The Dangerous Influence of Far-Right Talk Radio on American Politics

[drankin]

You live on a tiny planet and you want to make "your land" even smaller by placing arbitrary borders around it and keeping out "other people" as if they were somehow different. The very idea of nationalism is stupid.

Have you ever been outside the US?

Yes, I've spent some time in China. Canada probably doesn't count so much but I've been up there a few times.

Are you suggesting that countries should not have borders?

 

[Poop-Loops]

Yes, I've spent some time in China. Canada probably doesn't count so much but I've been up there a few times.

Are you suggesting that countries should not have borders?

I'm suggesting that the idea of "other countries" is completely baseless. The only thing nationalism does is distances two groups of people who otherwise are completely identical in their goals and even most of their culture.

The sooner we get rid of these arbitrary borders the better.

 

[seycyrus]

Look, buddy, it's clear that you have a hard-on for O'Reilly, so let's just stop here.

Ok buddy. How about a bit of intellectual integrity on your part? Instead of just chowing down on regurgitated bits and pieces, why not just accept the invitation?

Am I asking you to do some incredibly difficult task?

Hey, what's this?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=whYi8sCF5Pg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eOpChXhglGg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qil6hE5qWxo&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XrNl6-j9x5w

Those look to be some regurgitated pieces of matter that your media masters choose to throw at you.

The man is an idiot and his show is a waste of time. His stories are ridiculous. He decided not to cover the Iraq War, the one he had a boner for, because it brought the US in a negative light. Great journalism, there.

Not that you would know from firsthand knowledge.

Pfft.

 

[drankin]

I'm suggesting that the idea of "other countries" is completely baseless. The only thing nationalism does is distances two groups of people who otherwise are completely identical in their goals and even most of their culture.

The sooner we get rid of these arbitrary borders the better.

I think this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black when you refer to these guys as wackos. Of course countries have to have borders. It's necessary for governments to have jurisdiction. A world without national borders is just wacko idealology.

 

[seycyrus]

Olbermann is no where near as ridiculous as O'Reilly. They are not even in the same ball park. Olbermann indeed says things that are biased, but when he makes a claim, he backs up his arguments with facts.

Can you give an undisputable fact that there is an organized conspiratorial effort to remove Christianity from Christmas? Neither can Bill O'Reilly.

Can you give me a cite where I claimed there was an ORGANIZED effort? No you can't

Can you give an undisputable fact that the kidnapped boy "loved" being kidnapped and raped? Neither can Bill O'Reilly.

I'm not here to defend the stupid things O'reiley might have said. Just liek I'm not here to defend the stupid things you have said.

Keith Olbermann engages in what is called "deductive reasoning." Bill O'Reilly engages in what is called "making things up."

So, let's watch Olberman's show one time next week. Talk about it and then watch O'reiley the next and do the same.

Evidently my Monday and Tuesday are now open again.

 

[seycyrus]

So, out of *all* the supporters of independent thought and intellectual freedom, is there ONE person who will step forward and accept the invitation for a discussion of an actual show?

This is PF, right? There ARE political threads allowed here right?

If O'reilley is half the idiot some of you say, then on any given night he should say about 100 stupid things. It'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.

On the next night we can then go on and discuss the hundreds of amazing, insightful, brilliant comments that Olberman offers.

 

[G01]

I'm not here to defend the stupid things O'reiley might have said.

Then what are we doing here?

Honestly I have offered specific examples from real shows as to why I hold the opinion of Bill that I do. (You have not done the same with Olbermann) I do not have time to waste more time watching Bill (especially since I don't enjoy his show), and then debating the two shows. I don't care enough about it.

With that I'm done with this thread.

 

[seycyrus]

If you ever have some time to kill and want to get a look at the sick inner workings of O'Reilly, read through the legal papers that were filed when he was hit by a sexual harassment case:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html

The guy's a nutcase.

Uhm, yeah...

Just took the time to go through your little expose.

I'd like to hear some of the recordings of these numerous phone conversations. Supposedly, he called her like 10 times, and got off. She felt repulsed and upset each time. And STAYED on the line each time! Without recording a single call!

Riiiiiight.

 

[seycyrus]

Then what are we doing here?

OK, let me rephrase. I'm not here to defend *every* stupid thing he might have said.

Honestly I have offered specific examples from real shows as to why I hold the opinion of Bill that I do. (You have not done the same with Olbermann)

Have I denigrated Olbermann? No, I offered to watch Olbermann and discuss his show (I watch it all the time, as I've stated before), as a sort of recompense.

I do not have time to waste more time watching Bill (especially since I don't enjoy his show), and then debating the two shows. I don't care enough about it.

Everyone seems to have plenty of time to find little tidbits from sites dedicated to attack O'reiley, but no one has time to time to get some firsthand knowledge?

And another challenger goes down!

 

[Gokul43201]

I'd like to hear some of the recordings of these numerous phone conversations. Supposedly, he called her like 10 times, and got off. She felt repulsed and upset each time. And STAYED on the line each time! Without recording a single call!

Riiiiiight.

How do you know that none of the calls were recorded?

 

[seycyrus]

How do you know that none of the calls were recorded?

I guess I don't. I didn't come up with any links that offered what I would consider to be anything other that hear say.

Do you have any links of the recordings?

Am I supposed to believe that none of the anti-Oreiley sites have the actual tapes?

 

[lisab]

Uhm, yeah...

Just took the time to go through your little expose.

I'd like to hear some of the recordings of these numerous phone conversations. Supposedly, he called her like 10 times, and got off. She felt repulsed and upset each time. And STAYED on the line each time! Without recording a single call!

Riiiiiight.

You don't understand sexual harassment; she stayed on the line because he was her boss.

In many states, it's illegal to make recordings of a person's voice without them knowing. Perhaps she did make one; it's not admissable in many courts, though.

He settled the case for big $$. He's a jackass.

When I was in college, I had a roommate (who was, frankly, kind of dumb) who kept coming up with ideas of perpetual motion machines. I would take the time to listen to him, and then explain to him why it wouldn't work. He loved playing "try to stump the scientist." Eventually I got tired of the game, and I wouldn't listen to him anymore. I knew that a perpetual motion machine wasn't possible; no need to go over it again and again, and he clearly wasn't learning anything.

That's where I am with O'Reilly; the data are in and I'm convinced he's a complete idiot. There's plenty of evidence of that right here on this thread, but I came to my decision a long time ago.

No need to waste any more of my time on him, period.

 

[drankin]

Let's move on to Dr Savage. Now, he's a much more interesting personality. Savage doesn't think much of O'Reilly either.

 

[Poop-Loops]

You mean Dr. Weiner? Honestly, why would you change your name to something like that? He must have low self-esteem.

Or a really funny name. Hahahah!

Anyway, you can make him the definition of "Right Wing Lunatic" because he has gems such as:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1595550437/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1595550135/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This goes with the topic of Nationalism like I was saying. Someone so desperate to have an "in" and an "out" group is not alright in the head.

 

[seycyrus]

You don't understand sexual harassment; she stayed on the line because he was her boss.

Oh please. I understand victimization quite well thank you. I also understand a story that sounds more than a bit fishy.

That's where I am with O'Reilly; the data are in and I'm convinced he's a complete idiot. There's plenty of evidence of that right here on this thread, but I came to my decision a long time ago.

No need to waste any more of my time on him, period.

In your story about your old roommate, you listened to him yourself. You didn't listen to other stories about him.

But this is *ridiculous*. No one. I mean no one! is willing to step up to just watch one frickin show??! and discuss it? They'd rather just sit and watch and see what little spoofs someone throws up on thew internet. Let me guess, it's time for comedy central!

LET'S HEAR IT FOR INDEPENDENT THOUGHT! Hoorah!

 

[Poop-Loops]

INDEPENDENT THOUGHT!

I don't think you're allowed to utter those words if you watch Fox at all. I'm pretty sure it's in their contract.

 

[seycyrus]

I don't think you're allowed to utter those words if you watch Fox at all. I'm pretty sure it's in their contract.

Says the guy who is afraid to watch one show and talk about it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Alright, let's stop the nonsense and stay focused on the subject - nonsense.

 

[seycyrus]

Alright, let's stop the nonsense and stay focused on the subject - nonsense.

I'm sorry, I was too busy watching my taped episode of Olbermann to notice the topic change!

He just got done talking about Barbara Walters interview and how she said bad things about Rosie. He then proceeded to make fun of O'reiley for talking about Barbara and Rosie.

 

[drankin]

You mean Dr. Weiner? Honestly, why would you change your name to something like that? He must have low self-esteem.

Or a really funny name. Hahahah!

Anyway, you can make him the definition of "Right Wing Lunatic" because he has gems such as:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1595550437/?tag=pfamazon01-20
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1595550135/?tag=pfamazon01-20

This goes with the topic of Nationalism like I was saying. Someone so desperate to have an "in" and an "out" group is not alright in the head.

Of course he changed his name, he's in radio. I wouldn't put on a show called "The Weiner Nation" either. Duh.

He considers himself a conservative. He's a bit over-the-top but... he rocks. LOL

What do you mean about "in" and "out"? And what is your contention against nationalism? A world without nations, now THAT'S lunacy.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Says the guy who is afraid to watch one show and talk about it.

Yes, I'm afraid. Boy, you got me there.

Of course he changed his name, he's in radio. I wouldn't put on a show called "The Weiner Nation" either. Duh.

If he was the conservative he says he is, he wouldn't feel the need to change his name.

Plus, the Weiner nation has a much better ring to it than the Savage nation. He went from a name that is a euphemism for the penis to a name that compensates for his penis.

What do you mean about "in" and "out"? And what is your contention against nationalism? A world without nations, now THAT'S lunacy.

Yes, Heaven forbid we all realize that we live in a tiny rock and stop fighting over small clumps of land. Heaven forbid we realize that our neighbors have the exact same goals as we do and that we could get more done by helping each other out than fighting or competing.

Ingroup and outgroup? You've never heard of those terms. You poor thing. It's cute that you're still trying to debate politics, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outgroup_(sociology )

Desperately trying to create an ingroup that you belong to is a sign of sever insecurity and longing to be accepted. What better way to be a part of a group than to proclaim some common enemy and declare that only you can defeat that enemy, so everybody should rally with you?

 

[drankin]

If he was the conservative he says he is, he wouldn't feel the need to change his name.

Plus, the Weiner nation has a much better ring to it than the Savage nation. He went from a name that is a euphemism for the penis to a name that compensates for his penis.

Sooo, if one is conservative they can't change there surname? It's against the conservative rules? Interesting. Your insinuation of penile compensation is childish. I think he changed it to Savage because the term savage certainly depicts his passionate personality. Regardless of the reasons why one changes their surname (I actually have myself) doesn't disqualify a persons point of view.

Yes, Heaven forbid we all realize that we live in a tiny rock and stop fighting over small clumps of land. Heaven forbid we realize that our neighbors have the exact same goals as we do and that we could get more done by helping each other out than fighting or competing.

This is liberal extremism. As Dr Savage points out, that mindset is a mental disorder. English want to be English, Irish want to be Irish, French want to continue being French, Americans want to be Americans, Iranians want to be Iranians... take away their borders and they lose their culture, their identity, their government and their language. Your idea, though ideal in a strange sort of way, is not even close to reality.

Ingroup and outgroup? You've never heard of those terms. You poor thing. It's cute that you're still trying to debate politics, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outgroup_(sociology )

Desperately trying to create an ingroup that you belong to is a sign of sever insecurity and longing to be accepted. What better way to be a part of a group than to proclaim some common enemy and declare that only you can defeat that enemy, so everybody should rally with you?

Of course I've heard of those terms. So you claim the Dr Savage is trying to create these groups because he is severely insecure and needs people to rally around him? Interesting psychological eval. I take it your a doctor too?

Keep it coming, this is great stuff!

 

[Hurkyl]

Heaven forbid we realize that our neighbors have the exact same goals as we do

Heaven forbid we acknowledge diversity. :tongue:

 

[drankin]

Heaven forbid we acknowledge diversity. :tongue:

Good point, and what is this "exact same goals" nonsense? I thought we were talking about this planet?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There are those too...but they are just nowhere near as popular or well-financed.

Yes, liberal talk radio was a total flop. I find it notable that hate-talk doesn't sell among liberals nearly as well as it sells to conservatives - neo-conservatives, that is. That is rather ironic when one considers that the neo-cons see themselves as being more Christian - a philosophy of love, at the least - than liberals. And even more ironic is the fact that nutjobs like LL&S rant about the "liberal media".

 

[drankin]

Yes, liberal talk radio was a total flop. I find it notable that hate-talk doesn't sell among liberals nearly as well as it sells to conservatives - neo-conservatives, that is. That is rather ironic when one considers that the neo-cons see themselves as being more Christian - a philosophy of love, at the least - than liberals. And even more ironic is the fact that nutjobs like LL&S rant about the "liberal media".

What exactly is hate talk? Just curious why both the conservatives and the liberals accuse each other of "hate talk".

 

[seycyrus]

Yes, I'm afraid. Boy, you got me there.

Yeah, keep talking.

I think Osama Bin Laden is a piece of crap, but I still went and read his manifesto. read it *myself*.

You're worried about something or another. You can rationalize it to yourself however you want, but I guarantee you that if it was a youtube video of O'reileys stupidest sayings, you'd find the time to watch it.

You've had time to watch a bunch of snippets. Post them, and participate in a thread about them, but not watch an actual show.

In the meantime, somehow I watched both CNN and Olbermann. You know, so I would have a clue about what I was talking about.

The fact is, your "treasure trove" of material wouldn't manifest. Oreiley would say just as many stupid things as Olbermann or any CNN pundit.

One of the points that was brought up in an early post in this thread was an "Open mind to an alternate point of view."

Well looks like that idea was just shot to pieces and replaced by ..."Err let me log on the web and see what my favorite blogger who supports my own point of view tells me I'm supposed to believe."

 

[seycyrus]

What exactly is hate talk? Just curious why both the conservatives and the liberals accuse each other of "hate talk".

Hate talk is the term used when conservatives succeed in markets in which liberals fail.

The failure of liberal radio *couldn't* be due to poor talent, inefficient marketing or an uncommitted audience.

Meanwhile, comedy central is doing quite well.

 

[Gokul43201]

I guess I don't. I didn't come up with any links that offered what I would consider to be anything other that hear say.

Do you have any links of the recordings?

Am I supposed to believe that none of the anti-Oreiley sites have the actual tapes?

Didn't he actually settle the suit and pay her off because the plaintiff's case included word-to-word quotations of the phone conversations?

PS: Quotes such as these?

 

[Gokul43201]

The O'Reilly Saga, Part 2 of many:

O'REILLY: Now if the [Canadian] government -- if your government harbors these two deserter [sic], doesn't send them back ... there will be a boycott of your country which will hurt your country enormously. France is now feeling that sting.

MALLICK: I don't think for a moment such a boycott would take place because we are your biggest trading partners.

O'REILLY: No, it will take place, madam. In France ...

MALLICK: I don't think that your French boycott has done too well ...

O'REILLY: ...they've lost billions of dollars in France according to "The Paris Business Review."

What's the problem with this?

There is no such thing as the "Paris Business Review" - O'Reilly just made it up, as we've come to expect from him. Not just that, The US Census Bureau reported increased imports from France during the time of the "O'Reilly Boycott" compared to a year earlier.

Just the usual self-aggrandizing nonsense that shows nothing but wanton disrespect for any kind of journalistic ethics.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405020006

 

[chemisttree]

Is it any wonder that with people like this bending the ear of working class Americans - hour after hour, day after day, year after year - we get what we have in Washington? But the worst of it is that in spite of the nonsense this guy spreads like horse manure, I defend his right to free speech. At the same time, it makes me sick to see what his brand of bs, and that of his comrades in arms, Larson & Limbaugh, has done to the country. And I have to wonder if there comes a point where his words of hatred are indeed like yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Getting back to the topic of the thread... Are the likes of Larson, Limbaugh and Savage having an effect? Did Rush's "Operation Chaos" really have an effect? Do really believe that Limbaugh is responsible for two Bush terms? Do you believe that the Limbaugh dittoheads swayed the election in Indiania to give Hillary a slim victory?

Do you believe what Obama's campaign has said about it... namely that, http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Exit_polls_indicate_Limbaughs_minions_turning_0506.html"

Or do you believe that there was no effect whatsoever, that, "http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/05/06/exit-polls-confirm-operation-chaos-abject-failure/"

I think Operation Chaos' real goal is just to get the left's panties in a wad. That appears to be working. :rofl::rofl:

 

[Poop-Loops]

Good point, and what is this "exact same goals" nonsense? I thought we were talking about this planet?

Food, shelter, peace, love, prosperity, freedom. Do you deny that everybody wants that?

 

[edward]

What exactly is hate talk? Just curious why both the conservatives and the liberals accuse each other of "hate talk".

What exactly is hare talk? Below is hat talk.



As Ivan mentioned the neocons are vicious. They try to defend their actions by accusing the liberals of doing it too. That is about as far as the two way accusations go.

 

[edward]

To be fair, here is a list of liberal hate radio talk show hosts as presented in the Free Republic.

Google the names, or bring them up on youtube. You will not see the angry vicious attacks against conservatives as a whole, and very little about individuals.



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



Liberal Hate Radio Guide



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

Thom Hartmann -

Anti-Corporation, thinks the "evil" coporations are out to screw the middle class.
Invokes Ronald Reagan's name in a negative way every single show, thinks Reagan destroyed the country forever.

Thinks Jimmy Carter was a great President...no, really.

Has Liberterian or "conservative" guests on, then spends the rest of the show, with his callers, making fun of them.

Thinks George Bush should be impeached.

Hates Fox News


Ed Shultz - Big on improving gas milage and using additives in your vehicle.

Makes fun of "Slanthead" every show...aka, Sean Hannity.

Thinks George Bush should be impeached.

Hates Fox News.


Stephanie Miller - Has the worst amateurish radio show ever, including sound effects from your old high school radio show.

Like to laugh at her own comments...constantly.

Has the entire 1st hour about "Right Wing World"

Thinks George Bush should be impeached.

Hates Fox News.


Bill Press - Thinks Dennis Kucinich is a very viable candidate.

Makes fun of CNN and Fox News, all the while wondering why he's never on these networks.

Thinks Karl Rove runs the government.

Thinks George Bush should be impeached.

Hates Fox News.

 

[drankin]

Food, shelter, peace, love, prosperity, freedom. Do you deny that everybody wants that?

Yes, it's impossible to even suppose that "everyone" wants that. Probably half the Muslim world believes in a Jihad against Western civilization. That takes peace and freedom out of it right there. Not counting N. Korea and a handful of other nations on the planet and what their ideals are. I'll believe that everyone wants prosperity but that's about as close assuming what everyone wants that I can swallow.