the folks to take you seriously? You said yourself that God doesn't play dice with the universe, so you must believe in God, okay? But you tell us everything is relative, and you can't even answer a simple either-or question. Make up your mind, professor. I'll give you the last word.

Einstein: Logically, the absence of a dice-player implies nothing about ...

O'Reilly: Maybe not to you, professor. But the folks want someone to look out for them, okay? So we present the facts, and let them make up their own minds. But we thank you for your time, professor, and of course we respect your opinion. Coming up after the break, best-selling author and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will tell us whether the Minutemen at Lexington and Concord were "insurgents" or freedom fighters.

Tue Aug 31 2004 7:14 PM


dhermesc:

WOW, also this talk about O'Reilly bullying around full grown men and not one mention of Chris Matthews threatening a woman half his size after being out played on a subject he knew nothing about.

Wed Sep 1 2004 6:21 AM


Josh:

The Alan Colmes observation came from an Air America Radio interview ... Speaking of Air America Radio, who are the leading radio media lefties? Don't tell me anyone actually appreciates Janeane Garofalo or the idiots on Unfiltered. If you want to counter Rush you had better find some intelligent people who do more than name call and can back up their arguments with real facts. Yelling just to yell doesn't work for very long.

Wed Sep 1 2004 1:34 PM


raging red:

"If you want to counter Rush you had better find some intelligent people who do more than name call and can back up their arguments with real facts. Yelling just to yell doesn't work for very long."

Are you kidding? How long has Rush been on the air? Those tactics have been working for him for years. Rush wouldn't know a "real fact" if it bit him on the ass.

But I agree that those on the left shouldn't stoop to his level.

Wed Sep 1 2004 8:48 PM


David:

Indeed. I find it fascinating how anyone outside of that Fox world is someone who yells just to yell and does not back up his or her points with facts. This has to be number one on the list of right-wing talking points.

Wed Sep 1 2004 9:14 PM


Spooky:

Hey Jim, I would like to point out that Fox is coming after you on a radio show hosted by ManCow. We all know that Eric Muller is one of Rupert's pocket slaves. How he does it. He talks for a while about how he is voting Libertarian. Then it is noted that he did not cover the democratic (which he calls dummycraps) convention (& he is in Chicago & bitching that the protesters had to stand 100 years away ), Yet he is covering the republican convention (which is in New York & calling all the protesters fat stupid jobless losers). He will make fun of them for a bit, But every thing the republican speakers say is magical & awe inspiring. He is pumping out disinformation at the same time making light of things from your movie, & taking credit for noticing them. He is also spreading the disinformation from speaking to a recent guest. A democrat who ken star sent to prison for two years. Her comment was "I am proud that out of every tax dollar 8 cents goes to feeding the poor." He turned it into "She wants to take 8 more cents out of every dollar we make." Maybe you should take on this lying bastard.

Thu Sep 2 2004 1:42 PM


naomi:

Aren't we lost? Democrats and Republicans alike? I have to make what should be an unnecessary monstrous effort to get my news from a multitude of sources just to get a vague idea of what the facts really are. Its become a war of propaganda and both parties seem to feel that they will lose favour if they don't continue to battle each other over semantics. I'm always wondering what newsworthy material is overshadowed by this ugly propaganda war. I can't wait to vote for Kerry in this election (even though Texas will be red), but I am ashamed to be an American when the once beautiful political arena has been reduced to which party is more skilled at spinning. Im quite sure it is the republican party, however, because how else could the country be split 50/50? My favorite quote this week is "If you aren't completely appalled, then you aren't paying attention."

Sat Sep 4 2004 10:07 AM


naomi:

PS, I loved Tony Prentakis' creative dialogue posted on 8/31 between O'Reilly and Einstein. Perfect representation of how ludicrous O'Reilly is and how impossible it is for anyone to have a real and productive conversation with him.

Sat Sep 4 2004 10:18 AM


Shane:

Why is that all the criminals, sodimites, people who take advanage of minoritys, anarchists, and all around scum bags have to embarass our party. Like the protesters out side the RNC. We can do better. And also Kerry has alienated National Guard members with his ripping on Bush's sevice. We need to show off the good side of our party but it seems the wrong people are making too much noise.

Sat Sep 4 2004 12:37 PM


Linda:

Wow, that is so true. Maybe we should take a look in the mirror. Us dems are bunch of hypocretes who play to the libral nuts, racists who claim be be civil rights activist, and crinals for a few extra votes. Are we that desperate. FOX is killing us by telling the truth.

Sat Sep 4 2004 1:06 PM


Joe:

Wow! O'Reilly has a million listeners during any minute he is on. Limbaugh has 20 million listeners. I had to hunt around the web to find this site. Thank God for the internet;in the past, the only time your type of views were heard was passing the joint in a basement somewhere. Ok, so you don't like Bush, but the flawed primary process left the Dems without a serious candidate.

Sun Sep 5 2004 3:13 PM


Michael:

Give me a break. Protesting is great. Its a healthy sign that you still live in a free country.
While your at it why not sensor all artists or radical thinkers, or inventors, or people with new ideas. Lets have everyone be PC and make sure they are neat and clean and make their beds and clean their rooms and behave like good little boys and girls. Then are we OK?

THINK, PROTEST, QUESTION, DISAGREE, CREATE, HAVE A NEW IDEA, BE FOOLISH, GO BEYOND THE STATUS QUO.

Are these all ideas of the devil?
Are we living in a Christian Jihad against free thought?

You can only oppress, suppress, oppose or control people for so long and then they rise up out of necessity and kick your ass. i.e.. the Goths vs the Roman Empire.

Mon Sep 6 2004 9:44 PM


Lee:

How stupid, no micheal we are embarassing the demecratic party by acting like a bunch of goths. You can act like a barbarion if you want, but please don't asociate yourself with me.

Tue Sep 7 2004 12:03 PM


d.g.lewis:

people are caught up on fox news that they have lost focus on the mess bush and cheny have had on OUR country. fox news is doing exactly what they want to do in this election year. by squabling over them the right hopes people wont notice job loss,halburton handouts,1000+ dead in iraq,no osama,no healthcare,@huge deficets something any other time would make a true righty cry like a baby.

Tue Sep 7 2004 1:37 PM


Lee:

Yea man, Fox is bombing us by exploiting how week we are on terror, how Micheal more has raped our party to fill his pockets, and stamping out all our propaganda. It's fools who don't understand the voluntear military and what an awsome job they are doing. When you look at the history our nations military campeigns, 1000 dead is a CATASRTOFIC SUCCES when liberating a large country. We can't pretend 9/11 did not happen, and why did it happen. Due to the fact that our boy Bill Clinton shot cruise missles at Osama's training camps failed to destroy them then just quit. Just like he quit in somalia. The hornets nest that is the middle east has been stirred up and we gotta deal with it.
So all we got is no osama(it's alot more complicated then that )health care(thanks trial lawers)Huge deficets(hey we got one). As a long haired berkinstock wearing liberal I'm crying like a baby.

Tue Sep 7 2004 6:35 PM


Wayne:

I just found this thread. I used to watch Fox and O'Reilly till a few weeks ago when Mary Spio appeared on his show relating her experiences during the Gulf war. Her allegations were from the commanding officer Lt Col Bob Tomlinson of her Air Force unit (602 TCS) sexually harassed her on this deployment, to the rampant sexual activity going on in the "foxholes". She fabricated service dates, and gave misleading answers about her service. There were 4 (perhaps 5) females deployed with this unit. Airman Spio, Airman Piegsa, Sgt Root and Sgt Gerousky. It hit home, because I served in the 602 TCS from 1992 - 1994, the same time as then A1C Spio. Additionally, Mary and I attended technical training at Keesler AFB, MS AFTER Desert Storm, yes we were stateside during the war. I was often paired to work with Mary both in and out of garrison. We spent nearly the entire deployment to Turkey working together on the sattelite communications van. Additionaly Mary's roomate for the deployment was a female sergeant, whom I admittedly had a relationship with during that time period. Further, I belive Airman Piegsa was deployed to a remote site (Ketia?). There is little if any time that we did not see, hear, and experience the same events. Simple fact checking and corroberation would have shown most if not all of the "facts" present on the factor during that segment were absolutely false. So there you have it, I was there, it didnt happen like it was presented on The Factor.

Wed Sep 8 2004 3:53 PM


SGT Slaughter:

Yea, but did you go to Nam. If not, your not worthy. And give us all a break, your boy Kerry got a V on his silver star. The only one in the history of warfare. But amazingly nobody can figure out who awarded to him. Maybe the military records fairy gave it to him.

Wed Sep 8 2004 11:02 PM


Conservative John:

Wait a minute. Kerry was in Vietnam? Who knew?

Thu Sep 9 2004 3:32 PM


Katie:

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU for Outfoxed and your commitment to outing W. Wishing you a "CATASRTOFIC SUCCES".

Thu Sep 9 2004 7:08 PM


Chris:

This is an outrage. Kerry is a lying flip flopping coward who's entire existance in vietnam was to be a senator. Bush is God.

Fri Sep 10 2004 2:01 PM


Libral Larry:

Oh my, I now realise that my party is the party of gays, anarchists, Al Sharpton, abortionists, a fat slopy uncept film maker, gun control freaks, socialism, crimnals, and atheists. Our candidate ia a Hermon munster who's uglyness is only paralelled by his wife. He trys to be all things to all people thus earning the label 'Flip Flopper' . I guess I won't vote and I should tell all my hippie bush basher loser friends not too either.

Mon Sep 13 2004 12:38 PM


Brian:

How can any objective person watch Fox News and not realize that Conservative opinion and guests far outnumber liberal AND progressive opinion and guests? Check out the reports compiled by www.fair.org ... also surprised how NPR is leaning a bit to the right in a recent study? Or is Fair.org a bunch of lying, non-profit, liberal sissies?

But why just the focus on Fox? I understand they are the most biased and right wing. But what about CNN, NBC, MSNBC etc. The week the Iraq war started there were a total of 393 opinions aired on U.S. networks regarding this decision. A grand total of 3 were ANTI-WAR. That's a fair and balanced media in a democracy that needs to know the truth, the facts, unbiased? They all FAIL! Not just FOX!!!!

Have you figured it out yet? Most of our mainstream (extreme) media is OWNED BY A GRAND TOTAL OF 6 CORPORTATIONS! Down from 50 back in 1980 due to deregulation. We have a corporate owned media intimidated by the right wing where Bush is always potrayed as strong and decisive and any liberal is potrayed as weak and flip-floppy. Is this any different than STATE RUN MEDIA?

Our democracy can not survive when our media is always at the mercy of corporations and conservatives. They do not present all the facts. Just check out the difference in war coverage between CNN and CNN International for example. When the Saddam statue toppled that's all we saw on CNN. But On CNN-Int we saw a split screen showing the costs of war in civilian lives and causalties. If that aired for one week on American TV the opposition to the war in this country we skyrocket.

Bush is heavily invested in Clear Channel which has 1400 radio stations. Colin Powells son Mike heads up the FCC? And people say the media is liberally biased. No way!

Tue Sep 14 2004 12:58 PM


Brian:

How can any objective person watch Fox News and not realize that Conservative opinion and guests far outnumber liberal AND progressive opinion and guests? Check out the reports compiled by www.fair.org ... also surprised how NPR is leaning a bit to the right in a recent study? Or is Fair.org a bunch of lying, non-profit, liberal sissies?

But why just the focus on Fox? I understand they are the most biased and right wing. But what about CNN, NBC, MSNBC etc. The week the Iraq war started there were a total of 393 opinions aired on U.S. networks regarding this decision. A grand total of 3 were ANTI-WAR. That's a fair and balanced media in a democracy that needs to know the truth, the facts, unbiased? They all FAIL! Not just FOX!!!!

Have you figured it out yet? Most of our mainstream (extreme) media is OWNED BY A GRAND TOTAL OF 6 CORPORTATIONS! Down from 50 back in 1980 due to deregulation. We have a corporate owned media intimidated by the right wing where Bush is always potrayed as strong and decisive and any liberal is potrayed as weak and flip-floppy. Is this any different than STATE RUN MEDIA?

Our democracy can not survive when our media is always at the mercy of corporations and conservatives. They do not present all the facts. Just check out the difference in war coverage between CNN and CNN International for example. When the Saddam statue toppled that's all we saw on CNN. But On CNN-Int we saw a split screen showing the costs of war in civilian lives and causalties. If that aired for one week on American TV the opposition to the war in this country we skyrocket.

Bush is heavily invested in Clear Channel which has 1400 radio stations. Colin Powells son Mike heads up the FCC? And people say the media is liberally biased. No way!

Tue Sep 14 2004 1:00 PM


Hey Brian:

Tell that to your boy Dan Rather, Brian. And the Clinton News Network Leans To the left undoughtably. And poeple die in war, it's bad and we are all aware of it. Thomas Jefferson Said "From Time to time the tree of liberty must be fed with the blood of tyrants and patriots." Liberty has a cost but in the land of the brave we are willing to pay it.

So take your anti Bush-Big corperation conspiacy theory and contemplate it over another hooter. Then share it with your buddys at the UFO convetion.

Tue Sep 14 2004 6:45 PM


Michael:

If you ever have had a chance to watch BBC news in England you’ll notice a difference. Which at first is hard to figure out. But after watching for a while you begin to see it. The news seems to be more objective with points of view from various angles. By that I mean that if a news incident occurred say in Iraq, their reporter might interview an Iraqi to get his opinion, perhaps a Frenchman and maybe a Turk, as well as giving the viewpoint of the US. What makes that refreshing and more objective is that it isn’t all filtered through a US news media. In the US we get the news filtered through the TV reporter which represents the station and its policies. The media has gone the way of corporate America. Which is to say, that the view points of the news are more like op ed pieces reflective of management policy. This seems to be a trend. So we end up getting less and less purely objective news. Its not really a conspiracy its just powerful self interest at work. This is why I believe that letting the private sector sort things out without restrictions or guidelines is a misguided idea.
Why? Because unrestrained capitalism becomes like the ‘Lord of the Flies” . It seems that the default program for capitalists falls to entropic lust for greed and power, which ultimately does not server the greater good in any society. Don’t go and start crying ‘Socialist’ because that system in the extreme stifles the competitive spirit. But their has to be guidelines, like monopoly laws, which seem to be somewhat ignored lately. Without ethical guidelines everyone gets bilked especially the young and the old who fall prey to unscrupulous scams. We all end up spending too much time in vigilance against wave after wave of the onslaught of invasive marketing and billing tactics and strategies until it simply takes over much of your life.

PS. Ignore the Klu Klux Klan guys. They can't say anything thats very intelligent just mostly arrogant and beligerent. I can imagine them getting together to cut holes in their sheets and polish their marching boots.

Tue Sep 14 2004 9:07 PM


dhermesc:

Micheal, you must hate Robert "Sheets" Byrd and Jimmy Carter then. No other major party fields more Klansman and "retired" Klansmen then the democrats.

Wed Sep 15 2004 6:00 AM


Anonymous:

I am certainly not left wing but having watched those video clips there are several things that I found hard to believe. Firstly how badly conducted the interview was. The interviewer's job is suppose to be to ask questions of both interviewees, encourage debate (not argument) between them, challenge interviewees when they have clearly made up statistics and make sure there is no bias.

This interview seemed more a conversation between two people, who would be regarded as right-wing extremists in most of the world (certainly all developed democracies that are not the USA), with a token ‘whining liberal’ in the background.

Lying! Until I watched American television I had never seen someone so blatantly lie in an interview (I don’t understand how someone could say "over 60%" without some kind of proof). In Britain people actually take notes into interview so they know the facts before the debate starts and if someone was wrong they would have to apologies or retract what they said.

If I hadn’t of been so disgusted I probably would have been amused by how biased this interview, which was essentially about bias, really was.

I’m so shocked ‘the Greatest Democracy in the world’ can invade other countries under the pretense of encouraging democracy when this is what passes political interview.

Wed Sep 15 2004 8:41 AM


Brian:

Hey poster with the name "Hey Brian" listen up...

How typical of an uniformed Republican like you. You take a quote out of context from 200 years ago and then call me names. Can't you do better than that? Prove me wrong with facts stating otherwise instead of spewing off.

I never said there was a consipiracy. But I agree with Michael that the media is served by self interests which is NOT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN A STATE RUN MEDIA. We do need to go back to some regulations for fairness and balance because a democracy cannot survive without a fair and balanced media. This is serious and critical to the future of this country. This existed before the Reagan years. One hour of conservative opinion matched with one hour of Liberal opinion? What's wrong with that? One Democrat guest for every one Republican guest. Facts repotrting not opinion. Choosing stories based on those that servce our democract best not the most self serving for the bottom line and shareholders.

We've left it up to the corporate owned media to set up and live by high standards but they've failed miserably. And this is a fact. It's not a liberal opinion. There is no doubt of this.

Wed Sep 15 2004 12:59 PM


Brian:

One more thing "Hey Brian" poster. You're comment that "people are aware that people die in war" shows how detached those of us on the sidelines are and how the media in this country has downplayed the deaths and injuries. Numbers, names and figures don't quite have the same impact as the pictures, video and objective eyewitness reports.

Tell me why international media can show both the fireworks displays in Iraq as well as the aftermath showing the blood, charred bodies, the mamed, the dead civilians and soldiers... but the U.S media only focuses on the fireworks display????? Instead the U.S. media says it's not appropriate or wrong for the families who have loved ones in Iraq. What a joke!

Most people don't have a clue about how the The benefit vs. the cost of this war is well hidden. The Pentagon won't allow the caskets to be shown and anyone that brings up the names or numbers in the U.S. News is slammed as unpatriotic. Very few people are aware of the costs in this war. Sure they know the numbers. But no one knows the suffering that these people and their families members go through. The 10's of thousand of innocent Iraqi civilians including children that have been killed by both U.S. and opposing forces. Oh, and I completely forgot about how far off Bush was on his estimates for the cost of this war in DOLLARS! Money that could have been spent on healthcare, creating jobs, and YES PAYING FOR TAX CUTS!!!!

What's the benefit again? Bush is full of crap. At first he said, WMD because Iraq was an imminent threat. Now even Colin Powell knows that wasn't true and implied he would have made a different decision HAD HE KNOWN! We had no proof to justify this war. Now it's changed. Then it was about freeing people from an evil tyrant. Everyone knows Bush criticized Clinton and Gore for trying to police the world and said he wouldn't go for that in his administration. Now it's so important to establish a democracy there because why...? Something to do with winning the war on terrorism? That's a stretch. Especially since Bush recently said the "War on Terror" isn't winnable. It wasn't a terrorist state when Saddam was in power. Although I agree he was an evil b!

Now bring on the sticks and stones "Hey Brian" or can't you have a civil debate?

If you think this war is worth sacrificing more American and Iraqi lives then I expect you have or will be volunteering to fight the "Good fight". Come on where's you patriotism or are you another in a long list of phony pseudo patriots with little flags sticking out the car window or sitting at home replaying the video of the 911 attacks over and over with that saddistic smile on your face.

Wed Sep 15 2004 1:30 PM


Michael:

ja selbstverständlich Kommandant
dhermesc

Wed Sep 15 2004 2:24 PM


Michael:

Brian

You should really ignore these sobs.
If you look at all their posts they are just short trivial undocumented answers taken out of context.
They never answer any questions. Just look for weakness and attack that weakness again and again like boring morons.
Why waste any more energy on these people.
Here is their strategy. Focus on the opponents weakness, or create an imaginary weakness for instance ‘flip flopping’ and repeat examples of it over and over again until the opponents name becomes synonymous with the negative connotation.
It would be like us giving endless examples of Bush being a dumb ass, moronic daddy’s boy again and again without saying anything else. Maybe thats what we should do, just post all of Bush’s dumb ass statements and weaknesses. Again and again ignoring any other comments or statements. Letting these guys fry and fry and fry.

Wed Sep 15 2004 2:40 PM


dhermesc:

Micheal:

Glad you agree. I also appreciate your recognition of a superior.

Wed Sep 15 2004 3:26 PM


Michael:

Sehr lustiger Herr mesc

Wed Sep 15 2004 5:04 PM


Michael:

PS
Bush ist ein stummer Esel ohne Gehirne.

Wed Sep 15 2004 5:09 PM


Roy DeMeo:

Clicking around the dial last night and landed on Fox News, Haninty & coumbs. Allan was talking about the news story out of Alabama where some woman lost her job because she had a Kerry bumper sticker on her car. He was stating that Kerry had given the woman a job working for him. With impeccable comedic timing Hanity say, “Yeah, but only for 48 more days and then she’s out of a job again, hehehehe”. At that point the camera pans to Hanity broadly grinning about the future upcoming unemployment of another person in George Bush’s America. At that moment you can see the light go on behind Shawn’s beady little eyes – it was really hard to miss, unless you weren’t watching. He realized he’s made a mistake laughing about unemployment of some poor drone because of a rich company owner. He recovers nicely with, “I’ll give her a job”. Yeah, right! I offer $50 of my own money to everybody reading this now - if that woman is working for Hanity in 1 year making equal pay that she was making in her previous job. Wanna bet?

Here’s a link to the local news story, http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/040912/sticker.shtml

BTW the company that fired her is Enviromate in Decatur, Ala., Here is the web page for the company – http://www.betterinsulation.com/search_results_for_nebraskaMFG1.htm

The good man that owns the company is named Phil Gaddis. He’s also a bankruptcy atty. So yes, I’m sure his business has taken off because of Bush’s policies. Here’s his website - http://www.pgeddes.com/

And here is his e-mail, unless he’s changed it already. I encourage you to drop him a line to let him know what you think. phil@pgeddes.com. He’s really a compassionate man.

Thu Sep 16 2004 7:08 AM


Brian:

Thanks Michael. Hey just saw this on according to DemocracyNow.org:

FCC Raids And Shuts Down Tennessee Station KFAR And in Knoxville Tennessee, the Federal Communications Commission has shut down community radio station KFAR. Yesterday morning three federal marshals raided the station's studios and confiscated all of the station's equipment. The three-year-old station was operating without an FCC license though it was in the process of applying for a license. One supporter of the station said, "The real criminals are the FCC officials who have given the public airwaves away to huge media conglomerates like Clear Channel." KFAR stands for Knoxville First Amendment Radio.

Wish I knew more details. Can one operate a radio station while license is in process?

Thu Sep 16 2004 7:48 AM


Hey Brian:

I Guess you wrote this before the CBS deal. Oh, and I have seen whats going on in Iraq FIRST HAND. You are a fool if you think forgein media is sooo perfect. It is easy to put a horror spin to war. So tune back into Al jesaera and get your point of veiw. And Micheal do bist ein doom khaf.

Thu Sep 16 2004 6:25 PM


Doug B:

I just watched the Fox clip,WOW,it seems to me that they are George Bush's CNN. Or maybe jon kerrys moveon,or his multiple 527's. Why can't you lazy people just quit complianing and expecting the goverment to bail you out of all your dispairs.Reach down and grab onto something and build yourself a respectable life,this is America and anything is possible. The goverment was designed to protect you, not feed you, not pay for your health-care. You got sick by probally doing something you should'nt ex.unprotected sex,homosexuality,drugs,smoking,drinking or just thinking someone else should be responsible for the things you do. If the democrats would only realize that a person is responsible for thier actions and should be held accountable we would all be better off.

Fri Sep 17 2004 8:53 AM


martha zinger:

You are a bright energetic person
thanks for what you are doing

Sat Sep 18 2004 10:50 AM


Ghost:

Brian, lost of the information about the FCC raid on KFAR (Knoxville First Amendment Radio) is on our website at http://www.kfar.org/

Sat Sep 18 2004 9:58 PM


Jay:

Hey,
I just bought the movie and I can't wait to watch it. I live in a very republican town, Hackettstown, New Jersey, and our local blockbuster somehow can't find their copy. I called and asked if they had a copy and they said that they did and it was in. When I went to get it, I couldn't find it in any of the sections, they couldn't find it either. I had two clerks looking. One of them said "I'll look in the back, in case someone put it there for some reason." They couldn't find it. He said "It say's it's never been rented, maybe someone swiped it." So I said, "well what do you do when that happens, will you get another copy?" And he said "Well maybe, I don't know". I said, "Well I would really like to rent it, could you leave a note for your manager or something?" and he suggested I try another blockbuster.

Sun Sep 26 2004 4:53 PM


earl:

so you've dedicated your life to hating bush?

what life?

Tue Sep 28 2004 11:25 AM


Rant:

I view with interest the interview with clip on Krugman and O’Reilly. I view global economic thought with what might happen in Australia. I have been of the view and so have many other economists that the US economy is just about on its last legs. Just view this document at this Web site before the political sensors get at it. http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/latest-digest.html#anchor0. This guy could hardly be called liberal or left wing, he is just calling as he sees it. To me it supports Krugman argument that the American economy is in deep shit. God help the next President, only hard work not paper shuffling by Wall Street will get America going again.

Thu Sep 30 2004 2:25 AM


Spin Stopper:

Jim, speaking of propaganda.... nice to see you spinning the facts yourself. It's obvious to see that you put together that "OutFoxed" ordeal. Cutting and paisting is definitely your strong point. Why don't you put the facts up that Bill was referring to, the most obvious one to me was the number of liberals vs. conservatives on Fox News. Instead of just talking about 3 months, why don't you look back on the numbers that Bill was talking about so that you can see that overall they DO put more on. I would go on and point out the other spins that you put up, but I know you care nothing for facts.

Thu Sep 30 2004 6:17 PM


nancy:

i see tryanny and disembling everywhere. this country looks awfully like ancient Rome at its close right about now, look it up."this is america, and anything is possible" IS a 'way-back kind of comment, back to the 50's and 60's, and I have seen warfront,(jerk) vietnam, to be concise,but Iraq is not a war, it's a game devised to look like a war(see'Wag the Dog')by Bush and his thugs, leaders of mass destruction.......if we were using our brains, we'd tell him and Kerry to go to.....well, you get the point.

Fri Oct 1 2004 11:03 PM


Tiny:

c'mon Jim- get real! The left wingers and the right wingers get all over o'reilly for each comment he makes. He is the only one I know of that runs right down the middle. I have served my country (Navy '89-94) and lived out of country for 7 years ('94-01) and have seen many, many things that would make you squirm. Just because o'reilly does not kiss up to Kerry (and he has done WHAT for mass. in the past 20 years??) ya think he's right winged? Wake up and smell the cordite kiddo, I do not trust the bobble-headed, used car salesman smile that kerry has. Bush has been there for 4 years- and he means what he says!

have a great day!

Sat Oct 2 2004 3:33 PM


njguardsman:

Tiny

Couldn’t of said it better myself!!!

Sat Oct 2 2004 7:42 PM


12345:

You people are morons. Fox may slightly be slanted conservative but they still are the most fair and balanced when you compare them to other stations. You just hate george bush so when ever you hear anything good about him you think that someone is trying to be bias towards him. You people prove that we evolved from monkeys. Go ahead and shoot yourself. Finally do the world a favor.

Wed Oct 6 2004 9:32 AM


12345:

You people are morons. Fox may slightly be slanted conservative but they still are the most fair and balanced when you compare them to other liberal stations. Showing dead bodies and crying mothers is completely unecessary. Did you people not no what goes on in a war? PEOPLE DIE, GET OVER IT. 1000 people is not alot for as long as we been there and the things we have accomplished(capturing a madman leader, taking over the country, and establishing an interim government). You just hate george bush so when ever you hear anything good about him you think that someone is trying to be bias towards him. I opposed both the afganistan and iraqi war when they started because i treated 9/11 like a criminal act. I was wrong, it was an act of war that threatens ours and the world's way of life. Terrorism cannot be tolerated. Saddam was one and supported others. Senior members from al-queda and iraq have met together, read the 9/11 report. Just because we do not have absolute proof does mean these relationships did not exist. You people prove that we evolved from monkeys. WAKE UP!!

Wed Oct 6 2004 9:50 AM


Null:

You're a moron, If you think the war has done us any good, your a moron.

Saddam was contained, he wasn't a treat, we knew this before the war, and after we toppled him and tore though his country looking for proof of our lies.

You are a moron, Saddam had control over his country through fear, which might have not been the most idea situation in the world for them, it did prevent another Iran from happening, now there is nothing to stop it.

We stuck a BS gov in Iraq leaving a totally fukd country in the wake. I'll bet you that Iraq will become the greatest threat to the US in the world, and we have put this path on course by toppling the leader that keep the country in check.

We are not attacking the real backers of 9/11, and we will never go after them. It is very clear which countries are involved, Saudi's being #1 on the list.

Who's next? Moron, Do you think it's time we invade France for backing Iraq with weapons? well that won't work when we are giving them Nuclear Materials. Who then? We won't attack the Saudis, or Iran, the two most major terriorist backers.

What bout Israel? Should we attack them? There are enough reports of Israel spying operations during 9/11 that they had to have involvement, even if they only had knowledge of the attacks, it's still criminal for them to not tell the american people, unless they did and our goverenment decided to not do anything about it. Sure seems that way.

Before you speak about things not yet fully understood and call everyone here morons for expressing opinions on the matter, you should really think about the knowledge you consider fact, cause unless you went out and experienced these events directly, in the various countries throughout the last 40 - 60 years, you don't have cardboard box to stand on and bitch.

Wed Oct 6 2004 2:32 PM


Tammy:

I personally can understand why people don't bother to register and vote. I avoided political process of anything for years, and finally registered for the first time this year. None of the candidates can honestly relate to the normal, average, working American. Edwards comes the closest out of all of them because of his upbringing. Nader seems to have half of a clue, but with a current poll rating of 1%, he has no chance in hell. Erkel would get more votes with write-ins at this point.

Four years ago, Bush was enthralled by a supermarket checkout scanner. This year, Kerry's wife had never been in a Wendy's fast food restaurant and was totally amazed by chili in a cup. One has 750 million in ketchup under their belt, and the other one has oil and likes to toss out baseballs. How can they tell me, as an American citizen, that they feel my plight, my pain, over trying to survive day to day?

They can't, and that's why people don't bother to vote, and can you honestly blame them? I was proud that I finally took a stand and registered, but I have absolutely no idea who I'll vote for, and therein the problem lies~ will I still be proud four years from now, or when asked who I voted for, will I cower away from the question and divert to "Do you think it will rain tomorrow?"

I'd love to see a middle class, blue collar worker with foreign policy knowledge, common sense, and a bank account under 5 grand be nominated, but it'll never happen. So until that time arises, I'll be forced to buy into the facade of "I'm worth millions, but if you vote for me, you'll be better off, and God Bless America. Oh, by the way, what is a..........Walmart?"

Wed Oct 13 2004 3:57 PM


Hater of Bushy Poo:

Bush Hata is here! Read up on Bush's Nazi ties! You'll be quite interested in the facts! ^_^

P.S. Jim great work! O'Reilly is a jerky merky berky!

Tue Oct 19 2004 7:46 AM


Hater again:

Yes you heard me! NAZIS - HITLERS REGIME!! ENEMIES OF THE USA BUT NOT ENEMIES OF BUSH'S FAMILY!! sorry for the caps but I have to get my point across. Conservaties go to hell.

Tue Oct 19 2004 7:48 AM


eric:

George Bush licks donkey balls for votes

Thu Oct 21 2004 11:39 PM


J Kahn:

Hey Jim, what are you going to do with your life once Kerry has been defeated? The new polls show Bush widening his margin of victory in most of the decisive battle ground states(oh that's right, the polls have it all wrong). It's sad to say, but Kerry will be defeated because he could not keep his wife and Elizabeth Edwards from making harmful remarks. The American people seek grace and humbleness from their first ladies, not an obnoxious blowhard. Most American people cannot handle two more weeks of this garbage, let alone an entire four years.

Fri Oct 22 2004 1:22 AM


Anonymous:

alot of you guys dont seem to realise how much fox news manipulates the truth! it couldnt get much more pro-bush its ridiculous

Thu Oct 28 2004 3:54 AM


ranndino:

Ah, just when I see Billy on the John Stewart show and start to think that he's not such a bad guy (he was even funny) I find this clip of him completely losing his crap on Tim Russert’s CNBC show during a so called “debate” with the New York Times writer Paul Krugman. This is the best example of how conservatives "debate issues". I am yet to find one that does not use the same tactics of yelling, personal insults and intimidation over logic, reasoning and factual arguments. The amazing thing is that they think they actually win these arguments by making complete asses out of themselves.

As Bertrand Russell famously proclaimed (and this has become one of my favorite quotes because it is so applicable to our present environment), "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

This explains why during this so called debate poor, nerdy looking, intellectual Krugman looked like he had a flashback from childhood days - confronted in the schoolyard by a loudmouth, physically superior, emotionally unstable buffoon. This debate might have as well featured Gandhi against a pit-bull that hasn’t been fed for a week. In a barking contest a pit-bull surely would have had a leg up, so to speak.

It was truly sad to see. The anti-intellectual crap dominates the airwaves nowadays. The uneducated drones swallow it whole without bothering to chew. O’Reilly and his idiot followers celebrate encounters like these because it makes them feel all tough inside. Tough like a gorilla pounding its own tits and feeling its balls grow more hair (possibly for a future transplant to his bold, dummy head, since Bill, by his own admission, never had much luck with chicks).

Pounding himself in the chest is, incidentally, Bill’s favorite pastime. I especially love it when he constantly refers to himself as “we”. We have noticed, we have mentioned before, we have predicted, as we have pointed out… Who the fuck is “we”? I think all the celebrity and adulation from his legion of loyal followers has gone directly to Bill’s brain and he has started seeing himself as some kind of a pontificated monarch. Either that or he has developed a multiple personality disorder.

This would also explain Bill’s constant whining about why John Kerry never came on his show. O’Reilly has sunk so deep into self-aggrandizing delusion that he actually believes that his show is powerful enough that it would help Kerry win the elections, had the Senator bothered to grace The Factor with his presence! Talk about a man in need of serious, urgent therapy. According to Nielsen O’Reilly’s spin zone is watched mostly by old, religious, not terribly well educated Republican douchebags who see Kerry as a bagette waving, scarf enveloped, ushanka-wearing, ketchup dieting, commie bastard married to a pompous foreign capitalist pig (how did that happen?).

After watching this despicable display of the most pathetic form of machismo vs. Krugman why would Kerry ever subject himself to what has become a complete circus act? There is no doubt in my mind that the clown in charge would not be as cuddly with Kerry as he was with Bush. Despite O’Reilly’s laughable claims during the John Stewart show that he is an undecided independent.

As much as I despise lying conservative pricks like Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh (I could go on) at least they are genuine enough to admit that they are on the right. O’Reilly can’t even do that. Bill, no doubt, is a media star, but so is Jerry Springer. Unlike Bill, Jerry knows exactly what he is (a peddler of entertainment for the lowest common denominator) and never takes himself seriously. Perhaps it has something to do with superior intellect.

O’Reilly’s audience, at least those in it who still take him seriously as someone who tells it like it is and is looking out for us (another one of his pompous slogans) must be the dumbest four million adults in America. Comedy Central, pissed off by Bill’s insistance on calling John Stewart show’s viewers “stoned slackers” produced a Nilesen study showing that their viewers are much better educated, much better informed and much higher paid. O’Reilly thinks it’s scary that these people are voting. Hmm, is it because well educated, well informed people don’t watch his show other than for the purpose of laughing at him and won’t be voting for his beloved Bush? Yeah, who needs people who won’t shell out cash on your books, t-shirts, doormats and mugs? Doormats. What a concise description of Bill O’Reilly fans.

Now that the sexual harrassment scandal has passed, but not before eating into O’Reilly’s pocket to the tune of an estimated four million dollars (I’m willing to bet my right pinkie that that was the most expensive “shut up” in his life) I would really like to see him espouse advice on family values, Clinton’s morals, today’s youth’s preoccupation with sex… Common, Mr. Independent Know-It-All, indulge us, will you?

If I only had a dollar for everytime Bill O’Reilly farts out hyppocritical bullshit I would be richer than he is. Maybe then I could afford to order toilet paper with his pissed off, rightous mug on it. His way of arguing and depth of reason remind me very much of Beavis, so why not get some O’Reilly TP for my bunghole?

Tue Nov 2 2004 3:28 AM


ranndino:

Election day. Anyone checking in on the "fair and balanced" Fox News? They've had Republican lawyers whining about irregularities all day. What a joke. Must mean things aren't going so swell for their idol.

Tue Nov 2 2004 1:00 PM


Anonymous:

Major scandal about the DNC on CNN just now. The former DEM campaign advisor for Clinton was just going off on Kerry and Terry about siphoning major money off the party. DOn't mean to be a killjoy people, but if this is true Im pissed. He attacked Kerry insinuating he was dirty. Praised Howard Dean. I'm not all that surprised when I recall how many times I was flabbergasted when I'd see him on his windsurfer,snowboard, bike, etc. Tell me I'm not the only one who was thinking 'what the hell is he doing!!'

Thu Nov 4 2004 10:35 AM


ranndino:

Um... Yeah... The poster above must be a freeper in disguise. And as Freepers go they're usually not too clever. Why in hell would Kerry have to steal money from the DNC? I'm sure that with a fortune he and Theresa possess he can afford a windsurfer, a bike, a snowboard and a few more toys to boot.

Thu Nov 4 2004 3:09 PM


Tyler:

please, you paint one picture of democrats - elite people who don't care about anyone and have no God. This couldn't be further from the truth. Why do democrats choose to help the poor by taxing themselves? The red states are only nominally taxed. "Redistribution of wealth", as you call it, happens 90% of the time where it is from a Blue state and to a Red one.
Blue states did have higher crime.. not higher crime rates when you count per capita. We did however have a higher amount of abortions under Bush then Clinton.
Democrats are aren't libertarians (look up what this word liberal typically personifies) which is the way the current Republican party is leaning with the help of Rupert Murdoch (Fox News/Michael Moore books... yes he takes both sides to reinforce points). Beyond that Murdoch is Australian and became a citizen a couple years ago.
What really bothers me is who is running the country? The cabinet is leaving and the CIA too? What is next??

Mon Nov 15 2004 10:59 AM


Werner:

Fox News is unbelievably lopsided and "biased".
I am happy that I live in Germany where we have several totally unbiased and highly critical TV stations. Why not watch some of those (or, if you don't speak German, watch the British BBC to hear and see the truth?

Mon Nov 22 2004 8:52 AM


Dadude:

Unqualified, uninsightful, unintelligent question to present:

Am I the only one who just wants to slap this little bitch ("Fact Finder" Jim)?

I saw "Outfoxed" and I watch FOXNews. If you took that movie and put cheery, 1950s-sitcom-esque music behind it, FOXNews would sell it on it's site. That movie is solely mood music with absolutely nothing to say.

Had some funny parts. Especially that one scene that lasted about 77 minutes when the commentators thought they were being clever...

Sun Nov 28 2004 2:47 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Another two thumbs down from an avid FAUX NEWZ viewer. Was there ever any doubt? :)

Sun Nov 28 2004 4:25 PM


Daniel:

"I'm a Traditionalist" - Bill OReilly on MSNBC.
"I'm a Progressive" - Bill OReily on NPR.

He's changed party affiliations!

Thu Dec 2 2004 7:26 PM


David:

I think Russert let O'Reilly run on against Krugman in order to let him show his true colors. He seems scared to let anyone even finish a single sentence. It's amazing that he considers himself a broadcast professional when he tells his interviewees to shut up repeatedly. Truly pathetic! So afraid of a conflicting opinion that the only response his towering intellect can come up with is a solid 3rd grade recess "shut up!" Imagine William Buckley telling a guest to shut up...
O'Reilly's disconnection with the facts has been documented time and time again.

What truly saddens me are the sheer numbers of people who need to hear his reconstruction to bolster their pre-conceived world view. Remember the folks who insisted the world was flat and resided at the center of the universe?

Mon Dec 6 2004 2:45 PM


dave65:

This probably isn't the right venue for this but don't know where else to go:
Why can I not access the Krugman vs. O'Really bit?
I've got Quicktime, Windowsmedia, AOL Broadband, all the good stuff. Keying in to either 56K or 200K results in a window with whatever is behind it showing on the screen and the eight minute, ten second bit never starts. Bottom banner states the bit is "playing". Any answers out there? Appreciate it. Is the bit being sabotaged by FOX, or something?

Thu Mar 10 2005 9:23 AM


Roman:

has anyone here read the books 1984 and/or Fahrenheit 451? These books are almost treated as prophecies, and they explore the influence of the media and how it is shaping our world.

I think the points that George Orwell (1984) and the other writer whose name i cannot recall are trying to put across is wondefully portrayed in our modern world with FOX being on the offensive, driven by greed and money, and not, ironically, by "fair and balanced" opinion that they oh so love to popularise.

It is sad how the books that i mentioned were written about half a century ago and the writing is slowly coming true, with more censorship and more "i like this candidate, my opinion is right, so i will argue with you on national tv and if you make a good comeback, my catchy 'ok, that's it, cut his mike' phrase will come into play".

It's tragic what this world is coming to, next thing you see is FOX editing History books, previous newspapers and changing the past.

Eventually, 2 plus 2 will equal 5, according to FOX news, so to speak.

Roman

Mon Mar 14 2005 2:05 AM


E. Fisher:

Dan H.............. O'Riely is worse than benign, and he's a "journalist?

Wed Mar 23 2005 2:18 PM


Alex:

I, for you all the best site aboute gilmore girls stars hollow gilmore girls and una mamma per amica

Wed Jun 29 2005 12:23 PM


Anonymous:

from what ive read here this is a very leftist website

Mon Oct 3 2005 2:20 PM


alfred:

I think both gentlemen showed themselves to be assholes. And, Jim you actually took sides! That's funny.

Sun Oct 16 2005 1:35 PM


Stella Rice:

Bill O'Rilley is disgusting and he needs to go get a real job~He's one of the most angry, white males on the air---get rid of him!!!!

Sun Nov 20 2005 4:44 PM


ultimatebet:

That's a good one :) ultimatebet

Tue Nov 29 2005 1:07 AM


Mike:

Bill O'Rilley is brilliant, he knows what hees talking about!

Sun Dec 4 2005 10:21 PM


Anonymous:

lazy democrates

Fri Dec 9 2005 8:31 PM


Spencer:

Quick question, how the hell did Bill O'Rilley get his own TV show.... Well who ever is passing out TV shows to complete mullets needs to find him a douchebag for a partner

Fri Dec 9 2005 8:42 PM


Courtney:

This was a good way to learn more about bullies

Sat Apr 22 2006 3:09 PM


EatShitBush:

All Bush supporters should kill themselves.

Wed Jul 12 2006 11:35 PM


Jay:

Bill O'Reilly needs a taste of his own medicine. He should interview George Galloway, now that's a man who don't take any crap from noone. Bill will never because he knows he'll get his ass handed to him.

Wed Nov 29 2006 4:59 PM


Gentile:

This is for Roman.

You would be wise to go read Cormac McCarthy's
new novel The Road or Thomas Pynchon's introduction to the new version of 1984. Pynchon mockspeople like you --'whoa, orwellian dude.' He also
points out that Orwell believed that you should constantly be questioning your own party's beliefs
and mottos-- something few Asses or Elephants do. If you were in 1984 you would not be able to even write your comments without being hunted down, or did you just read the spark notes? Try being objective.
Our society was much more Orwellian under Lincoln than Bush-- if you knew anything at all about history. And guess what, because he was "Orwellian" he stopped slavery. Sure cost alot of human beings to stop slavery. We will not defeat terrorism because everyone wants to play politics. Write your comments on this blog the next time the "thought police" knock down your door and tell you to stop having sex or reading books. People these days are morons. No one is doing anything to control your actions or monitor them. If you had any mind at all you'd throw your tv out and stop reading conspiracy theories on the internet. Oh no-- Watch out 2+2 might equal 5-- I think that it already does in our public school system.

Thu Dec 7 2006 11:31 AM


Zeke:

Way to go Bill O'Reilly......He ehammered Paully K again and again, always does and will because of the facts. And by the way Congrats on the cancellation of "Air America" I mean "Hot" air.

Mon May 14 2007 11:24 AM


Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam

Email:







Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Last.fm Weekly Artists Chart

<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>