The O'Reilly Factor!

[GutZ]

Does anyone watch this show? It's friggin great! Sometimes it's hard to tell if it serious or not.

 

Everytime I've watched the show it makes me laugh.

 

O'REILLY: Now, you are a wealthy guy, now and you have a house in the Hamptons, and you go to Nobu and all these swell places. What's that about? I don't do that.

STERN: What, sure you do.

O'REILLY: No, I don't.

STERN: What do you do? You don't have a nice house now?

O'REILLY: I have an OK house, but it's nothing like yours.

STERN: You don't talk about — I live in an apartment in Manhattan.

O'REILLY: Oh, come on. An apartment. You live in a big high-rise. It's...

(CROSSTALK)

O'REILLY: I live in a nice house but it's a regular house.

STERN: You don't have a nice house?

O'REILLY: I have regular house.

STERN: You're going to paint yourself as some bum.

O'REILLY: My car's five years old. I live in a regular house. You're living large.

 

That's just gold.

 

What do you all think about it?

 

p.s. I live in Canada, I never hear anything about it or what people think.

[Sisyphus]

Bill O'Reilly is such a parody of himself already, Stephen Colbert barely has to change anything...

[ecoli]

I'm not a fan of Stern's radio show, but you can hardly criticize him for successful. He found a topic the public likes and found a medium that worked for it and was able to market it well.

And besides, isn't O'rielly a conservative republican? Why would he put anyone down for being rich??

[Sisyphus]

And besides' date=' isn't O'rielly a conservative republican? Why would he put anyone down for being rich??[/quote']

 

The biggest hypocrisies or wanderings from reality never seem to bother O'Reilly in the slightest. Doesn't even slow him down.

[Pangloss]

No, he's pretty much in his own little world. He's also not a very good interviewer -- he's not a good listener, his choices for questions are poor, and he's generally more interested in repeating his own opinions than in giving his guests a forum.

 

To his credit, he does invite guests with contrary points of view, he gives them a chance to speak their peace (mostly), and he traditionally gives them the last word (though he's not above cheap-shotting them afterwards).

 

One thing I've always found amusing about BOR is the way he's portrayed as far-right conservative by the Loathing Left (it's amusing to watch them emo over him, ironically making him more relevant than he should be). He's certainly conservative on a number of issues, but he's in favor of gun control, gay adoption, and opposes a ban on flag burning (amongst other issues normally associated with the left). What would probably be more accurate would be to call him a "conservative populist".

 

I applaud his bucking of the left-leaning mainstream media, but he demonstrates such a consistent degree of ineptitude for accuracy and cavalier disrespect for intelligence that I find him difficult to watch. Just to give one example, he favors teaching creationism alongside evolution in science classrooms, not because of his religious beliefs, but because he feels it's more fair to represent both sides and "let the kids decide for themselves". (sigh)

[bascule]

One thing I've always found amusing about BOR is the way he's portrayed as far-right conservative by the Loathing Left (it's amusing to watch them emo over him, ironically making him more relevant than he should be). He's certainly conservative on a number of issues, but he's in favor of gun control, gay adoption, and opposes a ban on flag burning (amongst other issues normally associated with the left). What would probably be more accurate would be to call him a "conservative populist".

 

And he thinks Bill Clinton should be UN Secretary General! Please... he's not fooling anyone.

 

Bill O'Reilly claims his show is a "No Ideology Zone". It's clearly anything but.

 

Bill O'Reilly rails against left-wing radio commentators and columnists. When was the last time you saw Bill O'Reilly talk about Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Michael Savage going over-the-top?

 

Bill O'Reilly claims he's always been registered an independent, and deliberately tried to cover up having been registered a Republican for years, then when exposed writes it off as clerical error.

 

Bill O'Reilly's token left-wing stances, in a pathetic attempt to appear moderate to meet the supposed "No Ideology Zone" angle of his show, pale in comparison to his multitude of right-wing positions. He constently rails against left wing media personalities, and, much like you (and Hannity) love to do, breaks everything down into "the left" and "the right". That's especially ironic, Pangloss, because you and I are both excellent examples of how people don't fit into those nice cookie cutter groups. I really wish you'd stop seeing things in terms of "the left" and "the right" (I guess here you at least subdivided "the left" into "the Loathing Left").

 

Now granted, O'Reilly is more liberal than, say, Sean Hannity, but that's not saying much. At least in Hannity's case his blatant right-wing views are offset by the unseemly, leperous lizard-man that is Alan Colmes.

 

All in all, Bill O'Reilly is an example of the systemic right-wing bias in the allegedly "fair & balanced" programming on FNN.

[bascule]

Does anyone watch this show? It's friggin great! Sometimes it's hard to tell if it serious or not.

 

I used to watch FNN every day after work (with a little bit of herbal enhancement)... namely the Bill O'Reilly/H&C block. There'd usually be 5 gems or so a night between the two shows of thoroughly ironic hilarity.

 

Nowadays, between Keith Olbermann, the Daily Show, and YouTube I get these gems delivered straight to me without having to watch the interstitial crap.

 

And watch out... O'Reilly will get inside your head.

[padren]

And besides, isn't O'rielly a conservative republican? Why would he put anyone down for being rich??

 

Its the wealthy liberals that live in ivory towers in an elite aristocracy and attend romanesque banquets and orgies... whereas conservatives are in-touch-red-state-salt-of-the-earth types that just happen to have billions of dollars sitting around due to their honest work'n elbow grease attitude and faith in the capitalist system.

 

I had to paraphrase, I've heard it many times before, but its hard to memorize something word for word as you hear it when your eyes are rolled back deep in your head.

 

 

Long ago I classified Bill O'Rielly, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter not so much as media figures, but simply as bad odors. It was an involentary reaction that just sort of creeped up over time.

[GutZ]

I used to watch FNN every day after work (with a little bit of herbal enhancement)... namely the Bill O'Reilly/H&C block. There'd usually be 5 gems or so a night between the two shows of thoroughly ironic hilarity.

 

Nowadays' date=' between Keith Olbermann, the Daily Show, and YouTube I get these gems delivered straight to me without having to watch the interstitial crap.

 

And watch out... O'Reilly will get inside your head.[/quote']

 

Yeah it's only fun when liberals get interviewed. Whenever there is a republician on its full of...

 

That's right!

Yup!

Exactly!

Right on!

Excellent!

Couldn't have said it better.

 

...type replies.

[Pangloss]

And he thinks Bill Clinton should be UN Secretary General! Please... he's not fooling anyone.

 

Haha, does he really? That's a new one on me!

 

Bill O'Reilly claims his show is a "No Ideology Zone". It's clearly anything but.

 

Definitely. He's also a consumate spin artist.

 

Bill O'Reilly rails against left-wing radio commentators and columnists. When was the last time you saw Bill O'Reilly talk about Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Michael Savage going over-the-top?

 

Well I have to say that I'm not a regular viewer, but I've never seen him attack those individuals.

 

But I have seen him criticize Ann Coulter, and I have seen her reaction to that. It seemed genuine to me. (shrug)

 

 

Bill O'Reilly claims he's always been registered an independent, and deliberately tried to cover up having been registered a Republican for years, then when exposed writes it off as clerical error.

 

This is an issue for other public individuals as well, such as Michael Moore, but I don't think voter registration is a bellweather for ideology. You have to be registered in one party or the other in order to vote in the primary races. For example, I'm registered as a Republican in Florida, but I voted for a Democrat in the Senate and Presidential races in 2004.

 

Extremists during the Great Political Awakening have been trying to equate the statements "I'm a registered X-ican/-ocrat" with "I'm a member of the X-ican/ocratic party". I think it's a mistake to follow that spin.

 

 

Bill O'Reilly's token left-wing stances, in a pathetic attempt to appear moderate to meet the supposed "No Ideology Zone" angle of his show, pale in comparison to his multitude of right-wing positions. He constently rails against left wing media personalities, and, much like you (and Hannity) love to do, breaks everything down into "the left" and "the right".

 

True enough. I'm not sure that's a bad thing, though. It's bad to overgeneralize, but it's not bad to attack media bias or discuss the extreme positions. (See below.)

 

 

That's especially ironic, Pangloss, because you and I are both excellent examples of how people don't fit into those nice cookie cutter groups. I really wish you'd stop seeing things in terms of "the left" and "the right" (I guess here you at least subdivided "the left" into "the Loathing Left").

 

I agree with the first sentence, but I think you're confusing my political analysis with my opinion. I think it's clear that the country has become more polarized. Isn't the success of Fox a perfect example of this?

 

 

Now granted, O'Reilly is more liberal than, say, Sean Hannity, but that's not saying much. At least in Hannity's case his blatant right-wing views are offset by the unseemly, leperous lizard-man that is Alan Colmes.

 

All in all, Bill O'Reilly is an example of the systemic right-wing bias in the allegedly "fair & balanced" programming on FNN.

 

I guess that would be a "yes" answer to my question above. (grin)

 

I agree with the above assessment. My opinion about Fox (which I'll just reiterate here for the benefit of newer readers) is that it's nice to have some counterpoint in media bias, but I don't think the media bias in the other networks is deliberate the way it is at Fox. The fact that Fox chose its bias and enforces it as a selling point is detrimental to the industry. In short, it's a classic example of how two wrongs don't make a right.