HOST UNHINGED AFTER SALES FIGURES REVEALED; CALLS DRUDGE 'THREAT TO DEMOCRACY'

(c)DRUDGE REPORT 2003 ^ | THU DEC 18, 2003 09:25:08 ET | Drudge

[Fester Chugabrew]

Drudge is "bad for democracy"? Sheez. The guy writes very little of his own stuff. He merely points out what's happening elsewhere and does it quicker than the rest. Some mighty fine scoops.

I come to FR first, however, when it comes to news and commentary. I'm sure we're "bad for democracy," too. Surpised they didn't bring up FR last evening.

These high and mighty twits don't trust joe-with-half-a-brain.

[.cnI redruM]

Hey, we may be bad for Democrats, but we'll never be bad for democracy.

[ampat]

I don't remember exactly what his words were but I think he said "I was KIDDING' ". I think he realized he was over the top on using "bazooka" as an example of assault weapons (since no one uses a bazooka anymore anyway) and he could have been more clear. I don't think he suports automatic weapons, and maybe he thinks assault weapons means automatic weapons, and weapons larger than small arms. He does support hunting weapons and self defense weapons for home defense, including handguns. He may, after all, be ignorant on the fine points of the new laws on assault weapons (magazine capacity, handgrip on long guns, bayonet lug,etc). I for one keep an AR-15 and .45 auto handy. I won't bring a bolt action rifle to a gun fight.

[Jokelahoma]

O'Reilly has fallen into the trap of those who become too successful too quickly. He went from tabloid "journalist" to The Factor, and now he's believing his own press. He's cantankerous on the show, even when he takes up conservative causes. Instead of understanding people watch the show to hear a spirited defense of the ideals, O'Reilly apparently believes they watch in order to see him interrupt guests, browbeat anyone with whom he disagrees, and pontificate even when it seems obvious he's not done a lot of research, regardless of the topic or his take on it. The more he looks for topics that allow him to bloviate instead of topics that appeal to your average Fox viewer, and the more he takes sides on issues based solely on what will allow him the opportunity to yell the loudest, the more likely it is his ratings will dive. His 15 minutes are almost up.

As for his comments that Drudge must die, well, that's just indefensible. I thought "kill anyone who disagrees with you" was a Clinton trick, not a Republican one. By the way, has O'Reilly ever said "Drudges numbers are wrong"? Or is he just using typical leftist tactics and attacking the messenger to distract from the message?

[sarasota]

Ah, the old Madeline Albright "I was kidding" defense. Yeah, sure.

[sinkspur]

O'Reilly apparently believes they watch in order to see him interrupt guests, browbeat anyone with whom he disagrees, and pontificate even when it seems obvious he's not done a lot of research, regardless of the topic or his take on it. The more he looks for topics that allow him to bloviate instead of topics that appeal to your average Fox viewer, and the more he takes sides on issues based solely on what will allow him the opportunity to yell the loudest, the more likely it is his ratings will dive

On the contrary, O'Reilly specializes in knowing his topics well, and challenges easy answers. His "in your face" attitude is precisely what has made him the number one prime time cable show!

His 15 minutes are almost up.

Hardly. EVERYBODY put up against him on MSNBC and CNN fails.

Sorry you don't like O'Reilly, but LOTS of other people do, as evidenced by his ratings.

[thesummerwind]

Mr. Jihad O'Reilly needs to smoke a doobie. What an arrogant, tunnel-visioned stiff! Anyone who has never gotten high and is in his 50's is a stiff!!

But, who would want to be with him when the rigid a**hole took a toke? Not me!

Bill's really not a bad guy, but he MUST get high. He really needs it!

[.cnI redruM]

Mr. Jihad O'Reilly needs to smoke a doobie. (lol) - What, you don't think he's paranoid now?

[Naspino]

I'm not a particularly big fan of O'Reilly, but Drudge is just a glorified webmaster.

Thinking on it I cannot remember the last time O'Reilly actually had a good show. He doesn't expose people and he rarely wins a point of view. Drudge at least brings the news that matters to millions.

[thesummerwind]

LOL!!! Maybe he could find a very good, long-time friend who is "hip", take him out on a quiet fishing trip, and loosen his tight a** up. He really needs it. His a** is so tight, it hurts.

Bill's not a bad guy, in fact he's a good guy, but this is almost the same thing as "the guy who needs to get a nice piece of a**!!!!

LOL!

[sinkspur]

I cannot remember the last time O'Reilly actually had a good show. He doesn't expose people and he rarely wins a point of view.

I watch O'Reilly every night, and he is frequently the winner in an argument, because the guest has no ready answer to his questions.

He's one of the best interviewers on television, though he does inject his own opinions too often.

But, his viewers like that, or don't like it, but they keep watching.

[sinkspur]

Anyone who has never gotten high and is in his 50's is a stiff!!

Lots folks haven't. I never have, for instance.

What a ridiculous litmus test.

[sinkspur]

Bill's not a bad guy, in fact he's a good guy, but this is almost the same thing as "the guy who needs to get a nice piece of a**!!!!

Another stupid gauge of "with-it-ness."

Are you in high school?

[SUSSA]

O'Reilly is an elitist piece of human excrement. He is just jealous of Mr. Drudge because Mr. Drudge is a real journalist and O'Reilly is an entertainer.

Note to scumbag Bill; Drudge is far more credible than The New York Times or The O’Reilly Factor.

[Bluntpoint]

Back 25 years ago, pot brought about the ruin of our school mascot.

[bk1000]

I heard it. It was not a big deal. He was pointing out that
as many now get their 'news' from blog sites, few realize they must verify what they read there. He did use the term 'crazies out there', referring to bloggers, and did mention Drudge in that sentence, but I did not think he meant anything serious against Drudge. He was flippant when he said it.

[DeFault User]

did mention Drudge in that sentence

The part I heard was that you couldn't believe anything on the Drudge website.

O'Reilly has become comic relief.

[Jokelahoma]

Who says I don't like him? I just don't care for his style, especially here recently. TOo many times, his interjections are along the lines of "oh come on...", and he ends segments with "yeah, well, I disagree". No counterpoint, nothing, just a "you're wrong, I'm right, la la la". As I said, it's my opinion that he's degenerated from a sharp, "in-your-face" defense of ideas on topics that Fox viewers care about, to "oh this is a good topic, I can scream about this one!". His ratings are still high. Perhaps they'll stay that way, or perhaps if he keeps making stupid comments like "Drudge must die", they won't stay so high. But then, if ratings were the only relevant factor (no pun intended) we'd be talking about President Brokaw, and perish that thought!

[Akira]

I agree completely with you. He's becoming more unwatchable for me every week. It's his style, not what he says. His lawsuit against Franken was pathetic, as was also his "hey, it's not up to me" excuse afterwards. This latest rant indicates an ego running wild. Jonah Goldberg at NRO has been predicting this for a while now, and it appears to be finally happening.

[CdMGuy]

I rarely watch O'Reilly, but I stopped surfing at Fox last night and he was on. It was hard to believe the words coming out of his mouth about Drudge, whom I read every day.

I have always viewed O'Reilly as a blow hard. I find him quite irritating, and his opinions are all over the map. As for Drudge, his web page is informative, and is only occasionally wrong.

O'Reilly just made himself look like the a-hole that he is. Just a pompous a-hole with a New York attitude. I say that as a native New Yorker.