≡ Click to see image ≡

Interesting that O'Reilly has a rivalry with the Daily Show. Which fake news program will win?

Wait... there are jews in the entertainment industry now?

yep, and they control the synagogues as well.

I had the misfortune of watching part of an O'Reilly Show.

Holy. Shit.

It's the purest evil. The things he espouses run absolutely counter to the operation of a just, supportive, and positive society. O'Reilly appears to be all about causing maximum harm to society. Hate TV.

It's the purest evil.

You obviously haven't seen Limbaugh. At least O'Reilly wears his brutishness on his sleeve. Limbaugh does his Choo-Choo Charlie routine to make himself look harmless while dispensing hateful ideas.

I wonder, do people like George Will and William F. Buckley feel embarassed by these baboons the way I'm embarassed by say, Ward Churchill?

How does the segment being a year old diminish from O'Reilly's idiotic premise?

At least O'Reilly wears his brutishness on his sleeve


yes, but he also tries to pull the "yo, I'm against death penalty and I'm for the little guy, I'm an independent" bullshit. Hannity and Rush (the latter between his usual crack hits of course) spare us that kind of hypocrisy -- they embrace and relish their role as political hit men. O'Reilly, just like InstaPundit, likes to pretend otherwise


the way I'm embarassed by say, Ward Churchill?

yeah, the all powerful Ward Churchill, who, as we all know, also has a massively influential radio and tv show!!!

matteo, this is me you're talking to, not some unknown slob. Easy.

And the fact that Churchill isn't as well known (in some circles) as Limbaugh and O'Reilly dosen't mean I don't cringe when I hear the man talk.

And (and I think you realize this) I'm not defending either of them*, I think they're both Machiavellian pond scum. I'm just trying a little deatched analysis of their comparitive efficacy. (see I can use big words). Beside's my favorite right wing loon was Morton Downey Jr. He was at least sincere and entertaining, and his personal history makes him seem emblematic of the US's rightward swing post-1980, and as I told someone at a MeFi meetup recently: if we don't understand what made this country swing rightward (and this country runs hot-cold, left-right politically) we'll never be able to wing it leftward again.

(Also, for some reason my favorite crime writer, James Ellroy, is freinds with O'Reilly. But Ellroy's always had a weird perverse fascination with right-wing celebrities, so maybe that's it)

(Also Part II, recently I was on a long road trip with my Dad, who listened to Limbaugh and NPR back to back and chuckled inscutably to himself throughout both. I come from strange stock)

dosen't mean I don't cringe when I hear the man talk.

where, giovanni. seriously, where?
Ward Churchill is a nobody, Ward Churchill is another classic example of excellent framing by the GOP: he's nothing, but they managed to make him look like some kind of leader of the Democrats.
Churchill was just one college professor, in a country that's lousy with them. the "liberal" media (heh) turned him into somebody with a following, somebody mainstream. he wasn't.

Rush, instead, has a following. he's mainstream.
same for Hannity, O'Reilly, etc.

compare Churchill's book sales with, say, Ann Coulter's. then tell me which one is representative of their political side.

;)

I tend to switch between Limbaugh and Franken on the drive back from school every day. Generally Franken will be discussing important issues that face this country (war, health care, social security, etc) while Limbaugh is screaming about some tiny town in the middle of nowhere that apparently hates America. Then he'll rant for an hour about how loathsome liberals are.

Well, I'm glad to say that I'm unaware of any such heinous media personalities on Canadian-content airwaves.

Which, mind, may be because I don't watch television and my car radio is perma-tuned to CBC.

Ward Churchill is another classic example of excellent framing by the GOP: he's nothing, but they managed to make him look like some kind of leader of the Democrats.

Agreed, but it frustrates me when we give them such easy "framing fodder," and too many of my comrades waste time and energy defending oafs like him, when the should just say, "this guy's an ass, and does not speak for me, so let's get back to the issues..." which would be the smart and expedient move. Just saying.

Well, I'm glad to say that I'm unaware of any such heinous media personalities on Canadian-content airwaves.

according to the late Mordecai Richler (a man I deeply admire) some of the hardcore Quebec separtists and far-right folks out west are pretty loathsome or at least nutty, but I don't know how much airtime they get. I do know that Quebecois women are absolutely gorgeous. And that you have more and better hockey.

I do know that Quebecois women are absolutely gorgeous. And that you have more and better hockey.

jon, it's called a hockey puck. With a p. :)

did you see the entry below that one--koshering the WH kitchen--i bet the insane windbags will have something to say about it. The more this goes on, the more hateful towards everyone who's not Christian or Catholic they get.

Oh, and back on topic, since Comedy Central started the obvious O'Parody "Colber(t) Repor(t)", he has to fight back in whatever impotent way he can. Although O'RLY's ratings are better than Jon's (2.5 million a night vs. 1.6 million), the
O-ratings are down a half million from last year's peak while the Daily's still trending upward, and both are still regularly beat by Spongebob.

(and both the Daily and Colber(t) are beating the Big O's 11PM rerun and Anderson Cooper too)

Colbert is not good tho--those people are already parodies, and he's not taking it further or anything.

O'Reilly only gets 2.5 million viewers? Holy crap, that'd be considered minority interest viewing here in the UK. There are programs for farmers and disabled people that get as many viewers as that.

Agreed, but it frustrates me when we give them such easy "framing fodder," and too many of my comrades waste time and energy defending oafs like him, when the should just say, "this guy's an ass, and does not speak for me, so let's get back to the issues..." which would be the smart and expedient move. Just saying.

Well, no, that's being drawn into the trap, too. You have to expose their method for the demagoguery that it is. In America, people have the right to be asses; in such a climate, there will be asses without end. That goes without saying. They'll never be able to stop playing this game unless they're called on the method.

Michelle Malkin had a recent example where she simultaneously tried to gin up the "Bush derangement syndrome" meme AND promote her book "Unhinged Liberals". She started out talking up sarcastic comments by Janeane Garofalo, who at least is on Air America, but by the end of the article she was gleaning blog posts. This for a syndicated print column -- I thought it usually went the other way around.

The whole point of these exercises is to 1) put lib'ruls on the defensive -- notice how you tripped over yourself in order to apologize quickly -- and 2) create a wedge between liberals and independents, who don't want anything to do with those "crazies".

Anyway, you were pretty close there, don't mean to nitpick.

notice how you tripped over yourself in order to apologize quickly --

I'm not apologizing for anything, I honestly think Churchill (powerful or not) is an ass, and I also belive that we have nothing to gain by defending his sort. And, sure, this is all expediency and gesture, but politics has never been pretty or honest.

twenty comments and no one has posted the orly owl yet?

hey, fuck them all.

i kind of have to aqdmit i think colbert is also douche. he's a douchebag with better politics, but he can't seem to figure out his persona. is he supposed to be funny? he is not. what then, is he?
caveat ad lector: i have not seen his new program. i don't have a tv anymore because i love watching college basketball and not working. it wasn't working out between us, me and tv.

Colbert not only is supposed to be funny, but is.

from Gilliard: What the wingnuts don't get is that the secularization of Christmas is the triumph of Christian values, even if megachurch owners want to shut their doors on Christmas Sunday. Christmas has become such a part of American life that even non-christians respect it and in many cases practice some of its rituals. Does it diminish their religion? No. No more than me going to a Passover Seder diminishes mine.

But this horrible, evil bigotted War on Christmas these people are perpetrating does. Because at its core is an attack on those who are not Christian, and it's done under the guise of respecting Jesus's birthday.

Colbert is the visual interpretation of late 1980s/early 1990s Usenet. I am certain he is an old net geek.

Also, if O'Reilly really is only 2.5mill, I'm hugely relieved. That's less impact than the History channel.