• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Bill O'Reilly on Today's Fresh Air

Bill O'Reilly's sudden departure from the NPR studio shows that he...

  • Is a big crybaby

    Votes: 8 28.6%
  • Cannot take the heat

    Votes: 8 28.6%
  • Imploded upon impact

    Votes: 4 14.3%
  • Is a lying liar

    Votes: 8 28.6%

  • Total voters
    28
Status
Not open for further replies.

Richmond Jake

You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!
Messages
18,313
Points
44
Alan - I wanted to check them all but being called a liar is the biggest insult--and in this case, most accurate.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
Fair and balanced polling

Nicely balanced poll Alan, if that is your real name. Or, should I call you Mr. Al Franken?
(sorry Al)
 

SGB

Cyburbian
Messages
3,388
Points
26
EG -

Be sure to get your poll posted as soon as Franken appears on O'Reilly's show. ;)

Which should occur shortly after hell freezes over.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
I'd pay good money to see a Texas-Style Caged Grudge Match between those two!
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
13,902
Points
57
I couldn't vote in this poll

I just listened to the interview on Fresh Air, and I'm not sure how I feel about either Gross or O'Reilly.

This is the second time I've listened to an O'Reilly interview on NPR and I am impressed by his inability to be flustered by the interviewer. Yes, he does come on very strong, but I am not wholly convinced that he is a bad righty. And I was put off by at least one of his statements.

I have always really liked Fresh Air and Gross, but as evidenced by this interview and a previous interview she had with Gene Simmons, she seemed to get very flustered and exhibit a nervous laugh too much, when interviewing these two individuals. Maybe it was just with these two people, and otherwise she is a very good interviewer.

I was lucky to hear this interview and also the interview with Franken last month, and she definitely did not give the same level of interviewing to Franken as to O'Reilly.

I read a couple chapters of Franken's book after his interview, and now I think I will definitely have to read a couple chapters of O'Reilly's book in order to see the difference or similarities.

In the end, I think O'Reilly may have been justified in ending the interview as he did. Without more thought, that is as much as I can say.
 
Last edited:

jordanb

Cyburbian
Messages
3,232
Points
25
Re: I couldn't vote in this poll

mendelman said:
I have always really liked Fresh Air and Gross, but as evidenced by this interview and a previous interview she had with Gene Simmons, she seemed to get very flustered and exhibit a nervous laugh too much, when interviewing these two individuals.
What annoys me most about her is that she's mastered the "I'm not really listening, I'm just asking questions and couldn't care less about the responses" "mhmm" sound.

Like this:

<Subject> I hate my life, I hate this world, I hate everything and everyone. After this show I'm going to go in the back and drink a full bottle of Draino. Goodby all you cruel people!

<Gross> mhmm. So you've written a new book?
 

H

Cyburbian
Messages
2,850
Points
24
He is the classic “all dishy, but no takey”.

I lost respect for him many moons ago, but this just adds to the pile-o-crap mounting around the man.
 

The Irish One

Member
Messages
2,267
Points
25
Can't take the heat

That poll is freakin great. I must confess O'reilly entertains the hell out of me, I enjoy the radio and tv show occasionally. Hearing him leave the interview was just a weak move. I'd rather he just bullshit with Teri Gross, she was clearly out to get him and it was funny, he has thicker skin than that. Now as far as O'reilly not knowing he was registered Republican, F**kING BULLSH*T.
 

martini

Cyburbian
Messages
678
Points
19
Just listened to it as well. It seems very weak of him to simply get up and leave like that. Poor guy got offended and couldn't take the heat that he so readily dishes out. Whatta crybaby.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Re: Can't take the heat

The Irish one said:
Now as far as O'reilly not knowing he was registered Republican, F**kING BULLSH*T.
probably tried to register as a libertarian and they put him in the conservative catory or something like that.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
I am impressed by the guy's egomania/paranoia. Apparently anyone who writes or speaks anything that does not glorify His name is attempting to discredit Him. Yet a critic calling someone else's book a "bumper sticker" is praising it because the author is liberal. As it happens, I heard the Al Franken interview when it first played. It focused on the lawsuit, asked Franken to respond to the claims, and to defend what he wrote. He answered the questions. In this interview, O'Reilly was asked to defend his statements and respond to what others had written. He did not. Or as Duke suggests, at least not credibly.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
There are some very important things that happend on that program and the fight that will emerge. Alan, you may have had a good time with that pole. Yuk it up while public raidio still exists.

That NPR reporter just started a new round of "GET PUBLIC RADIO". That woman reporter was no Mara Liason that sits next to George Will on Sunday morning. In comparison, she was an amature in water over her head. She picked O'Rielly as a target thinking she was going to be smart and score one for the liberal wing of society and she got munched.

I would have ended the interview where he did also. At the point where she said "that was a different interview" and "no I wasn't as hard on Al Franken" it was GAME OVER! She admited her piss poor attempt to GET Bill O'Rielly.

I am all for satire. That is why I did not get serious in the religious thread. It would have been silly to go further than just the surface in there. Notice, Decaterhawk and others avoided it. Why? what would have been the point of volunteering to have your inner peace shreded for the kicks of others.

I listen to NPR every day. I listen to the BBC at night. I like prarie home companion. I like living on earth and the folk music on sunday. I LIKE THE PBS SYSTEM IN GENERAL. This was not a win for PBS, it was a disaster. O'Rielly has 10 times the market of PBS. O'Rielly has political power and a podium to use it due to connections to the conservative republicans in this country. PBS has much less power. They preach to a shrinking party. A no name met Goliath and got crushed.

Tonight on O'Rielly, they discussed it. After that, they put a GOP personality on. This person said that it was something that was looked at as on the choping block. HMMM how bout that, a publicly funded station in the largest part taking political sides? Why, of course it would be marked for doom. You still yuking it up?

She had nothing, thought she was going to be cute and trick him. Guess a bigger shark found her. Oh, and NPR would not appear on The Factor to discuss the wisdom of the interview tonight. Thats BRAVE!

Thanks you DUMB ASS BITCH! Now I have to worry about missing the wonderful old reruns of Planet X, Word Jazz, and The Green Lantern, Celtic Crossings, and a host of other neat shows. Or am I one of the few that listen to what you can't find any where else?

Yuk Yuk Yuk! :( :( :( :(
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
Duke: Put down the gun and step away from the ledge. ;)

PBS has been on the right's hit list for years. Do a search on "PBS" and you'll find all the nasty letters I have written them over the years. They are biased and it is that simple. Instead of defunding them I vote we just round them all up late one night. ;)
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
el Guapo said:
Duke:...PBS has been on the right's hit list for years. Do a search on "PBS" and you'll find all the nasty letters I have written them over the years. ...
Yeah, I know they are biased AND I know that they have been on the rights hit list for years. I no longer believe there is such a thing as "Fair and Balanced" or "unbiased" or any other such NONSENSE. I think that people need to get at the same discussion from multiple points of view. Its at that point, that you begin to put together the most coherent point of view on a subject.

The problem here is that PBS does some really neat things. FOX news isn't biased? CNN isn't biased? The NY Times isn't biased? They all are. Each has a point of view that brings something to the table.

I have no problem mixing it up politicly, but damn, if you are going to attack somebody, you better be prepared to deliver the knock out blow or you are screwed. ESPECIALY if you are the little fish.

I HATE O'Rielly. If it werent for the fact he is of Irish descent, he would be the first to say "OK, we'll take the (Mel Brooks, blazing sadles for those who don't know) but we won't take the Irish". I have listened to him say really ignorant things. He is a populist with a lot of uneducated opinions. Hell, Rush is a lot more politicly savy and smarter to boot, O'Rielly is just sharp at sniffing out the bullshiter and the inconsistent. But in this case I find myself defending him.

The NPR corespondent was out of line in the sense that she should have stayed on topic rather than trying to roast him. OR She should be like that to ALL of those with ANY political offiliation. All she did was put other programs that are neat on PBS in danger. FOX news to me is love/hate. I can't help but watch and even agree, but damn, the party line talking points and the freaken bickering like little freaken kids gets so old.

At least if NPR does not agree, they still manage to bring on both sides for 1 hour blocks with none of the normal network bickering. Such a series of pro and con discussions on PBS radio stations were what led me to believe and support the lies that sent us into war as a forign agressor. I still think it was the right thing to do. I would have agreed that bastard and his vast array of minions needed killing without the lies. The important thing is that NPR had MANY discussions about a conflict which allowed the NEOCONS to get thier point across.

What were her bosses thinking going along with that line of reasoning?
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Sorry for ranting, but I like to listen to intelligent radio, even if I don't agree with a lot of what I hear (Tavis Smiley for instance). Without PBS it would be the same 40 freaken pop songs on the radiao until my head exploded! :)

I know they are listening to me when I yell at the dashboard radio! :) They BETTER be taking notes! :)
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
Every employee of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting knows their job depends upon being on the left side of issues. Their unofficial and unacknowledged mission is to promote change in society and challenge the conservative position on all social and economic issues. Someone please challenge this position.

We just don't have the political base to kill their funding, yet.
 

gkmo62u

Cyburbian
Messages
1,046
Points
24
I just listened to the entire interview. I have my own bias out front and like O'Reilly, though have not read his books.

I have as well listened to Ms. Gross and find her show predictable.

I was surprises O'Reilly lasted that long. Getting her to admit that she was not as hard on Al Franken was well done but more so was her reference to Franken's work as "satire". Idiotic.

Good for Bill. Boy was Terry a little flustered at the end.

Duke--good work and thoughts. I certainly don't agree with you on things but your comments are terrific.

Thought Garrison Keller makes me want to tear my eyes out when he sings on Praire and I really only like when he reads his stories. Enough of the Viking Folk singer stuff....

-G-
 

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,214
Points
29
Duke Of Dystopia said:
That NPR reporter...
Teri Gross is not a reporter. She is the host of a show called Fresh Air. She's had that gig for quite a while now. She's not an "amature" [sic] and is very good at what she does. Her show is akin to a variety show - Mr. O'Reilly should have treated it as such and not let his egomania get in his way. The man imploded. He was not on a hard news show. He busted a nut because he didn't want to hear a reading of a People magazine review?! Jeez! And once Teri read that review after Bill left the studio, it was clear that Bill over-reacted. It was such a softball review! As a liberal who listened to the Al Franken interview a month ago, I looked forward to Teri's interaction with Bill. I wanted to hear Bill be a human and be honest. I wanted to hear his side of things. Instead, he locked-up, went on the attack, and let his love for himself turn into self-loathing.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
Why do some "conservatives" act like they are an oppressed minority? All three branches of the federal government, a massive tax free propaganda industry (organized religion), a majority of state and local governments aren't enough???

Oh no, a variety show interviewer on a network listened to by 10% of the population didn't fawn over me!! I am so opporessed!

Give me a break.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Alan said:
Teri Gross is not a reporter. She is the host of a show called Fresh Air. She's had that gig for quite a while now. She's not an "amature" [sic] and is very good at what she does. Her show is akin to a variety show - Mr. O'Reilly should have treated it as such ......
I agree with your distaste for O'Rielly.

I listen to Fresh Air all the time. Your right, it is a soft veriety show.

So explain to me again why she was GRILLING him? I would disagree that she is not an amature. If she is going to try and roast somebody, she is no longer has soft and fuzzy show but an antagonistic journalist. So what if he over reacted. He does because he gets attacked all the time. Of course thats what he seas. He come on to the show expecting exactly what she did to him. He should not have treated it as a fuzy interview. She ADMITTED the fact she was treating him harder.

OK, you like Al Franken, Fine. She new when he came on the air those two had a beef with each other (she is an amature for sure if she didn't). She had no business treating them different at that point

From listening to the interview, it was plain to see she was flustered by being caught! How cute. She was not prepared to play hard-ball. To bad, she did more harm than good.
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
I tuned into this thread last night as I was working late, and since I am on the left coast, I was reminded that Fresh Air was going to be on in 30 minutes. So I knew the ending before I heard the interview, but I listened to it anyway. O'Reilly is an ass, and he must have known damn well that he was going to be challenged -- even attacked -- on an NPR show, and that yes, they would have gone easier on Al Franken. Duh! O'Reilly should have known this even better than most, seeing as how he does the same for people on his show. And frankly, I don't think that Terri Gross was even being very hard on him! She could have done a lot worse!
 

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,214
Points
29
Well, I didn't say anything about liking Al Franken. I said I listened to the Fresh Air show in which he was a guest.

I disagree with your assessment of Teri Gross's performance on her own show. As an interviewer, I'm sure she's very well aware of which tack she can take with her guests. In the case of the Bill O'Reilly guest, I am sure she thought to herself, "Well this could go bad because he is such a jerk. Nevertheless, I am going to give him a chance to endear himself and take it from there. If he is cool and easy-going, then he'll get better questions. But if his ego shines through, then I'll read the NYTimes and People book reviews. It's his choice."

Or whatever. As a listener, I was just as flumoxed as Teri when Bill said the NYTimes book review of Moore's new book was favorable. The review said it was a "bumper sticker" and Bill took that as a favaorable review. Anyone who can read and comprehend tone, intent, and context will know that the review of Moore's book was tepid, not favorable. Bill set himself up. He chose to misinterpret a simple book review of a simple book. From that point, I'm sure he was seen as fair game.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
moose said:
.....he must have known damn well that he was going to be challenged -- even attacked -- on an NPR show, and that yes, they would have gone easier on Al Franken. Duh! ...
Yup, he did, I bet he also new the transcript of the Franken interview better than she did. Again, what where her bosses thinking?

He goes on, takes the attack, and then procedes to his own show. He rips her to shreds on a show 10 times more popular. He gets a few more bullets during a budget crunch to work towards eliminating PBS!

Those clips will show up again and again and again. I mentioned a number of shows I listen to above. It pisses me off that they would add fuel to the conservative flames to eliminate them. O'Rielly was so far ahead of them it was not funny. He showed up to take the interview knowing what was going to happen and new how he was going to use it to squash thier puny attempt at playing hardball.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
moose said:
I tuned into this thread last night as I was working late, and since I am on the left coast, I was reminded that Fresh Air was going to be on in 30 minutes. So I knew the ending before I heard the interview, but I listened to it anyway. O'Reilly is an ass, and he must have known damn well that he was going to be challenged -- even attacked -- on an NPR show, and that yes, they would have gone easier on Al Franken. Duh! O'Reilly should have known this even better than most, seeing as how he does the same for people on his show. And frankly, I don't think that Terri Gross was even being very hard on him! She could have done a lot worse!
Thanks for supporting my position that NPR is the Media Wing of the Lefty Ministry of Education. Now can I defund them please?
 

gkmo62u

Cyburbian
Messages
1,046
Points
24
Everyone misses El Guap's point: Why should tax payers pay for Teri Gross to attack Bill O'Reilly?

Let Al Gore's new media network pay for the programming on NPR!
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
gkmo62u said:
Everyone misses El Guap's point: Why should tax payers pay for Teri Gross to attack Bill O'Reilly?
For the same reason that I have to pay taxes that will go towards the war in, and subsequent rebuilding of Iraq, when I didn't believe in the cause in the first place.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
moose said:
For the same reason that I have to pay taxes that will go towards the war in, and subsequent rebuilding of Iraq, when I didn't believe in the cause in the first place.
Our logic lesson for today:

"Red Herring (aka Smoke Screen, Wild Goose Chase)

Description of Red Herring:

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim."
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
No, I actually think you are missing the underlying point, which is we ALL pay taxes for things we don't particularly like.

You conservatives are just SOOOOO offended by the evil radical Marxist NPR (and Public Television), home of such left wing shows as Marketplace, and Masterpiece Theatre. I mean, NPR is such a huge waste of gigantic amounts of tax dollars, unlike, say, aid to our "ally" Pakistan.

Its easy to dismiss an argument by quoting text from Logic textbooks, thereby missing the entire point of the first argument. If anything, the "waste of tax dollars" argument was the original "red herring", given how trivial public tax support for NPR really is.
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
Re: Red Herring

OK, I'll restate.

"Why should tax payers pay for Teri Gross to attack Bill O'Reilly?"

As taxpayers, we all end up paying for services/programs/items that we don't necessarily use/agree with/belive in. It happens to all of us. You don't agree with spending federal dollars on PBS. I don't agree with spending federal dollars on war with Iraq. Everyone has their opinions on what their tax dollars should go towards. (see "Your Tax Dollars At Work" thread for more on this).

A red herring would have been if I had bypassed the question of tax dollars funding PBS and had instead raised the issue of how PBS was good for children.
 

Seabishop

Cyburbian
Messages
3,838
Points
25
gkmo62u said:
Everyone misses El Guap's point: Why should tax payers pay for Teri Gross to attack Bill O'Reilly?
I'm all for Terri Gross attacking Bill O'Reilly, as long as NPR at least makes some attempt to have a more conservative host attack a liberal guest once in a while.

El Guapo, watch some good Fox like "Joe Millionaire in Europe" and you'll know why we need public television. ;) It may or may not be a red herring but PBS does promote the arts and (somewhat) noncommercial educational programs that commercial broadcasters wouldn't touch. Especially for those who can't afford cable.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
BKM said:
No, I actually think you are missing the underlying point, which is we ALL pay taxes for things we don't particularly like.

You conservatives are just SOOOOO offended by the evil radical Marxist NPR (and Public Television), home of such left wing shows as Marketplace, and Masterpiece Theatre. I mean, NPR is such a huge waste of gigantic amounts of tax dollars, unlike, say, aid to our "ally" Pakistan.

Its easy to dismiss an argument by quoting text from Logic textbooks, thereby missing the entire point of the first argument. If anything, the "waste of tax dollars" argument was the original "red herring", given how trivial public tax support for NPR really is.
As much as it may grate, BKM, you are constitutionally obligated to pay for the "aid" to Pakistan and wars you don't like that the country wages. I am presently only statutorily obligated to pay for PBS - therefore, textbook red herring fallacy. It's not internally illogical for me bitch about wasting my tax dollars on programs that promote a particular political viewpoint I disagree with.

I'm not offended by Masterpiece Theatre, or Antique Roadshow, or This Old House, or History Detectives, or a myriad of other shows that would be a commercial success elsewhere. Since the tax support is so trivial, is should be no problem for the market to pick up the tab if PBS wants to continue with political programming - just like it does for Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC...
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
El Feo said:
...I am presently only statutorily obligated to pay for PBS - therefore, textbook red herring fallacy. It's not internally illogical for me bitch about wasting my tax dollars on programs that promote a particular political viewpoint I disagree with.....
I have to disagree with you on this one El Feo. I don't understand your split between constitutional requirement for a conflict and a staturory funding on another. Both are decided by elected officials and can be withdrawn by elected officials.

The red herring is the funding debate. The actual topic was started as a thoughtless gesture of somebody basicly boasting "wasn't it great that NPR attacked a disliked tv host" No, it wasn't great that she did that (nobody is really arguing she didn't). It only adds to the justified belief that conservatives pay for somebody to bellitle them. It just places a lot of neat programing at risk for the foolish few that thought they were going to be cute.

Getting back on topic, the whole debate about funding of PBS is why it was such a stoopid thing for Terri Gross to do what she did. This is Exactly why O'Rielly has made an issue of the whole event. Why can't conservatives understand? Why don't liberal PBS followers understand that they should not cut thier noses off to spite thier face. So he signed off. Yeah, he seems petulant and whiney. He then went back to his studio at a nongovernment job, and proceded to beat NPR and PBS over the head with a nice number of soundbites.

I reiterate that Terri Grosse and/or her bosses were amature in how they gamed this interview out. :(
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
Sorry, this is pointless splitting hairs, El Feo. Whether I am required to pay by statute or constitution is irrelelvant to the basic point (I have to pay taxes and I pay taxes for things I dislike-a lot(School of the Americas, anyone?).

Your argument is a legalistic technicality. One could even argue that many of the "defense" expenditures ARE in fact UNCONSTITUTIONAL as they effectively worsen the security of the Unites States in exchange for some dubious ideological and economic goals-but that's a whole new thread.
 

plankton

Cyburbian
Messages
750
Points
21
I agree with BKM's post 100%.

My experience with NPR is that they promote tolerance, clean air & water, and cultural diversity.

What a terrible group of no good thugs.

Give me a break.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
BKM said:
Your argument is a legalistic technicality. One could even argue that many of the "defense" expenditures ARE in fact UNCONSTITUTIONAL as they effectively worsen the security of the Unites States in exchange for some dubious ideological and economic goals-but that's a whole new thread.
My point is BKM, that war and foreign policy are Constitutional imperatives of the state. Advocacy of particular political positions by government agencies was a feature built in - advocacy by "government media" is not and I would think you would find it dangerous and objectionable. I would have no problem with public funding of NPR and PBS programs that are clearly nonpolitical or apolitical - perhaps I haven't been clear enough on that. But the split second NPR and PBS - essentially the state press - begin spending my dollars to propogandize through programming such as Fresh Air, Frontline, and, well, basically everything that Bill Moyers touches, that line is crossed. If they want to break clean from all public funding and propogandize in the free market, like all other media, then good for them.

You're right, this should be a new thread.
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
plankton said:
I agree with BKM's post 100%.

My experience with NPR is that they promote tolerance, clean air & water, and cultural diversity.

What a terrible group of no good thugs.

Give me a break.
One could also argue that their promotion of the secularization of society, their battering of social institutions, their blind support for abortion on demand, and their mainstreaming of a wide variety of hedonistic lifestyles on the taxpayer's dime is a tad bit thuggish to a large segment of the American populace...

It’s not all about saving gay baby whales by talking ad nausea in a monotone "it's all be done" voice about emotions and empowerment.
(sorry gay baby whales)

Best call Pyongyang for more support arguments cause tolerance, clean air and water and cultural divertiy are threadworn.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
One could also argue that their promotion of the secularization of society, their battering of social institutions, their blind support for abortion on demand, and their mainstreaming of a wide variety of hedonistic lifestyles on the taxpayer's dime is a tad bit thuggish to a large segment of the American populace...
Boy, I need to start listening more often. NPR sounds like a regular adjunct of the Penthouse Magazine editorial policy. I just thought it was boring, rather self-satisfied baby boomer babbling. What am I missing?

Edit: It actually just occurred to me that one of the worst offenders in the crimes you lay at NPR's feet is your very own favorite source of unbiased, patriotic news: Fox Television, owned by that Australian right wing nutcase Rupert Murdoch. Ironic, isn't it?

My point is BKM, that war and foreign policy are Constitutional imperatives of the state. Advocacy of particular political positions by government agencies was a feature built in - advocacy by "government media" is not and I would think you would find it dangerous and objectionable.
I know that "war" is a consitutional imperative of the state.

I still don't agree with your basic point: that we can "pick and choose" what our tax dollars are spent on. As I mentioned above, it can be argued that the debacle in Iraq has worsened our national security in order to benefit a very narrow, frightening view of the world (and the economic interests of a few connected profiteers). to me, it would be MORE constitutional to object to tax dollars spent on Iraq-what is having a really more significant impact on the future of this country? But of course, anyone objecting to the war is a communist or something. h
 
Last edited:

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
BKM said:
Boy, I need to start listening more often. NPR sounds like a regular adjunct of the Penthouse Magazine editorial policy. I just thought it was boring, rather self-satisfied baby boomer babbling. What am I missing?

Edit: It actually just occurred to me that one of the worst offenders in the crimes you lay at NPR's feet is your very own favorite source of unbiased, patriotic news: Fox Television, owned by that Australian right wing nutcase Rupert Murdoch. Ironic, isn't it?
its like rain~i~ain on your wedding day, its like winning the lottery and dying the very next day....

I have many sources of information, as I'm sure you also do. Yet, only one is sponsored by my tithing to Caesar at sword point.

Yes, I spend some time with Fox News every day, but I also l hear and equal amount of NPR daily. Does that surprise you?

I also hear voices in my head, but they are delayed by 30 minutes to ensure no insider trading.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
BKM said:
Edit: It actually just occurred to me that one of the worst offenders in the crimes you lay at NPR's feet is your very own favorite source of unbiased, patriotic news: Fox Television, owned by that Australian right wing nutcase Rupert Murdoch. Ironic, isn't it?
That just occurred to you? Geez, you're normally more on the ball than that. Tell, me, BKM, how many of your hard earned dollars does Rupert Murdoch extort from you in the form of taxes to pay for that biased "reporting"?

None, you say?

Well, then it's not really ironic at all, is it?

P.S.- FYI, I don't even get Fox News. I have to get my news from other market-funded sources, sift it through right/left bullshit bias filters of varying strength, and arrive at my own conclusions.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
That wasn't my point, El Feo. I was responding to El Guapo's suspect argument that NPR is somehow the major source of the vulgarization of American culture.

Otherwise, your argument that Fox doesn't receive tax dollars is correct, of course. As for "just realized" all I meant was that I realized after my original post that I had left that out.
 

El Feo

Cyburbian
Messages
674
Points
19
BKM said:
That wasn't my point, El Feo. I was responding to El Guapo's suspect argument that NPR is somehow the major source of the vulgarization of American culture.

Otherwise, your argument that Fox doesn't receive tax dollars is correct, of course. As for "just realized" all I meant was that I realized after my original post that I had left that out.
Sorry, BKM. I am being a snippy ass. FYI, despite what you may think, I have fun "discussing" these issues w/ you (even if I get hot under the collar sometimes) and you often make me reconsider my thinking on things - even if you never make me change my mind ;).
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
BKM said:
That wasn't my point, El Feo. I was responding to El Guapo's suspect argument that NPR is somehow the major source of the vulgarization of American culture.

Otherwise, your argument that Fox doesn't receive tax dollars is correct, of course. As for "just realized" all I meant was that I realized after my original post that I had left that out.
One man's vulgarian is another's moral icon. :)

[Fade to Dream Sequence] In this Corner the Angry White Male Nazi Tag Team of The Gambler (Bill Bennet) & The Racist Pill Popper (Rush Limbaugh) vs. the team of the Compassion Nazi's The Whorehouse Madam (Mia Anglou) & The Gay Street Hustler (Barney Frank) [/Fade to Dream Sequence]
 

DecaturHawk

Cyburbian
Messages
880
Points
22
Hot damn, you guys! Mostly intelligent, respectful argumentation from both sides. This is a great thread!
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
I would pay big dollars (provided by taxpayers. of course) to see that battle, El Guapo.

Of course, the right would win based purely on the tonage of the combatants (ooh. ooh, fat joke! me bad).
 

el Guapo

Capitalist
Messages
5,995
Points
31
Get Real - Have you looked at Mia and Barney lately? They have done some serious swallowing in their days. (pun intended) ;)
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
el Guapo said:
...In this Corner the Angry White Male Nazi Tag Team of The Gambler (Bill Bennet) & The Racist Pill Popper (Rush Limbaugh) vs. the team of the Compassion Nazi's The Whorehouse Madam (Mia Anglou) & The Gay Street Hustler (Barney Frank) .....
:)

To bad we can't get strom thurmond matched up with someone. How bout Powel Vs W. Clark! Rumsfeld Vs. Carville!. This could make a great night of arthritic old men beat the hell out of each other with canes chairs, senate bill binders!

Hell, Pay per View, Think of the C-span ratings! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top