Bill O'Reilly

[Is O'Reilly:]

Is O'Reilly:

comedian

 7 (13.7%)

satan

 10 (19.6%)

75 IQ

 9 (17.6%)

pervert

 8 (15.7%)

journalist

 17 (33.3%)

Total Members Voted: 39

[law123]

Which opinions/theories of O'Reilly does everyone disagrees with so violently?  From what I've seen recently, the major issues he discusses are:  immigration (he is a hard-liner, wants a big crackdown on the flow of illegal immigrants)  Jessica's law crusade (blasts judges who are soft on child predators as well as media outlets who defend the judges)   "War on Christmas" (he is a social traditionalist)  Iraq war (thinks its a disaster but is still worth keeping troops in Iraq and tring to win/salvage it) very recently:  oil prices (thinks we are being gouged by oil companies who are engaging in "profiteering" as well as by, what he calls "speculators", futures-traders in the oil markert playing upon people's fears of Iran instability, to artificially bid up the price of oil).

I could care less what he says.  The problem is that it is construed as news, rather than opinion.  His show doesn't appear on the "opinions" page.  It appears on Fox News.

This is less than accurate.  His program is admittedly "news analysis."  He does not do hard news reporting.  Many shows take his format--they briefly present the story, but the bulk is debating and analyzing what the story means for society.  Crossfire didn't appear on an "op-ed" page it appeared on CNN.

[law123]

When he says "no spin" I think he is referring to the fact that he tries to format his program without adhering to a strict party ideology.  He espouses both Democratic and Republican views and is critical of both parties.  Whereas other similar shows like Crossfire, Hannity & Colmes, Scarborough Country, and whatever that garbarge show that Tucker Carlson has on MSNBC all decidely take the strict view of whatever party they support.  While he may very well be a Republican I think he is more fair than any other TV talkshow host around.

[law123]

When he says "no spin" I think he is referring to the fact that he tries to format his program without adhering to a strict party ideology.  He espouses both Democratic and Republican views and is critical of both parties.  Whereas other similar shows like Crossfire, Hannity & Colmes, Scarborough Country, and whatever that garbarge show that Tucker Carlson has on MSNBC all decidely take the strict view of whatever party they support.  While he may very well be a Republican I think he is more fair than any other TV talkshow host around.

He only rags on Republicans when they are being moderate.  His show is tremendously biased.  It's called spin if you talk a lot about one side of an issue while conviently leaving the rest at home.

Nah.  I actually watch the show for the reasons I already pointed out.  His main issue for the past month has been to bash the oil executives, who are obviously conservative R's.  Not to mention, by bashing them, he is angering many of the big-money, corporate types--also generally Republicans.  I cannot imagin ehow anyone who actually watches the show can say he leaves out the "other side" of an issue.  He takes great pains to include both sides just so people can't level that claim against him.

[law123]

No, it represents that he isn't party-line.  You accused him of being a R. lackey.  I said he is critical of both parties...hence the oil exec. example.

[kmpnj]

I would disagree to a point.  I watched him interview James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, and O'Reilly ripped into him for being a homophobe.  It was fascinating to say the least.

[law123]

No, it represents that he isn't party-line.  You accused him of being a R. lackey.  I said he is critical of both parties...hence the oil exec. example.

No.  Currently the republican leaderships are criticizing the oil companies because the people they represent (sitizens) are so concerned about it.  They would like to keep their jobs come midterms.  Therefore, O'Reilly is still towing the party line.

I am not sure that the R. leadership is critcizing the oil execs.  I think they are looking for a long term solution to a problem.  Even if they were, by his criticism of people who are generally seen as an important part of R. politics, you certainly cannot claim him to be towing the R. line.  Further, he could not be anymore critical of the President when it comes to the Iraq war without resorting to some of the tactics used by LA/NY Times.  He has even recently warned that Bush is in danger of going down in history as one of the worst Presidents in history.  He compared how Bush may be viewed by historians to how Carter is viewed.

[dukenukem]

bill oreilly is a prophet

["Legapp" Stands for "Legal Application"]

Perhaps the most irritating thing about him is his victimization complex.  From a recent show:

"They don't like me. They being the, you know, elite media, whatever you want to call them. And then they're looking to smash you any way they can."

Not "they don't like the way I treat issues," or "they disagree with what I have to say"... "they don't like me."  Poor Bill!

His worldview is constantly us v. them.

[philibusters]

Perhaps the most irritating thing about him is his victimization complex.  From a recent show:

"They don't like me. They being the, you know, elite media, whatever you want to call them. And then they're looking to smash you any way they can."

Not "they don't like the way I treat issues," or "they disagree with what I have to say"... "they don't like me."  Poor Bill!

His worldview is constantly us v. them.

I won't argue that he has much intellectual merit, but us against them sells, its fun to listen to, kind of like listening to two WWF wrestlers talk before a match.

[Alamo]

I do enjoy his feud with Keith Olberman, his clear intellectual superior, who keeps baiting O'Reilly with snide remarks and watching him explode.