Can Bush bounce back?

[pilferk]

What questions has he asked??

A poll comes on the news u guys believe it automatically.? The same poll comes on and read everyone of the left wing posts on here, automatically its bullshit just cause FoxNews Reported it.

Read what was written again.? ? You're not understanding the conversation, I think.

I just love how extreme left wing zealots condemn and bad mouth everything that isnt their view. Just like Bill O Reilly, he is called Liberal by some,Conservative by some but he criticizes Bush every single night on his show over something.

Bill calls himself a conservative commentator.? How much more authoritative a categorization do you need?

Just because he sticks it to Left Wingers who arent held accountable anywhere else, he gets perceived to be right wing when I think he is the closest thing to middle of the road on TV.

He's percieved as right wing because a) his politics are right wing and b) he says he's a right winger (Edit for clarity and sandmans sake: Ok, maybe not.  He was a registered Republican, though...so maybe Right winger isn't the right word....perhaps Conservative or Republican is best).? I'm SURE you would think he's "middle of the road" because he shares your viewpoint.? Bias will do that to an opinion.?

Arguing with Booker is pointless, he is a left wing zealot like most of u on this board and u guys dont even take the time to try and see any other point of view, so why waste hours to post something that isnt gonna even be comprehended anyway?

Pot. Kettle. Black.? When was the last time you took into account Booker's viewpoint?? Right.......

I got better things to do with my time then to try and post some sense into people who are mere feet away from having a cult mentality.

"Post some sense into people".? Ye gods that sounds totalitarian.? Like you're the only one with sense? Please.....

Facts are these.

I know SLC, that u are a big fan of moveon.org, they are an extreme left wing website true or not? But yet u believe and take them as fact.

If Moveon.org posted that Bush's rating was 30 percent, it would be on this board in about 5 seconds.

But just cause something is on Fox it immediately is not valid info.

U cant argue with people with that kind of logic; its impossible.

Fox is biased.? Rupert admits it.? It's a CONSERVATIVE news outlet.

Moveon.org is biased.? I've NEVER seen SLC post a "fact" (poll results, etc) article citing ANY left wing site as the original source of the data.? If you have, please point it out.? But my guess is your perception doesn't match up with reality and you're letting your perception, rather than history, run your argument for you.? Might want to double check, eh?

[Booker Floyd]

What questions has he asked??

Why not just respond to my post?

For example, you said this:

I dont really think Polls are accurate at all though, I mean how many on this board have been called up and asked their response?

But you also said this:

Still yet he had a lower rating than Bush, so Its fair to say Bush is better than Carter.

Jimmy Carter was the polar opposite of Bush and had lower ratings than Bush.

So try answering these questions:

If you truly believe that polls arent accurate at all, why would you use them as proof that Jimmy Carter was objectively a bad president and Bush is better?

Why was Jimmy Carter "gutless" in the Iran hostage crisis? (Feel free to answer in that thread)

When accusing "us guys" of jumping on polls from "left-wing sites" and posting them as fact, to what site were you referring?

I just love how extreme left wing zealots condemn and bad mouth everything that isnt their view. Just like Bill O Reilly, he is called Liberal by some,Conservative by some but he criticizes Bush every single night on his show over something.

Who calls O'Reilly "liberal?"? You really believe everything that man says, dont you?? Because his rhetoric seems to be the basis for a lot of your own.? For example, how am I a "left-wing zealot?"? I think you hear O'Reilly throw around that nonsense and accept it without even fully understanding what being a true "left-wing zealot" even means.? Using MoveOn.org in a "polling" hypothetical...does MoveOn even post president approval rating polls, let alone conduct them?? What do you really know about MoveOn, other than that O'Reilly dislikes them and uses them as an example of "left-wing extremists?"

Instead of getting angry and reacting by calling everybody left-wing zealots and using other inane O'Reilly rhetoric, why dont you just think about the stuff, address it, and perhaps prove us wrong?? And if you really believe in having an open mind (you must, since you think I have a "cult mentality" and am not open to other views), then why not be open to possibly accepting some of the points you cant really argue??

[SLCPUNK]

Who calls O'Reilly "liberal?"  You really believe everything that man says, dont you?  Because his rhetoric seems to be the basis for a lot if your own.  For example, how am I a "left-wing zealot?"  I think you say O'Reilly throw around that nonsense and accept it without even fully understanding what being a true "left-wing zealot" even means.  Using MoveOn.org in a "polling" hypothetical...does MoveOn even post president approval rating polls, let alone conduct them?  What do you really know about MoveOn, other than that O'Reilly dislikes them and uses them as an example of "left-wing extremists?"

Instead of getting angry and reacting by calling everybody left-wing zealots and using other inane O'Reilly rhetoric, why dont you just think about the stuff, address it, and perhaps prove us wrong?  And if you really believe in having an open mind (you must, since you think I have a "cult mentality" and am not open to other views), then why not be open to possibly accepting some of the points you cant really argue? 

Fuckin' A.

[pilferk]

Who calls O'Reilly "liberal?"?

Not even O'Reilly himself....

[sandman]

does o'reilly really call himself a "conservative commentator"?

cause i've never heard that. in fact, i've heard him say he's independent, and that he does not subscribe to any single ideology. i've also heard him criticize BOTH sides for drinking kool aid.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

That is why I like O'Reilly. He is an independent. Hell just as easily criticize Bush as well as the democrats. No politician should be free from being scrutinized.

[pilferk]

does o'reilly really call himself a "conservative commentator"?

cause i've never heard that. in fact, i've heard him say he's independent, and that he does not subscribe to any single ideology. i've also heard him criticize BOTH sides for drinking kool aid.

O'Reilly, when asked, has said he is not an "across the board conservative" but his "audience is made up mostly of moderate conservatives".

His own words.

There are other quotes substantiating that he is, in fact,  "mostly conservative" (which, to me, means he's conservative).

In addition, while he CLAIMS to be a registered independant, Al Franken very publically outed him as a registerd Republican, which O'Reilly then admitted to.

If you'd like a more extensive list of quotes, and proof, I could dig it up....

[sandman]

does o'reilly really call himself a "conservative commentator"?

cause i've never heard that. in fact, i've heard him say he's independent, and that he does not subscribe to any single ideology. i've also heard him criticize BOTH sides for drinking kool aid.

O'Reilly, when asked, has said he is not an "across the board conservative" but his "audience is made up mostly of moderate conservatives".

His own words.

There are other quotes substantiating that he is, in fact,? "mostly conservative" (which, to me, means he's conservative).

In addition, while he CLAIMS to be a registered independant, Al Franken very publically outed him as a registerd Republican, which O'Reilly then admitted to.

If you'd like a more extensive list of quotes, and proof, I could dig it up....

i'm not talking about his audience, or what he's registered. (many people that fall into the "independent" category register with one of the parties so they have a voice in the primaries).

you stated the following....

"Bill calls himself a conservative commentator.  How much more authoritative a categorization do you need?"

that's what i'm looking for proof of.

[pilferk]

i'm not talking about his audience, or what he's registered. (many people that fall into the "independent" category register with one of the parties so they have a voice in the primaries).

you stated the following....

"Bill calls himself a conservative commentator.? How much more authoritative a categorization do you need?"

that's what i'm looking for proof of.

And, if you read what I wrote, you'd see it:

O'Reilly, when asked, has said he is not an "across the board conservative" but his "audience is made up mostly of moderate conservatives". (Interview with Mike Wallace)

His audience is relevant, since, if he weren't a conservative commentator, why would he say his audience is "mostly moderate conservatives"?? Do conservatives enjoy listening to liberal commentators?? Do liberals enjoy listening to conservative commentators?

He's said he is not an "accross the board conservative". (a quote)

He has said he's "mostly conservative". (a quote)

He calls himself a political commentator. (His own bio)

Would you prefer if I changed it to: He calls himself a mostly conservative commentator? Or a mostly conservative commentator mostly listened to by moderate conservatives?  The point is, and was, he doesn't even consider HIMSELF a liberal.

Use google.? You'll turn up a bunch more of his comments on the subject.? He's TRIED to wiggle in some interviews, but has been pinned down pretty securely, and in his own words, in others.? If you really want me to use google for? you, I will...but not until a bit later in the coming week.? My time at the computer over the next couple of days will be pretty limited.

Your first point is pretty laughable...especially considering O'Reilly INSISTED he was a registered independant...but Franken proved him wrong (aka: caught him lying).? Independant voters MIGHT register (for primary purposes) with a party, but they certainly wouldn't LIE when asked about it?? What purpose would anyone have in being deceptive?? To try to portray some semblance of independance when their really isn't one?

[sandman]

i'm not talking about his audience, or what he's registered. (many people that fall into the "independent" category register with one of the parties so they have a voice in the primaries).

you stated the following....

"Bill calls himself a conservative commentator.? How much more authoritative a categorization do you need?"

that's what i'm looking for proof of.

And, if you read what I wrote, you'd see it:

O'Reilly, when asked, has said he is not an "across the board conservative" but his "audience is made up mostly of moderate conservatives". (Interview with Mike Wallace)

His audience is relevant, since, if he weren't a conservative commentator, why would he say his audience is "mostly moderate conservatives"?? Do conservatives enjoy listening to liberal commentators?? Do liberals enjoy listening to conservative commentators?

He's said he is not an "accross the board conservative". (a quote)

He has said he's "mostly conservative". (a quote)

He calls himself a political commentator. (His own bio)

Would you prefer if I changed it to: He calls himself a mostly conservative commentator?

Use google.? You'll turn up a bunch more of his comments on the subject.? He's TRIED to wiggle in some interviews, but has been pinned down pretty securely, and in his own words, in others.? If you really want me to use google for? you, I will...but not until a bit later in the coming week.? My time at the computer over the next couple of days will be pretty limited.

Your first point is pretty laughable...especially considering O'Reilly INSISTED he was a registered independant...but Franken proved him wrong (aka: caught him lying).? Independant voters MIGHT register (for primary purposes) with a party, but they certainly wouldn't LIE when asked about it?? What purpose would anyone have in being deceptive?? To try to portray some semblance of independance when their really isn't one?

i'm not trying to defend o'reilly. so i'm not sure why you're getting all defensive about it.

to call my first point "laughable" makes no sense to me. are you saying people do not do this?? i for one do. and i know others that do as well. i certainly did not imply that o'reilly does this.

maybe you should read my posts.

why imply i didn't read yours? i quoted a clear statement you made, which i don't believe is true. 

i could be wrong. i don't watch him frequently. that's why i'm asking for proof.

but stating that someone refers to themself as a "conservative commentator" puts them in that rush/hannity category. and i don't think o'reilly views himself that way at all.

[SLCPUNK]

How anybody could believe that OR is an "independent" is beyond me.

[pilferk]

i'm not trying to defend o'reilly. so i'm not sure why you're getting all defensive about it.

Not defensive at all.? But I've provided the proof you asked for.....For some reason, though, you're not "getting it".?

to call my first point "laughable" makes no sense to me. are you saying people do not do this?? i for one do. and i know others that do as well. i certainly did not imply that o'reilly does this.

Since we're talking about O'Rielly.....what you do isn't really relevant.? I gave you specific proof that he lied and Franken caught him in it.? Did it in the first post, too.? YOU offered reasoning behind it.? ?The only LOGICAL reason you'd do that is to defend O'Reilly.? Otherwise, why bring it up?

maybe you should read my posts.

And maybe you should read mine.

why imply i didn't read yours? i quoted a clear statement you made, which i don't believe is true.?

Which I had already provided "proof" of in earlier posts.? And then restated it, again.

i could be wrong. i don't watch him frequently. that's why i'm asking for proof.

Which you've gotten.? And you asked for it again.? And now, again.? If you really want MORE, I'll give it to you.? Probably be Tuesday-ish when I get time to go hunting again.

but stating that someone refers to themself as a "conservative commentator" puts them in that rush/hannity category. and i don't think o'reilly views himself that way at all.

He calls himself a political commentator.? Agreed, right?

So now you're arguing the conservative part.

He's called himself "mostly conservative".

He's said he's "not an across the board conservative" (which can only reasonably be interpreted as him being "mostly" conservative...otherwise why even use the word conservative).

He's said his audience is "mostly moderate conservatives".

How much more clear do you need the picture painted?

[SLCPUNK]

O'Reilly supports every conservative issue they have except for the death penalty and global warming.

O'reilly gave a key-note speech at a thing called "The Republican Restoration Weekend" where 10,000 right-wing white males and right-wing females talk about how right they are on everything. Great thinkers like Sean Hannity, Brit Hume, Trent Lott, and Tony Snow also spoke. How many independents went to this thing ? Answer: None.

All his fill in hosts are conservatives. Dont you think a registered independent would have ralph nader or a moderate democrat host once in a while ? Hell no, conservatives only.

BO writes for townhall.com a right wing website, every author is "conservative" and he was listed as such too.


Just arguing if he is or is not right wing is a joke. The guy is a conservative if there ever was one. The guy lies through his teeth on almost every broadcast. You think he is going to be honest about anything else?

[sandman]

i am not arguing whether o'reilly's views are conservative or not.

and i'm not arguing whether he's a registered republican or not.

i'm saying that bill does not refer to himself as a "conservative". you can continue to make the ASSUMPTION that he INDIRECTLY "calls himself a conservative commentator", but i've never seen or heard him call himself conservative.

you say you've provided "PROOF". but all you've done is throw out some quotes with no links. that is NOT proof.   

in fact, read this, which quotes bill's own book.


"O'Reilly disagrees vehemently with the common belief that he is a conservative, preferring to call himself a traditionalist and a populist. In his book The O'Reilly Factor, he describes his political affiliation this way: "You might be wondering if whether I'm conservative, liberal, libertarian, or exactly what... See, I don't want to fit any of those labels, because I believe that the truth doesn't have labels. When I see corruption, I try to expose it. When I see exploitation, I try to fight it. That's my political position."

Such statements have drawn the ire of media watchdog groups, such as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting and Media Matters for America, that feel that his opinion is overwhelmingly conservative or, more specifically, Republican. In 2003, FAIR published a book compiling their record of his factual inaccuracies up to that point, titled The "Oh Really?" Factor. O'Reilly refers to people who frequent these outlets as 'kool-aid drinkers', trying to discredit anybody who has a viewpoint with which he disagrees.

"I've always been an independent," he says. "I always split my ticket. I vote for the person I think is best."

[Charity Case]

I like OR.  His show is entertaining and contains stories that show both the good and the bad in Iraq whereas many of the liberal news programs (and OR is not news, I know) only show the bad.  O'reilly takes Bush to task on things all the time.  Whereas i rarely see commentators on CNN r CNS give any credit away to republicans.   I like to see some of the positive things that we are doing in Iraq from time to time.  If you watched CBS or CNN you wouldn't think anything poisitive has happened in Iraq (which of course is ludicrus).  I like his stance on the illegal immigrants as well.  I agree we need to be alot more tough on our borders. 

However, is he independent as he states he is?  No.  He is conservative pretty much across the board.  Is pilferk independent as he states he is?  No.  He is, at least as far as anyone can tell here, a liberal.  People want to be different things to different people at different times.  What does it matter that he is conservative?  I like to watch Chris Mathews and he is a liberal.  Both are entertaining IMO.  I really don't like Hannity and Colmes or Greta Van Sustren (all three bore me to death).   But I real like Brit Hume. 

Why don't we see any positive stories of Iraq on the liberal channels (i.e. cbs, msnbc, cnn)?  At least fox shows the good and the bad.

[pilferk]

i'm saying that bill does not refer to himself as a "conservative". you can continue to make the ASSUMPTION that he INDIRECTLY "calls himself a conservative commentator", but i've never seen or heard him call himself conservative.

I've provided you quotes where he has done, essentially, exactly that.

you say you've provided "PROOF". but all you've done is throw out some quotes with no links. that is NOT proof.? ?

It IS proof, links or not. ?Unless you doubt the quotes came from him. ?There is a Mike Wallace interview online somewhere and a transcript of his "exchange" with Al Franken as well. ?The quotes I provided came directly from them, if I remember correctly. ?Again, given my schedule, I won't have time to go hunting for them, and the others I found, until sometime Tuesday. ?Should you desire an answer more quickly...use google. ?That's how I found them in the first place.

in fact, read this, which quotes bill's own book.

"O'Reilly disagrees vehemently with the common belief that he is a conservative, preferring to call himself a traditionalist and a populist. In his book The O'Reilly Factor, he describes his political affiliation this way: "You might be wondering if whether I'm conservative, liberal, libertarian, or exactly what... See, I don't want to fit any of those labels, because I believe that the truth doesn't have labels. When I see corruption, I try to expose it. When I see exploitation, I try to fight it. That's my political position."

Such statements have drawn the ire of media watchdog groups, such as Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting and Media Matters for America, that feel that his opinion is overwhelmingly conservative or, more specifically, Republican. In 2003, FAIR published a book compiling their record of his factual inaccuracies up to that point, titled The "Oh Really?" Factor. O'Reilly refers to people who frequent these outlets as 'kool-aid drinkers', trying to discredit anybody who has a viewpoint with which he disagrees.

"I've always been an independent," he says. "I always split my ticket. I vote for the person I think is best."

As I've said, he likes to talk out of both sides of his mouth about the issue. And Franken has already proved he lies about the subject. ?For what reason, I'm not sure. ?But he HAS been quoted, when pinned down to describe his ideology mostly in terms of conservatism.

Whether he regularly says "Hey, I'm a conservative commentator" really isn't the point. ?He has called himself a qualified conservative in the past.

[pilferk]

However, is he independent as he states he is?? No.? He is conservative pretty much across the board.? Is pilferk independent as he states he is?? No.? He is, at least as far as anyone can tell here, a liberal.?

Liar.

Remember, we've talked about this Charity....

I've explained my personal politics many times before. So "as far as anyone can tell here", I'm exactly what I've said I am. We tend to talk about issues? upon which I agree with the libs, mostly because I disagree with this administration almost across the board (they spend more money than the "tax and spend" dems ever did), and tend to side with the libs on social issues.? And we've been over this many, many times.

And I am a registered independant.? REALLY. (You can have Al Franken check if you'd like)

[shades]

registered independent,
thats funny,
you're a liberal to the core.
Like your heros Farakan, Michael Moore, Jesse jackson, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy,
All those people have one thing in common, they are all rich at the expense of speaking up for the needy, in their words. And laughing at you for following them blindly and helping promote their agendas.

[pilferk]

registered independent,
thats funny,
you're a liberal to the core.
Like your heros Farakan, Michael Moore, Jesse jackson, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy,
All those people have one thing in common, they are all rich at the expense of speaking up for the needy, in their words. And laughing at you for following them blindly and helping promote their agendas.

 

Liar again.

I so hate to disappoint you and your intent to pigeonhole me.

But then again, I expect no less....politico-amnesia.

I'm not a proponent of Farrakhan's agenda.  He's way too militant for my tastes.

I've said before I'm not a fan of MM.  Wasn't before Farenheit 9/11, and wasn't after, either.

I'm not a Jesse Jackson fan, especially his work to promote unionization at all costs.  He's advocated circumventing NLRB guidlines and mandates on more than one occasion.

I voted for Kerry. I also voted for Nader the election prior.

Ted Kennedy is hit or miss.  His stances are usually a bit TOO liberal for my tastes.

[Booker Floyd]

But then again, I expect no less....politico-amnesia.

I honestly wouldnt give him that much credit.  I just dont think he knows much about that of which he speaks.