Fox news is pure, ratings-driven crapola. The worst collection of sensationalist half-truths one can find short of "A Current Affair." Do yourself a favor and watch some other channel's news. Fox is clueless. It is their brand of news and "reporting" that is in part responsible for the "dumbing down" we always hear about.
Fox news is ok. Most tv news sucks, though. I only read newspapers and weeklies. IMO the WSJ has the best reporting of news; I do not refer to the editorials but only the reporting. I read the LA Times for local news only.
Regarding viewpoint shows, I personally enjoy watching The O'Reilly Factor only because he speaks his mind and speaks with some intelligence. The other pundit shows are so imflammatory and lack intelligence. I may not agree with all of O'Reilly's opinions, but I respect him for attempting to be real.
<strong>There are a lot of tough minded people on the left who have come out solidly behind the President and the war effort. Leo was only holding up to scrutiny those who haven't.</strong><hr></blockquote>But who, specifically, was he talking about, and what, exactly, did they do? He just talks about "the elite" and "the chatterers of the left" (ignoring the fact that he, too, is a chatterer) and vaguely implies that they lack the values of real Americans, without being very specific about what exactly they did.
If he specifically criticized Chomsky, for example, or Leahy, then I would say that's fair. The article just seems like something used to stir up Americans against other, nameless and faceless, Americans. The conservatives on these boards have gotten awfully mad at liberals who blame America since 9/11, but now, in this thread, they seem to be applauding it.
What he was basically saying is.. the anti-war protesters are upset they are not getting their way. They are upset they have nothing (credible) to blame Bush with. They are trying to treat it like NAM.. when it's not.
<strong>Regarding viewpoint shows, I personally enjoy watching The O'Reilly Factor only because he speaks his mind and speaks with some intelligence. The other pundit shows are so imflammatory and lack intelligence. I may not agree with all of O'Reilly's opinions, but I respect him for attempting to be real.</strong><hr></blockquote>
REAL? Oh, my bsides are hurting from laughing at this comment. O'Reilly is a sensationalist to the nTH degree. He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. A former "A Current Affair" talking head now is a "respected journalist". Someone needs some KY Jelly to get their head out of their ass... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I like O'Reilly. Maybe because I agree with much of what he has to say. But mostly because he speaks like he's not always reading from a teleprompter like all the other cookie cutter news guys out there.
REAL? Oh, my bsides are hurting from laughing at this comment. O'Reilly is a sensationalist to the nTH degree. He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. A former "A Current Affair" talking head now is a "respected journalist". Someone needs some KY Jelly to get their head out of their ass... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
So because he worked on Current Affair that makes him illegitimate for any other job in journalism? I don't suppose you could name the other news org's he worked for? You know he went to Harvard right? Public Policy school I think. MA degree.
<strong> He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't see where you are going with this. YOu have the talk show host from a show that is only there for sensationalism, the conservative radio talk show host (who by the way is Limbaugh not Limball) who actually does get most of his facts straight even if they are of a conservative bent to play to his audience, and an Ex talk show host who now is doing war reporting.
So you are saying that he is a sensationalist, conservative talk show host that actually gets most of his facts right but should be doing war reporting instead? (tongue firmly in cheek)
<strong>But who, specifically, was he talking about</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ummm, he quoted Andrew Sullivan who specifically mentioned the NY Times. He quoted Larry Summers who directed his comments to the academic world. There's some of the people he was talking about.
[quote]<strong>The conservatives on these boards have gotten awfully mad at liberals who blame America since 9/11, but now, in this thread, they seem to be applauding it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That chip on your shoulder - how's that working for you? Leo wasn't blaming America. What are you talking about?
He also didn't use the word "liberal" in his column. And as for me, I am a conservative but I didn't think I was mad at liberals for blaming America. Not all liberals blame America. I just thought of the moral equivalence crowd as morons - not liberals.
Comments
<strong>
Fox news is pure, ratings-driven crapola. The worst collection of sensationalist half-truths one can find short of "A Current Affair." Do yourself a favor and watch some other channel's news. Fox is clueless. It is their brand of news and "reporting" that is in part responsible for the "dumbing down" we always hear about.
[ 11-28-2001: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Fox news is ok. Most tv news sucks, though. I only read newspapers and weeklies. IMO the WSJ has the best reporting of news; I do not refer to the editorials but only the reporting. I read the LA Times for local news only.
Regarding viewpoint shows, I personally enjoy watching The O'Reilly Factor only because he speaks his mind and speaks with some intelligence. The other pundit shows are so imflammatory and lack intelligence. I may not agree with all of O'Reilly's opinions, but I respect him for attempting to be real.
<strong>There are a lot of tough minded people on the left who have come out solidly behind the President and the war effort. Leo was only holding up to scrutiny those who haven't.</strong><hr></blockquote>But who, specifically, was he talking about, and what, exactly, did they do? He just talks about "the elite" and "the chatterers of the left" (ignoring the fact that he, too, is a chatterer) and vaguely implies that they lack the values of real Americans, without being very specific about what exactly they did.
If he specifically criticized Chomsky, for example, or Leahy, then I would say that's fair. The article just seems like something used to stir up Americans against other, nameless and faceless, Americans. The conservatives on these boards have gotten awfully mad at liberals who blame America since 9/11, but now, in this thread, they seem to be applauding it.
<strong>
<strong>Regarding viewpoint shows, I personally enjoy watching The O'Reilly Factor only because he speaks his mind and speaks with some intelligence. The other pundit shows are so imflammatory and lack intelligence. I may not agree with all of O'Reilly's opinions, but I respect him for attempting to be real.</strong><hr></blockquote>
REAL? Oh, my bsides are hurting from laughing at this comment. O'Reilly is a sensationalist to the nTH degree. He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. A former "A Current Affair" talking head now is a "respected journalist". Someone needs some KY Jelly to get their head out of their ass... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
<strong>
REAL? Oh, my bsides are hurting from laughing at this comment. O'Reilly is a sensationalist to the nTH degree. He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. A former "A Current Affair" talking head now is a "respected journalist". Someone needs some KY Jelly to get their head out of their ass... <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
So because he worked on Current Affair that makes him illegitimate for any other job in journalism? I don't suppose you could name the other news org's he worked for? You know he went to Harvard right? Public Policy school I think. MA degree.
<strong> He's worse than Morton Downey Jr., Rush Limball and Geraldo Rivera combined. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't see where you are going with this. YOu have the talk show host from a show that is only there for sensationalism, the conservative radio talk show host (who by the way is Limbaugh not Limball) who actually does get most of his facts straight even if they are of a conservative bent to play to his audience, and an Ex talk show host who now is doing war reporting.
So you are saying that he is a sensationalist, conservative talk show host that actually gets most of his facts right but should be doing war reporting instead?
<strong>But who, specifically, was he talking about</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ummm, he quoted Andrew Sullivan who specifically mentioned the NY Times. He quoted Larry Summers who directed his comments to the academic world. There's some of the people he was talking about.
[quote]<strong>The conservatives on these boards have gotten awfully mad at liberals who blame America since 9/11, but now, in this thread, they seem to be applauding it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That chip on your shoulder - how's that working for you? Leo wasn't blaming America. What are you talking about?
He also didn't use the word "liberal" in his column. And as for me, I am a conservative but I didn't think I was mad at liberals for blaming America. Not all liberals blame America. I just thought of the moral equivalence crowd as morons - not liberals.
[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: roger_ramjet ]</p>
[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>