Posted on 08/02/2007 6:36:11 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
Spoken like a true newbie who has the scent of a TROLL.
Remember where you are my friend, and Rush's personal Rx has been debated on here many times, and the effort against him had been motivated by Dimocrap operatives to defame him and take him off the air. They failed.
And so will you if you are not careful.[/quote]
OMG, so sorry, just an attempt at humor, not meant to be an offensive attack,
since Rush himself constantly jokes about how great he is, "El Rushbo", "talent on loan from god" etc. and then the MSM libs finally found a chink in his armor with the meds incident,I just thought it would be humorous to suggest that only rush himself would come online to proclaim his godlike status IMO Rush is great, but he's just a political pundit,c'mon lighten up
SHEESH ! !
I liked to listen more in the Reagan and then Carter years, he's been pretty boring lately.....
My entertainment talk show list these days goes,
1. Laura Ingraham
2. Good Morning America
3. Sean Hannity
3 rush limbagh
4. Savage Nation
Hillary has her own scrotum, thank you
I don't watch O'Reilly on tv - but then I don't watch ANYone on tv, because I don't watch tv.
I _do_ read Bill's columns when I find them in the editorial pages of The New York Post at work.
And I have also read his book, "Culture Warrior", which I enjoyed.
Having said that, I find Mr. Reilly to be right-on on nearly every topic that he takes up. He claims he has no problem poking at the right as well as the left, and I believe him. Sometimes the jabs at the right are well-deserved, as well.
Others have accused O'Reilly of being "lowbrow", but that's fine with me, the typical lowbrow neanderthal.
My advice to Bill is to keep doing what he's doing. Just fine with me.
Let's get on to more important things.
- John
Then stay off the thread.
A relative of mine sent Mr. O. a letter when he stated an error about the Middle East to Daniel Pipes of all people. Since that time, Mr. O. has been better on the topic so he does look at his mail and sometimes learns from it. I have a feeling he will back off on the FR attacks. I sure hope so. The “moral equivalency” thing does not work.
Indeed, and O'Reilly has show he can certainly be a nitwit by trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.
The absolutely only way to do what O’Reilly suggests is as you say, preview every post. That would effectively take away one of the things that makes FR great, which is the flow of conversation that is so fast as to make it almost like a chat room, a free flowing conversation that gives birth to great ideas and a confluence of minds which gives us great moments like Rathergate.
His suggestion that paid moderators would somehow do a better job of pulling posts that cross the line than volunteers really makes no sense. It’s simply an issue of volume and paid or volunteer there simply wouldn’t be the manpower to watch every post.
Besides, I think Mr. O’Reilly should realize the internet is not static. There’s no break for commercial or edit the tape. A thinking person should understand a site as big as FR, every now and then there’s going to be something unacceptable posted and every now and then a post like that will slip through.
How anyone can compare sites like Kos or DU, where entire threads are devoted to hateful comments, to a site like FR, where the vast majority of the time the posts are well within the bounds of polite conversation.
O’Reilly also left out the fact than even when a post doesn’t go so far as to need to be pulled, the offending poster is often berated by other posters for being hateful or unChristian.
BOR is dishonest? What a surprise!
His swiftboat stuff caused me to raise my eyebrows. I finally figured it out when that sexual harassment allegation came out shortly afterward. (I don’t know if there was anything to the charge, but I think he was basically trying to win some favor with the left because he knew this was about to hit the fan.) My last straw with BOR was when he suggested Shawn Hornbeck stayed with his captor because he was getting a better deal there than with his real parents. Then, when the public was outraged, he tried to spin his way out of it by claiming the leftists were taking him out of context.
Sometimes O’Reilly gets himself so worked up on an issue, you can almost see the last vestige of logic leave his head.
On some things he is dead on. Immigration and child predators for example.
But when it comes to things like this (and technology in general), he has not a clue IMO.
I used to watch BO every night and thought he was very sensible. After this stunt I’m done. I sure hope the rest of Fox News doesn’t follow his lead, or they’ll have no viewers left.
BO is a pervert who should be taken off the air and taught a thing or two.
I used to watch BO every night and thought he was very sensible. After this stunt I’m done. I sure hope the rest of Fox News doesn’t follow his lead, or they’ll have no viewers left.
BO is a pervert who should be taken off the air and taught a thing or two.
His method and style are more like Olbermann every week!
I don’t know why anyone is surprised by this. I could see this coming the moment he took on the Daily Kos. What BOR fails to acknowledge is there is a big difference between hate coming down from the top — as illustrated by Markos — and the comments of a rogue few anonymous posters. You don’t have Jim Robinson writing the kind of hateful stuff Markos writes. Kos called our troops mercenaries and said he feels nothing when they die. I don’t think, (or I hope) you don’t see parallel hate like that from Robinson. That said, I do think there are those who make us look bad with their posts and it is up to us to call them on it. I have often cautioned against this. I took issue with the D.C area freepers for calling code pink types “hags” and you would have thought I was Jane Fonda from their reaction — and this was something under Kristinn’s lead. I do think people like Kristinn and Jim have an obligation to call for civility when they have a chance to see things getting out of hand.
LOL! So he’s a “pervert”, but you were fine watching him until this stunt?
The problem with Bill’s logic is the poisoning the well fallacy: Bob is a kitten-lover. Bob is a child-molester. Therefore all kitten-lovers are child-molesters. (Hyphenation is intentional to clarify the syllogism, of which there are 2^8, or 256, combinations, most fallacious.)
Got a new title in honor of O’Reilly’s, non-mention, non-retraction performance tonight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.