Scarborough blasts O'Reilly for being GOP "suck-up"
On the January 4 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country, host Joe Scarborough responded to Fox News host Bill O'Reilly's attacks on NBC and MSNBC by asserting that O'Reilly was "way off base on MSNBC, on NBC, and certainly on me. And I challenge you to debate me anytime, anyplace, anywhere." Scarborough further challenged O'Reilly to "find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress, that was against exploding deficits, that was against reckless spending, and was against turning Congress into the type of swamp that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years." Concluding, Scarborough stated, "That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative. That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years."
O'Reilly has recently taken to attacking NBC and MSNBC for what he perceived to be "Bush-hat[ing]" and "irresponsible" reporting of Saddam Hussein's execution. For instance, on the January 3 broadcast of his television show, O'Reilly asserted that "NBC News led the way" among the "Bush-hat[ing]" media because "elements over there" were "calling the execution a PR disaster for the USA." O'Reilly was presumably referring to a January 2 report on Saddam's execution by NBC News Middle East correspondent Richard Engel during NBC's Nightly News, in which Engel reported that the "execution wasn't just a PR disaster for the Iraqi government. The gallows were on a U.S. military base, and many in the region are blaming the U.S. for letting it happen."
On the January 3 Scarborough Country, Scarborough first addressed O'Reilly's remarks, stating: "Bill O'Reilly says NBC News hates President Bush and sides with Saddam Hussein or at least feels sorry for Saddam Hussein because some of us questioned how the lynch mob took over the execution scene." Scarborough then went on to say that "today, the United States government appeared to share our concern over the way that disgusting spectacle played out." Scarborough later addressed Saddam's execution, explaining that he was "concerned about the United States of America and our reputation" because "there was a lynch mob, people screaming [Muqtada] al-Sadr's name while Saddam Hussein was being executed." Scarborough also said that the execution "was a debacle" and that "[a] lot of people are embarrassed, and they should be embarrassed, " because this is "a guy, who I've loathed for 20-30 years," and he appeared to be "the most dignified guy there."
On the January 4 editions of both his television and radio shows, O'Reilly continued to attack NBC News' coverage of Saddam's execution. On his radio show, O'Reilly asserted that "[t]hey are an activist network now. They hate Bush across the board. They hate him. Their White House correspondent, David Gregory, hates him. The Today show hates him. The Nightly hates him. Everybody hates him, across the board." Further, on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly stated that he was "disturbed by" NBC's reporting " because I don't believe it's honest. I believe it's a calculated decision to attack people in the hopes of getting viewers, which is sleazy to say the least." O'Reilly then claimed that every member of Today was liberal, including "[t]he weatherman." O'Reilly asserted that it was a "business decision to go to the left" to gain viewers.
Additionally, on The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly falsely claimed, "There isn't one conservative ... not one conservative commentator that works for NBC News at this time." In fact, at least two MSNBC hosts -- Scarborough and Tucker Carlson -- are known conservatives. Scarborough is a former Republican Florida Congressman and Carlson is a well-known conservative commentator who used to write for the conservative publications Policy Review and the Weekly Standard, in addition to formerly being the conservative co-host of CNN's now-canceled program Crossfire.
On January 4, Scarborough devoted a segment of his program to responding to O'Reilly's fresh attacks on NBC, in which he noted O'Reilly's falsehood that "not one conservative commentator ... works for NBC News." Scarborough also took O'Reilly to task for noting that White House press secretary Tony Snow called Gregory a "partisan," without noting that Snow apologized for doing so. Scarborough concluded the segment by issuing a challenge to O'Reilly:
SCARBOROUGH: Bill O'Reilly ... You're ... way off base on MSNBC, on NBC and certainly on me. And I challenge you to debate me anytime, anyplace, anywhere, and find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress, that was against exploding deficits, that was against reckless spending, and was against turning Congress into the type of swamp that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years.
That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative. That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years.
As Media Matters for America has previously noted, O'Reilly has argued that "if you attack someone publicly ... you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward." Yet, despite this pledge, O'Reilly has not hosted a single NBC representative to address his very public attacks.
Scarborough and O'Reilly recently clashed after O'Reilly blasted NBC News' decision to refer to the ongoing sectarian violence in Iraq as a "civil war," as Media Matters noted. On the November 28 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly said, "[T]he American media is not helping anyone by oversimplifying the situation and rooting for the USA to lose in Iraq." After airing the clip on the November 29 broadcast of Scarborough Country, Scarborough said O'Reilly is "suggesting that NBC is rooting for America to lose in Iraq" and asked: "What is going on at Fox News? Why is Bill O'Reilly claiming that my network, NBC News, is rooting for terrorists? That's truly insulting to me."
From the January 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight.
Blaming America for Saddam's execution -- that's the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo." As soon as I heard Saddam Hussein was going to be executed, I knew the Bush-haters would swing into action and, as usual, they did not let me down.
NBC News led the way: elements over there calling the execution a PR disaster for the USA. Did you think Saddam's hanging was a PR disaster? I didn't. The mass murderer got what he deserved.
We also heard an NBC commentator say President Bush is allowing Americans to be killed in Iraq for money and other insane stuff. Unbelievable.
[...]
O'REILLY: But it is also true that the strategy in Iraq was flawed and the war has not gone well, so you can argue competence all day long -- that is valid -- but ascribing evil motives to the president is irresponsible and no legitimate news organization should be party to it, NBC News included.
It is long past time to drop the Bush-hating and work to secure the best results in Iraq for America and the world.
The New York Sun reporting today: There is now rock solid proof that Iran is behind much of the violence in Iraq. Looking forward to seeing [columnist] Robert Scheer, The Baltimore Sun, and NBC take on Iran.
As for Saddam, anyone who puts his well being ahead of America's is misguided and a fool. No doubt. And that's the Memo.
From the January 3 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country:
SCARBOROUGH: Tonight, Bill O'Reilly says NBC News hates President Bush and sides with Saddam Hussein or at least feels sorry for Saddam Hussein because some of us questioned how the lynch mob took over the execution scene. I want you to take a look at what aired with Bill O'Reilly's show about an hour ago.
O'REILLY [video clip]: As soon as I heard Saddam Hussein was going to be executed, I knew the Bush-haters would swing into action and, as usual, they did not let me down. NBC News led the way: elements over there calling the execution a PR disaster for the USA. Did you think Saddam's hanging was a PR disaster? I didn't. The mass murderer got what he deserved. You also heard an NBC commentator say President Bush is allowing Americans to be killed in Iraq for money, and other insane stuff. Unbelievable.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, today the United States government appeared to share our concern over the way that disgusting spectacle played out. White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters that President Bush hasn't even seen the now-infamous video. And military officials in both the United States and Iraq are shifting the blame as to why there was so much chaos during the final moments of Saddam Hussein's life. And, of course, arrests followed. It was a debacle. A lot of people are embarrassed, and they should be embarrassed.
And you know what? I can't speak for NBC News; I can just speak for myself. I really don't care about Saddam Hussein's last two minutes of life. I'm not concerned about a man that gassed the Kurds. I'm not concerned about a man who slaughtered Shiites for 40 years. I'm concerned about the United States of America and our reputation, and I'm sure that Bill O'Reilly understands that.
Here to talk about the chaos surrounding the killing of the dictator and whether NBC News really hates George Bush and loves Saddam Hussein, [MSNBC senior political analyst] Lawrence O'Donnell. Lawrence, is it just me, or was there a reason, if you were American, to be embarrassed at the fact that there was a lynch mob, people screaming al-Sadr's name while Saddam Hussein was being executed, and we knew it would be an execution seen by the world?
O'DONNELL: Yeah, Joe, I think it's a tactical embarrassment. I, for one, don't care what you do to someone whose neck you're about to break. I don't care if you spit on them. I don't care what you do. There's no dignified way to break someone's neck. That just isn't possible. So, I don't care about the behavior. It doesn't offend me in any way. It doesn't bother me in the least.
But, it is a tactical error. And Tom Brokaw was absolutely right when he said [on the January 2 edition of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning] that we got everything wrong about this that we could get wrong about it because what we've done is, in effect, given Saddam Hussein, on his end of it, a dignified last moment. Saddam Hussein did not go kicking and screaming; Saddam Hussein was perhaps the most dignified man in the room. And that's what -- that's what the --
SCARBOROUGH: And Lawrence O'Donnell -- hold on. You know -- I want to stop you right there because I know there are going to be a lot of people that are going to attack you there -- but my wife and I were watching this video, and I turned to her in the middle of it and I said, "Saddam Hussein" -- a guy who I've loathed for 20-30 years -- I said, "Saddam Hussein is the most dignified guy there! We are making him look like a martyr to the entire Arab world!"
O'DONNELL: Yeah, that's a --
SCARBOROUGH: How does that help the United States of America? How does that help our troops on the ground? How does that help a guy that is patrolling Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad not get his head blown off because we set this thing up in such a way that makes us look bad?
From the January 4 edition of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:
O'REILLY: Now, after Saddam was hung, Brokaw, who is still the face of NBC News -- and remember, NBC News has gone sharply to the left. They are an activist network now. They hate Bush across the board. They hate him. Their White House correspondent, David Gregory, hates him. The Today show hates him. The Nightly hates him. Everybody hates him, across the board. There isn't one person in that organization -- they just fired [MSNBC political analyst] Monica Crowley. She would have probably been the only one that has any use for Bush at all. There's nobody there.
[...]
O'REILLY: Now, this is -- you can't win. See, Bush can't win. And I'm not defending Bush in Iraq. That's a screw-up, no question. But he can't -- no matter what he does, NBC News, The New York Times, The Washington Post -- they're going to say he's an idiot. There's no sense of balance or fairness in their reporting. That's activist journalism.
[...]
O'REILLY: OK. We have come to expect that. That's partisan politics. We don't expect it from the media that you have a media juggernaut. Ninety percent of the American media is: "Bush is an idiot," and now it's: "He's evil." Now that you've got the nuts at NBC News there saying, "Oh, he has soldiers there to make money." This is on NBC News. It is an incredible collapse in journalistic ethics.
[...]
O'REILLY: OK. David Gregory, the White House reporter for NBC was called out by Tony Snow a few weeks ago and said, "Look, you're blatantly partisan." That's what Snow said to Gregory because Gregory was basically saying that the 9/11 -- I'm sorry -- the Iraq report showed that Bush was incompetent, and that's not what it showed. It showed that the war was not going well and had recommendations, but it didn't reflect back on any kind of competency at all. In fact, the people on the Iraq commission stayed away from politics, but Gregory chose to spin it that way, and Bush -- and Snow called him on it.
Now, certainly, that's -- you have to say that was an example of a reporter being an activist. No?
From the January 4 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: All right. It was five against one if I remember on that interview -- five against Bernie.
Also, if you read my book, Culture Warrior, you know I describe Tom Brokaw as the most liberal of the big three anchors. That was being the late Peter Jennings, [former CBS News anchor Dan] Rather, and Mr. Brokaw. My opinion has been bolstered by this.
BROKAW [video clip]: The debate goes on here about Guantánamo and about access to people's private records, and then to say that we're going to install in Iraq a judicial system and a democratic form of government and have something that resembled the worst kind of nightmare out of the old American West. Not much dignity.
He was -- he was a god-awful man, Saddam Hussein, and he did have a trial. But to not have control of the execution and to have it really just fuel more sectarian violence at a time when we're trying to dampen that is -- is not helpful, which is an understatement.
O'REILLY: Mr. Brokaw, echoing the far-left position that Saddam's execution was somehow the United States' fault, and we are bad for letting it happen the way it did. Joining us now from Washington is the aforementioned [Fox News contributor] Jane Hall, becoming a major star, and from Miami, [former CBS News correspondent] Bernard Goldberg, who still has bruises from his CNBC confrontation.
OK. Now, what I'm trying to get at here, so everybody understands, is that you have a major shift in a major news organization. The Today show: very powerful; Brian Williams, news; they have Dateline NBC. They have two cable networks. It's a business decision to go to the left.
[...]
O'REILLY: Right. And that they'll get more viewers, and --
GOLDBERG: Exactly. If that's your position, I'm with you. I think -- I think when they declared the fighting in Iraq a civil war, for instance, they did that less than three weeks after the election, when the Americans rejected not only the Republicans but rejected in large part what was going on in Iraq. I think they've made a decision as if they're saying, you know, "We're the network that speaks for all of you out there in America." And to that extent, it is a business decision.
I think MSNBC is a different matter altogether. They're a very liberal network. But I think there's a reason for that. And I think it's a business reason, too. It's counter-programming.
When the Super Bowl is on, ESPN is running, you know, [American Olympic gold medalist] Brian Boitano figure-skating extravaganzas, because anybody who doesn't like the Super Bowl might watch that. I think MSNBC is the non-Fox network. And I think they're saying anybody who hates Fox, anybody who hates Bill O'Reilly, come over here. We're not them. We're not them.
O'REILLY: Yeah, sure there's no question that they're doing that. That's got to be sanctioned at the highest level. The irresponsibility they show has to be sanctioned, Jane, at the highest levels, and it is being sanctioned. And I'm disturbed by it, because I don't believe it's honest. I believe it's a calculated decision to attack people in the hopes of getting viewers, which is sleazy to say the least.
HALL: Well, I think you have to differentiate. I agree with Bernie. I think on the prime-time -- on some of their talk show hosts, they have made a decision to go after Fox, to be the anti-Fox, the anti-O'Reilly. Their audience is small, but it has grown, and they are -- I think they're going to do more of that.
O'REILLY: Sure, they will.
[...]
O'REILLY: There isn't one conservative, Bernie, not one conservative commentator that works for NBC News at this time.
HALL: How about Joe Scarborough? Even on -- Joe Scarborough. They've had --
O'REILLY: He doesn't work --
GOLDBERG: Jill. Jane --
O'REILLY: Go ahead, Bernie.
HALL: They've had Rush -- they've had -- wait a minute, let me finish. They've had Rush Limbaugh on with [NBC News Washington bureau chief] Tim Russert, and I think that's thanks --
GOLDBERG: Yeah, once.
HALL: No, they've had other people on. I just really disagree with taking --
O'REILLY: Look, I like the Today show.
GOLDBERG: Listen --
O'REILLY: I do this show all the time. Matt Lauer is a liberal. [Today co-host Meredith] Vieira is a liberal. [Dateline co-anchor] Ann Curry is a liberal. The weatherman is a liberal.
[...]
HALL: Let me just say the reporting on NBC Nightly News, I think, is worthy of respect. It is fair. And I think we could talk about Fox News and what a lot of people think about the opinion on Fox News. You guys only see one side of this, and you only take a few examples.
O'REILLY: No. We can talk about Fox News. Maybe, we'll do that next week.
HALL: OK.
O'REILLY: But I will make a prediction that ABC News will beat this year, 2007, NBC News, because many people in the center, independents, are seeing what I'm seeing.
From the January 4 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country:
SCARBOROUGH: Tonight: Bill O'Reilly says everybody -- and I mean all of you, all of you in here -- everybody hates President Bush. There's not a single conservative at NBC. He said it an hour ago. Oh, really, Bill? Well, we're going to hear Bill O'Reilly's latest tirade against this network. Coming up.
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: Bill O'Reilly's at it again, saying just about an hour ago on his TV show that NBC News is, quote, "far left." Watch this.
O'REILLY [video clip]: You have a major shift in a major news organization. The Today show: very powerful; Brian Williams, news; they have Dateline NBC. They have two cable networks. It's a business decision to go to the left.
SCARBOROUGH: And this follows earlier comments made on his radio show today that there's not a single conservative at NBC News and everyone at this network hates President Bush. Listen to what else he said.
O'REILLY [audio clip]: Bush can't win, no matter what he does! NBC News, The New York Times, The Washington Post -- they're going to say he's an idiot. There's no sense of balance or fairness in their reporting. That's activist journalism.
SCARBOROUGH: Bush, an idiot? I've never said Bush is an -- Chris? If I ever said -- do you think Bush is an idiot?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely not.
SCARBOROUGH: Absolutely not.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We would never say that, nor have we ever said that.
SCARBOROUGH: You're a Connecticut Republican.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have never -- would never say that.
SCARBOROUGH: We are conservative people. OK. So, my question is this: Why does Bill O'Reilly hate NBC so much? Here's Bob Kohn -- he's the author of the book, Journalistic Fraud. We also have Mike Barnicle. He's a columnist for the Boston Herald and an MSNBC contributor, so he, too, must hate George Bush!
Bill Kohn [sic], why does Bill O'Reilly hate me so much? Why does he hate NBC so much?
KOHN: Well, I think Bill O'Reilly would do well not to use unqualified terms like "everybody," and I don't think that's the substance of what he's trying to say.
SCARBOROUGH: But Bob, he did say, though, tonight -- he said, "There is not one conservative at NBC." Bill knows that's a lie. He knows he's attacking me when he says it. He knows I'm saying the same things now that I've said for four terms in Congress and three years on TV. Why is he lying about my record, to paraphrase Bob Dole?
KOHN: Well, I said that he shouldn't -- should not -- do that, OK? He should not use unqualified terms. And maybe he's going overboard, I think, in saying "everybody." And I don't think he's specifically accusing you.
SCARBOROUGH: This is, Bob -- isn't this really about -- he's angry at Keith Olbermann. He can't attack Keith Olbermann on the air anymore --
KOHN: No.
SCARBOROUGH: -- and so he's got to attack all of NBC.
KOHN: No, no. I think what he's seeing is very specific examples of what's happening at NBC, and it is moving decidedly to the left.
SCARBOROUGH: How's that?
KOHN: To give you an example, the other day, this Richard Engel story that was on the Today show, on Brian Williams' show, and I think you repeated it just the other night -- Richard Engel, the NBC News reporter, not a commentary -- not a commentator, specifically said in his news report that the execution of Saddam Hussein was a PR disaster. That was his opinion.
O'Reilly is seeing NBC take opinion and put that into its news stories. That's the same criticism that he had -- that I had, especially, with The New York Times and others. So, what -- he's simply a media watchdog, OK? He's a media watchdog, and he's simply bringing these points. What's the big deal?
SCARBOROUGH: Well, listen, why doesn't he watch-- why doesn't he watch himself? I mean, Bill O'Reilly gives his opinion every night. I love the guy for it. I love that he puts himself out on the line. A lot of people hate him. I've got no problem with that. Just like when liberals put themselves on the line, I love that, too. I like people that fuel the debate. What's wrong -- how --
KOHN: There's nothing -- I don't have a problem -- I don't have a problem with you or Olbermann or anyone else or Bill O'Reilly expressing his opinion. I don't think that's what the complaint is. He is suggesting, and there are examples, clear examples recently, and one I just mentioned, of a news reporter at NBC biasing the news. That's a problem. I think he's got a good point here.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, so, you're saying that Richard --
KOHN: Using words like "everybody," accusing you, I don't think that's correct.
SCARBOROUGH: You're saying --
KOHN: I think he shouldn't do that.
SCARBOROUGH: You're saying that Richard Engel shouldn't be able to look at a situation I think most people would say was a PR nightmare? I think, today, George W. Bush said he wishes that it'd been handled better. The Pentagon was embarrassed. The State Department was embarrassed by it. A reporter can't say --
KOHN: I think we can argue that point.
SCARBOROUGH: -- this is a PR nightmare?
KOHN: I think you can argue that point. I think -- because if you take this and put this into perspective, this was an Iraqi problem. The Iraqis did it, OK? This is a fledgling democracy. We didn't do that with [Oklahoma City bomber] Timothy McVeigh because we've got 200 years of democracy and experience.
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: All right, let's listen to what Bill O'Reilly said about NBC's chief White House correspondent, David Gregory, earlier today.
O'REILLY [video clip]: David Gregory, the White House reporter for NBC, was called out by Tony Snow a few weeks ago and said, "Look, you're blatantly partisan." That's what Snow said to Gregory.
SCARBOROUGH: OK, and Mike Barnicle, again, I've always defended Bill O'Reilly on this show, up until he said we were Marxists, communists, or whatever he's saying. We're against the war; we're against the president. I've supported this war from the very beginning; I just hate how stupidly it's been run.
What O'Reilly didn't tell people, that was -- that Tony Snow -- again, I think a very good man -- apologized to Gregory. Now, take a look at what he said after calling Gregory "partisan."
SNOW [video clip]: You and I had a conversation last week that got a whole lot of play in a lot of places, where I used the term "partisan" in describing one of your questions, and I've thought a lot about that, and that I was wrong. So, I want to apologize and tell you I'm sorry.
SCARBOROUGH: Mike, you know, Tony's a great man for doing that. We all knew -- as soon as "partisan" came -- left his lips, we knew he had made a mistake. But why would O'Reilly go on today using words that Tony -- about Tony Snow that Tony Snow had retracted himself?
BARNICLE: Hey, Joe, I'll use the word "everybody," as Bill did on his program, as in everybody has the right to have a couple of bad days and make a few mistakes in their life, and Bill made a couple of mistakes here in his broad indictment of NBC News and right there of David Gregory.
The larger issue involved here that you were speaking with Bob about earlier with regard to Richard Engel -- Richard Engel needs no defense or lectures on journalism from anyone. Richard Engel is doing a terrific job at covering a very difficult war to cover, and by labeling what happened with the Saddam Hussein execution as a public relations disaster is not opinion, it's fact-based.
[...]
BARNICLE: Stop the shouting. Here's the reality of it: The way he died made Saddam a folk hero among savages whose only intent is to kill Americans. So, more Americans -- Iraqis are going to have more resolve to try and kill more Americans because of the way Saddam Hussein was executed, like it was a chapter in Deadwood on HBO.
SCARBOROUGH: And I'll tell you what. In the end, I guess the thing that made me the most angry about it is not 'cause I'm a liberal, it's because I'm a conservative. It's not because I oppose our troops, it's because I support our troops, because I represented our troops for eight years on the Armed Services Committee. The people who are going to be suffering on this aren't people at Fox News or MSNBC, they're going to be the 19-year-old kids that are going to be touring Sunni neighborhoods, trying to keep things in order, and getting blown up because of the sectarian violence that's going to continue ripping apart the country, probably at a more intense pace because of the sloppy way that execution was handled. I think it was a disgrace. I think it was a PR disaster. But that's just my opinion.
Bob Kohn, thank you for being with us. Mike Barnicle, thank you for being with us.
Bill O'Reilly, just attack Rosie. You're what -- way off base on MSNBC, on NBC, and certainly on me. And I challenge you to debate me anytime, anyplace, anywhere, and find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress, that was against exploding deficits, that was against reckless spending, and was against turning Congress into the type of swamp that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years.
That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative. That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years.
Although I disagree with many things Republicans believe in I think it is safe to say that Scarborough recognizes a shill, O'Reilly. I watch Scarborough and it's a decent show, funny at times and much better than Tired Carlson. If Joe keeps this up he may help Republicans rescue their party.
NOW OREILLY ATTACKS HIS FELLOW CONSERVATIVES FOR TELLING THE TRUTH.
O'REILLY'S RULE: - If you report the truth it's Liberal Bias. You are from the Far Left if you report the news accurately.
This proves once and for all that Bill is Extremely Right Winged. I do believe this new name for him will stick. - SUCK-UP - It was coined by a fellow Conservative so that gives it more legitimacy.
I wish that I could have said all that to Bill, but it had way more credibility coming from Joe. Joe has a new supporter and I'll be sending him a well deserved thank you note. Conservatives like Joe could rescue Republicans from the hole they are in right now.
There are some -SUCK-UPS- alive and well on this WebSite. They have been in support of that "REPUBLICAN SWAMP" for a very long time now.
It's too bad they don't have the honesty and truthfulness that Joe Scarborough has demonstrated.
But no, they just continue SUCKING-UP day after day without any respect for the truth.
Joe is one of many Repubilcans that I respect. Too bad all Conservative are not like Joe. That would be very good for their cause.
Joe is one of many Repubilcans that I respect. TOO BAD all Conservative are not like Joe. That would be very good for their cause.
Correction:
In my heart of hearts I should have said THANK GOD instead of TOO BAD. But If Joe ran for office again I'd vote for him before some of the Democratic Suck-Ups who have been supporting the issues Joe has mentioned.
your Scarborough jubilation but...
What did Scarborough say about Shrub's tax cuts that have in large part created the fiscal nightmare which he now complains about?
I'm not sure what he siad myself, but I'd be real interested to know.
YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT JOE SAID!!??
Then why on Earth did you post that comment? Joe was defending himself and the honest and truthful Conservatives who are up front enough to admit to:
"Turning Congress into the type of SWAMP that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years." - - FROM JOE - -
If it will make you happy I'll send Joe a note and have him edit your TAX CONCERNS into his comments. But with Joe being a Conservative I might have a real hard time to get him to add your stuff in, but I'll try it.
He might agree with those Tax Cuts For the Super Rich Folks. If he does I doubt if I would support him on that.
If it will make you happy camper I'll write him a note to see if he will address your concerns.
It sounds like you don't know what Joe said about Shrub's tax cuts either.
You could have just said, "I don't know either."
I always did like Joe even when I disagreed with a few of his positions on liberals, but this was just ... FANTASTIC!
In blasting O'Reilly
That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative. That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years.
Well said Joe. Thank you.
I think Joe Scarborough and Lou Dobbs are probably the greatest conservative anchors. Joe and Lou screw up ocassionally, but they are pretty good. Joe has even defended his more progressive colleague Keith Olbermann several times. I do truly believe it is voices like his that will keep the Republican Party alive, and it is voices like O'Reilly that are destroying it...
"I think Joe Scarborough and Lou Dobbs are probably the greatest conservative anchors"
Lou Dobbs is a "conservative anchor?" You've got to be kidding me! Lou Dobbs is a raving left wing populist. The only issue that he's conservative on is immigration. Most of the time he just talks about the "War on the Middle Class" and how the evil Republicans are screwing everybody. Dobbs isn't even a moderate, let alone a conserative.
...you cannot be a Conservative if you care about the middle class?!?! Wow, those are some strict rules you Conservatives have! Was there some sort of ceremony when you folks stripped Mr. Dobbs of his Conservative credentials? Is he banned for life? Or, if he stops caring about the middle class, will he be allowed back into the fold?
contrary to what the neocon monarchists are telling you, is something a true conservative SHOULD care about.
Get out your history books and see what happens to societies who go the direction of our current Republican gang; small ultra-wealthy elite, working class slipping down into poverty, while an underclass (read:illegal immigrants) is demonized as the threat to the working class.
Doesn't work out that well.
Their are very FEW issues that Lou Dobbs is liberal such as the Iraq War and on SOME economic issues. In almost everything else(from gay marriage to gun control) he is hard core conservative. Just because he is not a raving Bush Lover like the fools at FAUX News does not making him a "SCREAMING LIBERAL". Just check out wikipedia if you don't believe me...
I just read the Wikipedia article, and you're flat out lying. For one, the article said that Dobbs doesn't think gay marriage is a threat:
"In June, 2006, as the U.S. Senate debated the Federal Marriage Amendment, Dobbs was highly critical of the action. He asserted that traditional marriage was threatened more by financial crises perpetuated by Bush administration economic policy than by gay marriage."
The article also didn't say anything about his views on gun control, and the only issue that they mentioned Dobbs was conservative on was immigration. Exactly what I said. Dobbs may have been a conservative at one time, but he isn't any longer. His views have changed drastically:
"Originally a classically conservative economist, Dobbs' views have changed over time, and he is now a strongly populist critic of the "excesses of capitalism," which he identifies as globalization, offshore outsourcing, illegal immigration, free trade deals, corporate/big business influence in government and the Bush administration's tax cuts. He advocates fair trade, warning that the U.S. trade and budget deficits threaten the American middle class"
Doesn't sound like much of a conservative to me. It seems like he opposes conservative view points on all economic issues, from free trade to tax cuts to the minimum wage. Also, Dobbs calls himself a populist, not a conservative.
"On November 15, 2006, Dobbs declared himself a populist"
Maybe you should have read the article more carefully.
Populist conservative to me
quite well.
I just wish he would remind us that the Middle Class has not always been RAPED; sometimes it insisted on getting what it got, and decided later that it wasn't really that good.
That was not only true but insightful. I absolutly have to agree. I do a lot of demanding that the government take responsibility, I have to admit the middle class needs to take some too.
For one thing supporting gay marriage does NOT make you a screaming LIBERAL OK!!! I know plenty of stern conservatives who support gay marriage and do not find it a BIG DEAL. It Is the FAR RIGHT of whom have a problem with it... Secondly if you would check out his articles on cnn.com you would notice a pretty conservative lean; yes he is not a cheerleader for corporate execs but that ALSO doesn't make him a liberal. His views on globalization are somewhat liberal so I have to give that one to you. HE I guess you could say would be a more centrist conservative...
"For one thing supporting gay marriage does NOT make you a screaming LIBERAL OK"
I never said it did. I was simply pointing out that you lied about Dobbs' position on gay marriage. In a previous point you claimed that Dobbs was against gay marriage. You either lied or were simply misinformed, one of the two. Also, if you think that those that are opposed to gay marriage are only far right conservatives, then you are misinformed on that as well. Most polls show that about 75% of the American people oppose gay marriage. I don't think that 75% of the American people are "far right." Also, what conservative positions does Dobbs hold that conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan held? The Wikipedia article only mentioned one, which is illegal immigration. Dobbs was liberal on all the other issues Wikiedia mentioned.
I was trying to state that Dobbs is not VERY liberal. If you read his wikipedia page or listen to his show you would know this. Look at other sources if that is not enough...Oh and you lied about the "poll" that shows 75% of people NOT in support of gay marriage. A recent USA Today poll shows 46% of people in favor of gay marriage and 54% who do not. May I ask where your source was? I am done with this little debate anyways...it really is not that interesting...If you think Dobbs is a liberal than FINE...
Apparently the third option - simply being mistaken - doens't exist in your hard-line ideology.
Shall I be a a smart aleck and say "You either lied or were simply misinformed, one of the two"? The actualy number of less than 60% - at most.
[link to people-press.org]
Truth detector - Do you know why your so desperate to defend yourself and that Congressional & White House SWAMP?
Because you're among the targets of Joe's comment (Your a - SUCK-UP -)
THE GLOVE FITS!
YOU MUST ADMIT!
Conservatives like Joe Scarborough are a breath of fresh air and Joe is an asset to his party. But you are busy SUCKING UP to the Republicans who have damaged our country and damaged the Republican Party.
Maybe you should send an e-mail to RogerAiles over at the F-Word channel?
If Billdoe is not a Republican/Conservative, then what is he?
And why have so many Republicans/Conservatives defended him for so long?
I have my own theories about O'Reilly, and since you asked I hope you'll bear with me as I explain them.
I started watching O'Reilly around 9/11, long story short--our eldest son was away at college and told us about him. Apparently [almost] everyone on campus watched & liked the guy.
At first I thought he was great. NOT because he was a Republican or a Conservative...back in those days he really did come off as an Independent thinker. A centrist if you will. I thought he was Fair & Balanced. I concider myself a fairly moderate Conservative, so I felt he spoke for *moderate* people like me. Unless you've watched him over the past 5 years it's probably hard to believe that this guy was once pretty impartial & unbiased. But he was. [BTW I rarely watch O'Reilly these days, unless he has an interesting guest on...I actually have grown to like Keith Olbermann]
O'Reilly's personality & viewpoints SEEMED to take a sharp turn to the Right as time went on. And his vitirol towards Liberals and more so to the Far Left [though he seemed to lump them together at times] grew almost irrational. IF I had to pinpoint when this happen [or became clearly apparent] I'd say it was around the time he was charged with sexual harrasment. It seemed to me that he BLAMED the Liberals & the Far Left for his woes. WHY? I've no clue, other than he really does consider the Media to have a Left-Wing Bias, and felt they were out to get him. Of course he'd NEVER blame himself for his own indiscrestions...It was those big bad Liberals!
Now I don't know IF O'Reilly's ideology began changing [over time] from the Middle to further Right OR if he was ALWAYS a Right-Winger--but in the closet ;-)
O'Reilly is still trying to claim he's an Independent, but the jig is up. He is an unabashed Bush/neocon apologist and his HATE for Liberals & the Far-Left is indisputable.
Just like I don't lump Liberals and the Far-Left into one category, I'd hope you & others can see the distinction between Conservatives & the Far-Right [neocons]
I believe MOST Conservatives stuck up for O'Reilly [early on] because we considered him fair. MANY neocons never liked him. I think you'd find that today MANY Conservatives do NOT agree with him [on every issue] or would back a lot of what he preaches. Today he speaks MORE to the Far-Right.
Hope that wasn't too lengthy...and made sense.
being slammed by liberals for his promise to go against the war and never trust the Bush administation again if there were no WMDs in Iraq as it went by the wayside. He did seem to hate to be reminded of that.
If there's one thing that ticks O'Reilly off [and turns him into an instant enemy] is when he's REMINDED of or CONFRONTED with past statements he's made.
I think O'Reilly [in the beginning] did attempt to be the voice of reason. BUT he became the voice of the unreasonable once MMFA & others began challenging him.
I respect your opinion and your angst at O'Reilly's drift into some sort of netherworld.
Thank you for your thoughts on this.
It wasn't TOO long-winded ;-)
You might think twice BEFORE ever asking me for another opinion!
I heard about O'Reilly for the first time (in my life) just last year. I was watching the Daily Show when Jon discussed Bill's remarks about him and Colbert. It was a hilarious skit...
Nice to see you back on the forum, seems like you were MIA there for awhile--or did I just miss your posts?
I think O'Reilly would be SHOCKED to think you'd never even heard of him till last year...as I think the guy BELIEVES he's one of the best known commentators world-wide ;-)
What an ego-crusher for Billy-Boy hahaha!
I am preparing for college, sending applications, looking at places, etc. and have been SWAMPED with homework lately. Economics is becoming a PAIN...lol. I do still look at the threads usually every day, but don't have the time to comment often. I also started a Dailykos account(username:Feingold Fan) and have been traveling their occasionally. However MMFA is still the BEST!!!!
I have one question. Did you hear about Joe Biden's announcement to run for president on Sunday's Meet the Press? Maybe it was just a brain lapse on my part, but I could have sworn he said he would...
You HEARD correctly...Here's THAT part of yesterday's Meet The Press transcript for ya!:
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Biden, presidential politics. You said last year that you would make a decision January of ‘07.
SEN. BIDEN: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you running for president?
SEN. BIDEN: I am running for president.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you filing exploratory committee?
SEN. BIDEN: I am. I’m filing exploratory committee before the month is out.
MR. RUSSERT: This month.
SEN. BIDEN: This month.
MR. RUSSERT: And you’re going to take on Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and all other comers.
SEN. BIDEN: I’m going to be Joe Biden, and I’m going to try to be the best Biden I can be. If I can, I got a shot. If I can’t, I lose.
*Good Luck with the College thing...we [my wife & I] went through it with our 3 sons. It can stress you out BIG TIME!!*
I posted on News Hounds during MMFA's Holiday break [under jeter2] I haven't made it back over there in several days. Posters there were terrific, though their "trolls' are out of control!. BUT I'm with you, nothing beats MMFA!
I thought I heard it right, but I just had to make sure. I am scared about college(the work load and other stuff),but I am hoping I can survive. What majors or specialties were your three sons in? I am thinking psychology, but I also like writing so I may chose journalism too. Political Science was at first my interest but not so much anymore. The political scene has become nothing more than childish catfighting between the left and the right and real debate(the fruit of a good democracy) is dieing fast.
Believe it or not I used to be a regular viewer of The Factor when it first came on, even though I disagreed with O'Rielly most of the time, he had diverse and interesting guest and he was not in the full all out assault mode that he is now always in. I believe you're right O'riellys progressive hostility and vitriol was a sign that he was evolving into the full fledge right wing nut he is today. Hostility and declaring war on anything and everything that is remotely perceived as a threat to right wingdom is a sure sign that his indoctrination has been complete. This explains O'rielly's assault against NBC. Fox is losing viewers and MSNBC is gaining viewers, believe me if it were CNN that was seeing this rapid rise in viewership they would be the target of O'rielly's ire. This is a quenessential right wing tactic, anyone who disagrees with them or engages in practices they disapprove of is the enemy, and they must be destroyed. They are warmongers and I'm not speaking only in the military sense. I am hoping these extremist are in the process of becoming marginalized because I truly believe they are incapable of compromise or respecting anyone that hold views that differ from theirs. They also turn on conservatives like yourself and Joe Scarborough unless you guys tow the line on every issue they support. Anything short of that and you’re viewed as traitors to their efforts for total domination. They still have their warriors though, just read the posts of the right wingers here. Other than a few minor mistakes like not evicting the Hispancis from the country or rounding up all Muslim Americans they beleive the wing nut legislators that were recently kicked to the curb by a sane electorate were doing a bang up job and that congress operated in the best interests of the American public . I hope rational Republicans like yourself will take back control of your party, but Lord knows you guys are going to have to fight the wingers for it, they are not gonna go willingly and it might get pretty nasty. I think you have seen a moderation of the Democratic party because although I am as liberal as they come my party veered too far left for the taste of the average American. Your party repeated that mistake and the fringe element was allowed to assume control of the Republican Party.
Actually I do recall you mentioning [ages ago] that you had in fact watched O'Reilly.
I think you're correct about O'Reilly's reaction to NBC [and MSNBC] likely stemming from Fox's decline & MSNBC's upswing. Hey I've crossed over...I watch Keith Olbermann INSTEAD of Billy-Boy.
Bush Republicans are in desperation mode. You can hear it no matter what program you tune into. Moderate Republican/Conservatives and even SOME that were considered More Far-Right are tired of the incompetence & deception.
Lynn, I heard even Ollie North was AGAINST Bush's latest cockeyed "SURGE" plan!! What does THAT tell ya!
I'm enthusiastic about the in-coming Democratically controlled Congress. I'm hoping they will follow a MORE moderate agenda than the Republican controlled Congress did.
I believe you & I have agreed in the past that EITHER extremes, Left or Right, do NOT represent the majority of US citizens.
Hey Lynn, on a personal note, I hope you & your family had a great holiday...and I wish you all a Happy New Year! :-)
Good for Scarborough. O'Reilly is just miffed, and maybe a little worried, because MSNBC's ratings are the only cable news network that actually had a bump in 2006.
And he is right, Scarborough is a conservative while O'Reilly is a Bush/Republican whining apologist. His mouth and ridiculous factually-devoid rants will be his credibility's undoing, if it isn't already.
I'd have to disagree with you here. For one, the only reason that Scarborough is doing this is for ratings. Scarborough doesn't really even care about the Republican Party anymore. He just wants to start a controversy with O'Reilly to get more attention and help out his ratings. Scarborough has been slamming the Republican Party for the past several years. Sometimes I wonder if he's paid by the DNC. Sure, the Republicans have screwed up in many areas such as spending, immigration, and the Iraq War, but the Dems will still be much worse now that they're in power, and Scarborough was actively cheering for the Dems to win the last election. It seems as if all he's trying to do is get more left wing viewers to tune in to hear him bash the Republican Party. He's seen how well it has worked with Keith Olbermann. Also, MSNBC's ratings were so low to begin with, it was pretty much impossible for them to get any lower. The only way to go was up. O'Reilly may be a suck up for the GOP, but Scarborough is a suck up for MSNBC. He's simply trying to get MSNBC and his show better ratings by bashing O'Reilly. As I said, he's seen how well it's worked forKeith Olbermann.
Also, Olbermann was the one who started the whole feud between Fox and MSNBC. In his Worst Person of the World Segment, he's named O'Reilly the Worst Person in the World over sixty times. He consistently bashes O'Reilly and Fox News. He went so far as to call Chris Wallace a monkey. Olbermann is a complete jerk who started the whole feud. O'Reilly is just fighting back. I don't fault him for bashing MSNBC, when Olbermann bashes him constantly.
I sprayed Pepsi all over my monitor when I read your post attempting to portray O'Reilly as the poor innocent victim to mean old Olbermann's vicious attacks.
Naturally, it did not occur to you that O'Reilly consistently wins "Worst Person In the World" because he consistently says and does indefensable things.
Sheesh...
Tread not into the mind of a conservative. Ye'll go mad from what ye find there.
"I sprayed Pepsi all over my monitor when I read your post attempting to portray O'Reilly as the poor innocent victim to mean old Olbermann's vicious attacks."
Sorry dude. Better luck next time. But, do you really think it was all right when Olbermann called Chris Wallace a monkey? Was that really necessary?
You have just been arguing liberal opinion and GOP bashing is good for ratings!?
You told us a few days ago that nobody wants to listen to liberal talkers, the ratings prove it you said. When were you blowing smoke up our collective bums, then or now?
Hmmm. Maybe I should clarify. No non liberals want to listen to liberal commentators. Conservative talk radio has been very successful, because the hosts have been able to get moderates and liberals to tune in, as well as conservatives. MSNBC can't get hardly any conservatives or moderates to tune in, because NBC has always been known to be very left wing. Thus, they're pandering to people like you and the left wingers who go to the left wing web sights. Olbermann has become almost a hero to Media Matters and other far left web sites, and he's getting the far left to tune in at an amazing rate. He knows where is core audience is, and he's playing to it.
Who is this far left of which you speak?
There is no comparable lunatic fringe that can match the hard right extremists so common to our political landscape.
True, libs and progressives fight back and fight back hard but this jangling tone has been set by an ultra-authoritarian movement bent on lies and slander against Democrats.
Quick! Name 5 lefties out there in media land who could be considered extreme.
Without even the slightest strain I can give you 10 howling rightwing political pornographers.
The existence of the extreme left, like Sasquatch, is a myth promulgated by fearful loonies. Sift through the narratives that the rightwing confederate bigots have formulated. Where is the truth?
Is a vote for a Democrat a vote for the terrorists? Are homosexuals actually threatening to destroy marriage by seeking to marry? Is Christmas really fending off a full frontal assualt? Do progressives plot and scheme to ban Christianity? Do liberals suggest consevative judges are justifiably assasinated? And on and on it goes.
These are strawdogs fabricated by status quo junkies who fear those of us with the courage to live and think for ourselves.
they are seldom can attract an audience big enough to support them. There are several in the print media that I would classify as to the left of the spectrum, but then you would not see them that way, because they are probably only slightly left of the mainstream politcal left.
because they do not garner an audience that would indicate to me a lack of extremism on the left. Now what does that say about your rank and file conservatives?
( BTW, I hope the holidays were pleasant, Oscar)
of personal perception, i.e. TD above calling Dobbs a liberal while others call him conservative (not necessarily extremism, but a somewhat parallell course). I listened to Jim Hightower years ago on Saturday mornings and he espoused views that I would consider extreme to the left, don't think he is on the air anymore. If one's views are left of center, views more than narrowly right of center will be considered extreme and vice-versa. I consider much of the writing of several columnists (most of the time) to be extremely left leaning, but you would probably see them at worst as slightly left of your position. Nothing wrong with that, just a matter of perception on the part of the viewer/reader.
BTW, the Holidays were great!!! Had family in from out of town, weather was great!!! And yours????
Yes he IS off the air but that is because Disney fired him for criticising them, his ratings were VERY GOOD. Donahue had the very BEST ratings on MSNBC when he was fired. It takes a while to get ratings virtually no one gets them overnight. Audiences build. Check Limbuaghs ratings when he first began. The only exception to this rule I have ever seen is Stern and frankly I dont see the attraction but he is the king. Its the ADVERTISING that is the fly in the ointment. BUSINESSES do the bulk of advertising and they have a vested interest in NOT having a left wing message widely disseminated.
The corporate media just doesn't want to put on liberals. And absolutely not far-left liberals.
The corporate media doesn't want to put them on, doesn't want to promote them, and doesn't want them getting in the way their right-wing spinning.
News Corporations want right-wingers, bottom line.
on Profits (BAD CORP). If a commentator can attract listeners and sell advertising, Corporate Media would not care what the message is, the time slot would sell. The problem I see is that those that consider themselves as the liberal voices would not take $$ from advertisers so as to avoid the appearance of a "sellout" and would prefer public financing. True or not, I do not know, but that is my perception. Several month ago, a poster at MMFA suggested that the majority of Americans are liberal and yet Air America is having a problem staying solvent. I suggested at that time, if that poster would solicit donations to keep Air America solvent that I would contribute what I felt was my fair share (the math for that is more than is relevant for this post, but will detail on a relevant post in the future).
Yes it may be about the money but there is long term money MEDIA itself is a business, and listeners do not directly equate to money. ITS ADVERTISING that pays the bills, and Business itself has an anti leftwing message bias. Business does not want a leftwing message widely distributed. Hightower had a HUGE audience building rapidly and he was fired by Disney. There are a few media institutional analysis that show exactly this. As long as advertising pays for the media it will always have a business/elite bias. Notice that isnt liberal or conservative exactly.
as far as making a donation to Air America, but I don't agree with the thrust of your argument. You say that,
"If a commentator can attract listeners and sell advertising, Corporate Media would not care what the message is, the time slot would sell."
This is not really true. This is not true in the sense that Corporate Media is always on "high alert" to frame and sell the right-wing agenda. Sure, if they can make a few bucks by putting on a liberal commentator or two, then they'll do it. But the agenda--THE OVER-RIDING AGENDA--is to develop and promote the right-wing agenda.
Corporate News wants right-wingers, and that's the way it is.
that was damn good post.
I'm cutting and pasting that post for future laughs. That's not even worth a serious reply.
You're living in some sort of parrellel universe.
I have an idea for you: Go to the Media Matters homepage, in the search box type "Bill O'Reilly," and then get acquainted with the dozens of personal attacks, smears and character assasinations that this wretched pile of human wreckage has unleashed.
Please, I beg you!
Sure, the Republicans have screwed up in many areas such as spending, immigration, and the Iraq War, but the Dems will still be much worse now that they're in power
Truth Defector --------------------------------------------------
If we had elected a pack of rabid chimpanzees, they could not screw this country worse than the Grand Old Pedophiles.
"The Republicans have screwed up" Corrections, THE REPUBLICANS HAVE F***UP THIS COUNTRY!!!!! We are in a war were young men and women are dying each day. They went into this war without sufficient armor. We cannot account for thousands of weapons which the insurgents are using to kill us. We have Rummy who could not put together a puzzle designed for 2 year old's let along run a war. We have tax cuts for the rich, the bridge in Alaska to nowhere, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and let us not forget Mark Foley. We have Chenney and Bush, "Marriage is between a man and a woman" but leave my daughter alone she will be a great parent with her partner" There is not enough space to list the last 12 years and I think that Joe has the balls to confront his parties mistakes and call them on it. The reason the Republicans lost in November is because the rest of the party wants to do what Bill wants to do, pretend that they just came to the party when in truth they have had control for the last 12 years. The reason Bill is upset a Keith is because he decided to express his opinion (this is America) and not care that in expressing his opinion he would be labeled a traitor, unpatriotic or what ever the new white house phrase is.
Olbermann has named O'Dork the "Worst Person in the World" only 60 times? No Way!
Olbermann is a conservative.
"Olbermann is a conservative"
I hope that that's just a joke. Because if it's not, then you have some serious problems.
"I hope that that's just a joke. Because if it's not, then you have some serious problems."
The fact that you have to ask..................... Not much else to say is there?
that I went to Kornell?
That was my Olbermann impression...
That's the Second Post of yours I just can not figure out.
Olbermann is a conservative? - - Please explain yourself!
What exactly do you think of Kieth Olbermann?
Will be much worse than the GOP lying, corruption, warmongering, doubling of the national debt, is WHAT again? Oh thats right you have access to that vast rectal database. Your posts are 90% baseless assertion and 10% PURE DELUSION.
I just can't get that phrase out of my head: Suck-up, suck-up, Suck-up, Suck-Up: SUCK-UP!!
Yes!
OK.....CODED - I get that one. Sometimes I just don't know what your trying to say! But this one is clear.
When you said Keith Olbermann is Conservative I flipped out trying to understand what you meant.
Was it an attempt at humor or what?
An attempt at humor.
Take THAT Bill O'Frothyatthemouthy!!
Well, it only took 10 years, but somebody talked back to him...
He's been guilty of Right Wing Hackery in the past, but lately he seems almost as disgusted with Bush as I am. Compared to the mindless Republican sycophants like Limbaugh and Hannity, Joe is a breath of fresh air.
And herein lies the difference between Republican party apologists and spineless kool aid drinking Bush lovers - and principled conservatives who are sickened at the current crop of big government Repubs who have soiled the name of conservatism.
Joe is one of those COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVES that we have been hearing about. I applaud him for his actions and he is absolutly correct. The GOP has destroyed the meaning of conservatism and have lost greatly because of it. KEEP TALKIN JOE, WAKE THE CONSERVATIVES UP PLEASE!!!!
Cons need to be out of business for at least a decade.
Calling O'Reilly a GOP suck up is certainly a modest start, but way too little, way too late. He has rightly been called far worse by the non-con world for years.
pretty much agree with that, especially the fact that Bush has soiled the name of conservatisim.
I'm not sure you can really say that Joe Scarborough is a breath of fresh air just yet.......
But if he keep this up, along with finally realizing that Bush doesn't represent the Republican party, let alone America as a whole....... is a start.
I'm a progressive liberal, sort of a democrat, so I have no respect for Bush, what respect I had for him, which was little, was right after 9/11 when he had an oportunity to bring this country and the world together.
It was less than a week after that fateful day that I never looked back to trusting the Bush regime!
As for Scarborough.....he has a way to go to really make amends to his being an appologist for this pathetic excuse for White House leadership.......
Like David Brock, of this here website, Joe has a really good chance......
Of course, it helps that MSNBC, Joe's bosses have finally come to the conclusion that Bush isn't worth defending! If that is what it takes, I can live with that.
Then again, Bill O'rally is, to say the least, a loss of a job from being tossed in a white padded room.
"Like David Brock, of this here website, Joe has a really good chance"
I'm sure that you would like Scarborough to become a liberal like David Brock. That would probably be the only way you could stand him. Most liberals on this site simply don't have any respect for people with differing views. Also, Bush is representative of both the Republican Party and conservatism. He's been bad on two issues, and those two issues are immigration and spending. The execution of the Iraq War could have been better as well, but we were right to go in when all our intelligence told us Saddam had WMD's. Bush has been a solid conservative and traditional Republican on every other issue. He nominated two great Supreme Court justices in Alito and Roberts, and his tax cuts have helped the economy boom. Bush has been a great President on 90% of the issues.
Most liberals on this site simply don't have any respect for people with differing views.
I would posit that "most liberals on this site" lend precisely the same level of respect as they receive.
If I didn't have respect for differing views, then I wouldn't come to this left wing website. I would just stay on the right wing websites where I don't have to read anything I don't disagree with. The fact that I'm here at this website shows that I respect dissenting views and am open to new ideas. I would like to see you go to any of the right wing sites and try to debate the conservatives there. Go to Media Research Center or www.redstate.com. See if you can handle opposing view points like I can.
and you are correct, you wouldn't have to read differing opinions there. Progressive ideas, even calls for unity get censored, removed and revoked by the fraidey cat moderators in conservo cyber fantasyland. So do not come up in here talking about respect when respect for disssent is what rightwing authoritarians loathe.
to some of the righty sites, and have never been able to post. Usually a long process of emailing passwords, reviewing my info., then denied or, better yet, revocation of a posting privelege I never had.
I think the ease with which one can come onto MM and post speaks volumes. Opposing views are encouuraged here, getting in isn't the hard part.
I think you come here because you enjoy telling Liberals how wrong and nutty we are and how correct you are and to tell us how you have all the answers. You don't seem to be very open to other ideas you simply want to dispute them. Now there is nothing wrong with simply coming here to enjoy a heated debate and to argue the affirmitive of your long held beliefs. We all do that here, but don't pretend that you are open to anything that contradict your beliefs. You chastise us for parroting Liberal talking points while speaking right wing talking points, and you show VERY LITTLE RESPECT for views that differ from yours, and get angry because we don' t share your views. There are many conservative posters here that I have great respect for even though I disagree with them 90% of the time. They at least can demonstrate that their views were logically thought out before they reached their conclusions and that they're not simply parroting something they read on a website that they would like to be true. They will also concede Liberals can do the same. As Tommy said a few weeks ago political philosophy can be like religious philosophy. You can honestly reach different conclusions about what is best. It doesn't mean that the people who disagree with you are stupid, mentally ill, or evil.
Moreover, your allegiance seems to be more to the Republican Party than to conservative philosophy. It seems that Joe Scarborough and many of the conservative posters here are more committed to their philosophy than they are a political party and that shows integrity. That's definitely the difference between them and some of the other self identified Republican posters that post here. Also you do realize that many of the conservatives that post here are not registered Republicans don't you? They are actually Conservative Independents just as many of the Progressives that post here are not affiliated with the Democratic Party. Now I am a registered Democrat but God knows I'm an independent thinker. When I take exception with something my party does or a politician I support does I e-mail them and let them know. I don't support or enable anyone or any entity to do things that I feel are harmful. Now sometimes we can disagree on what's harmeful, but I do know that the vast majority of the people in this country know that the Bush Iraqi policy has been harmful to America, and saying so isn't wrong. And yeah, the Saddam hanging was discraceful, it was like an old wild wild west or KKK lynching. Dancing around a dead body, how disgusting is that?
"Moreover, your allegiance seems to be more to the Republican Party than to conservative philosophy"
It's actually to both, because they're one and the same. There are only two issues that the Republicans haven't been very conservative on in the last two years, and those issues are spending and immigration. Other than that, the Republicans have been solidly conservative on everything from tax cuts to judicial nominations to national security issues. The so called "conservatives" who endorsed the Democrats in the last election are complete idiots, Scarborough included. They endorsed a party that has taken a sharp turn to the left over the years and support absolutely no conservative positions whatsoever. I realize that the Republican Party isn't perfect, but they're still a whole lot better than the Dems. The Dems aren't conservative on anything. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY.
LYNN WAS CORRECT....
You support the Republican Party and not true Conservative philosophy.
AND YOU, - TRUTH, proved it in your previous comments. Here's the proof:
You just called a Republican/Conservative Joe Scarborough who supports the TRUE Conservative philosophy a "Complete Idiot."
And Joe has responded to Republicans like You, O'Reilly and Others who have been defending a Republican Party that has damaged both your Party and your Country.
For his honest and truthful response you call him a "Complete Idiot"? Well I guess that's OK because he in turn calls you a Complete "SUCK-UP" TO THE REPUBLICANS who have damaged our country and your party.
If you were a true Conservative Supporter you would be helping Joe to get your party out of the deep hole your in right now.
But NO you're too busy SUCKING UP. Please keep it up though, because it helps prove that Joe is right. It shows that you're aligned with the Oh-Really's and the Far Wrong in our country. Your helping the Democrats, but you don't even know it!
You know, my guess is that if Joe Scarborough was President, you would probably like him even less than you like Bush. You guys often bash Bush and call him a neo-con and war mongerer and all kinds of things, but if we had an actual small government conservative like Joe Scarborough as President, you would probably like that even loss. If Scarborough was President, we would be spending far less money on your cherished social programs like Medicaid, Medicare, etc. Scarborough would probably try to cut the size of the federal budget in half. The reason that Scarborough doesn't like Bush is simply because Bush and the Republicans have been spending money like Drunken Democrats. He even wrote a whole book about it. However, Scarborough doesn't dislike Bush for the same reasons you do. He dislikes Bush because he thinks that Bush ISN'T CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH. My guess is that if we had a small government conservative like Scarborough as President, you guys would be screaming about how he's trying to starve children and the elderly and is only looking out for the rich.
YOU SAY: - Republicans have been spending money like Drunken Democrats!?
Wake up TRUTH! You're still living in the past. Your party came into power on a pack of lies. They said that Big Government and Big Spending and a Big list of other items does not work.
Then you Republicans swept into power on those lies and PROVED IT. You Proved it Dose Not Work!
The "Contract with America" should have been called "The Contract ON America." Because now, our country and your party has be damaged.
Instead of being honest or truthful you prefer to transfer the blame by calling todays Republican big spenders "Drunken Democrats." Guess What? I prefer a Drunk Democrat any day and 3 times on Sunday over a Sober Republican. I’m an Independent
Today your cherished Republican Party is in a Steep Decline, a Deep Abyss. Why aren't you calling for the much needed corrections to your Conservative Party like Joe is calling for?
You're a very desperate defender of your party to a fault. Your still in denial about all the issues that led your party to the Abyss.
You defend issues that many Republicans don't even agree with. You are still today Sucking Up to the Republicans who have damaged our country and led your cherished party into the Abyss.
"Your still in denial about all the issues that led your party to the Abyss"
You seem to forget that we won the previous three elections before the 2006 midterms. We lost one election in the previous six years, big deal. Our party isn't going into an abyss, and the country definetely isn't. Our economy is now booming from Bush's pro growth tax cuts, and our aggressive stance on terrorism has prevented us from having another terrorist attack after 9-11. I would say that we're in pretty good shape for the most part. I've criticized the Republicans for spending too much, and they probably got the message after the 2006 midterms. They learned that they need to stop spending like Democrats and become fiscal conservatives again.
Yes, I do remember the Conservatives sweeping into power on the wings of their proclamation that big Govt. doesn't work.
Conservative then took the reins of Govt. and proved that they were correct. Not because they were drunken Democrats. It's because they have led our country and your party into a deep dark Abyss by being the Conservatives that they truly are.
If you can't see that our country was being mislead into a SWAMP, then how do you explain the election where the voter screamed it at you TO GET THE HECK OUT OF CONGRESS!
Your wrong and Joe Scarborough is right on. He uses the words Republican Lead SWAMP. I LIKE THE WORD ABYSS.
You remind me of that ABC Show "DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES" - You're desperately in denial on the war when you say we haven't been attacked.
NEWS FLASH TO TRUTH: - Americans are attacked and killed every single day. Can't you see that?
Bush has provided a permanent supply of new bodies, 'RESOURCES' as Hannity calls our brave troops. Bush will be sending even more American Target to be killed as soon as this week.
In addition to that, Bush has emboldened and empowered the terrorists worldwide. As Pat Robertson has predicted we are due for a devastating new attack here at home.
Many Conservatives are against this new SURGE as Bush calls it. But not you. You just continue SUCKING-UP to a policy that has our fellow Americans dying day by day. Your like Hannity, who wants to send additional targets to be killed in vain.
"As Pat Robertson has predicted we are due for a devastating new attack here at home."
Wow. A liberal actually agreeing with Pat Robertson. That's amazing. Even I don't agree with the lunatic Robertson, so that's sort of interesting. Also, I never even said anything about Iraq. I never said that I supported a surge or even the current policy in Iraq. For the record, I actually agree with the Dems that we should be focused more on training the Iraqi troops then on actual combat. However, when Scarborough was talking about the "Swamp" the Republicans created, he was talking about the huge increase in spending, not the Iraq War. Scarborough has suppored the War in Iraq from the very beginning. He simply doesn't like the fact that the Republicans have been so fiscally liberal. He even wrote a whole book about it. Scarborough is angry at the Republicans for NOT BEING CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH! That's what you don't seem to understand. You should be happy that the Republicans keep acting like Democrats on spending issues.
sorry to make a personal attack, but you're insane if you think the war in Iraq is having any impact on attacks here in the U.S.
"the Republicans have been spending money like Drunken Democrats".
What it really means is that Republicans spend money like Republicans, and that a Democrat would have to be drunk to spend money like Republicans do.
Seems true enough.
On where it is the Nat. Gov. gets involved. For example, I am all in favor of small government when it comes to the same sex marriage debate, but oppose small government when it comes to real national issues such as S.S. and Medicare (neither of which are, or should be, party affiliated, becuase it affects all people in this country).
And delusions. Oh yeah Bush is a traditonal conservative thats why he has expanded executive power like he was Pharoah, yet traditionally conservatives are skeptical of federal and particularly executive power. He has doubled the national debt in six years, he started a war of aggression and NONE of those things are traditionally conservative. I used to respect the traditonal conservatives I saw on your side. William F Buckley, John Danforth, Barry Goldwater, now you have Bush, is LYING a tradtional conservative value? Those guys would disagree but Bush lies like most people breathe. You consistantly denigrate liberals, post insulting and ignorant stereotypes of us and simpleminded slams on our takes on issues. Now I am not an expert on Planet Wingnut but on Planet Earth that isnt anywhere NEAR respect.
Early on when I started posting on various sites I used to post at conservative sites. You're fellow right wingers aren't very welcoming to an African American Liberal woman and racially offensive responses to my posts were common. Red state is one of the principle culprits, but that was the case on many conservtive sites. Hell it could be like that at MMFA sometimes, but that was before they instituted their registration process, and the rational posters always out weighed the knuckleheads here so I hung around.
The execution of the Iraq War could have been better....
Truth Defector
-------------------------------------------
READ MY LIPS: The war should never have been declared. Bush and his cronies lied about WMDs all along and still do.
Bush did not seek a formal declaration of war from Congress. He requested, and received, the authority to use armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" to defend American interests against "the continuing threat posed by Iraq."
There was NO threat imminent or otherwise...He launched an invasion based on FAULTY intel. Or LIES. That's why we need Congress to launch an investigation to determine WHICH it was.
I'm presently reading 'Hubris' [written by Michael Isikoff, David Corn] and the MORE I read the MORE I'm inclined to go with the latter....
He nominated two great Supreme Court justices in Alito and Roberts - The truth defector
-------------------------------------
Although Alito moves like he has a stick up his a$$, he and Roberts are probably a baby step up from the junkie con Rehnquist who popped pills until he became a paranoid schizophrenic roaming hospital wards hallucinating about CIA plots. Nice job covering up that piece of info until after his death. Kudos.
You said:
"I'm sure that you would like Scarborough to become a liberal like David Brock."
I never insinuated this theory! However, since the right-wing media you seem so bent on defending has essentially ruined any concept of an actual middle anymore, I would rather Joe aspire to be an actual reporter
"Most liberals on this site simply don't have any respect for people with differing views."
First, most of us in here are just regular Joe's, we are not paid to report or even commentate, but we all give our personal opinions. There is a world of difference between a potential disrespectful liberal in here and a paid conservative operative that couldn't be respectful if a gun was to their head.
"Also, Bush is representative of both the Republican Party and conservatism."
If this is the case, then the Republican party is in serious trouble.
"He nominated two great Supreme Court justices in Alito and Roberts, and his tax cuts have helped the economy boom. Bush has been a great President on 90% of the issues"
I suppose I can grant you Roberts, maybe. But Alito? Have you ever looked up his record? It has conservative activism written all over it.
Those wonderful tax cuts that you think are such a boon to our economy were dressed to look like they actual help anyone but the rich. I can tell you, with 16 years as a tax preparer and 5 years as a tax accountant, these 'tax cuts' hardly help the middle class, but they are a financial boon to guys like those you seek to defend!
As for the economy, have you been in an Unemployement office recently? Homeless shelter? How many American jobs have been sent to foreign countries under Bush? How many people lost a job paying $13.00 an hour only to find another one that pays only $9.50 an hour? Explain to me how that makes a strong middle class?
I won't even start on SocSec or HealthCare or those lovely little signing statments with every law or that America stands for justice not torture, regardless who the enemy is or the attempted sale of our ports to the UAE or Haliburton and those pesky secret meetings that Cheney had or no-bid contracts or a NCLB law that was funded with about 28% of the needed money to even sort of work
As for Bush being a good prez....... I think you might want to come up with some facts to back that funny opinion of yours, and when I mean facts, I mean facts from real sources, or at least independant ones. 90%......hardly!
In the REALITY based universe, Bush has only two options, history will show him as being in that lowest class of among the worst presidents in hisotry or alone as THE worst president in history. The majority of historians already say this and factual reality shows this clearly. I dont see how the argument can be made this isnt obvious.
Excuse me for cutting in here but, 'all the intelligence'? Seems to me that it is abundantly clear at this point that the 'intelligence' was cherry-picked in order to facilitate and invasion.
All our intelligence said NO SUCH THING. I am just a blue collar guy and I read enough intelligence to be skeptical. We were hearing different from other countries, that is a rightwing talking point and appology with not one shred of legitimacy. The tax cuts have NOT made the economy boom, at least not in any meaningful way for the average guy. In the past six years the median income has only FINALLY gone up a tiny bit this last year after dropping or staying even the previious five years. The eoconomy is great if you own an oil company or defense corporation other than that it sucks. You seem to believe that reality is like tinkerbell and you can just MAKE It conform to your delusions if you just repeat the mantra often enough. Delusions are NOT factual reality and your posts are pure delusion.
I would bet that your retirement fund managers invest your funds in industries other than oil and defense.
Why? Because other sectors (and their stockholders, including you) are doing well.
Because, by and large, the economy is doing well. No? Compared to what? Is every last person "doing well"? Hell no. Is every last person EVER doing well? No. I'm not doin' that good myself. Is it someone else's fault? No.
on the immigration issue. Google "North American Union" and get insight into a mindset held by Bush and others: us peasants just can't see the Big Picture and the direction things need to go. This has been a non-story to the media, for some reason.
Talk about the Middle Class screwing ourselves.
Is actually VERY neocon. It comes from the Straussian school of the noble lie. See we are a bewildered herd with no business giving our input into policy. Thats the way they see it so as our betters they are obligated to tell us the noble lies nedessary to get us to do what is in our best interest regardless what we may think about it.
This is of course not a new agenda. Adam Smith once said about economic policy that it was amazing that no matter how disasterous economic policies were to those they were supposed to help they somehow always seemed to benifit those who MADE those policies. The more things change the more they stay the same.
had it together.
I never really cared for Joe because he seems so dismissive. But lately, he's been pretty good following my favorite sportscaster, Keith!! I may not share many of Joe's views, but he defends his positions using SOME logic, instead of the tired GOP/FOX "news" soundbites.
Limbaugh's cyst must have been removed, since it's posting here. In that case, he can now join the army and fight the war he loves so much. In today's military, nobody is too old to sign up.
Bill: "And I'm disturbed by it, because I don't believe it's honest. I believe it's a calculated decision to attack people in the hopes of getting viewers, which is sleazy to say the least."
Wow. You couldn't write a character who wasthis balatantly ironic and unaware of it. Absolutely hysterical!
I was reading along thinking, "Change NBC to FOX, and change hates Bush to hates Any Democrat, and you've given a perfect description of the entire Fox News Network. But the beautiful part is the way he can muster up all that self-aggrandizing indignation and spit out all that bulls#*t without choking on it. Oscar people? For your consideration.
I mean
Considering what you say about FOX........
I certainly agree with you on what you say........
However, I wonder, what does FOX love more:
The profit they make for destroying decency in this country with all their twisted GOP talking points propaganda or.....
do they love the fact that they are destroying America at its very fabric all in the name of profit and a place at the dinner table with Bush Co with said propaganda? Do they even care?
You may get a visit from Fox Security...
Let's have a celebrity death match.
fun?
...though.
"...find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress."
Joe Scarborough ridiculed Janeane Garofalo for saying that if we invade Iraq, "we're doomed."
That is inconsistent with him being "against military adventurism."
O'Reilly did say that there isn't one conservative commentator who works for NBC News, which is technically correct. Scarborough and Carlson work for MSNBC. O'Reilly was trying to point this out but was then interrupted. Just look at the transcript.
O'REILLY: There isn't one conservative, Bernie, not one conservative commentator that works for NBC News at this time.
HALL: How about Joe Scarborough? Even on -- Joe Scarborough. They've had --
O'REILLY: He doesn't work --
GOLDBERG: Jill. Jane --
O'REILLY: Go ahead, Bernie.
Is conservative. What were the chances that O'faflel would say something true even by accident?
You proved that at least one thing Bill said wasn't technically a lie.
for O'Reilly. This man has lied, spread falsehoods and has attacked, with opinionated verbage, nayone who is not on his side. He even tried to strongarm a caller because he mentioned Olberman. Bill is about making money. Ever notice his constant huckstering of his book...listen closely.
O'Reilly is the worst of the FoxNews lot...at least Gibson and Hannity are up front about it...O'Reilly does the weasly everyman independant guy schtick. I'd really like to see this fight continue and maybe more conservatives will be willing to admit the last six years have been a fiasco.
are getting so large that even makeup will not cover them much longer. Bye-Bye, Bull (it will take more time, but I think its too late for restoration.)
possibly keep a straight face when he said the following;
“The irresponsibility they show has to be sanctioned, Jane, at the highest levels, and it is being sanctioned. And I'm disturbed by it, because I don't believe it's honest. I believe it's a calculated decision to attack people in the hopes of getting viewers, which is sleazy to say the least.”
Bill O, you have raised "sleazy" to a new high, or low, as the case may be; yet you have the gaul to accuse MSNBC and NBC of chaseing the ratings gods. You are nothing but a self promoting hack who would have been right at home with the likes of Joseph Goebbels. What a joke you are!
I think MSNBC lies somewhere near the center of the political spectrum. I would hope that both networks would be more concerned about content rather than ratings, but we all know that will never happen. My opinion about the execution video is that I would never watch it. I have turned down several public execution viewings in the Middle East because I call myself an American and I find it humiliating, shameful and inhumane. We obviously do not have much control in Iraq, because these kind of videos don't seem to be made in American executions. Fox needs to realize that they no longer are reaching the majority of Americans. The election results speak a thousand words. I think it is time that both networks get back to the news and not the ratings war. I quit watching FOX News because they were so blatantly one sided. I don't get that feeling from MSNBC. I think there is a new class of people in the United States called the Central Class. I have friends on both ends of the political spectrum, and the last 6 years has brought us all closer to the center. I have liberal ideals and conservative ideals. Does that make me a trader? It's no wonder Congress can't get anything done anymore. We all use to look at our network news for the real deal, but now it has turned into a huge ratings war. Bill is so worried about what other people think and do, he really doesn't have a good message anymore. Joe seems to call it like he sees it and to me he seems more sincere. Maybe we should all start watching the news on PBS. I actually would watch more PBS if my satellite provider would provide prime time viewing during prime time hours.
Scarborough said here that "Bill is just mad at Keith but he can't talk about him anymore"
why cant bill talk about him anymore???
I thought I was an Independent but Iguess in my old age I am a Liberal with a capital L.I'm a self-confessed news junkie. O'Reilly thowing stones is ludicrous.Thank God for Google.Anyone appearing on Fox and I refuse to add the word News is a card carrying NeoCon.Type in the name of the Guests on Google and find out where these people are coming from.The really good news is Fox is losing viewers. JHickey
and you can just bet that Boise State didn't really beat Oklahoma. It was all phony.
And not a single slant left play called in the whole game.
Media Conspiracy.
That post was dumb, right? I have seen you do much better, the snide and ridiculous is just that not to mention juvenile
I just wanted to talk about the game, but didn't want to appear blatantly off-topic. So I did what I did.
Sorrreeeee!
can agree on. FOX is helping Bush to destory the USA.
(1) So, O'Reilly thinks that the mark of a true conservative is that you will never criticize or question anything conservatives, or Republicans, do. (2) I think that it is pretty exciting that O'Reilly, the Bush "suckup," is making sure that the whole world knows that 90% of us "hate Bush" and "think that Bush is an idiot." Keep saying it, O'Reilly!!
Bill O'Reilly: No conservatives at MSNBC. False
David Gregory said to Tony Snow that the ISG report said Bush was incompetent. No. David Gregory ASKED if the ISG report goes AGAINST Bush's policy.
Since when is Matt Lauer a liberal? He talks to guests about how their new cookies will make them healthier.
I love to see these corporate right-wingnut gasbags flail away at one another in this pitiful melee.
Even wing-nuts like Scarborough are starting to kick O'Reilly's ass.
Please, please, MMFA!!! If Oreilly decides to accept the chalenge post it on this site. I read these media watchdog sites to get some point of view of the media discourse in the states and we don´t get FOX here sweden or finland. It would be interesting to see how this plays out.
You can google the transcript of the O'Reilly Paul Krugman. Krugman ate him alive
That clip from Tom Brokaw was great, I'm not sure why Bill chose that sound bite for his point becuase... I thought it made O'Reilly sound like the idiot trying to pin Brokaw as a crazy left-wing loon... I thought that what Brokaw was saying was well thought out (as everything he says is) and was very unpartisen...
just my thoughts though...
...the graphic under Scarborough's first guest? the forgot to put quotes around the title of his book, so it just labeled him as 'author, journalistic fraud' implying that he was both.
i was sure some o'reilly zombie would have picked up on that being a shining example of some "liberal media bias"...
how far right the media has gone. Lou Dobbs a liberal? O'Reilly fair and balanced? Come on! What used to be represented (through the media) as centrist is now considered far "left." Has the public become more right wing? Perhaps. However, I think that the media itself became more ideologically conservative (especially in sucking up to the neo-conservative business evangelicals).
We all know that, over the past three decades, the media has been slowly bought out by a few enormous business conglomerates and these same conglomerates are only concerned with protecting their business interests--which (surprise, surprise) happen to be the same interests as those of the neo-conservative lunatic politicians in power (until a few days ago).
The neo-con appetite for power of the has been voracious. The more the media, the conservative Republican party, even the Democratic party cedes to them, the further to the right they move and the more they want.
There is some hope, however. Despite the irresponsible MSM, America has spoken. The public has grown tired of the fascist right-wing neo-conservative warmongering and fearmongering. They voted in the Democratic party because they're no longer living in fear and they see this country's government descending into fascism and corruption. Joe Scarborough now "gets" it. Bill O'Reilly never did and never will.
But I do agree the FRAME has moved to the right.
thoughtful scholarship. Your posts do not.
Try to not use the word Fascist so irresponsibly. Also, having an obvious chip on your shoulder for enterprise is really tired old stuff.
Now that the Neo-con Fascists have been thrown out, I can't wait to see the Progressive Replacements' leadership on im-portant issues. One that comes to mind, because foreign policy is easy for y'all, is Darfur.
Please tell us what y'all want to do, because NOTHING will happen unless Uncle Sam leads the way.
I'm waiting for an answer from any Progressive. And be sure you make it sensitive. Those murdering, genocidal maniacs need love too. It's just lack of understanding and communication that's the problem, of course.
The paragraph should have been:
The neo-con appetite for power has been voracious. The more the media, the conservative Republican party, even the Democratic party cedes to them, the further to the right they move and the more they want.
The cool thing here is watching the slow, inevitable progression of a dedicated conservative into a liberal. He doesn't know it (and don't tell him), but he's on his way. Just as Arianna saw the light after spouting the party line for so long that the insensibility of it eventually dawned on her, so goes Mr. Scarborough. He'll fight the change tooth and nail the whole way, denying it to the best of his ability, but I can see intelligence in Mr. Scarborough, so it's inevitable. Unlike Mr. Bill'O.
It's a fascinating process to watch really. Just step back and observe, then welcome him into the light when he gets here and say; " Hey Joe! What took you so long!" :-D
It wasnt really a slow progrssion. At least not the way she described it. She really believed in the compassionate conservative message. She is herself a very compassionate person. When she realized the substance was that compassion was only lipservice among the conservative elites and would NEVER materialize she was lost to them. I would describe it more as an epiphany than a slow progression
Saddam was executed *now* so no further trials could be held that might have the defense calling, say, Donald Rumsfeld....
Just mention Laurie Klasutis, he will react worse than mentioning KO to BillO.
Scarborough has muddied the waters enough, that while he can never be indicted for covering up her death, much less being the cause of it, he also has muddied the waters enough that he can never be free of the accusation either, and I could never watch him without seeing her ghost sitting on his shoulder, so I don't watch him at all.
Gotta love the Repubs duking it out over what went wrong on various levels in Iraq & w/Saddam....I say keep fighting & blaming each other for the next 6 years while the Dems attempt to get some things done/accomplished for the nation.
Remember when O'Reilly said that if no WMD are found in Iraq, he won't trust GW Bush ever again? Funny how he is one of the few people who are still defending Bush and bashing his critics at every chance.
O'Reilly is much better at visiting the Playboy mansion and offering to use vibrators on Factor producers than he is at pretending to be a Culture Warrior who is offended by all of the secular society.