The W
Views: 101430587
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.12.14 0326
The W - Current Events & Politics - O'Reilly
This thread has 42 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(2555 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (29 total)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on
Since I woke up too late to catch all of SmackDown! from the start, I flipped over to catch the "Won't Someone PLEASE Think Of The Children" FOX special. It pretty much confirmed everything I ever thought about O'Reilly - boorish, pompous, dismissive, self-centered, phony, and transparent.

Linda made it through unscathed, but heck, she only had a couple minutes of the special, so it would have been hard for her to look bad...even given the cavalier editing they used in an attempt to make whatever O'Reilly was blathering about seem relevant and important.

Just about everybody he talked to looked pretty good, in my opinion. The only thing I got from that special was O'Reilly is really interested in stirring up the wrong kind of paranoia in the wrong kind of susceptible people - and it'll probably work, and he'll probably be able to line his pockets and increase his rep...which is probably what he REALLY wants out of all this, 'cause I sure didn't get that he actually cares about the children.

Hell, it was almost like a different kind of Crash TV, and just as crappy.



©CRZ™
Visit [slash] wrestling
Promote this thread!
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 129 days
Last activity: 129 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42

    Originally posted by CRZ
    It pretty much confirmed everything I ever thought about O'Reilly - boorish, pompous, dismissive, self-centered, phony, and transparent.


Amen. Sometimes I wonder if the guy listens to himself. I just don't understand how he (or his followers) can take himself so seriously. He doesn't give a damn about anyone, the only reason he has guests is so he has an object at which to hurl his insults and convince himself how smart he is.



Caring is the first step towards disappointment.
Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2923 days
Last activity: 2923 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Bill O'Reilly = Rush Limbough '02.

It's the same hitting of hot buttons, the same faux-populism, the same loudmouthed approach. And I have a feeling it will last about as long. (In the mainstream anyways ... Rush and Bill will be able to milk their 15 minutes in the spotlight for the rest of their lives.)






Past hills of chambermaids' dark bare arms and fields of muscles quilted to the bone,
Right now I'm flying over, yeah right now I'm flying home.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2887 days
Last activity: 2729 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on
Man, cavalier editing indeed. That was just awful, though I got a laugh out of seeing Eddy again. I used to have some small amount of respect for O'Reilly, but not anymore. Not that I loved the guy, but I thought that whatever opinions he holds, he just might have reached them through rational thought. I think we can all dismiss that, now. I like how he saved the ACLU guy for the last segment. I can't remember what it was about, now, but I remember thinking at the time that he saved his most credible opponent for the battle in which O'Reilly had the biggest advantage. Maybe someone can remind me what the segment was about. But what a pile of alarmist crap that was. Zed was right, in that Reilly is stirring up paranoia in the most susceptible portion of his audience. Whatever image he portrays on "The Factor," last night he revealed himself as a demagoguic bastard every bit as bad as those on the left.



I didn't expect to find a salesman drinking coffee this late in the morning. How long you been here, Joe?
DMC
Liverwurst








Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3532 days
Last activity: 3526 days
#5 Posted on
I didn't watch the whole thing, only parts. But I do think O'Reily made good points and has made many in the past. The fact is that in general the types of things he discussed are not all together healthy for young people to be immersed in. Yes I am a wrestling fan, have been since the 80s, but I do agree that to an extent "Attitude" era wrestling has been at times too graphic and violent to be considered healthy family entertainment (unless you consider guys pointing to their crotches and calling eachother S.O.B.'s left and right healthy family entertainment). It has toned down a bit, I think, since the WCW went down, which is one reason why I am tuning in whereas before I usually avoided WWF largely for these types of reasons. If I had a child though, I would still probably limit the amount of wrestling they can watch, and the type.

However, the chicken before the egg issue is probably the strongest argument I could make against thinking like O'Reily's here. How much of kids doing dangerous, violent things involving "wrestling" is a product of watching it on TV, and how much is a result of our society changing in general? After all, wrestling has been around for decades but you apparently never saw kids acting in the ways they were referring to before. So the big question of "Did the culture change wrestling or did wrestling change the culture?" applies here. Obviously though, that debate doesn't change the responsibility of broadcasters for airing programs in the past or present that have been too far over the line. The whole "We're just giving people what they want," even if true, doesn't hold a lot of moral water, IMHO.

DMC



Oh IT'S TRUE, IT'S DAMN TRUE.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 129 days
Last activity: 129 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
I don't think it is the man's opinions that bother people. I know they don't bother me. I actually agree with him on a lot of issues. But his habit of bringing people on his show only to provide him with ammunition and his tendency to ignore every other person on the face of the Earth annoy me greatly.



Caring is the first step towards disappointment.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2887 days
Last activity: 2729 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on
Good points both, but I want to point to what you said here, DMC:

"If I had a child though, I would still probably limit the amount of wrestling they can watch, and the type."

That was exactly the point of almost everyone O'Reilly had on. Basically, where are the parents? If O'Reilly really wants to get to the culprits, why didn't he interview neglectful parents and deadbeat dads? The "entertainment industry" just makes a handy target. I'm not disagreeing with you, DMC, when you say that these things aren't suitable for kids. In fact, I agree with you. But there's no substitute for intelligence and responsibility, and, sadly, some parents have neither. And, again, the whole chicken and the egg issue. Kids learn a lot from other kids, and schoolyard bullying has been around for a long, long time. I would hazard a guess that it existed well before the advent of TV or radio. Anyway, bottom line, I don't want to miss my wrasslin' because Bill O'Reilly wants TV to be even more of a substitute parent than it already is.

(edited by PalpatineW on 29.3.02 2057)
I didn't expect to find a salesman drinking coffee this late in the morning. How long you been here, Joe?
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on
When DMC and I were in Jr. High, a guy at our school was the victim of a pole job.

What is a pole job?

Two guys had him on the ground - one on each leg, and then they pulled him towards a pole so that his crotch hit the pole. The guy had a ruptured testicle.

Now, in 7th grade when this happened, no one blamed pro-wrestling. It was simply 2 stupid bullies attacking another child.

The question is this - why doesn't everyone in the US know about this incident? The answer is that the lawyer in the case went after the school district for negligence, instead of after the WWF for showing someone rammed into the ring pole.

National media only picks up stories that are interesting to a national audience - hence local stories that are just as horrific as the ones that are brought up as the ones against the WWF are ignored.

I'm not saying a guy getting a ruptured testicle is equivalent to someone dying, but this incident would have had legs if they lawyers had targetted the WWF and we could have seen the same press as the case in Florida last year where the stupid kid killed the other kid using a move that they claimed to have learned from wrestling.

So - not only are parents to blame for kids being stupid - and schools and other organizations that are complacent and leave kids unsupervised - We are also to blame for caring about these stories when people make stupid accusations.

PS> We're also to blame for O'Reilly because we are talking about him - giving him exposure.



I love it when a plan comes together
Pheadfred
Pickled pork








Since: 9.2.02
From: Nashville

Since last post: 4347 days
Last activity: 3430 days
#9 Posted on
" Blame it on the schools , blame it on the tube , but three fingers point right back to you ."

I started watching wrestling back in 1969 when I was 4 years old and I fell in love with it at that tender age . When I reached my pre teen years , I had a buddy that was into wrestling also , and on one particular saturday morning after our local wrestling went off , we decided we were going to have us a little wrestling match . Were we emulating what we had seen on TV ? Yes .
Did we ever do it again ? HELL NO ! Why ? Because our parents did a good job of supervising us , caught us , and busted our little asses and told us if they ever caught us wrestling again , there would be no more watching wrestling on TV again , plus there would be another ass whipping coming our way . (This was back at a time when it was ok to spank your children )
Did they blame it on wrestling ? No , they simply did what responsible parents should do , they taught us right from wrong .



(edited by Pheadfred on 30.3.02 0006)
"Damnit Peggy , here I am trying to contain an outbreak and you're driving the monkey to the airport. " - Hank Hill
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 5 hours
#10 Posted on
Bill O'Reilly is very talented a one thing - rhetoric. He has marketed himself in a way so that he can be a Republican, without actually claiming support for the party.

Just because he says there is no spin, doesn't mean he isn't spinning.

(edited by Leroy on 29.3.02 2251)
"It's hard to be a prophet and still make a profit." - Da Bush Babees
BDC
Chourico








Since: 26.1.02
From: Falls Church, VA

Since last post: 4522 days
Last activity: 3979 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on
O'Reilly's specially I found to be overbearing only because rather than engaging these personalities, he threw a bunch of stuff at them and forced them to be defensive. He wasn't looking for a solution, he was creating the opportunity for these people to make some alteration to their stance or policy and claim a victory for it.

When he interviewed Russell Simmons, for example, he threw all the lyrics and videos in his face, and Simmons' response was the trademark "rap is a reflection of black society" stuff. Instead of challenging that absolutely wretched notion, O'Reilly would just say "you're wrong, what about the children, what are you gonna do about it, etc"--it was circular. No interview, in my opinion, got anywhere.

O'Reilly had a great interview with Rosie O'Donnell, though--infinitely better than the Diane Sawyer piece from last week.

The conflict that exists between society and the pop culture that attempts to break through all kinds of barriers is nothing new--to say that O'Reilly is creating some kind of paranoia is absolutely preposterous. He just put a TV special on about things that many people, including my parents--myself as well--have talked about and worried about for years.

Bill O'Reilly = Rush Limbough '02.

It's the same hitting of hot buttons, the same faux-populism, the same loudmouthed approach. And I have a feeling it will last about as long. (In the mainstream anyways ... Rush and Bill will be able to milk their 15 minutes in the spotlight for the rest of their lives.)


This comment just doesn't make any sense without defining what is mainstream. Being the #1 radio guy for most of the last 14 years while being heard on 600+ stations seems pretty mainstream to me.

BDC



"Hitler had pieces of flair that he made the Jews wear."
DMC
Liverwurst








Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3532 days
Last activity: 3526 days
#12 Posted on
Ok, now just to jump to the other side, not that I am abandoning what I said about parenting, but can you guys also see how people who are trying to be decent parents can be frustrated by all the garbage in the media and in music that is out there? Don't these things make being a good parent continually more difficult, and wouldn't we be better off with some of them not being around? I think you *have* to point responsibility at the people writing violent music, yes even some of the Attitude type wrestling, etc., just as much if not more than the parents, for they are the ones putting this stuff out there in the first place. I think that is all O'Reiley was trying to do, even if you think it was a hype and hack job. (Again I did not see the whole thing, but I understand that he can come off like that...he is a "media *personality*" after all.)

Don't get me wrong--in recent months I have continually been drawn closer towards the "there are lots of parents are just idiots" argument, cause, well, there just are. (To prove this, go to Wall Mart at 11:30 on a Wednesday night and see how many 4 year old kids are there walking around aimlessly. WTF??? Maybe its just California, I don't know.) But I think it is all too easy to get drawn into simple parent bashing on these types of issues, and you have to look at it more objectively than that.

Guru--I do not remember the incident you are talking about at Somerset. But considering that Jr. High School was the worst two years of my life and that that campus, if you examined it closely enough, looked a WEE bit too much like a concentration camp, it does not surprise me that such an incident happened there.
DMC




Oh IT'S TRUE, IT'S DAMN TRUE.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 9 hours
#13 Posted on
This comment just doesn't make any sense without defining what is mainstream. Being the #1 radio guy for most of the last 14 years while being heard on 600+ stations seems pretty mainstream to me.

By your logic, Ruch Limbaugh and Howard Stern are both mainstream. I'm a big lefty and I listen to Limbaugh on occasion. Ratings don't mean people agree with you.

Also, if ratings (or circulation, or sales or whatever) meant you were mainstream, the right wing wouldn't have much of an arguement against the "liberal media" would they?



Expressing myself EVERY day!
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 129 days
Last activity: 129 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    Ratings don't mean people agree with you.


And just because people don't agree with you doesn't mean you are wrong.



Caring is the first step towards disappointment.
BDC
Chourico








Since: 26.1.02
From: Falls Church, VA

Since last post: 4522 days
Last activity: 3979 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    This comment just doesn't make any sense without defining what is mainstream. Being the #1 radio guy for most of the last 14 years while being heard on 600+ stations seems pretty mainstream to me.

    By your logic, Ruch Limbaugh and Howard Stern are both mainstream. I'm a big lefty and I listen to Limbaugh on occasion. Ratings don't mean people agree with you.

    Also, if ratings (or circulation, or sales or whatever) meant you were mainstream, the right wing wouldn't have much of an arguement against the "liberal media" would they?



I would say that ratings do equal a level of popularity, which I believe has a relationship with what is "mainstream." I don't believe being mainstream has a much to do with what is right or wrong. As far as your question, although rhetorical, needs to be answered with another question. What are you talking about, Moe? What does the conservatives vs. the liberal media debate have to do with what is mainstream?

BDC



"Hitler had pieces of flair that he made the Jews wear."
Busyman14
Cotechino








Since: 24.2.02
From: Weston, Florida

Since last post: 4479 days
Last activity: 4464 days
#16 Posted on
To go right out and say "O'Reilly is a pompus asshole who doesn't know what he talks about" is not 100% correct in this case. Yes he is arrogant. Yes he can be an asshole. But I think he had some points in his special that I agreed with, and others I found to be their for simple padding and to make him look better.

On the wrestling, why didn't he go after the Attitude stuff (Gravy Bowl Match, characterzation of women on the show, Crotch Chopping for example) instead of the actual wrestling? Instead he went for the wrestling itself which was stupid. As for the kid who fucked up his neck by letting a friend perform a tombstone on himself? I feel no pity for him, he shouldn't of been such a moron. Linda came off as...well Linda. If you honestly think you can get clubbed in the head with a steel chair and not have something happen to you, you deserve what happens. I think this was where O' Reilly came off as a huge asshole with an ax to grind here (and why play that case with the kid as an example? It was pretty much shown that the defense's case was full of it).

I remember a time he had Bob Backlund (excuse me, MR. Bob Backlund) on, and O' Reilly was clueless about even Backlund's move...his finishing move is the CHICKEN WING not the BODYSLAM (but Backlund generally agreed with O' Reilly on the current state of wrestling).

For the Internet porn part, I have to agree with O'Reilly. Who in the right mind would honestly agree with having a kid search for Pokemon and then have porn sites pop up? As they said in the special they're getting the next generation hooked on porn. WHY? Any red-blooded male is going to want to see porn or jack off once their teenagers, so why get them when they are young kids?

As for the ACLU, O'Reilly generally likes the ACLU, he just thinks they were dead wrong with the NAMBLA issue (and they are).

The movie argument was the weakest IMO. In the case of all the kids who got to see American Pie 2, that's the fault of the movie theaters. They are supposed to make sure that no one under 17 sees an R rated movie without an adult. And if a parent lets the kids see an R movie, that's the parents problem if the kid emulates the movie. The TV argument again fell down to the parents, but what about in the case where the two parents (or one parent) work or are lousy parents? Do we just write those kids off and let TV warp their minds? This issue isn't as black and white as many people think. I only support that theory however to a certain age. By the time your in middle school if your still taking everything from the entertainment industry as the bible, your a retard.

With the music, again it's often the parent's fault, but also fault should be placed on the stores that sell the CD's to kids. If the CD has the "Parent Advisory Label" don't sell it to kids!

And to be fair here, O'Reilly did spend the last segment on parents responsibilty, which of course most parents don't take seriously these days. (why would a parent with a 5 year old let the kid go meet the ICP? Didn't she ever see them "wrestle"?)

Overall I found the special to be half n' half. I don't know if O' Reilly really cares or not, but he had a point. We can't just dismiss it as a "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" argument, but at the same time it can't be an excuse for lousy parenting. It's not an easy issue as O' Reilly or his opponents tried to paint it, and I don't have the answer.

Final point on this thread: This is just the type of attention Bill O' Reilly WANTS. He happily mentioned a negative review of the special calling him racist for his views on rap music. He wants his e-mail flooded with e-mails calling him an asshole, pompus, and so on so he can play it on the air. He lives for this kind of thing. So if you don't like O'Reilly (I do like him, even though I do find him overbearing at times), it's best not to mention him. Now that's something he couldn't stand.

-Alex



TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 129 days
Last activity: 129 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
You have to understand, though, that we live in a society of self-conceise cowards. Nobody wants to take responsability for anything anymore, and consequently everybody is looking for a scapegoat to all of life's problems. Some general rules:

1) Every single thing that every single person on this Earth does is done with selfish intentions and only selfish intentions.

2) Every single thing we do or experience is directly a result of decisions we as individuals make. If I get fired from my job, it is my own fault, not my boss'.

It is this second rule that everyone tries to avoid realizing. As a result, nobody takes responsibility for their own decision making and their own actions, so we have come to live in a world of finger pointing.



Caring is the first step towards disappointment.
Busyman14
Cotechino








Since: 24.2.02
From: Weston, Florida

Since last post: 4479 days
Last activity: 4464 days
#18 Posted on

    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    You have to understand, though, that we live in a society of self-conceise cowards. Nobody wants to take responsability for anything anymore, and consequently everybody is looking for a scapegoat to all of life's problems. Some general rules:

    1) Every single thing that every single person on this Earth does is done with selfish intentions and only selfish intentions.

    2) Every single thing we do or experience is directly a result of decisions we as individuals make. If I get fired from my job, it is my own fault, not my boss'.

    It is this second rule that everyone tries to avoid realizing. As a result, nobody takes responsibility for their own decision making and their own actions, so we have come to live in a world of finger pointing.



1) Damn straight. Everyone does something, if not 100% so, for themselves. No matter what. Donate a ton of money to charity? Feed your ego or make you feel good about yourself.

2) On the fired part, it's not always your fault. Sometimes the boss could fire you for no good reason then he doesn't like you, or he wants to replace you with cheaper labor. In that case it's not so black & white.

-Alex
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 129 days
Last activity: 129 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42

    Originally posted by Busyman14
    2) On the fired part, it's not always your fault. Sometimes the boss could fire you for no good reason then he doesn't like you, or he wants to replace you with cheaper labor. In that case it's not so black & white.


In this case, I would see it as me being fired because I didn't do enough to prove to my boss that I was not expendable. But maybe that's just me.



Caring is the first step towards disappointment.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#20 Posted on

    Originally posted by Busyman14
    Final point on this thread: This is just the type of attention Bill O' Reilly WANTS. He happily mentioned a negative review of the special calling him racist for his views on rap music. He wants his e-mail flooded with e-mails calling him an asshole, pompus, and so on so he can play it on the air. He lives for this kind of thing. So if you don't like O'Reilly (I do like him, even though I do find him overbearing at times), it's best not to mention him. Now that's something he couldn't stand.
Well that's why I said it here, rather than send him an email - I'm pretty sure he'll never visit this board so I feel my comments are "safe." ;-)

I have to disagree with the characterization of BO as "Rush Limbaugh '02" - Rush is a lot better at using humour to make his points, so he comes across as genuinely entertaining to me...plus he makes no bones about the fact that his show is all about HIM.

I probably had some other points I wanted to make before I took the weekend off, but they'll come back to me if they're REALLY important. (I'm sure they're not)



©CRZ™
Visit [slash] wrestling
Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: John Pilger on Israel, Palestine, and Iraq
Next thread: Libertarianism in Song
Previous thread: Flying? Wear clean underwear!
(2555 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Yeah, that was one of the points I made but AngryServer seemed to have missed. Maybe it's not true for all of them, but many (probably most) 24-hour Wal-Mart stores are open Thanksgiving day. I've personally been to multiple on that day.
The W - Current Events & Politics - O'ReillyRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.238 seconds.