Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An 'Argument' over the book Killing Reagan...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
    Doesn't make it right
    No, but it makes it so common throughout our society that it renders this entire thread meaningless in any useful context.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #17






      Bill for Mayor of Tiddy Bowl Town.
      "Ask not what your country can do for you"

      Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

      you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
        I've heard so much anti O'Reilly hysteria that anymore I know to be skeptical of an attack.
        ...
        I watched his show for a good many years, but I had to stop about 5 or 6 years ago (well before I unplugged) because of the bombast and his attitude.
        That, and he claimed to be an independent when he was clearly nothing of the sort.
        Some posters here try the same trick, and its just as lame.

        Trust me, this guy is washed up and should be replaced ASAP. I think his ratings are a result of his time-slot and viewer inertia. ol' Bill does not even seem to like his job anymore, he might be doing it solely to promote his books.
        "Why is the Rum gone?"

        -Captain Jack

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
          I watches his show for a good many years, but I had to stop about 5 or 6 years ago (well before I unplugged) because of the bombast and his attitude.
          That, and he claimed to be an independent when he was clearly nothing of the sort.
          Some posters here try the same trick, and its just as lame.

          Trust me, this guy is washed up and should be replaced ASAP. I think his ratings are a result of his time-slot and viewer inertia. ol' Bill does not even seem to like his job anymore, he might be doing it solely to promote his books.
          It's how he makes his money, and he likes to hear himself talk. As long as people give him that, no real reason to stop.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
            It's how he makes his money, and he likes to hear himself talk. As long as people give him that, no real reason to stop.
            Much like the fat man. Angry, prone to hissy fits and a mud slinger...
            Credo quia absurdum.


            Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
              Some posters here try the same trick, and its just as lame.
              Indeed they do...and indeed it is.
              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                I watched his show for a good many years, but I had to stop about 5 or 6 years ago (well before I unplugged) because of the bombast and his attitude.
                That, and he claimed to be an independent when he was clearly nothing of the sort.
                Some posters here try the same trick, and its just as lame.

                Trust me, this guy is washed up and should be replaced ASAP. I think his ratings are a result of his time-slot and viewer inertia. ol' Bill does not even seem to like his job anymore, he might be doing it solely to promote his books.
                Ain't nobody independent. I accept him as a conservative commentator. As for whether he's washed up, the ratings say no. The time slot has nothing to do with it. We live in an age of 600 channels and on demand programming. If he's killing in the ratings, it's because he has an engaging show. If he didn't, there's 500+ other channels out there and hulu. As for plugging his books, he does that for about 5 minutes and who cares? It's his show and the network doesn't mind.

                For this thread I'm going to be dismissive of any argument that doesn't begin with "his opponent had some good points like:" Everything else is just knee jerk O'Reilly hatesturbation that has been going on for nearly two decades. When it comes to analyzing O'Reilly I keep it to a simple formula: either Bill is right or he's wrong. If he's wrong, explain why. If you can't then it's just hate static and I've heard it all before 10 years ago.

                Seriously. I can remember O'Reilly criticism a decade ago and it's the same as it is now. "Bill is mean and he sells stuff at the end of his show. Also his ratings are meaningless." That has been to go to argument for everyone from ACG critics to Mad Magazine.

                Either Bill is right or he's wrong. If he's wrong let's discuss it. I don't agree with Bill all the time either so I'm game if someone has a counterpoint. But if he's right then he's right. Either way his no spin mugs have no bearing on the validity or invalidity of his arguments.

                Hey, a new herring for the tank.
                A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                  Ain't nobody independent. I accept him as a conservative commentator. As for whether he's washed up, the ratings say no. The time slot has nothing to do with it. We live in an age of 600 channels and on demand programming. If he's killing in the ratings, it's because he has an engaging show. If he didn't, there's 500+ other channels out there and hulu. As for plugging his books, he does that for about 5 minutes and who cares? It's his show and the network doesn't mind.

                  For this thread I'm going to be dismissive of any argument that doesn't begin with "his opponent had some good points like:" Everything else is just knee jerk O'Reilly hatesturbation that has been going on for nearly two decades. When it comes to analyzing O'Reilly I keep it to a simple formula: either Bill is right or he's wrong. If he's wrong, explain why. If you can't then it's just hate static and I've heard it all before 10 years ago.

                  Seriously. I can remember O'Reilly criticism a decade ago and it's the same as it is now. "Bill is mean and he sells stuff at the end of his show. Also his ratings are meaningless." That has been to go to argument for everyone from ACG critics to Mad Magazine.

                  Either Bill is right or he's wrong. If he's wrong let's discuss it. I don't agree with Bill all the time either so I'm game if someone has a counterpoint. But if he's right then he's right. Either way his no spin mugs have no bearing on the validity or invalidity of his arguments.

                  Hey, a new herring for the tank.
                  In your rush to defend him you're forgetting that plenty of people find him disgusting on a personal level, even when agreeing with what he says. Right or wrong is irrelevant to him behaving like a smug prick.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Talk about irony - so far NONE of this discussion is about the book, which is what the tile claims to be discussing. It's all about everyone's personal dislike for the author.

                    INTELLECTUAL FLASH: If you don't like the author, don't read the book...and definitely do not watch him on television unless you can't find anything else to dislike him for. See how simple it is?
                    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      Talk about irony - so far NONE of this discussion is about the book, which is what the tile claims to be discussing. It's all about everyone's personal dislike for the author.

                      INTELLECTUAL FLASH: If you don't like the author, don't read the book...and definitely do not watch him on television unless you can't find anything else to dislike him for. See how simple it is?
                      One must remember that it is more fun to go after the messenger than the message. To give O'Relliy his due, I found his book Killing Lincoln to be well written and brought forth information that I had not read or heard about.
                      Read Killing Kennedy and enjoyed it.
                      Read Killing Patton and was not impressed
                      Read Killing Hitler and again not impressed

                      So, I gave up. Therefore no comment on the information found in Killing Regan
                      Too Much To Do Too Little Time

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                        In your rush to defend him you're forgetting that plenty of people find him disgusting on a personal level, even when agreeing with what he says. Right or wrong is irrelevant to him behaving like a smug prick.
                        Him behaving like a smug prick has nothing to do with his book.

                        And actually, I haven't defended him yet. So far no one has presented a credible criticism for me to defend. I can't defend (or advocate) his position on Reagan when poster have yet to bring up a point of contention. As I have not yet had time to read the book and his detractors have yet to bring up any contention my position remains neutral. (Incidentally, refusing to join in a hate circle jerk isn't really "defending" someone, it's just refusing to attack them.)
                        A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                          Him behaving like a smug prick has nothing to do with his book.

                          And actually, I haven't defended him yet. So far no one has presented a credible criticism for me to defend. I can't defend (or advocate) his position on Reagan when poster have yet to bring up a point of contention. As I have not yet had time to read the book and his detractors have yet to bring up any contention my position remains neutral. (Incidentally, refusing to join in a hate circle jerk isn't really "defending" someone, it's just refusing to attack them.)
                          They can criticize his behavior if they like. Facts are not necessary for opinion to be valid. Personally, I don't find him flogging his own books on his own show to be a bad thing. I find the guy disgusting, but I don't watch the show, so I won't complain.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            He certainly does not need me to defend him...but he hawks his books on air as all the royalties go to charity..and they are all bestsellers...Not such a prick..Makes the network look good...In his own words..

                            What Bill O’Reilly does with his book sale royalties
                            Apr. 15, 2013 12:21pm Eddie Scarry


                            “Nothing. I give it away. I support many charities. I don’t do anything. I don’t buy myself anything.”– Fox News Anchor Bill O’Reilly, whose “Killing” historical book series has dominated best-sellers lists

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              Talk about irony - so far NONE of this discussion is about the book, which is what the tile claims to be discussing. ...
                              Ah, no.
                              The OP is about that twisted excuse for an interview, the last of many.
                              The title is "An argument over the book--"

                              I couldn't care less about the books, not matter how well they started off. He's branched off into talking about icons that weren't even murdered, so who cares anyway?

                              Its about a news hound that senses he is losing relevance and its driving him insane.

                              IMHO, the only interesting thing here is that Conservatives are being critical of a conservative figure in the media machine.
                              When was the last time you ever saw Progressives calling a Progressive leader in the media anything negative?
                              "Why is the Rum gone?"

                              -Captain Jack

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                                When was the last time you ever saw Progressives calling a Progressive leader in the media anything negative?
                                Tuesday.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X