Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

OBAMA: O’Reilly interview was a positive give-and-take exchange

Letter by Lyle Laws, Puyallup on Feb. 11, 2011 at 12:52 pm with 168 Comments »
February 11, 2011 12:52 pm

We can all agree on who won the Super Bowl, but opinions vary greatly about who came out on top in the interview of President Obama that Bill O’Reilly conducted that day. In my opinion, the American people were the winners.

Not that all viewers would agree with that assessment, of course.

Some on the political right faulted O’Reilly for not going for the jugular with his questions, hoping to catch Obama in some sort of a “gotcha” situation, and some on the left chastised him for interrupting the president so often and for his question about how he deals with those who hate him.

I thought O’Reilly’s questions were firm but fair, and as to the interruptions, Obama knew ahead of time what to expect and took them in good-natured stride without being offended.

I think the president saw the occasion as opportunity to begin repositioning himself to the political center somewhat, and I felt that his answers were forthright and sincere. And, as a someone who has often been critical of his political positions, I must say that my respect for him rose considerably because of the way he conducted himself.

All in all, I thought it was an excellent give-and-take exchange done in a manner that demonstrated that opinionated people with widely differing points of view can disagree without being disagreeable.

Tags:
,
Leave a comment Comments → 168
  1. The best part of the interview was watching the liberal media types having a conniption fit. Chris Matthews was beside himself and slobbering more than he usually does, Ed Shultz’s face was even more distorted than usual and blood vessels about to burst. Now if that’s not pure enjoyment, what is?

  2. Roncella says:

    lyle, I agree with your remarks about the debate.

    However President Obama will continue to sound more and more centered and almost Conservative as the election gets closer and closer.

    President Obama observed the election results of 2010 and understands exactly where he has to position himself in order to have 4 more years in the Whitehouse.

    There is no Republican Candidate at present who can win aganst Obama, so far.

    President Obama has a built in voter block who will vote for him no matter how bad or good a job he is doing.

    President Obama has the lame/main stream media who support him 100% of the time. They minimize his short comings and mis-takes and maximize his few accomplishments.

    Both the Print Media and Cable for the most part will work as helpers for Obama as the election cycle gets near, so any Republican planning on running against him had better have millions and millions of dollars for campaign expenses, as President Obama has 1 billion and growing in his re-election bank.

  3. Gummyworm says:

    How can O’Reilly ask Obama “What were you least prepared for” and “what has been hard” and “what don’t you like about the office”, trying to bait a negative sound bite, not ask the converse questions, then finish with “I hope you think I’m fair”.

    Let me perfectly clear…I don’t think O’Reilly should only ask cream-puff questions. And I have no objection to any of the questions. But he (and Lyle Laws) should refrain from referring to O’Reilly as “fair” when the distribution of questions was as it was.

    I have no problem with wretched karaoke singers, either (I am one!!). But then they shouldn’t conclude with “I hope you think I’m good”. They aren’t. It’s fine that they aren’t. But they shouldn’t try to advertise themselves as being good. It’s fine that most interviewers aren’t fair…they don’t need to be fair. But then they shouldn’t conclude with “I hope you think I’m fair”.

  4. “I hope you think I’m fair”.

    When Oreilly asked the question it was to put the President on record that “…insert Presidents answer…” What is important is that the President did not say the things he and his minions have said over the past two years.

    How can the President and the minions now say Fox News is unfair… he was asked the question and his response was neutral at worst.

  5. Gummyworm says:

    Wait…did I read that right? rr98411, are you saying that since Obama had a neutral comment about the fairness of the most moderate of all foxnews personalities, it means that Obama and all of “the minions” must feel that all FoxNews people are completely fair all of the time?

    I think I broke my leg falling down your slippery slope, so I may not be able to make the necessary logical leaps with the same grace you did.

  6. To be fair and balanced Bill O should interview the fresh crop of Republican wannabes the same way he did the President.

    IMO the President won this round by showing Bill O up as the nasty little shock jock that he is.

  7. BlaineCGarver says:

    It does not bode well that people think that there should be a loser and winner in a Q&A session. It’s election time, and any incumbant will say whatever he thinks will sound good in times like this, especially coming off such a arse kicking as he had last fall.

  8. JudasEscargot says:

    The best part was O’Reilly stepping on his tongue and asking the President about being “hated”.

    You’d think O’Reilly would have sense enough to know that a black man knows plenty about being hated.

    You’d also think that O’Reilly would have stuck to the party line of “it’s his policies”

    For once, O’Reilly emoted the truth, albeit inadvertently.

  9. I prefer an interview where the interviewer asks the questions and the interviewee gets to answer. Some give and take is appropriate, but talking over and jumping in at inappropriate times is just rudeness. The constant interruptions and breaking in for asides by O’Reilly was irritating and not helpful. As far as being “fair”, nothing is fair in politics, and Obama did a great job letting the rudeness go. Much better than I would have. And, yes, there are plenty of rude interview styles on all sides. but generally, people do show respect and let people like the president or Speaker of the House, whatever party, finish a sentence.

  10. JudasEscargot says:

    tuddo – O’Reilly’s usual tactic is to have the producer cut the other person’s mic

  11. O’Reilley was respectful. If you don’t move in on President Obama, he filabusters, gives another platitudinous speech. Those of you who thought O’R was tough have got to be kidding.

    There have been two hour-long interviews with Rumsfeld this week too, but I’m guessing many of the folks around here who hold liberal views didn’t take the time to watch them? Over and over, without rancor or bitterness, he gave accounts about ways that the facts got twisted, words rearranged, etc. during not just the Bush administration but in others as well. The absene of toxins in his remarks simply demonstratethat he is well aware of the crap that flows from the media.

    As for O’Reilley asking the prez about being hated, he asked the same question of President Bush, but I guess you missed it. I’m shocked!

  12. mrenchirito says:

    O’Reilly asked the same exact question about being hated to GW Bush. I guess he’s racist against whites too. More nonsensical remarks from Judas who loves to play the race card at every opportunity. That’s common for people who are intellectually bankrupt

  13. I liked the occasional laugh that came from the President in response to Mr. O’Reilly’s questions. I mean, who in their right mind would take an O’Reilly interview about anything seriously?

  14. I missed it.

  15. In the old days, we would have watched programs such as these to listen to the president. We wanted to know what he had to say.

    These programs have turned into a contest, to see who won. It doesn’t matter what was said. It matters more, who won. (or lost)

  16. Obama did good in this one. He is clearly positioning himself to pretend to be a moderate. He could have chosen an interview with Chris Matthews, Rachel Madcow, Keith Olberman(heck he might have been able to get a new job out of it), or Ed Schultz. He strategically chose to accept an interview request with Bill O’Reilly. Bill did a great job of making the President answer semi-tough questions. And Bill knew us hardcore conservatives(I am one) would hate all the softball questions, and that the hardcore liberals would think he was being disrespectful of the President, or asking to tough a questions or…..It was a great interview, and I also raised my level of respect for Obama as a person and a politician. I do however consider his position change to be designed to retain the Presidency in 2012. He still is an utlra liberal at heart, and an idealogue. What will his views be if he is re-elected and doesn’t have another term to go after?

  17. TSkidmore says:

    What a waste of good oxygen O’Really is….all he proved was that he is a propagandist for the Fox Noise and the Republicon Party. Don’t know why Obama wasted his time….

  18. Gummyworm – early in the administration there was a concerted effort to undermine Fox News… The President made some comments and even went so far as to single out a singular American citizen. Anita Dunn as well as Robert Gibbs made overt negative comments against Fox News in an effort to demonize them and undermine their influence. Didn’t work…

    Your interpretation is interesting, umm never said nor implied what you wrote so movin’ on… Bill O’ specifically said one objective of the interview was to cast Fox News in a positive light. The “Fox News fair” question he stated was to get Obama on the record. Hence from this point forward, Fox News is a “real news organization” as opposed to what Anita Dunn thinks. Yes, they do have a “point of view” but it is not out of line nor unfair, Robert Gibbs would find that comforting.

    I could see how you could break your leg if I also interpreted a post the way you did. Interesting interpretation but you lost me at “I think…”

  19. Hate has no bounds to color nor gender… Obama, black man or not, is not the only one who has felt the sting of hated.

  20. bobcat1a says:

    No one has to demonize Fox News; they do a pretty effective job of it all by themselves. The only people fooled by Fox are those for whom Fox is the only source of “information.”

  21. JudasEscargot says:

    O’Reilly CLAIMS to have asked Bush such a question. Funny…..google doesn’t seem to produce anything but O’Reilly’s claim and the Obama question.

    As usual, when cornered, O’Reilly changes gears and makes something up.

    The real humor is that Conservatives buy his stories without fact checking.

    Someone produce the text – date and place, when Bill O asked Bush this question and make me wrong.

  22. mrenchirito says:

    “a reader wrote to us to ask whether O’Reilly did ask that question of Bush. So we looked into it.

    We discovered that O’Reilly was referring to an interview aired on Nov. 11, 2010, when Bush, by then out of office for almost two years, was doing publicity for his memoir, Decision Points.”

    To Obama, he asked whether it disturbs him to be hated by “so many” Americans. To Bush, he asked how he felt about being hated by “a lot of” people in the press, and then followed up by asking him more generally if he ever thought about being hated.

    Still, O’Reilly’s two lines of inquiry are similar enough that we’re giving O’Reilly a True.”

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/08/bill-oreilly/bill-oreilly-tells-obama-he-also-asked-bush-about-/

  23. mrenchirito says:

    It’s so not hard to make you wrong. You only Google what you want to Google. Every post you make is full of lies and distortion. You are a disgrace to this message and board and every other you venture into. And you wonder why so many people can’t stand you.

  24. redneckbuck says:

    If its not on google is surely does not exist.

  25. “Someone produce the text – date and place, when Bill O asked Bush this question and make me wrong.”

    Wow, betweeen challenge and result… 9 minutes… could be a record… challenge met by one (big stretch and yawn)… sadly, embarrasing for the other…

  26. Judas – like I said, you might watch FOX occasionally and learn something. You missed the Bush interview? Many liberal commentators put out O’Reilly didn’t ask Bush the same question without even checking. Typical.

    Good advice Bobocat – multiple sources.

  27. Meanwhile….on Media Matters…..an unnamed insider at Fox says “we just make things up”.

    Too bad the source is anonymous. What he says is believable but anonymous sources aren’t the most convincing.

  28. nwcolorist says:

    A couple pf personal comments –

    Fox News has become the most watched cable news channel (ten years running). That’s no fluke. People want to hear what they have to say.

    Yes there are people who watch only Fox for their news, just as there are those who get all their info from CNN. But a person seeking a complete understanding will want to get as many points of view as possible.

    O’Reilly is a good interviewer, but does tend to interrupt too often. However, IMO, he has become a boot-licker, a sycophant interested more in personal ratings than asking tough, necessary questions.

    What say you, counselor?

  29. blakeshouse says:

    It is utterly amazing,he idiots who think they have a clue. Take a look at the Neilsen numbers over the last 10 yrs on news. The lame stream far left media has tanked and Fox has continued to climb. Cable news has faired even worse in the US. Today, pick any fox news program and its numbers on third airing at 1AM beat all of cable prime time COMBINED.
    Denial is more than a river in Egypt you far left lib socialist / neo marxists. Go ahead and keep deluding yourselves.

  30. Billo interupted Obama 75 times. The entire interview was disgusting. Billo’s disrespect for the President was stunning. Those of you who thought the interview was good are nothing but brainwashed gopcult members who only care about your cult’s ideology, not the nation.

  31. Oh yeah FOX NEWS COULDNT FIND EGYPT ON THE MAP! We also know from 5 independent studies that Fox News viewers are grossly misinformed. The letter writers confirm those results.

  32. JudasEscargot says:

    “Fox News has become the most watched cable news channel (ten years running). That’s no fluke.”

    Absolutely no fluke. Walk into any public building where there is cable and you’ll find FOX on TV. Why? Contracts require such.

    I love it when ignorant people try to talking media ratings. This could be a fun day on the forum.

  33. JudasEscargot says:

    I stand corrected. O’Reilly did ask Bush a similar question. Not the same context, but similar.

    I’m glad I challenged it, because it gave my stalker something to do besides sit in front of her computer and wait for me to come home last night.

    How was the rally at Planned Parenthood yesterday?

    chile – wasn’t learning about FOX AND FRIENDS making up a riff between Oprah and Palin enough?

  34. JudasEscargot says:

    “Take a look at the Neilsen numbers over the last 10 yrs on news.”

    OK….CBS, NBC and ABC all have higher ratings than FOX. Next?

  35. JudasEscargot says:

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-news-shepard-smith-beats-all-competitors-combined/

    “pick any fox news program and its numbers on third airing at 1AM beat all of cable prime time COMBINED.”

    Check your math.

  36. Nice to have someone else blow a hole through Judas’ great research abilities.

    I think Obama chose to go on Fox for political reasons. He knows he needs to appeal to mainstream America whom he has successfully alienated in two years’ time.

    O’Reilly is showing signs of becoming a syncophant. Dennis Miller nailed it when he told O’R that he cared too much about being liked by the president.I wish Miller was on nightly.

    And yes, O’Reilly is too quick to interrupt just about everyone. That doesn’t mean he’s worthless. On the contrary; he’s watched by millions because he’s shone a light on things other people choose to ignore.

    bBoy, you don’t suppose the MM line was scathing sarcasm do you? I think perhaps it was, but I could be wrong. Seeing it in context would help.

    Finally, Polago, O’Reilly said, and I have no reason to disbelieve him, that he was trying to avoid the “must-win” approach, and I think he did it. He gave the president room to express himself.

    Those of you here who favor the left but exhibit reason are able to recognize some of the strengths of a news outlet like Fox. The rest of you are just too blinded by your dislike and preconceived notions. I have the same problem; most of us do at some level. For instance, I can’t take Chris Matthews; I find him utterly nauseating. And Bill Maher, though it’s clear he’s got brains, I cannot stand the sight or sound of him. His arrogance makes Bill O’Reilly look like a puppy. I choose to avoid Maher and Matthews in favor of liberal commentators who have not had this effect on me.

    If you hate O’Reilly, I presume you know where the off button is on your remote?

  37. JudasEscargot says:

    “O’Reilly is a good interviewer, but does tend to interrupt too often.”

    Contradiction.

  38. JudasEscargot says:

    “sozo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 9:48 am
    Nice to have someone else blow a hole through Judas’ great research abilities. ”

    I spent about 45 seconds looking. I really wasn’t that interested. Besides, it gave Ms. Stalker something to do. I had just gotten home from a retirement party. She sat waiting patiently by the computer for me.

    Oh..and sozo….

    “sozo says:
    February 11, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    O’Reilley was respectful. If you don’t move in on President Obama, he filabusters, gives another platitudinous speech. Those of you who thought O’R was tough have got to be kidding.”

    I think you’ll find the word is “filibusters”

    Is your spell checker broken or does it just work when you are correcting others?

  39. JudasEscargot says:

    “If you hate O’Reilly, I presume you know where the off button is on your remote?”

    When only one channel is showing the Super Bowl and FOX uses that stage for Billy O to go after the President, it’s rather tough to avoid, if you don’t want to miss the other programming before and after he’s done with his hatchet job.

    Personally, I left the room right after the “hate” question. Of course, after working many years in media, I have taste in journalistic quality.

    I was really miffed that Obama didn’t ask him the same question right back.

  40. JudasEscargot says:

    I suppose it’s only fair to admit why I didn’t spend a whole lot of time researching to see if Bill O was lying again…..

    On the September 28 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly falsely claimed that there was no option to register as an independent voter when he registered as a Republican in Nassau County, New York, in 1994. But while the “party enrollment” section of O’Reilly’s actual registration form, reprinted (Amazon registration required) in Al Franken’s Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Dutton, 2003), does not contain a box labeled “independent,” it does include a box labeled “I do not wish to enroll in party.” O’Reilly checked “Republican.”

  41. TSkidmore says:

    The “rating” argument put out by Fox Noise and the brain dead who listen is typical of how “facts” are reported out of context and using only the “facts” Fox wants. For example in Tacoma the basic cable has Fox – you have to upgrade to get MSNBC. So the claim is that there are more Fox viewers – horse feathers! Right wing radio owners own hundreds more stations than progressives or the stations that run them. Where the transmission is equal the progressive stations beat the right wing loons every time. These kinds of examples go on and on and put the “ratings” in proper context. Also proves that money – not democracy – runs the country. Very sad – very frightening – and ultimately our demise!

  42. JudasEscargot says:

    “”Does it disturb you that so many people hate you?” – O’Reilly to Obama

    To Bush, he asked how he felt about being hated by “a lot of” people in the press

    Read more: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2011/02/11/super-bowl-sunday-interview/#ixzz1DllPXRLL

    Similar enough for a Conservative who has an agenda.

  43. JudasEscargot says:

    Very good, TSkidmore.

  44. JudasEscargot says:

    From their own wiki – “The newspaper operates PolitiFact.com, a project in which its reporters and editors “fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups….”[7] They publish original statements and their evaluations on the PolitiFact.com website, and assign each a “Truth-O-Meter” rating. The site also includes an “Obameter”, tracking U.S. President Barack Obama’s performance with regard to his campaign promises.”

    Now, would you think that anyone who invests that much time and space into Obama has an agenda? Especially in Florida?

    Naw….couldn’t be, could it?

    Can anyone tell us if St. Pete’s Times spent that much effort on….oh, I don’t know…how about ……George W. Bush?

  45. JudasEscargot says:

    Now that I’ve dug deeper than 45 seconds, would we like to open the discussion again?

  46. JudasEscargot says:

    It seems that not all is well in St. Petersburg:

    “What happens when a newspaper fails to serve the community? After Freedom published its in-depth report on the St. Petersburg Times last summer, a number of journalists formerly associated with the Times came forward. They related incidents at the Times which revealed serious violations of journalism ethics.

    “When it was suggested to the Times that an internal investigation was in order, the paper’s attorneys declared the idea to be “preposterous.” The Times leadership apparently believes it is beyond the bounds of inspection—even from within its own ranks.

    “Not only journalists think it’s time for a hard look at the Times. Freedom heard from readers and former readers who say it is obvious to them that the Times “goes after” individuals and organizations in the community—particularly those who work for community betterment.

    “Emerging from the reader response to our exposé on the Times is a clear picture of a community that sees the paper as out of touch at best, too often utterly disdainful of the community it ostensibly serves, and from whom it takes advertising and subscription dollars.

    “In exchange for those dollars and public trust, the Times is supposed to report the facts and provide a true picture of the community. Readers say it is failing at both.

    Sometimes you have to dig past the manure.

  47. I don’t mind folks correcting my spelling Judas. That’s how we learn. However, f I corrected all the spelling errors I see on here, that’s all I’d have time for. I have mistyped many words myself.

    As I’ve explained before, pointing out YOUR spelling errors has simply been my childish response to the size of your ego. Yes, I said childish. I’m embarrassed to admit it but there you are.

  48. JudasEscargot says:

    Of course, Hotair.com (former owned by you know who) says this:

    For quite a while, a debate has simmered about whether PolitiFact operates from a political bias. The Pulitzer Prize-winning feature from the St. Petersburg Times in Florida rates the truthfulness of public statements by politicians and activists on a scale ranging from True to Pants On Fire. Republicans have complained for quite a while that PolitiFact aims more at the GOP, especially when PolitiFact named the allegation that ObamaCare was a government takeover of health care the “Lie of the Year.”

    So, Conservatives, I ask the question – when it Politifact lying and when aren’t they?

    LOL

  49. JudasEscargot says:

    sozo says:
    February 12, 2011 at 10:27 am
    I don’t mind folks correcting my spelling Judas. That’s how we learn. However, f I corrected all the spelling errors I see on here, that’s all I’d have time for. I have mistyped many words myself.

    As I’ve explained before, pointing out YOUR spelling errors has simply been my childish response to the size of your ego. Yes, I said childish. I’m embarrassed to admit it but there you are.

    Again. bozo has place the blame squarely on my back for its own behavior. If only I was different then bozo wouldn’t act that way.

    This must be that “personal responsibility” stuff that Conservatives talk about so much.

    “As I’ve explained before, pointing out YOUR spelling errors”

    Allow me to help you learn again. It wasn’t just me. You also corrected another reader’s typo also. Was it their ego that made you do it?

  50. JudasEscargot says:

    dang….I keep hitting the “b” when I mean to hit the “s”

  51. JudasEscargot says:

    frosty says:
    February 11, 2011 at 1:08 pm
    The best part of the interview was watching the liberal media types having a conniption fit. Chris Matthews was beside himself and slobbering more than he usually does, Ed Shultz’s face was even more distorted than usual and blood vessels about to burst. Now if that’s not pure enjoyment, what is?

    Fascinating. Matthews nor Schultz were on the interview. Why make stuff up?

  52. JudasEscargot says:

    “Bill O’Reilly predicted that his Super Bowl interview with President Obama would be the “most watched in the history of mankind,” but he fell far, far short of that guess, as the New York Times reports.

    O’Reilly made the prediction last week. To have followed through on it, he would have had to beat the record set by Barbara Walters in 1999, when 70 million people tuned in to watch her interview with Monica Lewinsky.

    But the Times’ Bill Carter says that the half hour in which O’Reilly’s interview with Obama drew 17.3 million viewers–a hefty number, to be sure, but nowhere near Walters’ record.”

    OUCH!!

    When you consider that the Super Bowl garnered 111 million viewers Billy O got all of about 15% of the people tuned in. Pretty sad when the largest viewing audience each year is handed to you on a silver platter – not to mention the heavy male audience, which loves Billy’s style.

    Gawd, I love this subject.

  53. Roncella says:

    To some of the uninformed who post here usually liberals, Bill O’ Reilly’s, interview syle is linked to the name of his show, The No Spin Zone.

    President Obama will take twenty mins. to ans. one question, O’ Reilly had about 10 mins. total to ask questions.

    He had to use his no spin formula to interview Obama or he would have only got one of his questions answered.

  54. JudasEscargot says:

    “Roncella says:
    February 12, 2011 at 10:52 am
    To some of the uninformed who post here usually liberals, Bill O’ Reilly’s, interview syle is linked to the name of his show, The No Spin Zone.”

    So your explanation to him lying about his voting registration is what?

    I can call myself a concert pianist, but I’m not one.

  55. JudasEscargot says:

    Here is a nice exchange, early in the interview:

    O’REILLY: So, you don’t know when he’s going to leave?

    OBAMA: Well, you know, ultimately, the United States can’t absolute dictate —

    O’REILLY: You can’t force him to leave.

    OBAMA: But what we can do, Bill, is we can say that, “The time is now for you to start making a change in that country.”

    O’REILLY: He’s already done that. But the longer he stays in, the more people are going to die. And the other problem is, Mubarak knows a lot of bad things about the United States. I’m sure you’re aware of that. OBAMA: Well, let me say this: the United States and Egypt have been a partner for a long time.

    Who is being interviewed? Isn’t the idea for the person being interviewed to do most of the talking? Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave.

  56. JudasEscargot says:

    Oh…and then there was this….

    “And the other problem is, Mubarak knows a lot of bad things about the United States.”

    Now what is Bill trying to say there? Is Bill saying the US has done wrong and Mubarak has the goods on us?

    Why didn’t this journalistic wonder dig deeper on this subject?

  57. mrenchirito says:

    First he says he stands corrected, then he goes on and on and on and on to try to justify how he wasn’t wrong after all. This is the kind of twisted behavior we are dealing with. Yes the newspaper is biased, nevermind they quoted EXACTLY FROM THE INTERVIEW, that is beside the point.

    Intellectual bankruptcy at its finest.

  58. JudasEscargot says:

    “JudasEscargot says:
    February 12, 2011 at 9:40 am
    I stand corrected. O’Reilly did ask Bush a similar question. Not the same context, but similar.

    As usual, my Stalkstress is suffering from a reading comprehension problem.

    “Does it disturb you that so many people hate you?” – O’Reilly to Obama

    To Bush, he asked how he felt about being hated by “a lot of” people in the press

    Taaammy….Taaaammy….Tammy’s in love……..

    I hate it when I have to explain the punchline.

  59. JudasEscargot says:

    I have to remember to stop wasting perfectly good sarcasm.

  60. For anyone interested in a truly fair and balanced news source try ALJAZEERA at

  61. ALJAZEERA

  62. ALJAZEERA

  63. for some reason I see reasom to be having trouble with the link so here goes again

    http://english.aljazeera.net

  64. CABLE NEWS RACE
    THURS., FEB 10, 2011

    FOXNEWS O’REILLY 3,325,000
    FOXNEWS BAIER 2,335,000
    FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,293,000
    FOXNEWS BECK 2,243,000
    FOXNEWS SHEP 1,936,000
    FOXNEWS GRETA 1,744,000
    CNN BLITZER 1,036,000
    CNN MORGAN 941,000
    MSNBC HARDBLL 844,000
    MSNBC O’DONNELL 843,000
    CNN COOPER 826,000
    MSNBC MADDOW 765,000
    CNN PARKERSPITZER 724,000
    MSNBC SHULTZ 575,000

    Despite all of the criticism against Fox News, the other two cable channels must be asking themselves – what will it take to beat those slimy a-holes? hmmm…

  65. PhiLABuster says:

    TSkidmore says:
    February 12, 2011 at 10:02 am
    The “rating” argument put out by Fox Noise and the brain dead who listen is typical of how “facts” are reported out of context and using only the “facts” Fox wants. For example in Tacoma the basic cable has Fox – you have to upgrade to get MSNBC. So the claim is that there are more Fox viewers – horse feathers! Right wing radio owners own hundreds more stations than progressives or the stations that run them. Where the transmission is equal the progressive stations beat the right wing loons every time. These kinds of examples go on and on and put the “ratings” in proper context. Also proves that money – not democracy – runs the country. Very sad – very frightening – and ultimately our demise!

    Read more: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2011/02/11/super-bowl-sunday-interview/#ixzz1DmHIYnS0

  66. PhiLABuster says:

    When in Las Vegas, St. Louis and New Orleans hotels, MSNBC was not available.

  67. Net 8PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s)
    FNC O’REILLY FACTOR 3,325 821
    CNN PARKER SPITZER 724 196
    MSNBC LAST WORD W/ L.
    ODONNELL 843 165

    If you are Elliot Spitzer, Kathleen Parker, and Larry O’Donnell, after a hards night work attemping to present a subject to your audience and your numbers are like above… do you not wonder if maybe Mom was right…. you suck at your current job.

  68. mrenchirito says:

    yes because Nielsen gets their ratings from hotel rooms…. NOT. Another false statement by PhiL (aka Judas). Notice how only one person posting ever uses bold type. The screen names change but the writing style and foolish comments are all too easy to recognize.

  69. PhiLABuster says:

    O’Donnell’s audience is a few months old and just moved to a new time zone, due to the resignation of Olberman. Couple with that the availability of Fox versus MSNBC. Apples and Oranges.

    Sort of like comparing O’Reilly to the Nightly News on NBC.

    Try a 25 – 44 audience and see how O’Reilly does.

  70. PhiLABuster says:

    Mwench – this name is in honor of sozo. Why would I want to hide behind it?

    I’m not you.

  71. PhiLABuster says:

    Mwench – just so that you understand, the use of bold and italics is to being emphasis to a point – frequenly used when certain people
    ::::coughMwenchcough::::: try to misrepresent a statement.

  72. PhiLABuster says:

    wow…that “w” and “r” are certainly close together.

  73. PhiLABuster says:

    “mrenchirito says:
    February 11, 2011 at 10:32 pm
    And you wonder why so many people can’t stand you.”

    The thought never crossed my mind. It appears you are certainly obsessed about it.

  74. Didn’t format correctly but the ODonnell’s numbers for 25-54 is @ 1/4 of Oreilly’s. 196-ODonnell… 821-OReilly.

    Isn’t the point of going to a new time slot is to do better in that slot and eventually beat the competition in that slot.

    ODonnell is doing about the same in his new slot as far as his total viewers. He is still getting beat… badly but at 10:00 (Eastern) it was at least closer. Bill O is 4 times the audience… apples/oranges vs crumbs is more like it.

  75. “You also corrected another reader’s typo also. Was it their ego that made you do it?

    No doubt.

  76. “I can call myself a concert pianist, but I’m not one.” — Judas

    You can also call yourself clever and well-informed.

  77. “If you are going try to analyze media numbers, at least learn the industry.”

    Is there a problem with the numbers? What do I need to learn? The numbers are valid. I used the 25-54 numbers, if you have the 25-44 then please share.

    If you got anything else to add, I am all ears.

  78. mrenchirito

    I sometimes use bold type for emphasis – especially within a italicized quotation

  79. PhiLABuster says:

    When you think you can compare a 15 year old program to a program that is a few months old, you need more than ears.

    Compare O’Reilly’s show to 60 minutes and tell me what you get.

  80. PhiLABuster says:

    rr – the 25-44 numbers would be on the same ratings as the 24-54.

    With O’Reilly, you could get even higher numbers if you found a rating that went up to 64. He skews to the higher age brackets.

    Dang it…..I just gave up a freebie.

  81. “When you think you can compare a 15 year old program to a program that is a few months old, you need more than ears.
    Compare O’Reilly’s show to 60 minutes and tell me what you get.”

    What does a 15 year old program have to do with my responses? How did 60 Minutes get into this conversation? No issue here. You wanna go there… 60 Minutes has more viewers per show than a single O’Reilly… it’s weekly vs daily… it’s network vs cable…it’s a different format… OK, and?

    “Try a 25 – 44 audience and see how O’Reilly does.”

    That’s what I was responding to…

    “With O’Reilly, you could get even higher numbers if you found a rating that went up to 64. He skews to the higher age brackets.”

    My post at 1240 does show that, All Viewers (000) – 3,325. 25-54 (000) – 821. You got something right.

    “Dang it…..I just gave up a freebie.”

    If this is a sample of your work, I am grateful you didn’t invoice me. Thank you.

  82. JudasEscargot says:

    You don’t get it, rr, but that’s OK. I didn’t expect you to get it.

    Speaking of large audiences, professional wrestling gets huge audience numbers on Monday nights.

    This might speak to the reason that O’Reilly gets large cumes.

    Birds of a feather and all that.

  83. “You don’t get it, rr, but that’s OK. I didn’t expect you to get it.”

    What don’t I get?

    What does wrestling have to do with Bill Oreilly? Changing the subject?

    Cute but you are not adding anything to the conversation.

  84. Novelist3 says:

    “Cute but you are not adding anything to the conversation.”

    When has he EVER?

  85. rr, if you hear it running, just jiggle the handle.

  86. Really……audience numbers as a measure of integrity…….

    Pet Rocks were popular for awhile – that must mean that they were important to our society.

    Professional wrestling gets big numbers – same thing.

    And…..newsfotainment shows with big numbers must mean that they are the best news sources!

    Quanity is not the same as quality.

  87. Yes, Judas. I am obsessed with you. I think of you day and night. I wish I were as bright and clever as you. I am so green with envy, all I can do is pretend to dislike you in the same way I dislike the flu.

    Actually a more apt analogy would be this. Imagine walking across the parking lot and getting something sticky stuck to your shoe, and no matter how hard you shake it, it goes with you and annoys you to the breaking point. The only choice you have is to get your own hands sticky trying to peel it off.

    I think I’ll go wash up now and try to avoid stepping on you again.

  88. “Really……audience numbers as a measure of integrity…….”

    Where did I equate number of viewers with integrity… focus, people, focus… O’Reilly gets the numbers he get because 3 million+ people on a given night think he provides analysis and opinion in a format that is informative in an entertaining, engaging way. Isn’t that why you watch opinion based shows?

    If you don’t believe me then how about Lawrence O’Donnell, the man who is competing against Bill O’Reilly:

    “When I look at TV I look at ratings. I never second guess ratings. Never. Bill O’Reilly is running a flawless television show. The proof of that is it’s the number one rated cable news show. I don’t have another thought about what that show should do. You look at it and just go, ‘alright no suggestions.’”

    Good enough for him… good enough for me… how about you?

  89. FOX NEWS couldnt find Egypt on the map.
    You republicans are pathetic.

  90. JudasEscargot says:

    “rr98411 says:
    February 12, 2011 at 8:08 pm
    “You don’t get it, rr, but that’s OK. I didn’t expect you to get it.”

    What don’t I get?

    What does wrestling have to do with Bill Oreilly? Changing the subject?

    Cute but you are not adding anything to the conversation.

    The continuation or lack of knowledge of media rating numbers continues.

    Here’s a hint – what is the psychography of the O’Reilly cume. Wealth? Education? The list goes on.

    If your programming is serving a million morons versus your competition servicing a half million people of affluence and knowledge, which is a more valuable market?

  91. JudasEscargot says:

    sozo says:
    February 13, 2011 at 7:07 am
    Yes, Judas. I am obsessed with you. I think of you day and night. I wish I were as bright and clever as you. I am so green with envy, all I can do is pretend to dislike you in the same way I dislike the flu.

    Actually a more apt analogy would be this. Imagine walking across the parking lot and getting something sticky stuck to your shoe, and no matter how hard you shake it, it goes with you and annoys you to the breaking point. The only choice you have is to get your own hands sticky trying to peel it off.

    I think I’ll go wash up now and try to avoid stepping on you again.

    Here is the comical part. I don’t know you. You are a chewtoy online for playtime inbetween the real parts of my life.

    Methinks you take all of this stuff entirely too seriously, but that’s probably because you have too much time on your hands while collecting those socialist checks.

    Let me suggest http://www.sondraK.com it will be right up your alley.

  92. JudasEscargot says:

    “Novelist3 says:
    February 13, 2011 at 12:22 am
    “Cute but you are not adding anything to the conversation.”

    When has he EVER?”

    Of course, THIS fine contribution had to do with the writer’s letter.

  93. JudasEscargot says:

    beerBoy:

    You and I must remember that we are talking to people that dig inflated attendence numbers at TEA Party rallies and Beck Contribution Parties.

  94. Unless you got valid demographics of the OReilly vs ODonnell vs Parker/Spitzer, then you got nothing.

    Any comment on the quote from O’Donnell? Good enough for you… or not?

    Any comment on the wrestling straw man… especially in light of the comment from O’Donnell?

    “The continuation or lack of knowledge of media rating numbers continues.”

    If you got a better measure than ratings… go for it.

  95. mrenchirito says:

    If Judas is the typical viewer of MSNBC and rr98411 is the typical viewer of FOX, then I’d say FOX’s audience consists of educated people who are able to back up what they say with facts. MSNBC’s audience consists of intellectually bankrupt individuals who spend their lives distorting and twisting facts in order to suit their own individual agenda. (oh and also consists of people that are obnoxious, arrogant, and immature).

  96. Roncella says:

    mrenchirito, You are sooo right.

    The fact you have to understand about many liberals is facts, truth, studies, will never change their minds about any issue, they will never stop pushing far left and liberal/progressive opinions.

  97. JudasEscargot says:

    rr –

    If I was selling anything other than Geritol, why would I buy O’Reilly’s show?

  98. JudasEscargot says:

    Why did O’Reilly fail on radio and Limbaugh failed on TV, but both have “huge cumes” on other media?

    These are the questions you ask when you are paid to buy media.

  99. I have to admit I use to watch MSNBC regularly but in the interest of good neighborly relations I had to stop.

    Watching Dylan Ratigan I felt I was watching someone trying to find a conspiracy theory behind every story. My neighbors were getting a little frighten of me when I kept saying “you lookin’ at me… you lookin’ at me…” Paranoid much…?

    Chris Matthews – I felt I was watching a person with a bad case of ADD. Thank God for the glass in the TV or he would have spit on me when he starts getting excited. The last straw was the sensation coming up my leg… I wasn’t too thrilled about that.

    After watching Ed Shultz I would constantly pick a fight with the neighbor that owns an investment brokerage. He had a better house and car than me, and I would beat the feces out of him while screaming till the veins were popping from my head, “I beat you in the name of social justice…. You are the reason my house and car sucks… You are a capitalist pig…”

    The rest of my neighbors didn’t say much until as a result of watching Keith Olbermann, I would just beat the crap out of anyone walking past my house… with a hardcover edition of the Oxford thesaurus.

    The final straw was when my neighbors found out I was starting to watch Lawrence O’Donnell. Immediately after that a steady stream of Sherriff’s Deputies with restraining orders from each of my neighbors starting showing up at my door. The theme throughout the orders were that as a result of my watching Lawrence O’Donnell my neighbors felt that if they had a copy of anything related to Bush and his crew I would just involuntarily snap.

    Thanks to Obama Care I am in therapy now. My wife has put a parental lock on the TV blocking out MSNBC. I watch CNN. My wife says I get a blank stare at the TV, drool sometimes.

  100. “If I was selling anything other than Geritol, why would I buy O’Reilly’s show?”

    I guess you got nothing else to offer…

  101. “Why did O’Reilly fail on radio and Limbaugh failed on TV, but both have “huge cumes” on other media?

    These are the questions you ask when you are paid to buy media.”

    OReilly – to focus on his core strength… a number one cable news TV show.

    Limbaugh – he has 400 million reasons… and a number one talk radio show.

  102. rr – I don’t watch cable tv because NO tv is worth paying for. Still have the rabbit ears atop the 19″ set.

    News Opinion show…..that’s an oxymoron……

    I used to enjoy Romper Room……I mean the McLaughlin Group but, since I moved, we don’t get that channel anymore.

  103. aislander says:

    beerBoy writes: “Still have the rabbit ears atop the 19″ set.”

    Then you must have made SOME technologically affirmative move. Otherwise, those rabbit ears on an older TV wouldn’t be able to make anything coherent (to the extent that anything on TV IS coherent) from the digital signal they are now receiving…

  104. The Speaker of the House was interviewed by David Gregory of the notoriously “fair” NBC sunday propaganda show, Meet the Press. Gregory kept trying to get Boehner to say something nasty about Tea Party folks. During a recent show some Tea Party people said that they thought Obama is a Muslim and Gregory was pushing in his usual style to get Boehner to condemn those comments. Boehner told Gregory, “it’s not my job to tell the American people what to think”. Gregory couldn’t let go but Buehner repeatedly put him in his palce. What I wish he would have said was, “I don’t recall the last Speaker of the House condemning liberals for bad mouthing Bush”, but he did manage to make Gregory look like the fool that he and his liberal media peers are.

  105. rr98411 your post at 301 has got to be the best I’ve ever seen. I was laughing out loud reading it because I could relate to those same feelings. The only other one that even begins to compare with those fools on MSNBC is the CNN show with the infamous Elliot Spitzer and his puppet Kathleen Parker. Now there’s a real comedy team. I have to admit though that whenever I need to lift up my sagging spirits, I turn on MSNBC for some much needed comedy relief.

  106. Judas, Newsflash!! I know Mattews and Shultz were not on O’Reilly’s show. I’m referring to their “REACTION” to the interviews! Jeeeeez!

  107. JudasEscargot says:

    aislander – “ageism” as you call it, is what marketing is all about. You don’t sell Geritol to teenagers. You don’t see Ipods to geriatrics.

    Hey, let’s make it racist. You don’t sell certain hair products to caucasians that you sell to blacks.

    I can see I’m getting far too complicated for this forum.

    I’m wondering how Rush has 400 million listeners in a country of 300 million people.

    As usual, the Conservatives are having math difficulties. I can’t wait to see the GOP budget proposal.

  108. Isn’t it O’Donnel who proudly proclaimed ” I am a socialist” on his show? He should have went on and said” I am an idiot and anyone who watches my show is a complete fool”. Speaking of chewing gum on the shoe, whenever I see a post from Judas, I think of the most recent dog pile I’ve stepped in.

  109. Judas, FYI (again), Rush has listeners all over the world! Duh!

  110. JudasEscargot says:

    frosty says:
    February 11, 2011 at 1:08 pm
    The best part of the interview was watching the liberal media types having a conniption fit. Chris Matthews was beside himself and slobbering more than he usually does, Ed Shultz’s face was even more distorted than usual and blood vessels about to burst. Now if that’s not pure enjoyment, what is?

    “frosty says:
    February 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm
    Judas, Newsflash!! I know Matthews and Shultz were not on O’Reilly’s show.”

    Contradicting himself, as usual.

    Now, being a regular listener to Ed Schultz radio show (he does radio AND TV, something O’Reilly failed at), I know what Schultz response was on Monday. He laughed at O’Reilly’s attempt to hatchet the President. The Right Wing bloggers will tell you different, but I get my information from the horse’s mouth, not the horse’s…….well….you know.

  111. JudasEscargot says:

    Frosty….so you are saying that 100% of Americans listen to Rush, plus another 100 million around the world.

    Uh huh……LMAO

  112. JudasEscargot says:

    “frosty says:
    February 13, 2011 at 6:44 pm
    Isn’t it O’Donnel who proudly proclaimed ” I am a socialist”

    NO. And it’s O’Donnell.

    Bernie Sanders, the Senator from Vermont calls himself a socialist because he knows what the word means.

    Maybe you’ll learn and it won’t be such a boogeyman word to you, too.

    BOO!!!!!

  113. JudasEscargot says:

    infants….listening to Rush.

    Well….that could be correct…

    LOLOLOLOL

  114. Judas, can you disprove how many listeners Rush has? I know for sure that all of the liberals wannabees listen because they spend half of their program trying to dispute what Rush says. Do you know of any other media personality that influences politics more than Rush? Huh?

  115. Bernie Sanders! Now there’s a real hero to the left. And yes, O’Donel(l) did admit that he’s a socialist. I heard it, you won’t believe it and I don’t care.

  116. Oh yes, I will agree that Shultz is the horse’s mouth. At last a lib who will on occasion tell the truth.

  117. Judas, I see that it’s your bed time and you’re momma will soon be tucking you in, easy goes it on the thumb sucking, o.k.? Ask her to get you a pacifier. Good night and sweet dreams.

  118. ai – got the digital conversion box. Bought the special antenna for digital signals – didn’t work as well as the old rabbit ears which are held together by duct tape – brought them back, tried another more expensive set, same thing.

  119. JudasEscargot says:

    Is frosty still here or out counting the Limbaugh listeners?

    Psssst….Frosty….the “400 million” was in reference to a dollar amount of a contract.

    rr was changing the channels, as usual, and I was redirecting to audience cumes, as was the original discussion.

    You, on the other hand, fell in the horse manure…..face first.

    400 million listeners……hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

  120. JudasEscargot says:

    “Do you know of any other media personality that influences politics more than Rush? Huh?”

    Nope. When you add up the few that love him and the millions that hate him, no one has more influence than Rush.

  121. I’m sorry Judas, not sure how this could have passed by you. He so hated you know…

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121504302144124805.html

  122. GayLordFauker says:

    frosty:

    I’ve been waiting for a couple of hours. I thought we had a date.

  123. Frosty – sometimes these boards get so serious, I just started writing and that was what came out. Glad you liked it, I had fun writing it.

    The thing with O’Donnell is now that he proclaimed his socialist bent, you know where he is coming from when he states a position. I have a weary eye when someone proclaims they are a centrist, as an example, but litterally everything they do is well left of center.

  124. I saw the Meet the Press interview… the look on Boehner face when the moderator was asking the question was precious… kinda like WTF are you asking me. I was ROTFLMAO… i had to rewind the DVR for a double take.

  125. ItalianSpring says:

    rr98411- you are fantastic. Keep it up.

    I didn’t watch the interview because I have believed for years that O’Really is a closet lib. He reveals little glimpses of this truth on occassion. I strongly suspected he would be serving some basketball sized softballs to the Kenyian and it appears I was right.

  126. GayLord, Sorry about that mix-up with the date. You mis -took me for Judas.

  127. Judas, I never mentioned the number “400” million. But you did at your 6:39 post. Caught again.

  128. Where’s Judas and GayLord? Not up yet? Ummm, looks suspicious to me. “The early bird get’s the worm”. hahahahaha.

  129. IS – I guess “they” got to Boehner since he is now insisting that Obama was born in the US and that he is a Christian…….

  130. yabetchya says:

    frosty says:
    February 14, 2011 at 6:03 am
    Where’s Judas and GayLord? Not up yet? Ummm, looks suspicious to me. “The early bird get’s the worm”. hahahahaha.

    No they have to wait for their other personas… philasumnersue to wake up.

  131. JudasEscargot says:

    “I have a weary eye when someone proclaims they are a centrist, as an example, but litterally everything they do is well left of center. ”

    And I have a weary eye when a Conservative claims to know what center is.

  132. JudasEscargot says:

    “frosty says:
    February 14, 2011 at 5:44 am
    Judas, I never mentioned the number “400” million. But you did at your 6:39 post. Caught again.”

    Frosty is like a child caught with his hand in the cookie jar claiming “I wasn’t taking a cookie”

  133. You are many things Judas, but you ar NOT complicated.

    And bBoy, I hate it when you so predictably fit the stereotype…bragging about your little rabbit ears and tv. We get it. You’re far too cool and sophisiticated to own an excess of toys.

  134. “And I have a weary eye when a Conservative claims to know what center is.”

    A centrist is someone who can’t make up their mind what they are. They are too busy trying to straddle the fence when all they end up doing is slip and fall with the fence in their crouch.

    From what I am reading no one knows what a Conservative nor a Liberal is… and yes that applies to me. I have not a clue anymore as it has been so basterized.

  135. A centrist is someone who has an open mind and can see the good and bad in the extremes and doesn’t take either side for granted.

  136. Polago says:
    February 14, 2011 at 8:12 am
    A centrist is someone who has an open mind and can see the good and bad in the extremes and doesn’t take either side for granted.”

    This is a beginning to the process of analysis but at some point you have to take a stand on a position. Please help me to understand where the centrist, “No Labels”  position for abortion is as an example…. What is the centrist position for taking a mini-vacuum cleaner and sucking an embryo out of a body vs a woman’s undeniable right to choose what to do with her body?
     
    Death penalty – Let’s show some mercy for a guy who cuts the liver out of his kids, sautés them and serves them with a nice Chianti and think he is redeemable and can return a functional member of society. Life imprisonment… sure as long as someone else pays for it.
     
    At some point that “centrist”, after seeing both sides, will need to take a position… a stand… one, I hope, based on principles and not on labels such as conservative nor liberal. Definitely not based on party affiliation – Dem/GOP.

  137. Your assumption that a centrist hasn’t taken a stand on the issues is faulty, rr98411.

    Your assumption that there is ‘a Centrist position’ is equally faulty.

    Your mind is closed. That’s why you have to align yourself with one of the extremes.

  138. Roncella says:

    Polago, Centrists are like flags blowing in the wind. They are slow to or never will take a stand on any issues.

    It takes courage to defend your beliefs no matter if your Conservative or Liberal or Independent. You actually have to tade a stand on issues and believe in yourself.

  139. Polago says:
    “Your assumption that a centrist hasn’t taken a stand on the issues is faulty, rr98411.”

    OK, I used an example, I am all ears yet again for a “centrist position” (oh wait there is none… true that) or potential solution if you like on that issue. You have another? OK, I am listening… A person doesn’t have to take a stand on anything for their whole life if they choose not to. They are easily identified, it is like watching a leave blow wherever the wind will take them.

    “Your assumption that there is ‘a Centrist position’ is equally faulty.”

    Dude I wrote… “This is a beginning to the process of analysis…” What???

    “Your mind is closed. That’s why you have to align yourself with one of the extremes.”

    I have seen the error of my ways. Thank you for holding a mirror to my “closed” mind, please fill me with your wisdom. One more time, how do we protect the itty bitty “tissue” growing inside my body while balancing my right to choose what to do with it?

    Wooo, a little windy today…

  140. flags, leaves… the methaphors are flying today… no pun intended.

  141. sozo – not sure how you think that is bragging. That I’m too cheap to pay for cable. Never said that I don’t watch a lot crappy TV.

  142. the methaphors are flying today

    Is that like a simile for meth heads only without saying like?

  143. bBoy, keep up the good work.

    sozo, rocnecella, and rr98, centrists follow the idea of the golden mena, and have a firm range of positions. Personal example, as a centrist I support the right of a citizen to bear arms, and depending on the bill might vote to close the gun show loop hole or to restrict certain types of firearms and excessories.

  144. “sozo, rocnecella, and rr98, centrists follow the idea of the golden mena, and have a firm range of positions. Personal example, as a centrist I support the right of a citizen to bear arms, and depending on the bill might vote to close the gun show loop hole or to restrict certain types of firearms and excessories. “

    First – I don’t believe there is any such thing as a centrist. As a side note, I am beginning to have issues with the labels liberal and conservative. They are starting to lose their meaning…. Starting, still got a ways to go.

    Second – your example, citizens right to bear arms – your position is not that of a centrist (see above), it is one of compromise (or at least an attempt at one). You have the right to bear arms, any law on the books is a restriction to that absolute right. We, as a society, have compromised our rights over the years. (libel laws, TSA groping, etc) This is not a liberal nor conservative issue. We are just dumb enough to make it one.

    You don’t have to explain/justify your rights to anyone, they exist for all of us… “conservative” “liberal” “centrist” “jerk” human being…

  145. Judas, I’m still waiting for you to tell me where I said Rush has 400 million listeners. The cookie jar analogy didn’t quite get there. Oh! what’s that I just stepped in?

  146. The best way to get to a liberal, besides telling the truth, is to laugh at them. Since liberals are not known for having a sense of humor, it bewilders them when someone laughs at their ideology. Practically everything I hear and read from the left is either too outrageous to believe or is just a downright misrepresentation. Humor is good for the soul, I guess that’s why God gave us liberals.

  147. Did I ask you what a centrist is, xring? I don’t believe I did.

  148. Sozo you got caught in the back blast.

    Frosty, a bird is know by the song it sings.

  149. JudasEscargot says:

    “Roncella says:
    February 14, 2011 at 9:45 am
    Polago, Centrists are like flags blowing in the wind. They are slow to or never will take a stand on any issues.

    It takes courage to defend your beliefs no matter if your Conservative or Liberal or Independent. You actually have to tade a stand on issues and believe in yourself.

    Why wouldn’t an Independent be known as centrist?

    How do you know if YOUR a Conservative? You believe in YOU’RESELF

    There is some of that political humor that frosty claims to enjoy.

  150. The definition of a centrist differs by one’s own self-labeling.

    Someone who believes he is a centrist believes that centrists are reasonable people who think the same way he does.

    Someone who defines himself as a leftist or a rightist defines a centrist as someone who isn’t really paying attention, can’t commit passionately to the obviously superior logic of his ideology and can’t see the “truth” about how bad the other side is.

  151. As I am against abortion, yet I feel that every woman should have the right to believe what they want about abortion, and a choice in the matter. That puts me in neither of the two camps that you seem to have chosen as being the only two camps worthy of recognition, rr98411.

    You’re apparently closed minded on the subject of choice. I am not.

    My position may not be as polarized as yours, but I challenge you to explain how my position has any less conviction than yours.

  152. First – I reread my post and what I asked for is the so called “centrist” position for a powder keg issue such as Pro-Choice/Pro-Life. Chosen because I don’t see a “centrist” position on this issue. I took no position, I presented a case…

    Second – my position is as a male, I am against abortion, yet I feel that every woman has the right to believe what they want about abortion, they have sole domain to their body and the sole choice in the matter what to do with their body.

    Third – I am not seeing too much difference between your stated position and my stated position above. That being said, is our position “Liberal” or “Conservative” (ps – I have no clue), I don’t see centrist as we actually have a position on the issue. A little nod to Judas, if we need a label – Independent (again what the heck does that mean, we don’t drink the liberal/conservative kool-aid. But based on our respective posting you have been accused of being a liberal and now I, a conservative. Go figure???).

    Per the Choice/Life example, our believes are in conflict with a potential action. The “camps” are either abort the embryo or have the child to term, help me out if there is another option.

    I had to go back and reread the postings that got us here… I was referring to a posting that implied I was a conservative when I have no clue what I am anymore. A woman has the absolute choice, I like the Bill of Rights… all of them, why do we allow ourselves to constantly get talked into accepting infringement of those rights? why spend more money than we absolutely have to for government services, is cable service really an essential service?, are there really that many people we need to provide a safety net for?…

    Oh well, a little off the subject, thanks for the feedback.

  153. xring “a bird is known by the song it sings”. Really? Do crows sing? Do sparrows spar? Do finches finch? Do robins rob? I could get into species such as hawks, eagles etc,etc, but you just added a new definition of what a bird species is known by.

  154. frosty – that comment is astounding and may well be one of the most absurd things you have ever written. The sad thing is, I think you thought that was clever word play.

  155. rr98411, I hate to jump into your debate with others, but what I have seen in the thread is that you would like everyone to use your own made up definition of “centrist” politics as the basis for discussion, yet others want to use the more wide-spread usages that have been defined for decades, even centuries in this country. It is OK if you want to use “centrist” to mean something no one else agrees that it means, but then you need to accept their definitions, also.

    The centrist positions in this country are not necessarily compromises and do not necessarily lack conviction. It appears to me that your view on the matter is that everyone should base all decisions on ideology. Purist ideologies, in my mind, have not been what this country has been about.

    We are a country based on rationalism, and decisions are best if they are made based on the best scientific evidence available. I think our founding fathers made that very clear in their discussions about what our country should be, practical and rational. Even what their statement of “All men are created equal” meant, a very ideological statement, has been modified by rational examination. That is one reason, in my mind, our country has been strong and has progressed.

    When decisions have been made based on religious ideology or based on willful ignorance, such as the time of the “Know Nothing” party, we have regressed. During my time in the South during the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s, the basis for not granting equal rights to racial minorities was expressed to me on religious beliefs or class-based ideology. So, too, now with the anti-Gay discussions. To use your example, our knowledge of when a group of cells becomes a human is not perfect, but we have gained greater understanding, and our laws on abortion have reflected that. We also use rational examination of the consequences of our laws to determine relative harm to the mother and to society. There was a time that eugenics was a prominent ideology and there were moves to allow all abortions on demand at any stage of the pregnancy if it would make a healthier and”prettier” society. We looked at that practically and what it would mean for our society and for individuals in our society and for the emerging human life, and rejected it. Some religions claim that God has told them what must be done, and they use that ideology instead of scientific evidence or rational evaluation, and I object to that. So, the centrist position on abortions, as in other political arenas can change, based on our best knowledge and rational evaluations, but that does not make them compromises or lacking conviciton, or somehow suspect.

  156. Hey Tuddo welcome, no problemo…

    Nope, you don’t have to accept anything I write, nor do I any of your stuff. I just made a statement, a response was made. Simply just got me thinking. I am just trying to understand and with the responses I see your point of view, but…

    I read your fourth paragraph and still wonder… If I want “A” and you want “C” we agree on “B”, is “B” now the “centrist” position? I submit we have compromised to move forward but again is there really a centrist position on the ProChoice/Life issue? (as an perfect black and white example) I submit no, both sides have just compromised. I believe your religious based example is valid but an attempt to offset it with eugenics is a little much. I get where you’re going, you made your point, again just a little much.

    I had this long response but upon rereading my musings it just boils down to… we just simply have a different point of view. In the future when I see the word centrist (as well as liberal, conservative, compromise, extremist, etc), in the interest of playing in the conversational sandbox, I understand from yours as well as other responses what it means and will gingerly play along as best I can.

    Form your second paragraph, we need to base decisions on principles and standards. The hecka funny part is, I noticed we all tend to agree on what those principles and standards are, we all just appear to disagree on how to implement them moving forward and where the collective line is.

  157. We are seeing the lack of centrist views in the Republican Party right now. Libertarians have allied themselves with value-based rightists, and both of them to a great extent depend on an ideological stance rather than a practical rationality. It will be interesting to see the political compromises when the values-based pols clash with the freedom-based ones on key issues. Whatever the results, the Republican party has moved so far to the ideological right that even if they compromise it won’t be a centrist position they stand for.

  158. “… the Republican party has moved so far to the ideological right that even if they compromise it won’t be a centrist position they stand for.”

    This statement would be a perfect example of why I think the term “centrist” is irrelevant. Basically if a person is to ones right they are “conservative” if they are beyond an arms length then they are probably considered “extreme”.

    Saving a buck, as an example, and living within your means is actually a centrist view… how we get there and the direction we come from seems to be where the rational high-speed train to saving goes off the rail.

  159. rr, if you believe the argument we are having is “living within your means”, then you have bought the far right propaganda. The argument that drove me out of the Republican party is their belief that we do not need a healthy middle class, but that we need a ruling, landed gentry of the top wealth owners and corporations. Theirr current attack on civil service workers in the Federal Government and in states is part of that campaign. Their vows to destroy unions is coming true with their assaults on workers rights in Congress and in numerous Republican-led states. Their vows to dramatically reduce workplace safety laws, environmental safety, food safety and other regulatory processes is being proposed. Their assault on consumer rights legislation is full-frontal.

    This nation has the means. We are at a 50-year low in the amount of taxes we pay. If you believe the propaganda the far right puts out you would think we were at an all-time high. Corporate earnings are reaching all-time highs, and profits are at an all-time high. If you believe the far right propaganda, you would think that corporations are struggling. CEO pay is at an all-time high. If you believe the far right, you might think we need to continue the enormous subsidies we give to the highest earning corporations in the world, the oil companies.

    All of this comes on the backs of the middle class which is struggling because of the obscene wealth of the wealthiest and the corporations. The last time that the wealthiest 1% owned over 90% of the nation’s wealth was in the 1890’s, and Republican policies are driving us closer and closer to that record. This is no accident, it is an assault on what made our country great. My Eisenhower Republican centrist views are now called “socialist” , liberal and leftist by the Republican Party.

  160. Tuddo – remember Gore Vidal’s rejoinder that in the US we have two Right wings of one Party….

    And……just to remember that some who I think are completely whacko sometimes find places of agreement – the PATRIOT Act is being held up by Tea Party freshman representatives – Kuchinich has stated that he is in agreement with their views on this.

  161. “rr, if you believe the argument we are having is “living within your means”, then you have bought the far right propaganda.”

    I know you use the term “if you believe” but where you get that I buy the far right propaganda, I have not a clue. I just used an example to illustrate the term “centrist”.

    Your whole premise is cloaked in… how about we go there… “far left propaganda” I don’t believe a lot of what you state in your posting (the classic “right” side of the house). And if it makes you feel better, nor do I believe the left side of the house.

    “a ruling, landed gentry”, “current attack” “destroy unions” “assaults on workers’ rights” “assault on consumer rights”… wow and that’s just the first paragraph…. Jeeze.

    Ok… whew, where do we begin… forget it, maybe we don’t… gotta use the word – “if” you believe you are a “centrist” (whatever the heck that means), or at best left of center… then this is how these conversations go off the rail.

    Taxes… 50-year low… so what, stop spending so much, duh.

    Wow, and I’m an extremist for that position. Please…

  162. Roncella says:

    98411, When reading tuddos posts, please understand they represent a very far far left liberal, progressive view point on everything she says.

    She however does not see herself as a far leftest. She really believes she is in the middle somewhere.

    I have a Conservative point of view, anyone who reads my comments understands that, even I understand that, thats not the case for tuddo.

  163. Roncella, my views are in the center right on fiscal issues. I guess you’ve missed my posts on being against mismanagement of our bus system, needing to tighten our approach to government and needing to pay for what we ask for, both by taxes and fees. Deficit spending by having huge government and increasing the size of government and not paying for those services was the Republican Party’s main push for many decades starting with Reagan. Spend more, and lower taxes is one of the reasons I did not like where the Republican Party was headed. If we are going to demand government services and increase them, like Republicans did until recently, then we have to apy for them. That is a conservative point of view.

    I am for living within one’s means, but I am not part of the crowd that thinks the government of “we the people” is an evil in our society. I am not part of the crowd that blames hard working middle class civil servants for the financial collapse caused by extremely wealthy CEO’s and high-stakes gamblers and those who removed financial oversight from protecting consumers of financial services. I have never agreed with the liberals on much of anything in the fiscal world. In fact, I am all for more tolling on our highways, higher fees for government services and full financial disclosures for all government transactions. When I do take a positiion for certain services to people, it is usually absed on the fact that it will improve our capitalistic sopciety. health care for instance is a good thing for me as a business man. It allows my workers to pay more attention to their job and less on worring about being sick. It takes a big burden off of me to run an expensive insurance business along with my regular businesses.

    One of the reasons I opposed the Republican Party so much during Bush has a lot to do with their financial mismanagement of the Iraq War and the idiocy of not making the people pay for those wars, but borrowing from China and reducing taxes instead of reducing the costs of war or requiring us to pay for them.

    I have admitted many times that I am a progressive in the area of treating people equally under our laws, which I am often amazed is considered an unusual position by the right until I realize that it is the same mentality as when I grew up in the South of a class-based society and the need for some to ahve people to be beneath them and subjugated to them in order to feel superior and better. When I look at the policies being proposed and the statements by many of the Southern Republicans, especially, I harken back to the arguments against the voting acts of the 1960’s, the marriage laws against interracial marriage, etc..

    Then and now, Southerners feel very strongly that only property owners should be able to vote on tax bills. school levies, and other laws that impact on everyone. That was the source of the “landed gentry” comment. I don’t think there is much sentiment in this part of the world, but this part of the world does not rule the Republican party. Southerm Republicans with those deep-seated values of a return to a class-based society are currently in power.

    BTW, I have stated on numerous threads that I am a great grandfather. If you want to call me “she” because you don’t recall my gender and as an alternate to using the more usual masculine pronoun to show your solidarity with equal rights for women, that’s OK by me.

  164. Roncella says:

    tuddo, I am sorry for using she, I thought you were female.

    You and I may be about the same age I’m not sure, but after reading many of your posts, I get the feeling that your beliefs have been formed years ago. My beliefs have changed over the years.

    I was very liberal in my twenties in my thinking. However as the years went by and I learned more and more about politics and politicians, I saw that I actually believed more of what Conservatives said than liberals or progressives.

    Again maybe no one has been honest with you but I do not see you as middle on very much, and thats ok, you just need to understand that your not middle or center right on very much, at least on comments I have read in your many posts.

    By the way your simple comment that you do not believe that we the people is an evil in our society, shows exactly where your beliefs actually are.

    Accordng to your many posts you are of the belief that Government is the answer to all poblems affecting everyone. You actually believe that the more government the better in all citizens lives affecting everything we do, all aspects of our lifes. If you really believe that, you most certainly are a very left liberal believer, and thats ok, just admit it to yourself.

  165. Tuddo – can’t argue with the GOP and their version of spending. I understand some of the issues behind some of the spending but they must and appear to have taken responsibility for that. Movin’ on…

    “Spend more, and lower taxes….” Do you mean revenue or rates? Lower tax rates are not a bad thing especially when they have typically lead to higher tax revenues. My problem is not with the revenue side of the house, They, the people “elected”, have not convinced me that they know what to do with the revenue they get. That has and always will be the issue for me. You want more tax revenue then you can have it, just stretch the dollar we give you.

    As far as the finance industry, check out any GAO or Commission report. You will find a few themes in them. One – the law or regulation typically existed. Two – the regulators missed it (too much surfing it seems or too dumb to catch it in the case of Maddoff). The Dem solution typically is more regulation… why? (yes, I know I am using a broad brush here).

    OK with the Bush / Iraq stuff but it’s fair to add that the deficits were dropping three years in a row since 2003. Does it make it right, nope. But he is not the boogie man he is made out to be and frankly I am bored with it. Enough already.

    Stuff from the South. Not gonna go there. That’s your life. Ok, I acknowledge my past in the so called “mean streets” of New York during the 60’s and 70’s. I’d also like to think I am not currently defined by those experiences. Movin’ on….

    Some of your generalizations just kill me. The Dem’s of the 50’s 60’s were no angels either. I am not pointing to Dem bad behavior to justify GOP bad behavior but it is 2011 and the only thing consistent between then and now is that they were slimy then and they are slimy now.

  166. Ron, you misstate my remarks. I do not believe “the more government the better”. What I do believe is that there is a role for government in the betterment of our soicety and our lives. When the rolke of betterment of our society is congruent with the improvement of our capitalistic economy, then I am for it. That used to be a very centrist view. If it is liberal, it is only because the far right and libertarian view has taken over so much. We had a big war that is often forgotten in this country, The Pig War. It was very early on testing what the belief was about the role of our central government. Could the central government tax its citizens to pay for projects that did not directly benefit them was one of the key elements. The answer from our founding fathers was a resounding “Yes”. Could the central government use the taxes for bettering the lives of the weak and disenfranchized (non-property ownes) was another part of that war. The answer was a resounding “Yes” from our founding fathers. It is not just my views that were developed early on about these questions, it has been the prevailing vioew of this country since its founding. The libertarians lost that war in the 1790’s and they will lose again to those of us with more centrist positiions based on the Cojnstitution and our founding father’s beliefs..

    We have too much history that shows that we need some regulations and oversight to keep the severe abuses of a totally free market to a minimum. When companies like BP willfully ignore the dangers known to them, when tobacco companies lie under oath, when food and health safety is willfully harmed for profit, we need a central government that has the power to rein in the abuses. That used to be a very centrist point of view. If it is considered liberal now, it is only because the far right wants to ignore our history and harm the American people with their policies just for an ideology of personal greed, not for a capitalistic economy that is beneficial to the entire society.

  167. rr, the only disagreement from me about your comments is that you need to look at the revised, real deficits in the three years after 2003. If you remember, Bush kept the cost of the war off the books. They have been added back now, so there is real info out there on that.

    I would add that those aligning themselves with the Republican party, for watever reason, should look very closely at the resurgence of the Southern anti-minority and Southern property-owners-only voting views. Fairness and equality under the law is one of my big things. I do think it takes a central government to guarantee those rights, and I think that is plainly carved in stone in our founding documents.

  168. Tudoo – as far as the Bush / War stuff my info is from CBO.Gov

    GOP – come on with the Southern Anit / Poverty stuff. I am sometimes follow that stuff until I hit a dead end, the roaches scatter with the light of truth, or even when I am drunk or stoned, it still doesn’t make sense. Sorry, don’t see it.

    Not to butt in, but what the heck… when and if the founding papa’s envisioned a society where the “weak and disenfranchized” benefited from a central government tax, i don’t believed they envision that @48% of them would not contribute via income tax.

    As far as regulation is concerned, we do have regulation, lots of it. When the fan gets full of the brown stuff, it usually aint because their was no regulation but the regulators were not doing their jobs. It has been consistent. BP as a recent example. Oh yeah they and the drilling company screwed up, but the regulators were not up to snuff either. We can demonize BP if that make ya feel better but Uncle Sam also needs to look in the mirror also. And sure enough, without even knowing the cause, the solution… you guessed it, more regulation.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0