[BenW]

I stopped watching the O'Reilly Factor a while back because old Bill just started going way too far overboard for my tastes. But I'm visiting the folks this weekend and they have The Factor on right now. There's someone else sitting in for O'Reilly and they were just talking about the Baylor athlete thing. I can't remember the conversation verbatim, but the gist of it that bothered me included the following (paraphrased by me as close as I can remember) statements made by O'Reilly's stand in:
------
"What normal person buys a gun when they feel threatened?"

"...normal people like you and me (referring to himself and his guest) go to the police if we feel threatened."

"Why would a normal person buy a gun and go target shooting in a field, reportedly as many as 30 times?"
------

That stuff sure doesn't sound conservative to me. It sounds more like talking points used by Brady Center reps. Grrrrrr.:mad:

[rock jock]

I think the point he was making, and by the way he did a very poor job at it, is that if you feel your life is threatened, the normal response is to contact LE. Now, a further step, and just as importantly, would also be to arm yourself regardless of the reponse by the authorities because ultimately your safety is in your own hands. But if you arm yourself but do not contact LE (assuming you have the opportunity), the logical conclusion is that a) you don't feel the threat is real, or b) you have no desire to resolve this through the legal process. The latter is simply called being a vigilante.

BTW, I share your frustation with O'Reilly. I only occasionally listen to him. Keep in mind that he is no differnt than other big-ego types from the conservative side. Rush Limbaugh is also a good example. They have some good things to say and overall I think they do some good, but you have to wade through a lot of BS to find a gem or two.

[PWK]

I believe Fox's moniker is "we report, you decide" I don't think I would call fox news conservative in the way Rush is conservative. Every newsperson is going to speak with some slant.

[rrader]

Fox news overall has no more institutional integrity than the hard-left propagandists at CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, etc...,

Rupbert Murdoch has leaned on the news division to soften it's coverage of the murderous Communist dictatorship in Bejing so as to protect his favored status there.

The fact that a fabricator like Geraldo Rivera is still on staff is another good example.

As for O'Reilly, he's no firend of RKBA.

If you want a trustworthy news source a live feed from C-Span without commentary is as good as it gets.

[10-Ring]

Compared to others, Fox News is conservative.

[BenW]

Compared to others, Fox News is conservative.
Agreed, but all you ever hear is how Fox is a mouthpiece for the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy". That's certainly not the case. I believe Fox is in fact as they themselves say, more fair and balanced than the other major news networks. But as this O'Reilly segment points out, they're certainly not a conservative mouthpiece. And just because they are my favored cable news source, that doesn't mean I won't call them on a CNN style statement. :)

[CasualShooter]

Fox news is about the only one I watch anymore. But, lately I believe they have been moving toward the left a little. :barf:

One of their new talk show hosts recently did a portion questioning CCW by teachers in schools in (I think it was) Utah. The host was ill informed of the facts and favored the "soccor mom PTA" view -- very much opposed and shocked at the very idea of CCW in schools despite the fact that many there have been doing it legally for several years and without any problems. :banghead:

[Art Eatman]

Not looking at each and every program on FOX; just generalizing: They seem to be more middle-of-the-road insofar as their efforts or their intents in reporting. When compared to the rest of the news networks, they're almost by definition Conservative. Certainly, some of their commentators are Conservatives--but not all.

By the very nature of their personal backgrounds, very few mediahcrities know diddly-squat about guns and gun issues. And, in general, they're surrounded by anti-gun people...

Art

[ALGORESUPPORTCENTER04]

Lets see why they are right wing:

Sean Hannity
Joe Scarbough
Bill O'Rielly
Ann Coulter
Brit Hume
Dick Morris
Geraldo Rivera
John Abrams
John Gibson
Neil Cuvuto
Micheal Regan

Oh yea, it is also owned by Rupert Murdock.

So what is your argument? Morons?

[BenW]

Oh that's right..... It's Summer and the 7th graders are home from school.:rolleyes:

I'm guessing Al will be banned in 3...2...1

[Glock Glockler]

Goresupport,

If you want to post your opinion here, even if you disagree with us, that's fine, but don't waltz in here and start calling people morons. That's not taking the high road.

[DonQatU]

Oh yea, it (FOX) is also owned by Rupert Murdock.

And who owns Rush Limbaugh? Michael Wiener (aka Michael Savage)?

Curious!

Don

[Art Eatman]

DonQ, if you know anything at all about MahaRushie, it's pretty obvious that he owns himself. He's an entertainer as well as a political commentator, and obviously is very good at it.

And, he seems to know three words that you don't find in the Liberal lexicon: "I stand corrected."

:D, Art

[DonQatU]

DonQ, if you know anything at all about MahaRushie, it's pretty obvious that he owns himself. He's an entertainer as well as a political commentator, and obviously is very good at it.

Ahhh! He own's himself! Strange thing though! I don't see a lot of radio stations licensed to the EIB Network.

But I sure see a lot of Rush's programming on CLEAR CHANNEL. Gee! Those Clear Channel folks are EVERYWHERE! They must have a lot of money to buy all those radio stations!

Don

[Sergeant Bob]

Uh-Oh, it's a Clear Channel Conspiracy! Clear Channel is trying to take over the world!!

Clear Channel is a business. They are in business to make money. Conservatives/Cafeteria Conservatives on the radio make money. If Liberals could make money on the radio, there'd be more Liberals on the radio. Money talks, male bovine excrement walks.

[johnr]

ALGORESUPPORTCENTER04- you're out of line, Mister.

[redhead]

ALGORESUPPORTCENTER - not only are you out of line, but you don't seem to know what a right-wing position might actually be.

Bill O'Reilly? Right wing? Not by any definition of the term.

Geraldo? On what planet is he a right-winger?

Joe Scarborough? He's not even ON Fox.

Dick Morris? Dick Morris?!! He just doesn't like the Clintons, so that makes him right wing?

What was your point again? I forget.

[Hkmp5sd]

RE: "ALGORESUPPORTCENTER04"

Please don't feed the trolls.

[redhead]

Please don't feed the trolls.

Sorry. You are quite right. Sometimes I just can't help that kneejerk of mine. I need to get it under better control. :D

[Diesle]

Love the name.... ALGORESUPPORTCENTER04 .

I was instantly suspicious when I saw you listed as a new member..... I'm absolutely vindicated now that you've included Geraldo Rivera in your list of right wingers.

Your going to have to do a lot better than that here....

I hear the clock ticking on your welcome here so..... HI and, if i miss your disappearance, BY.


Diesle

[CasualShooter]

Ditto! :D

[mattd]

The inner censor of the mind of the true believer completes the work of the public censor; his self-discipline is as tyrannical as the obedience imposed by the regime; he terrorizes his own conscience into submission; he carries his private Iron Curtain inside his skull, to protect his illusions against the intrusion of reality.
- Arthur Koestler

You shouldn't not listen to something just because you don't agree with it.

Sean Hannity - On a talk show with liberal. (balanced)
Joe Scarbough - He is on msnbc. Spelled his name wrong.
Bill O'Rielly - Has guests with different views. Name wrong.
Ann Coulter - not a fox news contributor
Geraldo Rivera - A liberal.
Neil Cuvuto - Another debate show, spell his name wrong too.

[0007]

See below

[0007]

Com'n, guys, we can use a little comic relief around here occasionally. And cut the guy some slack; it's not his fault he can't spell or read; remember, HE'S a LIBERAL - whatever his problem(s) are, they're _always_ someone else's fault...:D :D :D :barf:

[cpileri]

They were covering the serial arsonist that is roaming the area around here, but with all the sensationalism of any other BU!!$&IT news channel. They made sure to describe the "particularly gruesome" method of arson...

and I'm thinking,"OK, they kidnapped a resident, covered him in gasoline, and threw him back inside and applied flame"- that's particularly gruesome!

Nope.

They some type of flammable liquid on the porch and lit it. wow-wee. So that's more gruesome than...what?... a flammable solid? or perhaps lighting up a window instead of a porch? I dunno.

Oh, and they made sure to use words like "terrorism" and "sniper" alot, as in: an unnamed fire chief called it 'domestic terrorism'- yeah, I'm sure he did.
Ans a resident from the neighborhood who was indeed filmed saying it was like the sniper in that you never knwo who it is or where he will strike next. Yeah, whatever.

I'm not saying this isn't bad. Cripes, these are peoples homes! He already killed one old lady. Arson is 2-to-the-body-1-to-the-head material. But Fox really made me fume yesterday. I normally don't mind them either.

if I may steal and paraphrase something I heard on the radio: people around here ive in a state of panic all the time. we don't need some 2-bit newscaster coming along and making people think that the Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse are coming to take a crap on us!

C-

[DonQatU]

Clear Channel is a business. They are in business to make money. Conservatives/Cafeteria Conservatives on the radio make money. If Liberals could make money on the radio, there'd be more Liberals on the radio. Money talks, male bovine excrement walks.

Agreed, Sgt. Bob! But there are many that confuse the "money making entertainment of Limbaugh" with factual news.

NO..... I'm not saying there is a Clear Channel "conspiracy". They are actually quite straight forward about their agenda.

Were he alive today..... William Randolph Hurst would be very envious of their accomplishments!

Don

[CasualShooter]

there are many that confuse the "money making entertainment of Limbaugh" with factual news.

Where have I heard that before? :rolleyes: You give yourself away. :what:

Liberals Love to imply that Rush isn't factual. The fact is, that he is Very factual. He is much more reliable than the journalists on the so called local or national news programs. What's more, if he makes a mistake, he'll be the first to admit it. That's one of the things that sets him apart from the likes of Dan Rather, Connie Chung, Geraldo, and others.

Rush admits he is conservative. The others deny their liberal bias and think people are to stupid to see through them.

The thing that makes Rush successful, is his ability to present the facts with a mix of humor. That's what makes him entertaining. Another is his vocalization of conservative ideas and principles which are not or are rarely allowed in the liberal "mainstream" media.

One of the biggest proplems today with "mainstream" media news is that there are too many Journalists and not enough Reporters . That's also one of the reasons that Fox News is so successful.

[DonQatU]

He is much more reliable than the journalists on the so called local or national news programs. What's more, if he makes a mistake, he'll be the first to admit it.

Uh, is Rush sticking by his "yellow cake" uranium to Iraq from Niger story?

How about the aluminum tubes for "uranium enrichment" story?

In fact........ quote me ANY of Rush's reasons to go to war on Iraq!

Man, oh man! You prove my point, Casual Shooter!

If you would like........ I'll provide more Limbaugh lies.

BTW! I'm NOT a liberal! And Rush is NOT conservative......... unless you consider the "neo-cons" as conservative. If you do........you'll soon find out otherwise!

Don

[CasualShooter]

BTW! I'm NOT a liberal!
Sorry, if I struck a nerve, DonQatU; but, you sure fooled me. :scrutiny:

Many liberals don't want to admit it. The quote I cited previously isn't original - I've heard it before from liberals . :D

Uh, is Rush sticking by his "yellow cake" uranium to Iraq from Niger story?
How about the aluminum tubes for "uranium enrichment" story?

I do recall something about aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment; but, I think I heard that on the Fox News Channel.

I don't recall anything from Rush about "yellow cake" or aluminum tubes; but; admittedly, I don't listen to Rush all the time, only when I can. :)

One of the things I've noticed about many of Rush's critics is that they don't listen to him. :what: Analogeous to a critic's review of a movie he hasn't watched. Go figure. :D

[DonQatU]

Sorry, if I struck a nerve, DonQatU; but, you sure fooled me. Many liberals don't want to admit it.

Casual Shooter, I am deeply hurt! But, you've got me pegged. I'm one of those "Ron Paul" type liberals! :D

I don't recall anything from Rush about "yellow cake" or aluminum tubes; but; admittedly, I don't listen to Rush all the time, only when I can.

Casual, I don't remember the exact quote, but Rush did make that claim shortly after Powell addressed the Security Council. You probably didn't notice it because you are predisposed to believe anything Rush says.

He's an entertainer as well as a political commentator, and obviously is very good at it. ........And, he seems to know three words that you don't find in the Liberal lexicon: "I stand corrected."

Art, Rush IS very good at what he does....... readilly admit that. But the only time he uses the words "I stand corrected" is when he's challenged immediately by a caller that somehow got through all his screeners and corrects Rush's facts right on the air....live.

When he makes a false claim that is later proven to be incorrect, he just lets that go down the "memory hole".

He's sharper than many other neocon talk show hosts. Sean Hannity, for example, is still claiming an Iraqi intelligence officer met with Mohamed Atta in Prague shortly before 9-11.

Don

[HBK]

Don, are you liberatarian, then? Some of the stuff you come up with sounds, no offense, but kinda nuts. What do you believe in?

[DonQatU]

Some of the stuff you come up with sounds, no offense, but kinda nuts.

Oh, HBK, what stuff that I've posted seems "kinda nuts" to you? No offense taken IF you can prove I've been in error.

I think it only fair that you tell me what "stuff" I've posted is wrong.

Don

[HBK]

I'm not out to prove anything, I just wonder where you get all your ideas. I don't think I could prove you wrong, but nor could I prove you right. I'm hoping we both at least agree on the right to have a firearm for self-defense. I also believe that abortion is murder and that the government taxes me too much. I'm disappointed with the current administration's amount of spending. Do you have any information contradictory to that?

[DonQatU]

I don't think I could prove you wrong, but nor could I prove you right. I'm hoping we both at least agree on the right to have a firearm for self-defense.

We are in total agreement there!

Don

[braindead0]

Since when has Libertarian = nuts anyway?

Is is because Libertarians believe that individuals should be 100% responsible for their own lives?

[HBK]

I don't belive Libertarians are nuts. I lean toward that politically. Didn't mean to start a holy war by using the word "nuts". Next time I'll say something like improbable.

[braindead0]

Just wondered.. :evil:

[DonQatU]

Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said, "There is zero, nada, nothing new here." He said that "we've long acknowledged" that information on the attempted purchases from Niger "did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect."

Folks.... is that clear to you NOW?!! Claims made by the administration were false! They NOW admit it!

Don

[Hkmp5sd]

Claims made by the administration were false! They NOW admit it!

However, unlike the previous administration, they admit when they make an error. That is why "There is zero, nada, nothing new here." End of story. And one erroneous statement is hardly considered Claims.

[DonQatU]

However, unlike the previous administration, they admit when they make an error.

It wasn't an error. They knew these "yellow cake" documents were forged before they put the information out.

Everybody here knows (or should know) that Clinton was a lying cheating scumbag). So why is it, when Bush screws up, some feel it necessary to use the old "Clinton was worse" argument? Sorry, but that just doesn't cut it.

And the Bush administration admitted the "mistake" ONLY under intense pressure. Not because they are so morally superior, but because their feet were being held to the fire and they figured it was time to admit it and then do damage control.

That is why "There is zero, nada, nothing new here." End of story.

Ari is correct there! Those of us who were paying attention knew these claims were false long before Ari finally made it "public".

And one erroneous statement is hardly considered Claims.

Here we go again....... "erroneous"........ that implies a "mistake". It wasn't
a mistake. They knew the information was false when they put it out. Evidentally Secretary of State Powell protested. But he went ahead and put out information that he knew was bogus to the Security Council.

And you're right......... ONE "erroneous" statement is singular. "Claims" is plural. A whole litany of claims were made by the administration that have proven to be false. I can list them, if you'd like.

Don

[CasualShooter]

O.K., Don. Let's see your list. :)

BTW, What's your point? :confused: