Text 13178, 65 rader
Skriven 2008-03-19 02:57:22 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 13075 av Jeff Bowman (1:229/500)
Ärende: Bush Vetoes Waterboarding Bill
======================================
RW>> I've watched O'Reilly for ten years and have never seen that happen.
RW>> Somebody is pulling your leg if you think that is true.

 JB> Then apparently you've missed all the times he's done so.

You're talking to deaf ears. I've seen it too.

 JB>  O'Reilly is a bully.

Sure he is, when he choose to be.

 JB> When somebody says something he doesn't agree with, he tells them
 JB> to shut up (literally).  He cuts mics.  He yells at guests.  He tells
 JB> outright falsehoods and incorrect information and refuses to admit it
 JB> later even when called out on it by viewers.  They rewrite transcripts to
 JB> remove things that make them look wrong.  I'm not just making this up to
 JB> make him look bad.  I wish I were!

And I still don't understand why people accept an invitation from him to be
on the show when they must know what's coming to them.

 JB> Just some examples of bullying + "shut up" + mic cuts, if you're
 JB> interested in seeing it:

He isn't and even if he does he'll be saying they are tampered with to make
him look bad.


RW>> A Gallup Poll summed up Fox News this way. 'There is little difference in
RW>> the self-reportd use of cable news by partisanship. There has been a good
RW>> deal of focus on what is perceived to be a conservative orientation of the
RW>> Fox News Channel, but ... we are not able to distinguish any partisan
RW>> differeneces in the use of the specific cable news channels.'

 JB> It's just as easy for them to say that though as it is for you, because it
 JB> comes down to opinion in large part.  People like myself do see heavy
 JB> bias. Nobody is persuading me to think that way.  I watch the clips, and
 JB> sometimes the channel, enough to think it on my own.

It doesn't work like that with fanatics.

RW>> An astounding 58% of Americans answered that they believed the news
RW>> delivered to them was often flat out wrong.

 JB> Wrong, and intentionally wrong, are a different story.  I know sometimes
 JB> they (a in everyone) do get it wrong.  But the majority of news channels
 JB> likely report things accurately.  It's what they choose to report, or how
 JB> to report it, where much of the bias tends to come in.

I agree.

RW>> That's the Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr's fault...if you go to that church
RW>> for 20 years and hear that man's insanity, don't you think you'd be
RW>> influenced by it? You can't listen to that kind of hatered and not form
RW>> some kind of opinion and deny it while still attending those services.

 JB> Full agreement here, I already mentioned this in another post.  I don't
 JB> know how much influence it had on him, but as both you and I seem to
 JB> agree, you don't go to someone's church for 20+ years if you dislike what
 JB> they have to say.

My question here is: Have Wright been like this for 20 years?

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)