Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Perd Hapley on April 20, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
-
'Cuz he was always a jerk, and not the most reliably conservative/libertarian fella out there.
-
Not that much. I watched him early on, but as his head enlarged, I watched less and less until I completely stopped. He's a bit of a "safety over freedom" guy in my book.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi302.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fnn105%2Fdante1st%2Fcare-o-meter-1.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=4cb73c860bfa238137201418d34b8128fbf66b02)
I haven't watched him in years and never really cared for him when he was on.
My opinion, though, likely diverges from the large number of people who have been watching him.
It's funny to see the left working so hard to take down a moderate like Mr. O'Reilly, though.
-
'Cuz he was always a jerk, and not the most reliably conservative/libertarian fella out there.
He was a GOP statist shill and I hope he's gone for good.
-
I, too, watched him early on and had to blink my eyes and shake my head because he was in the face of the MSM. Pleasant surprise, that. But slowly but surely his huge ego began to manifest itself and I quit watching as I had with Hannity.
-
O'Reilly Auto Parts? I like them better than Pep Boys.
-
One word has summed up O'Reilly for me in the recently :
bloviate
bob
-
I, too, watched him early on and had to blink my eyes and shake my head because he was in the face of the MSM. Pleasant surprise, that. But slowly but surely his huge ego began to manifest itself and I quit watching as I had with Hannity.
I felt that way the first time I watched him. However, I realized pretty quick he did not have a consistent political stance. Moderate is as good of a description as any. He just wasn't a raging liberal which was a huge change of pace.
-
O'Reilly Auto Parts? I like them better than Pep Boys.
I do too.
-
I felt that way the first time I watched him. However, I realized pretty quick he did not have a consistent political stance. Moderate is as good of a description as any. He just wasn't a raging liberal which was a huge change of pace.
He was a raging populist.
-
O'Reilly Auto Parts? I like them better than Pep Boys.
My Dad uses them a lot, in his semi-retired, one-man automotive repair shop phase. I don't think they have Pep Boys out there in the boonies.
-
So interesting side note - I'm wondering what the future of Fox News will be?
I read up a bit on the background on the O'Reilly thing, and apparently both O'Reilly and Ailes were ousted by James Murdoch, one of the sons. It seems he's a raging liberal and despises Fox News. He's been complaining about them being part of the Murdoch empire for years. One story suggested he wanted to combine Fox and RT (which they also own) into a "Murdoch global news network". It suggested he might soon be taking over things from his father.
As much as some of the Fox personalities can be asses, I would miss not having a differing viewpoint to every other MSM TV outlet. That said, I've mostly been getting my TV news from Fox Business Network, which seems to be a bit more capitalist/libertarian oriented (Stossel, Kennedy, Napalitano, Pirro, etc.) than Fox News.
-
The Factor was all about O'Reilly. Current events, and the discussion thereof, were just a prop. We stopped watching him years ago.
-
O'Reilly Auto Parts? I like them better than Pep Boys.
Better than Auto Zone too.
-
So interesting side note - I'm wondering what the future of Fox News will be?
I read up a bit on the background on the O'Reilly thing, and apparently both O'Reilly and Ailes were ousted by James Murdoch, one of the sons. It seems he's a raging liberal and despises Fox News. He's been complaining about them being part of the Murdoch empire for years. One story suggested he wanted to combine Fox and RT (which they also own) into a "Murdoch global news network". It suggested he might soon be taking over things from his father.
As much as some of the Fox personalities can be asses, I would miss not having a differing viewpoint to every other MSM TV outlet. That said, I've mostly been getting my TV news from Fox Business Network, which seems to be a bit more capitalist/libertarian oriented (Stossel, Kennedy, Napalitano, Pirro, etc.) than Fox News.
It is James' style to cauterize wounds like that.
When the Murdoch empire got into trouble over here for malpractice (presented as phone hacking, though they had also been paying cops and other public figures for information), the paper most obviously guilty of the practice was closed and all the records relating to the hacks who had paid for information - and all the sources who had been paid for it - was sorted through by NI's lawyers and then an unknown amount of it was handed over to the Police and Prosecutors.
IIRC the end result was that all the sources were convicted, as were a couple of the hacks, but none of the suits.
-
Who?
-
Mildly smug that he got himself canned, he was a pompous jackass. but otherwise don't care.
-
With regard to Ben's question, I think Fox News will continue its slow slide to the left, though it might move a little faster now.
And the overall quality of its journalism will continue to erode; not that O'Reilly had anything to do with that.
-
I have given up on all news channels. I don't watch the news at all anymore.
O"Reilly getting fired makes no difference to me.
-
He was a GOP statist shill and I hope he's gone for good.
+1
-
'Cuz he was always a jerk, and not the most reliably conservative/libertarian fella out there.
He never claimed to be either conservative or libertarian. He said he was a "traditionalist." I liked him and will miss him. If the idiot James Murdock does lead Fox News to the left I may wind up missing the whole enchilada.
Don't be fooled; the libtards have scored a hit. We're down by one.
O'Reilly may have had a fat head but he was better than 99.99% of all the talking heads on cable and broadcast TV.
-
I always thought he was more of an opportunist. He found an opportunity to make a name for himself at Fox, and he did so. I believe that if the opportunity came up at any of the other networks, or the other side of the aisle, he'd be there so long as their checks kept coming.
-
I kind of like the fill in they are using right now, Dana Perino, I had not heard much about her but so far I enjoy the way she handles herself and her guests on the show.
bob
-
I don't write as goodly as this person but I agree with their take:
If the Right prefers standing firmly on the moral high ground, it can’t cave to the temptation to defend the indefensible. We’re different from the Left, but we’re still made up of flawed individuals who are pulled by fame and money. They’re not worth protecting just because you agree with them on the Second Amendment, taxation, and national security.
Sure, I’ll wait to see if the ongoing drama turns out to be an actual smear campaign as promised facts are presented. For now, though, I don’t put it past Bill O’Reilly to have done exactly what he’s accused of. His spirited crusade against political correctness shouldn’t lure us to ignore his transgressions nor betray our principles.
-
His stance on issues is based upon what's best for him, not an overall philosophy. He allowed guests very little time to speak, instead using them as whipping boys for his own arguements. I tired of him very quickly.
None of the conservative talkers are crying foul, so I assume it's not a liberal conspiracy.
-
From the few times I'd actually watched him, he was constantly staking out a "middle ground" on guns and 2A issues. Pro ownership of whatever constituted "regular guns" in his mind, pro carry, but constantly harping on guns that were "too dangerous" or "too extreme" and thought there should be a rigorous application process, should people even be allowed to own them at all. Seemingly completely ignorant of the NFA which pretty much is just that.
No loss.
-
He was just enough of a "conservative" to cause almost as much damage to the causes as he helped, especially when it comes to gun "rights."
I had stopped paying attention to him several years ago.
-
I saw somewhere this morning that he got a 25 million dollar going away present. The Left will crow about getting his scalp because that's what they do. It doesn't matter that he wasn't a conservative, they will paint him as one and how they brought his evil heiney down.
-
I saw somewhere this morning that he got a 25 million dollar going away present. The Left will crow about getting his scalp because that's what they do. It doesn't matter that he wasn't a conservative, they will paint him as one and how they brought his evil heiney down.
How did him sexually harassing women turn into the left getting his scalp? Guy sounds like a sleaze.
Unless that's ok now?
Chris
-
My dad always liked him and watched him every night. I thought he was mostly a blow hard.
-
How did him sexually harassing women turn into the left getting his scalp? Guy sounds like a sleaze.
Unless that's ok now?
Chris
That makes sense to the Left, though. In their narrative, O'Reilly was a conservative stalwart; a leader in our war on women (though we're also somehow religious extremists waging war on sex - I'm not sure how that works). To them, O'Reilly's only doing what conservatives do.
-
How did him sexually harassing women turn into the left getting his scalp? Guy sounds like a sleaze.
Unless that's ok now?
Chris
So, I guess you actually believe he really did sexually harass women? ;/
-
So, I guess you actually believe he really did sexually harass women? ;/
In this day and age it doesn't take much more than looking at a woman for more 6 seconds without blinking for some of them to claim you were harassing them. =|
It is one of those subjective things, what many would consider normal the outliers believe it is something else. :(
bob
-
Don't even need to look their way. be involved in your own life & they claim to be harassed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-gE7PGJtRc
-
Don't even need to look their way. be involved in your own life & they claim to be harassed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-gE7PGJtRc
@AnnaStorelli
Only for the brave, or foolish. :O
bob
-
So, I guess you actually believe he really did sexually harass women? ;/
You have proof he didn't? You don't settle multiple claims if you're innocent.
Chris
-
You have proof he didn't? You don't settle multiple million dollar plus claims if you're innocent.
Chris
FTFY
bob
-
FTFY
bob
It's all a libtard conspiracy.
Chris
-
You have proof he didn't? You don't settle multiple claims if you're innocent.
Chris
Who wrote THAT law?
While I certainly understand that settling FIVE sex harassment charges sure looks BAD, the fact is that the corporate lawyers (who defend the CORPORATE'S interest -- not the "defendant's") have long maintained the nasty habit of paying off ... "troublemakers" to make them "go away." It has been viewed as an economy measure -- the fear of losing in court and having to pay off big $$$$$ and suffer the publicity that results ... or paying the complainant off with a few million and a nondisclosure agreement, thus limiting the public awareness of the problem.
From what I glean, people who gain power and sexually harass tend to keep doing it. A habit they maintain so long as they can get away with it, until they are stopped .... like an "irresistable force" that finally discovers an "immoveable object." From this logic it would appear, perhaps (and not unreasonably) that O'Reilly is guilty.
Perhaps he is.
But, people who "pay off" troublemakers tend to create patterns as well. As I said, lawyers pay them off even when the accused is innocent. But this means, to the unethical "gold-digger" that all she need do if she wants a big settlement is to create a situation where, as they say, it's "he said versus she said," and if the pattern rings true, the lawyers will again settle.
To add to the matter, there's other motives as well. With O'Reilly, his perceived rightwing bent as well as Fox News' could easily create a political motive -- someone who is a strong leftist out to "get" both O'Reilly and maybe Fox News as well.
Of course, it might also not be quit this simple. Some COULD be phony charges and some COULD be legitimate charges where O'Reilly DID sexually harass a lady. Or maybe he just looked at her too long without blinking. I hear in someplace the cut off is 6 seconds......
I wasn't there. I DON'T KNOW THE TRUTH. AND NEITHER DO YOU. AS the credit on the old "X Files" stated; "The truth is Out There." Maybe, but it's not in either of ours' heads!
Maybe it will come out someday, maybe not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But let's not be so sure we actually have some real insight into the truth, 'cause we don't.
-
You're really stretching to make this a liberal plot.
He's been fighting these allegations from coworkers since 2004. His boss, who he supported until the guy was fired, was also accused by coworkers.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. But it's ok as long as it's a "conservative" pundit. We only assume the worst when it's a libtard being accused, amirite? ;)
Chris
-
You're really stretching to make this a liberal plot.
He's been fighting these allegations from coworkers since 2004. His boss, who he supported until the guy was fired, was also accused by coworkers.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. But it's ok as long as it's a "conservative" pundit. We only assume the worst when it's a libtard being accused, amirite? ;)
Chris
"Any fact when viewed from a alternate perspective, will yield a different interpretation," ~~Sherlock Holmes.
I'm not saying O'Reilly didn't do anything. I'm saying we don't KNOW he did. Yeah, the facts stink for him, and a pattern of behaviour exists. But as I said, that pattern cuts both ways.
Unless you're clairvoyant, I guess......
-
I have not watched the great bloviator in years. In fact, I don't recall having tuned in Fox News in a long, long time.
-
In this day and age it doesn't take much more than looking at a woman for more 6 seconds without blinking for some of them to claim you were harassing them. =|
And not looking at that same woman at all could be a micro/milli/mega aggression.
We really don't know what O'Reilly did or didn't do. Maybe they're unjust accusations, maybe he really IS a scumbag off camera.
In any case, his show was becoming . . . tiresome.
-
And not looking at that same woman at all could be a micro/milli/mega aggression.
We really don't know what O'Reilly did or didn't do. Maybe they're unjust accusations, maybe he really IS a scumbag off camera.
In any case, his show was becoming . . . tiresome.
I always thought he came off as something of a scumbag on camera, so I am inclined to believe there is something more to the accusations then him looking cross eyed at a couple pretty ladies. *shrug*
-
I always thought he came off as something of a scumbag on camera, so I am inclined to believe there is something more to the accusations then him looking cross eyed at a couple pretty ladies. *shrug*
People with an ego like he probably has, it is easy to believe. Regardless, the powers at Fox are using it as an excuse to get rid of him. I haven't watched Fox in years, but I have been meaning to watch Tucker Carlson.
I am curious if one of the other news networks would pick him up. Give him an all male staff and try to steal ratings from Fox. If it were just ratings, I think one of them would.
-
People with an ego like he probably has, it is easy to believe. Regardless, the powers at Fox are using it as an excuse to get rid of him. I haven't watched Fox in years, but I have been meaning to watch Tucker Carlson.
I am curious if one of the other news networks would pick him up. Give him an all male staff and try to steal ratings from Fox. If it were just ratings, I think one of them would.
oh, he will resurface with another TV show, I'm sure.
Like a lot of newyorker rino's who pose as conservatives he was astoundingly ignorant wrt RKBA, to the point of making me wanna scream
However, on other stuff, pretty good sometimes - he made it OK for grumpy old men to care about their diet by touting Wheat Belly Book .
His Killing books, while written for 8th grade literacy are all pretty good ( or at least the ghost writers are )
I liked him and will sortofmisshim.
Tuckers OK ish.
The one thing I heard that he did that sounds totally believable, was to constantly refer to an attractive young African American gal as "hot chocolate" ;/
Not really sexual harassment but just what a lot of older grumpy males say to waitresses , thinking they're being witty while everyone else is groaning and rolling their eyes .
Not enough to fire him but enough to yell at him.
I only get 4 channels at home, fox news is one so its kept there 90 % of the time-except for those unbearable old people commercials - I'm only over fifty - I'm not going to pick out my nursing home yet!
-
The one thing I heard that he did that sounds totally believable, was to constantly refer to an attractive young African American gal as "hot chocolate" ;/
Not really sexual harassment but just what a lot of older grumpy males say to waitresses , thinking they're being witty while everyone else is groaning and rolling their eyes .
Not enough to fire him but enough to yell at him.
I only get 4 channels at home, fox news is one so its kept there 90 % of the time-except for those unbearable old people commercials - I'm only over fifty - I'm not going to pick out my nursing home yet!
Just for the record, if that was said in a work place, it is 100% Sexual Harassment, as well as an EO violation, and enough to fire him. Especially if said more than once.
I am in the camp that doesn't care he's gone. He seemed like an ahole, was spectacularly wrong on some issues that rank high on my personal "give a damn" scale and had an arrogant, pretty much unwatchable, look how smart I am show. With a lot of spin in it.
-
. . .
The one thing I heard that he did that sounds totally believable, was to constantly refer to an attractive young African American gal as "hot chocolate" ;/
Not really sexual harassment but just what a lot of older grumpy males say to waitresses , thinking they're being witty while everyone else is groaning and rolling their eyes .
Not enough to fire him but enough to yell at him.
Considering that Ray Nagin referred to NOLA as a "chocolate city," why wouldn't that be acceptable? >:D
-
Considering that Ray Nagin referred to NOLA as a "chocolate city," why wouldn't that be acceptable? >:D
You should strive to hold yourself to a higher standard than Ray Nagin in .... well everything.
-
You should strive to hold yourself to a higher standard than Ray Nagin in .... well everything.
easy enough,
I worked around a lot of attractive young ladies in Reno for awhile and never once thought of saying anything like the hot chocolate
thing ....
I've never fit into the corporate mold , i just don't care much what other people are saying - I hadn't realized that "hot chocolate" could be considered
harassment - I probably need diversity training
http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2016/05/19/dying-laughing-guy-who-live-tweeted-mandatory-diversity-training-session-might-be-our-new-hero-and-yours-pics/
-
I've never fit into the corporate mold , i just don't care much what other people are saying - I hadn't realized that "hot chocolate" could be considered
harassment - I probably need diversity training
http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2016/05/19/dying-laughing-guy-who-live-tweeted-mandatory-diversity-training-session-might-be-our-new-hero-and-yours-pics/
My "corporate" Sexual Harassment/EO training has all been in the Military. And there's another thread going on that, that I'm avoiding comment in. Whether or not an individual agrees with where the lines are drawn, each organization (at least one anywhere near as large as Fox News) does draw lines on what is considered Sexual Harassment. There is also an actual definition, based on lost court cases.
If you are on the bottom, you can "not care what people are saying", although people surely care what you are saying. If, however, you are in any kind of leadership position it's your responsibility to care about things like that, and enforce the organization's rules. If O'Reilly said that, his producers should have stomped on him. Not only does it open Fox news to exactly what happened, allowing the anyone to operate on their own rules undermines the whole organization.
Were I to hear one of my soldiers refer to another like that, I would write them up at the first offense, and were it repeated I would refer them to higher, and recommend UCMJ action. Not as a CYA, but because no one in my organization should have to deal with being reduced to a sexual (and racial) caricature.
-
well, like I said, I never would have said anything like that.
It is a really dumb thing to say.
I guess I need to take the APS diversity course :laugh:
-
It appears co-president Bill Shine just resigned. Also Sean Hannity may be (of his own volition) going. I kinda put Hannity in the same "head swelling over the years" category as O'Reilly, but man, Fox News is bleeding.
I have to wonder if this is more of the younger Murdoch influence. Again, Fox has its problems and biases, but it's still about the only mainstream alternate view to the rest of the MSM. At this rate, I'll need to rely on Twitchy for even more of my news. I'm hoping Fox Business can ride it out.
-
It appears co-president Bill Shine just resigned. Also Sean Hannity may be (of his own volition) going. I kinda put Hannity in the same "head swelling over the years" category as O'Reilly, but man, Fox News is bleeding.
I have to wonder if this is more of the younger Murdoch influence. Again, Fox has its problems and biases, but it's still about the only mainstream alternate view to the rest of the MSM. At this rate, I'll need to rely on Twitchy for even more of my news. I'm hoping Fox Business can ride it out.
From what I have read elsewhere, the Murdoch kids are pretty much lefties. The father has lost most of his day-to-day control over the network and the kids are now taking it to the left.
Fox News is toast, IMO. We haven't had cable for several years now, so I won't miss the broadcast side. The leftward drift has been apparent on the website for a while. I expect that to accelerate now that the kids are running the show.
-
Were I to hear one of my soldiers refer to another like that, I would write them up at the first offense, and were it repeated I would refer them to higher, and recommend UCMJ action. Not as a CYA, but because no one in my organization should have to deal with being reduced to a sexual (and racial) caricature.
But what if the person IS a sexual or racial caricature?
(Yes, I have worked with examples of both.)
-
"The leftward drift has been apparent on the website for a while."
Not only that, it has become filled with Hollywood entertainment "news." No thanks!
-
"The leftward drift has been apparent on the website for a while."
Not only that, it has become filled with Hollywood entertainment "news." No thanks!
And a bajillion gazillion ads and weird scripts. Tolerable on the computer with ad block, not so much on the phone.
-
If they drift too far to the left, they will lose their audience and ratings....
-
If they drift too far to the left, they will lose their audience and ratings....
It sounds like that's what the younger Murdoch wants. I read an article where he was quoted as hating Fox News. He had talked about eliminating both Fox News and RT (which they also own) and creating a "global news service" or some such thing.
I'm not sure if he's as smart as his dad. Fox News, while it has strayed with age, filled a "renegade" niche within the MSM. I can't help but equate "global news" with liberal news. They'll be fighting for audience that is already distributed between dozens of news outlets that all say the same thing.
-
And in five years or so, once they are struggling to survive as a network, hopefully someone will tell them...."Hey why don't we try what made us successful in the past?"
But most people aren't smart enough to do that. Or perhaps, something else will come along to fill that niche....
-
And in five years or so, once they are struggling to survive as a network, hopefully someone will tell them...."Hey why don't we try what made us successful in the past?"
But most people aren't smart enough to do that they won't be willing to admit that moving left is what killed Fox News. Or perhaps, something else will come along to fill that niche....
FTFY
-
I wouldn't be surprised if a new network pops up inhabited by conservative expatriots from Fox news. The trouble is that some of what has been described as conservative are right wing nut jobs. I think it's just about all over but the shouting with respect to main stream conservative news. The Left wins because they are zealots and are united and have no shame. The Right loses because all they want to do is, as Rodney King said, "Why can't we all just get along."
-
There are (were)
two three IIRC, The Blaze which was started by Glenn Beck, until he went full retard.
Then there's CRTV.
Finally there's One America Network from The Washington Times.
We shall see who grabs Fox's on-air talent and becomes the new Fox News.