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

[Gokul43201]

The O'Reilly Saga, Part 1 of many:

O'REILLY: Have you been in combat Colonel?
CROWLEY: Yes.
PUCKETT: Me? No, sir, I have not.
O'REILLY: How 'bout you, Colonel?
CROWLEY: Yes.
O'REILLY: So you know what we're talkin' about. "Cause I was in combat and when you are there your adrenalin is flying through your ears. And you know you've got the gun and I just couldn't understand ...

And from another show:

"I've been in combat. I've seen it. I've been close to it. And if I'm... my unit is in danger, and I've got a captured guy, and the guy knows where the enemy is, and I'm looking him in the eye, the guy better tell me. That's all I'm going to tell you. He better tell me. If it's life or death, he's going first."

O'Reilly had never served in the military or reported from a combat zone, ever. Later in the same show.

O'Reilly: We've got a caller. Roger. Roger from Portland, Oregon. What say you Roger?

Roger: Yeah, hey, Bill. First things first. You just said you've been in combat, but you've never been in the military, have you?

O'Reilly: No I have not.

Roger: Then why do you say you've been in combat?

O'Reilly: Why do I say that, Roger? Because I was in the middle of a couple of firefights in South and Central America.

Roger: But you were a media guy.

O'Reilly: Yeah. A media guy with a pen, not a gun. And people were shooting at me, Roger.

Roger: People might think that you actually were in the military.

O'Reilly: Oh... We don't want to mislead anybody. But I made it quite clear... quite clear in many, many circumstances --

Roger: [mumbles something about being, or not being, "fair and balanced"]

O'Reilly: [quietly disconnects Roger] Yeah. Hey listen, Roger. You can take your little "fair and balanced" uh... snip remark and shove it, okay? You're not getting on this air. Um... You, mister macho man, have never come close to anything I've done, down where I've been. So take a walk and... uh... 'nuff said.

Not surprisingly, O'Reilly wasn't anywhere near the action during the El Salvador or Falkland Island conflicts. He reported on both stories from the CBS office in Buenos Aires.

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/12/04/bill_oreilly_decorated_war_vet_murtha_afraid_to_come_on_the_factor.php
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/7/11/133950.shtml

 

[Poop-Loops]

Dr Savage is a genius and borderline insane. I like to listen to him because he can say some outrageous stuff and back it up with intelligent reasoning. He is one of those classic individuals that are completely set in their way of thinking, which is refreshing by itself in a world of the wishy-washy. You can't blame people from calling him nuts but he makes some deep points that really get you thinking.

Name one.

The one thing I agree with him completely on is his philosophy of language, culture, and borders as being an essential distinction to maintain in the US. Everything else is thought provoking entertainment that can be really inspiring at times.

Nationalism? You're into that garbage? Watch this over and over until you get that stuff out of your head:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

 

[Poop-Loops]

Some of them are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Ward"

Ouch! Those right-wing nutters are well... nuts, but they're not that disgusting. Maybe O'Reilly, but even not that far.

 

[drankin]

Name one.



Nationalism? You're into that garbage? Watch this over and over until you get that stuff out of your head:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

Help me out here, I just read the definition to make sure I'm not missing anything. What's wrong with Nationalism?

I won't be watching any youtube for a few hours, I'm at work.

 

[Poop-Loops]

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?

 

[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.

 

[drankin]

Heaven forbid we acknowledge diversity.

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".