Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Arizona
555 posts, read 877,248 times
Reputation: 346

Advertisements

He does have more people that disagree with him on his show than any other political commentator. He is not afraid to debate anyone and that is to his credit. His problem is he interrupts some guests way too much. He had state Senator Russell Pierce from Arizona on recently to talk about the senator's campaign to withhold state birth certificates from anchor babies. He interrupted Pierce so much I never did hear how Pierce justifies this from the constitutional point of view.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,771 posts, read 104,756,288 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd View Post
the above comment proves you dont know much about OReily.

in deed Bill does have some things in common with conservatives but he is no "orthodox" fellow. He has some things in common with cons and some with libs and while he will attack a president on one hand, he will defend the guy where he agrees.

he has always done this.
He has been more than fair to Obama over the past 2 years. You are right.

Nita
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:32 PM
 
1,786 posts, read 3,462,096 times
Reputation: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
^ this.

liberals' knowledge of bill o is generally limited to what they've been fed by huff&puff, media morons & the daily kossack.
As is the Conservatives knowledge of Jon Stewart - but we put up with it last week. Welcome to the party!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:35 PM
 
Location: On Top
12,373 posts, read 13,196,047 times
Reputation: 4027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roguer View Post
O'Reilly is just trying to take even more of Oberfugle's dwindled audience.
Or Beck's whose viewers have dropped from a high of 3.7 to just over 1.9 million
according to Nielsen ratings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:40 PM
 
10,875 posts, read 13,813,272 times
Reputation: 4896
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
^ this.

liberals' knowledge of bill o is generally limited to what they've been fed by huff&puff, media morons & the daily kossack.
Liberals aren't democrats chief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Lake Norman, North Carolina
1,213 posts, read 1,632,253 times
Reputation: 393
Quote:
Originally Posted by meson View Post
Or Beck's whose viewers have dropped from a high of 3.7 to just over 1.9 million
according to Nielsen ratings.
Hmmm. The insane Oberfugle comes on opposite O'Reilly and Beck comes on at 5:00?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 03:22 PM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,670,668 times
Reputation: 20885
Quote:
Originally Posted by carterstamp View Post
Wait...did I wake up in a parallel universe? Bill O'Reilly defends President Obama's pressure on BP to set up an escrow fund.


Right Now - Mark Levin attacks 'phony, populist idiot' O'Reilly over BP fund
Mark Levin attacks 'phony, populist idiot' O'Reilly over BP fund


Twice last week, Bill O'Reilly booked conservative Republican stars on his show -- Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) -- and came at them from the unexpected stance of defending President Obama. With Palin, he defended Obama's handling of the BP spill. With Bachmann, he disagreed with her criticism of how the BP escrow fund was set-up.

All of that sparked an outraged rant from radio host Mark Levin, which the Right Scoop has captured and put online. In it, Levin makes the case that a lot of conservatives who don't have to worry about re-election are making -- that, yes, the president "shook down" BP, and that O'Reilly is a "phony, populist idiot" for thinking otherwise.


And this means........................................what?

I am a conservative and think O'Reilly and Hannity are idiots. I think Beck is way too negative. Rush just rehashes the party line.

Michael Savage is about the only talk show host who does not carry the water for either party and can still think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 04:14 PM
 
2,085 posts, read 2,469,400 times
Reputation: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
So the one time when O'Reilly doesn't bow down to the conservatives and big business you want to kick him to the curb?
When he's saying something stupid, yes.
Bachman doesn't want him to controll the money that BP has to pay out, because she knows it will not go where it is needed. You can't trust our government with money. That is what she is saying. She knows that BP has to pay, she just doesn't trust Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 04:23 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC
402 posts, read 853,222 times
Reputation: 237
Why is this news? He often defends Obama and the Democrats. While a Conservative, he's actually fairly moderate if you think about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2010, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,190 posts, read 19,466,581 times
Reputation: 5305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waianaegirl View Post
When he's saying something stupid, yes.
Bachman doesn't want him to controll the money that BP has to pay out, because she knows it will not go where it is needed. You can't trust our government with money. That is what she is saying. She knows that BP has to pay, she just doesn't trust Obama.
So instead choosing big oil to do the right thing is better?? Choosing a company that we know from internal e-mails took shortcuts and cut corners revolving around the security of the well?? A company who knew that the spill was perhaps greater than what they were originally letting on??

The purpose of the fund is to make sure BP pays for it, and to make sure those who need the help, get the help ASAP, not waiting upwards of 20 years in order to get the help, which is exactly what has happened with some people in the Exxon-Valdez spill of 1989.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:56 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top