TheHobbyist
Member
I choose to refrain from rendering an opinion at this time.
O'Reilly and Registration
- Thread starter armenius
- Start date
Alnamvet68
US Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 1,745
- Reaction score
- 1,087
No, that would be Malik Shabazz, or Richard Trumka, both, who by the way, have unrestricted access to the white house and the administration, and visit at least three times a week, as well as have daily phone conversations with you know who. As for the Xmas party, well, pick any 200 residents of zip code 90210.
vito
US Veteran
O'Reilly's expertise certainly does not extend to guns or the 2nd Amendment, but I think this is just part of being a person who grew up and lives in the urban northeast of the USA. Cities like NY, Boston, Philly, DC have been so anti-gun for so long that the overwhelming majority of people cannot even conceptualize having guns, or at least handguns. Guns have been so demonized that even folks who are conservative on other issues seem to think Mayor Bloomberg has the answers. I grew up in NYC but left over 40 years ago, and most of my family (other than my own children and grandchildren) live in or around NYC. Guns are so alien to them that I cannot even have a discussion with them because they see guns as something only police and criminals have. It is a mindset that defies logic and reason. I have a relative who understands that if his home was invaded, the police cannot get there in time to protect him and his family, that his baseball bat by the bedside is not likely to be effective against an armed intruder, but who still glazes over at the thought of having a gun in the home. Its as if I tried to tell him that he should keep a stash of heroin in the house, "just in case". That makes no sense of course, but he thinks of guns in exactly the same way, i.e., guns are for criminals so why would I have one? I think O'Reilly is part of that same culture and it distorts his general common sense attitude when it comes to guns.
gdnagle
US Veteran
And what if they decide to forgo the First Amendment without all the news coverage they could say, of these despicable acts maybe there wouldn't be any copycat act, lives saved. Circumvent on amendment what's to stop with just that one?
cmort666
Member
That's no excuse.
I'm very liberal socially, grew up in Chicago, and am MILITANTLY pro-gun.
People can have their own opinions. They can't have their own facts. When they try, that's called mental illness.
O'Reilly, like Bloomberg is wealthy, entitled and totally full of himself. He can buy NYC firearms and carry licenses, or armed bodyguards. You? You're on your own.
Yeah, he's "looking out for the folks"... unless there's somebody in their living room at 3:00am with a gun or a knife, or they get accosted in a mall parking lot. Then "the folks" are strictly on their own.
How about that. I have watched O'Reilly for years but not every night. He can be annoying at times and sometimes the mute button is in heavy use during his show. And if I miss his show I felt no urge to find it online if it is there.
But tonight I was watching and could not believe my ears when he was advocating that one solution to the lunatic mass shootings is Federal gun registration.
I know his show is recorded so I Googled him and the terms just to see if I heard him right. Did not find tonight's episode clip but top of the list was a 2013 clip after the Boston bombing with the very same rant.
Well, he is consistent but so very wrong in my humble opinion. I have been watching much less of him lately and perhaps this will make me swear him off all together.
But tonight I was watching and could not believe my ears when he was advocating that one solution to the lunatic mass shootings is Federal gun registration.
I know his show is recorded so I Googled him and the terms just to see if I heard him right. Did not find tonight's episode clip but top of the list was a 2013 clip after the Boston bombing with the very same rant.
Well, he is consistent but so very wrong in my humble opinion. I have been watching much less of him lately and perhaps this will make me swear him off all together.
Is O'Reilly is a doofus P.C.?
O'Reilly is not a conservative and never has been. He's a faux populist "I'm looking out for you.", and a statist. He's just not happy with the political affiliation of the current President.
He's not a conservative, he's certainly not either a libertarian or a Libertarian. He's an "O'Reillyan" first, last, and always.
I won't watch him any longer.
He's not a conservative, he's certainly not either a libertarian or a Libertarian. He's an "O'Reillyan" first, last, and always.
I won't watch him any longer.
Cooter Brown
Member
Bingo. Anybody that could watch him for more than five minutes and think he's a conservative is not watching closely enough.
He's a seller of commercials for a commercial network. No harm no foul there as long as you understand where it's coming from.
The harm is that sometimes his "bloviations" get picked up by the left and used to represent the conservative side, which they don't at all.
Fox is often demonized as a "conservative" network, but it really isn't. They have some hosts and commentators that are anything but conservative.
Frankly, I only watch Your World, Megyn Kelly (watch, I don't necessarily have the volume up), and Bret Baier.
The only true conservative on that network is Charles Krauthammer. He is nothing less than brilliant.
Oh, Shepard Smith should be called Shemp Smith, because he's a Stooge.
Other than that, I have no strong feelings on the subject.
Frankly, I only watch Your World, Megyn Kelly (watch, I don't necessarily have the volume up), and Bret Baier.
The only true conservative on that network is Charles Krauthammer. He is nothing less than brilliant.
Oh, Shepard Smith should be called Shemp Smith, because he's a Stooge.
Other than that, I have no strong feelings on the subject.
I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of fixing that for you.
O'Reilly is a fake populist. His entire "Looking out for you." BS is, well BS.
There are only a couple of shows on Fox that I can stand to watch. One is Special Report and the other is Your World with Neil Cavuto. Fox Business is better, once Imus goes back to haunting houses or whatever it is he does when he isn't speaking matter of factly on subjects he knows nothing about.
Fox News is generally disappointing. Their anchors and reporters are no more informed and no less opinionated than those on CNN and MSNBC. Or ABC, CBS, and NBC for that matter. Mostly they just read whatever drivel is put in front of them the writers. Who aren't reporters, just writers. Even the field reporters are woefully ignorant on most topics.
News media had some credibility back when they had "Bureaus". They had people who specialized in crime, national news, foreign news, the military, science, and so on. Now it's all general assignment reporters for the most part. There are still some specialists, like the ones that cover DC, and in a few cases international stories, but they are few and far between.
It's all about getting that big story first. Not right, but first. Fact checking seems like a lost art. As is the correction.
Very entertaining post regarding Fox News....Now would be the perfect time to offer specific examples supporting your statement.
There is nothing right wing about o'reilly. He's a statist through and through.
He believes in a strong, autocratic central government. In a word, he's a fascist.
I watch his show. He has some interesting people on. I fast forward over O'Reilly. It annoys the heck out of me when he interrupts Megan Kelly or Dr. Weedwhacker, both of whom are far more interesting than he.
If you disagree, feel free to watch.
Fascist may be a little strong, but definitely a Progressive and most certainly a sexist. It is clear when he has Megan or any other of the female Fox analysts on and debates them. Well, he tries to debate them, Megan is way smarter than him and that becomes really clear, really fast.
Cooter Brown
Member
That's a naught request, though examples seem to me to be implicit in the post. It expresses concisely and in an entertaining way the problem with news reporting today. His post is dead slap on, Fox, CNN, MS whatever...
You seem to feel that there is something differentiating Fox--I'll put on you the same onus you put on Gary--cite specific examples--other than opinion pieces by commentators--supporting your position.
My business can't function properly unless I have real information as to what is going on in the world. Fox News network is what I rely on 24/7...Also 70 of the 92 television sets in the White House are set to Fox News.I hope these two examples will be enough.
rcnixon
Member
You could put the period in that sentence right after the word "anything".
I've written this before, Bill O'Reilly is an actor and a showman. The purpose of his show is to make money; that is all.
Russ
Similar threads
- Locked
