Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Rapist Settles His Lawsuit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Well, in all honesty I don't think it hurt his career much. The sheep that loved him before will still love him. The rest of us were already pretty sure he was an idiot...

    So he's rather insulated if he settles. If he fights it and loses though, he would be done in the only area that he could get a job as a journalist - working for a heavily right-slanted station.

    He's making a good business choice. I can't fault the guy for that.

    Alastor.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Alastor
      Well, in all honesty I don't think it hurt his career much. The sheep that loved him before will still love him. The rest of us were already pretty sure he was an idiot...

      So he's rather insulated if he settles. If he fights it and loses though, he would be done in the only area that he could get a job as a journalist - working for a heavily right-slanted station.

      He's making a good business choice. I can't fault the guy for that.

      Alastor.
      I guess I would be considered one of the "sheep" that loved him before. But I don't really like him much anymore, nor do I listen/watch his show.
      Thanks for the memories, John. We will always remember you.

      You look great in Canton! Perhaps I'll get to see you some day...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by elwaymvp
        Honestly, I haven't exactly held Bill O'Reilly in the highest esteem as of late. He seems to be playing both sides a bit, trying to increase his fan base or something. I don't know about this whole scandal thing. I don't think he did it, but it definitely does not improve my view of him.



        Okay, you all can pick up your mandibles from the floor. It must really surprise you that a conservative like me would disagree with O'Reilly.
        i'm not surprised, o'reilly isn't particularly conservative - against the death penalty for instance.
        i don't watch any of the news tv shows anymore, but i'll listen to radio shows in my car. since some of you gave opinions on these guys: i can listen to o'reilly more than hannity simply b/c his opinions are at least occasionally unpredictable. hannity, IMO, would support bush if he crowned himself king and invaded canada simply b/c he is a republican. i don't think hannity is intellectually honest either - his usual technique is to get people to answer questions posed in a yes or no format that, if the person is to be intellectually honest, have no yes or no answer. for instance: "is america the best country in the world?" well this would depend on how you define best - one could certainly make an argument that so long as the US allows baby murder, the body count of which makes us the greatest murdering country in human history (perhaps 2nd - i believe we murdered some 50 million children - china may have beat that under mao, if you include starvation), we can't called greatest. anyways, when the caller hesitates, hannity jumps on them and says they're anti-america blah blah. its good entertainment for the masses i guess, but i don't think hannity is stupid - so his use of this technique must be intentional, which would make him intellectually dishonest. that isn't a hypo btw, i remember hearing that conversation a year or 2 ago.
        Last edited by mattos; 10-31-2004, 08:23 PM.
        sigpic
        go broncos
        share the sidewalk
        liberty > safety . . . ron paul '12!

        Comment


        • #19
          I admit that I over-stated it when I said it wouldn't affect O'Reily... I mean clearly there are some people that can take or leave him, and who will change their opinion of him based off of this incident.

          But he does have a weird groupie following out there. One that frankly, sort of spooks me out. I don't like Dead Heads, either, and there really is a kind of a cultish following of O'Reily out there. Sort of like Limbaugh I guess, or Jackson, or SHarpton. They all scare me a little. I guess we need the weirdos to remind us of who the sane people are though.

          Alastor.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by mattos
            i'm not surprised, o'reilly isn't particularly conservative - against the death penalty for instance.
            i don't watch any of the news tv shows anymore, but i'll listen to radio shows in my car. since some of you gave opinions on these guys: i can listen to o'reilly more than hannity simply b/c his opinions are at least occasionally unpredictable. hannity, IMO, would support bush if he crowned himself king and invaded canada simply b/c he is a republican. i don't think hannity is intellectually honest either - his usual technique is to get people to answer questions posed in a yes or no format that, if the person is to be intellectually honest, have no yes or no answer. for instance: "is america the best country in the world?" well this would depend on how you define best - one could certainly make an argument that so long as the US allows baby murder, the body count of which makes us the greatest murdering country in human history (perhaps 2nd - i believe we murdered some 50 million children - china may have beat that under mao, if you include starvation), we can't called greatest. anyways, when the caller hesitates, hannity jumps on them and says they're anti-america blah blah. its good entertainment for the masses i guess, but i don't think hannity is stupid - so his use of this technique must be intentional, which would make him intellectually dishonest. that isn't a hypo btw, i remember hearing that conversation a year or 2 ago.
            I don't think Hannity would support somebody just because they were a Republican. He likes several Democrats (he has a very good relationship with Zell Miller, for example), and he definitely disagrees with some Republicans (John McCain and Rudy Guiliani are not exactly his favorite individuals, nor is Schwarzenegger). And I have heard times when he has criticized Bush for something (though I will agree it is rare).

            Some of the questions he asks I do not agree with, like the example you cited (I think I remember hearing that specific example). However, a lot of people like to do whatever they can to avoid answering questions, and he is just trying to keep them on task and not let them evade. That is one of the primary reasons I like him.
            Thanks for the memories, John. We will always remember you.

            You look great in Canton! Perhaps I'll get to see you some day...

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by elwaymvp
              Some of the questions he asks I do not agree with, like the example you cited (I think I remember hearing that specific example). However, a lot of people like to do whatever they can to avoid answering questions, and he is just trying to keep them on task and not let them evade. That is one of the primary reasons I like him.
              i don't have a problem w/ him trying to keep the caller on task - so much debating is useless b/c of that very fact; that people just can't stay on one argument. my problem w/ him is that he poses a question he knows cannot be answered w/ a yes or no and then tries to make them answer w/ a yes or no.
              sigpic
              go broncos
              share the sidewalk
              liberty > safety . . . ron paul '12!

              Comment


              • #22
                Well said, Mattos.

                Alastor.

                Comment

                Working...
                X