hannity, beck, ingraham, et al. SAY that they are giving you their opinion. i don't seen the problem....if someone is telling you they are giving you their opinion...it is what it is.
i'll agree with you to an extent on o'riley b/c he tries to be "above it all" which is obviously BS....
but i don't see anything wrong with guys like hannity saying here's my opinion, and it's why i believe it.
O'reilly and Hannity are so predictable, it's to the point now that I know what they are going to say, or what angle they are going to take, well before they say it.
Most of the time when they speak with their guests, they don't listen to anything but the sound of their own voice.
It's a bit irresponsible as some people are impressionable, and put a lot of faith in what they say as unbiased and fair.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Hannity and the format of that show is an "opinion" agenda leaning to the "right." It really isn't about the human individual, or common sense.
hannity tells you he's a conservative...i'll agree that O'Reilly is misleading...he pretends to be a centrist....
and it's true that you can tell what hannity will say...but you can also predict what keith olbermann will say...and i have no problem with any of that...
my problem is with "journalists" who pretend to be unbiased...i just don't think that's possible.
And you ask me what I want this year
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
hannity tells you he's a conservative...i'll agree that O'Reilly is misleading...he pretends to be a centrist....
and it's true that you can tell what hannity will say...but you can also predict what keith olbermann will say...and i have no problem with any of that...
my problem is with "journalists" who pretend to be unbiased...i just don't think that's possible.
That could be a good subject for another post.
McNeil/Lehrer back in the day on PBS were probably as close to mainstream newsworthy unbiased reporting as the good 'ol USA has ever had. 'Course, not too many people tuned in.
McNeil/Lehrer back in the day on PBS were probably as close to mainstream newsworthy unbiased reporting as the good 'ol USA has ever had. 'Course, not too many people tuned in.
Good call. I was a loyal watcher of the show for years and years.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Hi Purple Hawk. I think, if Bill had let Paul, he would have more than made his point. One really can't debate this issue without a history lesson. These people just didn't wake up one day and decide to hate us for our freedom. It is a hard pill to shallow, but our past has come back to bite us and the current administration's actions have only made our position in the middle east worse. As for just walking out now after our fumble? Not sure is it is as easy as Paul says, we have really made a mess of things, but what he says about our past involvement fueling this fire is undeniable.
O'reilly runs a tv program, has guests on, has certain questions he wants to ask, and only a very limited time to do so. When the people dont answer his questions he will continue to push and then move on. From what i saw in that interview, Paul had more time to respond to the questions then most guests on orielly's program. So im not sure that argument is valid.
O'reilly runs a tv program, has guests on, has certain questions he wants to ask, and only a very limited time to do so. When the people dont answer his questions he will continue to push and then move on. From what i saw in that interview, Paul had more time to respond to the questions then most guests on orielly's program. So im not sure that argument is valid.
Perhaps the timing thing is a bit of a problem then.
Ever think this show might be just too "busy" to hold a decent conversation?
How exactly do the other shows on TV manage it?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
O'reilly runs a tv program, has guests on, has certain questions he wants to ask, and only a very limited time to do so. When the people dont answer his questions he will continue to push and then move on. From what i saw in that interview, Paul had more time to respond to the questions then most guests on orielly's program. So im not sure that argument is valid.
o'reilly is not a listener. never has been, never will be. he runs a media enterprise, that's the niche he's found for himself in the culpable american media market.
Perhaps the timing thing is a bit of a problem then.
Ever think this show might be just too "busy" to hold a decent conversation?
How exactly do the other shows on TV manage it?
i dunno - he only has the highest ratings for a show of his genre for a reason. Maybe you should contact producers if you think they are overbooked - i personally think a 6 minute segment to answer maybe 4 real questions (which paul answered none of) is more then enough time.
i dunno - he only has the highest ratings for a show of his genre for a reason. Maybe you should contact producers if you think they are overbooked - i personally think a 6 minute segment to answer maybe 4 real questions (which paul answered none of) is more then enough time.
Apparently not if Bill has to cut him off all the time.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
go back and time how much of the segment paul speaks
You mean how many sentences to dance in between Bill's interruptions?
Conversation is not classified as logical, when you are not free to make a point without feeling hastened towards ffrequent interruption.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
o'reilly is not a listener. never has been, never will be. he runs a media enterprise, that's the niche he's found for himself in the culpable american media market.
O Reilly didn't say we can't talk about history...he said we all KNOW history...and was trying to get Ron Paul off his talking points to actually address his question. I know people like you think all us cons are a bunch of inbreeding, heyseed hillbillies who haven't heard of great "thinkers" like noam chomskey, but we know about all that...and find O'Reilly's tactic of making his guest actually answer his question, as opposed to obfuscating, refreshing.
some dude posted a comment on that clip. This is what it reads, "Bill o'Reilly is always correct...according to Bill O'Reilly.
Tries to force his guest into a 'yes' or 'no' answer that will make them look bad and then argues over them if they try to engage in a logical debate." - Rackuzius
wouldn't you agree that's what o'reilly was doing? ok, sure, maybe o'reilly didn't have much time since it's a show and they have a schedule to run on... but still it makes you wonder.
o'reilly is a dick dude. he sucks balls... donkey balls.
and i'm not even a lib
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
O'reilly runs a tv program, has guests on, has certain questions he wants to ask, and only a very limited time to do so. When the people dont answer his questions he will continue to push and then move on. From what i saw in that interview, Paul had more time to respond to the questions then most guests on orielly's program. So im not sure that argument is valid.
it could also be that most of us watching actually KNOW the history...and Billy O was cutting through the bullshit that paul was spouting.
call that media sensationalism if you will...but i really don't need a history lesson from ron paul, eddie vedder, or noam chomsky. They're all nuts and live in a parrallel universe from the one I'm living in. if you go onto a show, just answer the direct questions and don't pretend to be above it all. you aren't smarter than the viewer, this is a fact ron paul and others need to realize.
And you ask me what I want this year
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
it could also be that most of us watching actually KNOW the history...and Billy O was cutting through the bullshit that paul was spouting.
call that media sensationalism if you will...but i really don't need a history lesson from ron paul, eddie vedder, or noam chomsky. They're all nuts and live in a parrallel universe from the one I'm living in. if you go onto a show, just answer the direct questions and don't pretend to be above it all. you aren't smarter than the viewer, this is a fact ron paul and others need to realize.
you can type that with a straight face while simultaneously posting in a thread that states that 33% of Americans (and 40% of Rep - Fox's base) believe that Saddam was involved in 9/11?????? That was only six years ago...
side note - I don't receive FoxNews....and I haven't watched many of these clowns speak....but holy o'fuck. What an ass O'Reilley is!..."it's policy to wipe out Israel, it's policy to attack America in Iran"...huh? policy?
then he talks about the "summer war" between Hezbollah and Israel and states that the US had "nothing to do with that".....ok.
And wtf is with intersplicing all the footage of people carrying rocket launchers n shit? how do they get away with this shit? complete garbage tv.
you can type that with a straight face while simultaneously posting in a thread that states that 33% of Americans (and 40% of Rep - Fox's base) believe that Saddam was involved in 9/11?????? That was only six years ago...
side note - I don't receive FoxNews....and I haven't watched many of these clowns speak....but holy o'fuck. What an ass O'Reilley is!..."it's policy to wipe out Israel, it's policy to attack America in Iran"...huh? policy?
then he talks about the "summer war" between Hezbollah and Israel and states that the US had "nothing to do with that".....ok.
And wtf is with intersplicing all the footage of people carrying rocket launchers n shit? how do they get away with this shit? complete garbage tv.
Im really sick of seeing posts and threads talking about a certain percentage of americans believing something - whatever that may be. HAve you also heard the percentages of americans that "supposedly" cant locate the US on a map? so why the fuck do we even take polls like this into accoutn when one we all know a good majority of american citizens are uneducated and more or loess idiots, and two the people being surveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life - ya thats where i wasnt my stats comeing from. Why the fuck do people even post those.
Billy O was cutting through the bullshit that paul was spouting.
do you do realize you just said the above?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Im really sick of seeing posts and threads talking about a certain percentage of americans believing something - whatever that may be. HAve you also heard the percentages of americans that "supposedly" cant locate the US on a map? so why the fuck do we even take polls like this into accoutn when one we all know a good majority of american citizens are uneducated and more or loess idiots, and two the people being surveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life - ya thats where i wasnt my stats comeing from. Why the fuck do people even post those.
I'm not sure if this rant was directed at me or not...
But I was simply addressing the facts that one: purplehawk seems to think that most Fox viewers are not uneducated and more or less idiots....and two that the people being suveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life that voted GW in for two terms.
..maybe you should have quoted phawk?
(( edit: ok ok..."more or less idiots" aren't quite a majority....he wasn't really voted in either time. ))
and what is wrong with polls coming from all walks of life, isnt that the point? You want to go survey a bunch of ivy league professors and see if they think Saddam was involved? How accurate a picture does that paint of the American public?
I'm not sure if this rant was directed at me or not...
But I was simply addressing the facts that one: purplehawk seems to think that most Fox viewers are not uneducated and more or less idiots....and two that the people being suveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life that voted GW in for two terms.
..maybe you should have quoted phawk?
(( edit: ok ok..."more or less idiots" aren't quite a majority....he wasn't really voted in either time. ))
and what is wrong with polls coming from all walks of life, isnt that the point? You want to go survey a bunch of ivy league professors and see if they think Saddam was involved? How accurate a picture does that paint of the American public?
i wasnt really directing it at you but more at various percentage posts on this forum that people seem to take seriously - i have no problem with polls i just think they should be take with a grain of salt. If such a large percentage of people are supposedly unable to find the US on a map (not sure the exact oercentage now but i heard it once and believe it was over 30), then why the hell should we take into consideration theri opinion? They obviously havent a clue . . .
side note - I don't receive FoxNews....and I haven't watched many of these clowns speak....but holy o'fuck. What an ass O'Reilley is!..."it's policy to wipe out Israel, it's policy to attack America in Iran"...huh? policy?
you speak some truth...but you need to listen to Rush Limbaugh first..he is a great man...my annointed Godfather even....listen to him, and before you know it, you, like me, will be a brainwashed hillbilly.
as far as not getting fox news...that's a problem, espeically if you're getting "serious journalists" like Keith Olbermann etc....i'm guessing free thinking people are going to search for something deeper.
make no mistake...worldwide liberalism is dying....and the conservative movement is advancing...it's undeniable. the evil hatemongers will soon rule the world...*evil laugh*
And you ask me what I want this year
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Comments
O'reilly and Hannity are so predictable, it's to the point now that I know what they are going to say, or what angle they are going to take, well before they say it.
Most of the time when they speak with their guests, they don't listen to anything but the sound of their own voice.
It's a bit irresponsible as some people are impressionable, and put a lot of faith in what they say as unbiased and fair.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
hannity tells you he's a conservative...i'll agree that O'Reilly is misleading...he pretends to be a centrist....
and it's true that you can tell what hannity will say...but you can also predict what keith olbermann will say...and i have no problem with any of that...
my problem is with "journalists" who pretend to be unbiased...i just don't think that's possible.
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
That could be a good subject for another post.
McNeil/Lehrer back in the day on PBS were probably as close to mainstream newsworthy unbiased reporting as the good 'ol USA has ever had. 'Course, not too many people tuned in.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Good call. I was a loyal watcher of the show for years and years.
O'reilly runs a tv program, has guests on, has certain questions he wants to ask, and only a very limited time to do so. When the people dont answer his questions he will continue to push and then move on. From what i saw in that interview, Paul had more time to respond to the questions then most guests on orielly's program. So im not sure that argument is valid.
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
Perhaps the timing thing is a bit of a problem then.
Ever think this show might be just too "busy" to hold a decent conversation?
How exactly do the other shows on TV manage it?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
i dunno - he only has the highest ratings for a show of his genre for a reason. Maybe you should contact producers if you think they are overbooked - i personally think a 6 minute segment to answer maybe 4 real questions (which paul answered none of) is more then enough time.
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
Apparently not if Bill has to cut him off all the time.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
go back and time how much of the segment paul speaks
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
You mean how many sentences to dance in between Bill's interruptions?
Conversation is not classified as logical, when you are not free to make a point without feeling hastened towards ffrequent interruption.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
"Culpable" is the key word there. Look it up.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Tries to force his guest into a 'yes' or 'no' answer that will make them look bad and then argues over them if they try to engage in a logical debate." - Rackuzius
wouldn't you agree that's what o'reilly was doing? ok, sure, maybe o'reilly didn't have much time since it's a show and they have a schedule to run on... but still it makes you wonder.
o'reilly is a dick dude. he sucks balls... donkey balls.
and i'm not even a lib
No! Soy hombre, comprendes? Soy hombre y tengo bolas muy grandes!
it could also be that most of us watching actually KNOW the history...and Billy O was cutting through the bullshit that paul was spouting.
call that media sensationalism if you will...but i really don't need a history lesson from ron paul, eddie vedder, or noam chomsky. They're all nuts and live in a parrallel universe from the one I'm living in. if you go onto a show, just answer the direct questions and don't pretend to be above it all. you aren't smarter than the viewer, this is a fact ron paul and others need to realize.
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
side note - I don't receive FoxNews....and I haven't watched many of these clowns speak....but holy o'fuck. What an ass O'Reilley is!..."it's policy to wipe out Israel, it's policy to attack America in Iran"...huh? policy?
then he talks about the "summer war" between Hezbollah and Israel and states that the US had "nothing to do with that".....ok.
And wtf is with intersplicing all the footage of people carrying rocket launchers n shit? how do they get away with this shit? complete garbage tv.
Im really sick of seeing posts and threads talking about a certain percentage of americans believing something - whatever that may be. HAve you also heard the percentages of americans that "supposedly" cant locate the US on a map? so why the fuck do we even take polls like this into accoutn when one we all know a good majority of american citizens are uneducated and more or loess idiots, and two the people being surveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life - ya thats where i wasnt my stats comeing from. Why the fuck do people even post those.
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
do you do realize you just said the above?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I'm not sure if this rant was directed at me or not...
But I was simply addressing the facts that one: purplehawk seems to think that most Fox viewers are not uneducated and more or less idiots....and two that the people being suveyed for this shit are random people from all walks of life that voted GW in for two terms.
..maybe you should have quoted phawk?
(( edit: ok ok..."more or less idiots" aren't quite a majority....he wasn't really voted in either time. ))
and what is wrong with polls coming from all walks of life, isnt that the point? You want to go survey a bunch of ivy league professors and see if they think Saddam was involved? How accurate a picture does that paint of the American public?
i wasnt really directing it at you but more at various percentage posts on this forum that people seem to take seriously - i have no problem with polls i just think they should be take with a grain of salt. If such a large percentage of people are supposedly unable to find the US on a map (not sure the exact oercentage now but i heard it once and believe it was over 30), then why the hell should we take into consideration theri opinion? They obviously havent a clue . . .
My Movie/Music Reviews & Sports Blog
you speak some truth...but you need to listen to Rush Limbaugh first..he is a great man...my annointed Godfather even....listen to him, and before you know it, you, like me, will be a brainwashed hillbilly.
as far as not getting fox news...that's a problem, espeically if you're getting "serious journalists" like Keith Olbermann etc....i'm guessing free thinking people are going to search for something deeper.
make no mistake...worldwide liberalism is dying....and the conservative movement is advancing...it's undeniable. the evil hatemongers will soon rule the world...*evil laugh*
And I try to make this kind and clear
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
And desire and love and empty things
Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days