[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
And he’s a moron with millions more dollars than you. While you’re at Cornell pointing out everyone else’s stupidity, he’s probably laughing at the likes of you all the way to the bank. [/quote]
As was pointed out in another thread, how does the size of one’s bank account correlate with their intelligence? Britney Spears anyone? lol
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
My take is that as etaco suggests, O’Reilly will not give Obama a hard time whatsoever. >>>
I thought he was going to kiss Hillary, but he did push Obama on the Surge, while offering him an out on the war, and says that the upcoming segments include pointed questions about his radical associations.
He just can’t bring himself to admit he was wrong on the surge. Agree or disagree with Iraq - it would have been a disaster of epic proportions to just leave. That is a fact.
The Ayers segment will be very interesting depending on how deep the questions go. He has a real problem here if it is pushed far enough.
[/quote]
He sounded foolish trying to weasel out of the surge answer. I hope McCain uses it in a campaign commercial.
[quote]hedo wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
My take is that as etaco suggests, O’Reilly will not give Obama a hard time whatsoever. >>>
I thought he was going to kiss Hillary, but he did push Obama on the Surge, while offering him an out on the war, and says that the upcoming segments include pointed questions about his radical associations.
He just can’t bring himself to admit he was wrong on the surge. Agree or disagree with Iraq - it would have been a disaster of epic proportions to just leave. That is a fact.
The Ayers segment will be very interesting depending on how deep the questions go. He has a real problem here if it is pushed far enough.
He sounded foolish trying to weasel out of the surge answer. I hope McCain uses it in a campaign commercial.
[/quote]
He did finally say it was a success while attempting to rewrite the history of he and Biden’s pre surge rhetoric on the matter. I’ll have all of these segments that will probably wind up in a torrent.
On another note, people have forgotten Biden’s socio-religious/geographical/let me partition a country like a hard drive scheme.
O’Reilly not that bad compared to other in the TV media. I would rather watch him than listen to Hannity repeat the same sound bites over and over again. I agree with BOR about 75% of the time and he generally has interesting guests and comentators on. Even the lib commentators he has on are far more competent than Alan Combs. I forget his name but he is a professor of political science or const law that’s on a lot. Probably my favorite lib. Sharp guy.
I caught a little last night and it was typical O’Reilly. He asks a tough question and then backs off. I think Obama handled him pretty well. I didn’t expect Obama to come in unprepared. He know the questions that are going to be asked and he is going to be well rehersed. The next segments should be interesting. I hope BOR stays on him a little more.
Shhhhhh…don’t tell Barry!!
http://www.budgettravel.com/bt-dyn/content/article/2008/08/02/AR2008080201203.html?cnn=yes
[quote]dhickey wrote:
O’Reilly not that bad compared to other in the TV media. I would rather watch him than listen to Hannity repeat the same sound bites over and over again. I agree with BOR about 75% of the time and he generally has interesting guests and comentators on. Even the lib commentators he has on are far more competent than Alan Combs. I forget his name but he is a professor of political science or const law that’s on a lot. Probably my favorite lib. Sharp guy.
I caught a little last night and it was typical O’Reilly. He asks a tough question and then backs off. I think Obama handled him pretty well. I didn’t expect Obama to come in unprepared. He know the questions that are going to be asked and he is going to be well rehersed. The next segments should be interesting. I hope BOR stays on him a little more.[/quote]
The only one I can think of that you are talking about is Mark Lamont Hill who is a professor of Urban Studies.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
The only one I can think of that you are talking about is Mark Lamont Hill who is a professor of Urban Studies.
[/quote]
Bingo. Very sharp guy. I don’t agree with much of what he says but he certainly takes people to task and usually gets the better of them. One of the few libs I wouldn’t mind having a beer with.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
The only one I can think of that you are talking about is Mark Lamont Hill who is a professor of Urban Studies.
Bingo. Very sharp guy. I don’t agree with much of what he says but he certainly takes people to task and usually gets the better of them. One of the few libs I wouldn’t mind having a beer with.[/quote]
Nice guy - I agree. At least he admits he believes in socialist policies.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
<<< I forget his name but he is a professor of political science or const law that’s on a lot. Probably my favorite lib. Sharp guy. >>>[/quote]
Dr. Marc Lamont Hill
LOVE that guy. Completely and utterly wrong with just about every syllable that falls from his lips, but he can talk in warp drive, never miss a beat and demonstrate an absolutely stellar command of the language. He is very upfront about his left wing commitments and makes no bones about the fact that he wants the biggest, most comprehensively funded government possible. Very refreshing. I actually mean that.
Transcript for anyone who missed it/wants to read the trascript
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/09/foxs_bill_oreilly_obama_interv.html
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
And he’s a moron with millions more dollars than you. While you’re at Cornell pointing out everyone else’s stupidity, he’s probably laughing at the likes of you all the way to the bank.
As was pointed out in another thread, how does the size of one’s bank account correlate with their intelligence? Britney Spears anyone? lol
[/quote]
Exactly my point. Thank you for restating it. For all the intelligence claimed by you and several of the other liberals on this forum, you probably don’t have the money they do. Intelligence isn’t what it’s cracked up to be. Moral sense and ambition carry a person much further in life.
[quote]bald eagle wrote:
dhickey wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
The only one I can think of that you are talking about is Mark Lamont Hill who is a professor of Urban Studies.
Bingo. Very sharp guy. I don’t agree with much of what he says but he certainly takes people to task and usually gets the better of them. One of the few libs I wouldn’t mind having a beer with.
Nice guy - I agree. At least he admits he believes in socialist policies.[/quote]
We’re in for another 10 years of socialism, so we might as well get used to it. From Johnson through Carter we tried it, and now there’s a new crop of voters who are in favor of it.
The idea of socialism cannot die because it’s part of a greater psychological phenomenom that precludes rational thinking about human nature and its economic implications, to wit, our inherent greed makes capitalism the best system.
Dr. Sanity’s take on socialism is very good:
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
The man is a moron.
And he’s a moron with millions more dollars than you. While you’re at Cornell pointing out everyone else’s stupidity, he’s probably laughing at the likes of you all the way to the bank. Not bad, for a moron.
Unlike, say, Stephen Colbert (who verbally rapes O’Reilly whenever they’re together)
There’s another towering intellect: Stephen Colbert. He’s like, so sarcastic that even HE doesn’t know when he’s being sarcastic! [/quote]
I said Stephen Colbert was smart? When? I said he verbally rapes O’Reilly. Which he does. Because Colbert is an actor, where O’Reilly is an idiot.
Making money doesn’t make you intelligent. O’Reilly filled a niche early and worked hard tog et where he is, doesn’t make him SMART.
I don’t sit around pointing out other people’s stupidity. We were talking about O’Reilly… I noted that he’s stupid. He never does research, and often confuses things that were said ON HIS SHOW, more often than not BY HIM. That’s stupid.
Seriously, I don’t get why you’re defending the guy <_<. It isn’t like I was parading my superiority over him. One can call a man an idiot, be right, and still be less intelligent than him (not that I am or am not).
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
<<< The idea of socialism cannot die because it’s part of a greater psychological phenomenom that precludes rational thinking about human nature and its economic implications, to wit, our inherent greed makes capitalism the best system. [/quote]
Brilliant!! And absolutely true.
The genius of our form of government and by implication the economy that grew out of it is that when one productive member of society does what’s best for them and theirs it’s also good for every other productive member of society. That continues to function until the unavoidable differences in talent and motivation inherent in the human race and exposed by that system fall into the cross hairs of the bleeding heart Utopians.
It may even begin with honest motives, but once the benevolent benefactors get a taste of the power that comes with large numbers of people depending on you IT IS OVER.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
RJ - interested to hear why you hate O’Reilly given your views. I can understand why you may not be a fan. Just curious.
Based on his outright vilification of AAS, despite his utter, and overwhelming ignorance of the subject matter - it is quite apparent that he is a lazy person. He can’t be bothered to actually do any homework.
And if he does happen to do some research, he starts with the ending, and looks only at that which supports his opinion.
I haven’t watched him since he railed against steroids.
I don’t like Sean Hannity either. [/quote]
Damn man, are you my twin?
I don’t like him because he is in favor of behavior restriction. Socially he’s to fucking anal. While I may agree with many of his points I am a liberty man…I don’t give a flying fuck what my neighbor does. He more of a 'let’s bring America back to the ‘50’s’ style mentality. I am for leaving people the fuck alone. He want’s to control people, I ain’t and never will be for that. He is as conservative as Obama is liberal.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
dhickey wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
The only one I can think of that you are talking about is Mark Lamont Hill who is a professor of Urban Studies.
Bingo. Very sharp guy. I don’t agree with much of what he says but he certainly takes people to task and usually gets the better of them. One of the few libs I wouldn’t mind having a beer with.
Nice guy - I agree. At least he admits he believes in socialist policies.
We’re in for another 10 years of socialism, so we might as well get used to it. From Johnson through Carter we tried it, and now there’s a new crop of voters who are in favor of it.
The idea of socialism cannot die because it’s part of a greater psychological phenomenom that precludes rational thinking about human nature and its economic implications, to wit, our inherent greed makes capitalism the best system. [/quote]
Thanks to our schools and colleges turning out more and more economic illiterates. And convincing them they have rights that require others to pay for them.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
The man is a moron.
And he’s a moron with millions more dollars than you. While you’re at Cornell pointing out everyone else’s stupidity, he’s probably laughing at the likes of you all the way to the bank. Not bad, for a moron.
Unlike, say, Stephen Colbert (who verbally rapes O’Reilly whenever they’re together)
There’s another towering intellect: Stephen Colbert. He’s like, so sarcastic that even HE doesn’t know when he’s being sarcastic!
I said Stephen Colbert was smart? When? I said he verbally rapes O’Reilly. Which he does. Because Colbert is an actor, where O’Reilly is an idiot.
Making money doesn’t make you intelligent. O’Reilly filled a niche early and worked hard tog et where he is, doesn’t make him SMART.
I don’t sit around pointing out other people’s stupidity. We were talking about O’Reilly… I noted that he’s stupid. He never does research, and often confuses things that were said ON HIS SHOW, more often than not BY HIM. That’s stupid.
Seriously, I don’t get why you’re defending the guy <_<. It isn’t like I was parading my superiority over him. One can call a man an idiot, be right, and still be less intelligent than him (not that I am or am not).[/quote]
O’Rielly isn’t stupid, he’s just intellectually careless/dishonest. Ego manifested through self-righteousness comes before all else with him.
O’Reilly is a business and from that standpoint his success cannot be denied. He’s not going to do anything that makes himself less profitable. What he’s doing is good business or he’d stop doing it.
That I can’t deny, but he’s a bad journalist, and an intellectually dishonest arrogant blowhard that refuses to let people finish their thoughts before yelling and abusing them.
I’d rather have an honest journalist in his spot asking the tough question.