Barack Obama on Bill O'Reilly - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-06-2008, 07:25 PM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
I don't understand the backlash to Olbermann in here recently.

What's changed so much about him?
I just had a conversation about this with a friend yesterday, so I'll sum it up (it's sort of long, sorry).

I don't know much has changed about his egotism. His recent comment to Joe Scarborough was absolutely bafflingly rude, as Scarborough, aside from maybe (ironically in both cases) Pat Buchanan, have been among the most objective political analysts I've seen anywhere on cable news. What Olbermann didn't like was that Scarborough would dare even imply it was a close race with McCain. That's just sheer stupidity, as well as laden with heavy doses of irrationality. Add in the jerk factor, which I wasn't really aware of until most recently and I think even some who still enjoy his show are starting to grow a little sour on him. He's supposed to be the antithesis of O'Reilly not the other side of the coin!! So, I think some are quite frankly just flat disappointed in him.

You know why I think he reacted that way towards Scarborough? Because Scarborough was nearly the only soul on MSNBC (Dan Abrams and a few analysts as well) that didn't treat Hillary Clinton as the 'Spawn of Satan', so Olbie resented that. He thinks he runs the fucking place over there. I don't even think Chris Matthews likes him much anymore. Do not veer off the 'chosen' path, Chris! That's another problem, many of his trusted viewers actually liked Hillary Clinton and grew sour when he had not only jumped in the tank, he bought the fucking tank and jerked off in it. I watch MSNBC most often, because I detest both Fox News and CNN. And I like most of their talking heads, even the most biased and from the extremes. Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan are both great.

For me, it's not about voicing opinions, most Americans (like myself) enjoy opinionated programming, if it's ESPN, American Idol or Cable News. I have no problem with that. What bothers me the most is dishonesty and hypocrisy in 'reporting' whether that's true objective journalism or editorial opinions (like Olbermann or O'Reilly). The least they can do is be consistent and forthright.

I used to listen to his 'Special Comments' to/about Bush and nearly agreed with every word, yet I would come away thinking "who does this self important blowhard really think he is?" but that was nothing more than a dislike of his attitude on my part. I don't need to like his attitude to enjoy his show, I watch O'Reilly as well from time to time. (usually I am flipping channels at commercial breaks regardless of who or what I'm watching). I don't think I saw the intellectual dishonesty at that time. So maybe that is truly what has changed, this latent, intellectually dishonest viewpoint surfacing through his outright infatuation with Obama.

What has really turned Olbie from maybe self-important blowhard to hypocrite has been his evolving into the Leftist champion while still railing on Fox News for doing the exact same thing. While it seems, increasingly so, that MSNBC has decided to counter-program Fox (which I don't have a problem with). Olbermann still sits on his soapbox on that network and blasts Fox for doing many of the same things. That's hypocrisy, period. The next time Olbie blasts Bill-O, just ask yourself, couldn't he say this same thing about himself if a few words were changed around? More often than not, that answer is 'yes'. Olbermann sees himself the same way Bill O'Reilly sees himself. Their version of objective truth always matches their own opinions.

So here is a clear distinction between what Olbermann does and what O'Reiily does. O'Reiily will allow someone on his show to knock down his 'objective truth'. He acknowledges that he might not own the monopoly on truth, believe it or not, you wouldn't know that from 'Countdown'.

O'Reilly will go on a rant about "secular progressives" and then he'll find a "secular progressive" with enough balls to come on his show. Agree with him or not, 1-it's usually pretty good TV, 2-that's a pretty fair way of presenting an issue to his audience (although it's generally a strawman-like guest). So, it's not ideal but he is demonstrating a willingness to present dissent to his own views. Olbermann has not ONCE, and if you can show me ONCE, I'll be floored, presented a dissenting view to his own opinions.

Ok, so why is this?
Is he afraid of the argument? I seriously doubt it. He's extremely intelligent, quick witted and articulate. I would imagine he would be a vicious 'debater'.
So again, why does he do this? Because he has no inherent interest to provide his viewer with the idea that his views may be flawed. He sees his analysis as objective unto itself.

So that's where the dishonesty comes in. You might ask "does he have to present those views? It's his own show, he can do what he wants!!" Yes, that's absolutely fine with me, if he wanted to come right out and say "I am not interested in dissenting views, my analysis is the TRUTH on this show". Sort of like Shaun Hannity or Rush does on his radio show. Fuck the opposition, this is my show!!! Fair enough.

Okay but he doesn't do that. He brings on news analysts that always agree with him!! He's telling the viewer "see, see, verified across this objective journalist source!!! (Richard Wolffe or Dana Milbank come to mind). So, he' operating as if he's presenting this dissenting objective view. In this light, he's holding himself above O'Reilly. "I bring on real journalists, who analyze my opinions!" It's ever-so convenient that they always mirror his views.

Let's suppose he did give a mea culpa to his audience "look, I am under no pretense that I have any objectivity left". That would be a forthright and honest thing to do. But what would it do to his blasting of FOX News and Bill Oreilly which so many of his viewers eat up? What would that say about the "objective" analysts that come on his show? He can't do it. So he has to continue the charade of being intellectually dishonest. You see, his ratings are doing better than ever because people don't want him to be that. They want him to be like O'Reilly in much of the same regard that the people who watch O'Reilly want him to be just as he is.

O'Reilly for all his warts, many shared with Olbermann, will at the very least sit face to face with the people he lambastes. So my last shot at Olbermann, is not only is he intellectually dishonest, a hypocrite, a self important blowhard, and a jerk, he's also a coward. Watch how Rachel Maddow runs her show, and I would bet you'll see the difference in how an admitted liberal, opinionated talking head should be handling themselves. I hope she doesn't disappoint me but I am not as Left as she is but I appreciate her not insulting my intelligence every time I hear her speak.
__________________

__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 07:35 PM   #77
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfan26 View Post
I've not seen someone come into FYM on such an anti-liberal, ultra-defensive blaze of glory in a long, long time. You spend half the time expressing your opinions and half the time with your face in your palm, somewhere between bewildered and appalled that people have the views they do in favor of Obama. We get it, you're conservative. We get it, you prefer McCain to Obama. OK. Let's just talk about the issues, please.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 07:42 PM   #78
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:59 AM
:uppitythumb:
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 07:45 PM   #79
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
I just had a conversation about this with a friend yesterday, so I'll sum it up (it's sort of long, sorry).

I don't know much has changed about his egotism. His recent comment to Joe Scarborough was absolutely bafflingly rude, as Scarborough, aside from maybe (ironically in both cases) Pat Buchanan, have been among the most objective political analysts I've seen anywhere on cable news. What Olbermann didn't like was that Scarborough would dare even imply it was a close race with McCain. That's just sheer stupidity, as well as laden with heavy doses of irrationality. Add in the jerk factor, which I wasn't really aware of until most recently and I think even some who still enjoy his show are starting to grow a little sour on him. He's supposed to be the antithesis of O'Reilly not the other side of the coin!! So, I think some are quite frankly just flat disappointed in him.

You know why I think he reacted that way towards Scarborough? Because Scarborough was nearly the only soul on MSNBC (Dan Abrams and a few analysts as well) that didn't treat Hillary Clinton as the 'Spawn of Satan', so Olbie resented that. He thinks he runs the fucking place over there. I don't even think Chris Matthews likes him much anymore. Do not veer off the 'chosen' path, Chris! That's another problem, many of his trusted viewers actually liked Hillary Clinton and grew sour when he had not only jumped in the tank, he bought the fucking tank and jerked off in it. I watch MSNBC most often, because I detest both Fox News and CNN. And I like most of their talking heads, even the most biased and from the extremes. Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan are both great.

For me, it's not about voicing opinions, most Americans (like myself) enjoy opinionated programming, if it's ESPN, American Idol or Cable News. I have no problem with that. What bothers me the most is dishonesty and hypocrisy in 'reporting' whether that's true objective journalism or editorial opinions (like Olbermann or O'Reilly). The least they can do is be consistent and forthright.

I used to listen to his 'Special Comments' to/about Bush and nearly agreed with every word, yet I would come away thinking "who does this self important blowhard really think he is?" but that was nothing more than a dislike of his attitude on my part. I don't need to like his attitude to enjoy his show, I watch O'Reilly as well from time to time. (usually I am flipping channels at commercial breaks regardless of who or what I'm watching). I don't think I saw the intellectual dishonesty at that time. So maybe that is truly what has changed, this latent, intellectually dishonest viewpoint surfacing through his outright infatuation with Obama.

What has really turned Olbie from maybe self-important blowhard to hypocrite has been his evolving into the Leftist champion while still railing on Fox News for doing the exact same thing. While it seems, increasingly so, that MSNBC has decided to counter-program Fox (which I don't have a problem with). Olbermann still sits on his soapbox on that network and blasts Fox for doing many of the same things. That's hypocrisy, period. The next time Olbie blasts Bill-O, just ask yourself, couldn't he say this same thing about himself if a few words were changed around? More often than not, that answer is 'yes'. Olbermann sees himself the same way Bill O'Reilly sees himself. Their version of objective truth always matches their own opinions.

So here is a clear distinction between what Olbermann does and what O'Reiily does. O'Reiily will allow someone on his show to knock down his 'objective truth'. He acknowledges that he might not own the monopoly on truth, believe it or not, you wouldn't know that from 'Countdown'.

O'Reilly will go on a rant about "secular progressives" and then he'll find a "secular progressive" with enough balls to come on his show. Agree with him or not, 1-it's usually pretty good TV, 2-that's a pretty fair way of presenting an issue to his audience (although it's generally a strawman-like guest). So, it's not ideal but he is demonstrating a willingness to present dissent to his own views. Olbermann has not ONCE, and if you can show me ONCE, I'll be floored, presented a dissenting view to his own opinions.

Ok, so why is this?
Is he afraid of the argument? I seriously doubt it. He's extremely intelligent, quick witted and articulate. I would imagine he would be a vicious 'debater'.
So again, why does he do this? Because he has no inherent interest to provide his viewer with the idea that his views may be flawed. He sees his analysis as objective unto itself.

So that's where the dishonesty comes in. You might ask "does he have to present those views? It's his own show, he can do what he wants!!" Yes, that's absolutely fine with me, if he wanted to come right out and say "I am not interested in dissenting views, my analysis is the TRUTH on this show". Sort of like Shaun Hannity or Rush does on his radio show. Fuck the opposition, this is my show!!! Fair enough.

Okay but he doesn't do that. He brings on news analysts that always agree with him!! He's telling the viewer "see, see, verified across this objective journalist source!!! (Richard Wolffe or Dana Milbank come to mind). So, he' operating as if he's presenting this dissenting objective view. In this light, he's holding himself above O'Reilly. "I bring on real journalists, who analyze my opinions!" It's ever-so convenient that they always mirror his views.

Let's suppose he did give a mea culpa to his audience "look, I am under no pretense that I have any objectivity left". That would be a forthright and honest thing to do. But what would it do to his blasting of FOX News and Bill Oreilly which so many of his viewers eat up? What would that say about the "objective" analysts that come on his show? He can't do it. So he has to continue the charade of being intellectually dishonest. You see, his ratings are doing better than ever because people don't want him to be that. They want him to be like O'Reilly in much of the same regard that the people who watch O'Reilly want him to be just as he is.

O'Reilly for all his warts, many shared with Olbermann, will at the very least sit face to face with the people he lambastes. So my last shot at Olbermann, is not only is he intellectually dishonest, a hypocrite, a self important blowhard, and a jerk, he's also a coward. Watch how Rachel Maddow runs her show, and I would bet you'll see the difference in how an admitted liberal, opinionated talking head should be handling themselves. I hope she doesn't disappoint me but I am not as Left as she is but I appreciate her not insulting my intelligence every time I hear her speak.
You make some interesting points.

You're right, Olbermann doesn't have any dissenting viewpoints on his show. However, I'd hate it if he did in the way that O'Reilly does. I find O'Reilly's style of having dissenting viewpoints on his show to be disingenious and annoying, because he has no interest in actually having a serious discourse. All he wants to do is try to get his guest to say something he disagrees with, and show the world how smart he is by proving them wrong. That's all it is. I'd rather Olbermann not have dissenting viewpoints on his show than to have them on that way.

Also - and this does not necessarily respond directly to anything in your post - I don't think Olbermann does anything on his show even approaching the sheer level of obnoxiousness of Bill's mailbag. It's like, "Hi Bill, you're awesome! You're right about everything! John Smith from somewhere", "Well, thank you John Smith from somewhere, I appreciate it." It's a roundabout way of complimenting himself.

Olbermann's got a huge ego, no argument - you don't get to the top of your profession without having an ego - but it's not even close to O'Reilly's. Imo, of course.

I only recollect one time where Olbermann claimed to be objective, and this was during one his 'worst person in the world' things, in response to somebody in McCain's campaign saying that MSNBC was not objective. Other than this, I don't remember any time in which Olbermann explicitly stated his objectivity.

If you want MSNBC to come out and say, 'yeah we're liberal', then you should also want Fox to come out and say, 'yeah, we're conservative', instead of continually blowing out their 'fair and balanced' line.

Yes, MSNBC is liberal. Frankly, if Fox was going to be so far right, there needed to be a channel that acted as a counterpoint on the other side. CNN is too centrist anymore.

P.S.Buchanan may be good - though I'd argue that - but you have to know he's only on MSNBC because they needed a 'token conservative'.
__________________
namkcuR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 08:01 PM   #80
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
CNN is too centrist anymore.
I like that about them. To me, centrist = balanced, whereby I can hear opposing viewpoints presented in a non-shouty manner. In my opinion, if you surround yourself with only viewpoints you agree with, you're more likely to fall prey to group-think.

I don't get MSNBC here, but I've seen plenty of clips online, and it seems to me they've become the leftist version of Fox. I can't stand the Fox style of reporting, so I'm certainly not fond of it coming from another network, even if they are closer to my political views. It's very offputting. Let me hear both sides presented in a reasonable manner, and I can decide for myself.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 08:45 PM   #81
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Olbermann is more overtly biased than anyone on Fox, save Hannity, but MSNBC as a whole is more balanced than Fox as a whole. Can anyone imagine a Democrat having his own show on Fox, like republican Scarborough does on MSNBC? It would never happen.

But about Obama on O'Reilly. I watch O'Reilly every night. I even Tivo it if I'm not home. It's a guilty pleasure, like reading the National Enquirer in the line at the market. As long as you don't expect to hear the truth, it can be wildly entertaining.

So why a serious person like Obama would lend credibility to that circus by agreeing to appear on the show is beyond me.
__________________
LPU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 08:48 PM   #82
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPU2 View Post
But about Obama on O'Reilly. I watch O'Reilly every night. I even Tivo it if I'm not home. It's a guilty pleasure, like reading the National Enquirer in the line at the market. As long as you don't expect to hear the truth, it can be wildly entertaining.

So why a serious person like Obama would lend credibility to that circus by agreeing to appear on the show is beyond me.
I would love to watch O'Reilly just for the sheer idiocy of the things that come out of his mouth, but, honestly, after a minute or two, I'm ready to give up my stance on gun control and shoot my TV. And for the record, I think Olbermann's a douche too, but I do tend to agree with his POV more, obviously.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 08:54 PM   #83
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPU2 View Post
So why a serious person like Obama would lend credibility to that circus by agreeing to appear on the show is beyond me.
Sometimes, when you're trying to appeal to wider audiences, you have to speak on a platform that they relate to. Like it or not, a lot of people do take Bill O'Reilly and what he says seriously.
__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 09:16 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
If your assumption is that O'Reilly is out to destroy Clinton/Obama in these interviews, I think that is a wrong assumption.
and this wasn't my assumption at all. Which reeks of the same tactics that O'Riley uses. Twist it and make it sound like the subject at hand.
My comment was to point out the fact that O'Riley was out of his element with Hillary Clinton and it always shows when he goes above his station.
He is no where near the league of Hillary Clinton, and Obama for that matter. That's all..
__________________
sue4u2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2008, 09:21 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2isthebest View Post
I would love to watch O'Reilly just for the sheer idiocy of the things that come out of his mouth, but, honestly, after a minute or two, I'm ready to give up my stance on gun control and shoot my TV. And for the record, I think Olbermann's a douche too, but I do tend to agree with his POV more, obviously.
Oh Jesus, I just read this and haven't stopped laughing.
Thank You..
__________________
sue4u2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2008, 03:09 PM   #86
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
Sometimes, when you're trying to appeal to wider audiences, you have to speak on a platform that they relate to. Like it or not, a lot of people do take Bill O'Reilly and what he says seriously.
No one under 70. Trust me, I work in the media and Bill O'Reilly is an industry joke. And not just among liberals either. Ever see anyone of any importance, conservative or liberal, maintain a straight face on that show? No one takes it very seriously. They know what it is. They appear only because of its massive audience. His ratings are right up there with WWF. Similar in make-up too.
__________________
LPU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 03:45 PM   #87
War Child
 
MaxFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 776
Local Time: 03:59 PM
[QUOTE=Irvine511;5433246]they've seen each other a few times in person[QUOTE]

one of those times being when Obama launched his campaign from Ayers' home.
__________________
MaxFisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 03:50 PM   #88
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 11:59 AM
^What? Obama made his campaign announcement at the Old State Capitol building in Springfield.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 03:54 PM   #89
War Child
 
MaxFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 776
Local Time: 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2isthebest View Post
^What? Obama made his campaign announcement at the Old State Capitol building in Springfield.
IL State Rep campaign, not presidential.
__________________
MaxFisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2008, 03:59 PM   #90
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxFisher View Post
IL State Rep campaign, not presidential.
Ah, ok. Thanks for clearing that up. I can't say I really care. I'd have the same reaction if McCain had made his campaign announcement from Keating's house. They know some people who have done illegal things and they're friendly acquaintances, it doesn't really say anything about them, though.
__________________

__________________
U2isthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com