OReilly melting down!!!

[Al-Gebra]

Dobbs was removed from the air for 3 weeks immediately following this episode.

good for him.

[Deedee]

wish it were that simple.  believing what you say doesn't mean that your words are relevant . . . and vice versa.

I should have separated my thoughts. He doesn't believe a single word that spews from his own lips. What he says is also irrelevant. Anyway, the average age of his viewers is 65. More than likely ad dollars will start to dry up in the next coming years... and not to sound crass, but his viewers are also literally dying off.

[Al-Gebra]

I should have separated my thoughts. He doesn't believe a single word that spews from his own lips. What he says is also irrelevant. Anyway, the average age of his viewers is 65. More than likely ad dollars will start to dry up in the next coming years... and not to sound crass, but his viewers are also literally dying off.

think you're right about the age of his viewers . . . the older folks in my life are the ones who watch him religiously . . . but they vote more regularly than I do, and they have a hell of a lot more money than I do . . . and, no, they're not about to die off anytime soon.  maybe in a decade or so . . . by which time the political/media landscape will look quite different hopefully.

that said, I think more people of my generation now feel (even if it isn't necessarily true) that we're at a crossroads now, so i expect we'll have better voter turnout among younger people this coming midterm election.

[240 is Back]

IMO his money stream is fine, since old people are living longer and their "market share" - both demographically and ad rev - is going up big time.

He makes old people feel safe.  many of them don't care about inside jobs or

They're retired and stay at home most of the day.  OReilly is late night TV for them.  They just want safety.  And many of them are born and bred racists, and they've just added Muslims to japanese, koreans, and other groups they fear and hate.

OReilly panders for money.  Which is fine.  But his statement about using FBI resources to investigate men WHO ARE ASKING FOR ANOTHER 911 INVESTIGATION is idiotic.  And, his statement that 911 skeptics don't deserve the constitution, that is just anti-American.

But it's America, and he still has a right to say it, no matter how asinine it is.

[Deedee]

Older people do tend vote more religiously, and that's a problem. But, they also have far less need for the kind of "products & stuff" that move ad dollars. These tend to get spent on programs that have a younger demographic 40-55. It's going to become a real dilemma for Billo and Company whose extreme vision repells younger people with income to spend.

[Camel Jockey]

think you're right about the age of his viewers . . . the older folks in my life are the ones who watch him religiously . . . but they vote more regularly than I do, and they have a hell of a lot more money than I do . . . and, no, they're not about to die off anytime soon.  maybe in a decade or so . . . by which time the political/media landscape will look quite different hopefully.

that said, I think more people of my generation now feel (even if it isn't necessarily true) that we're at a crossroads now, so i expect we'll have better voter turnout among younger people this coming midterm election.

Pretty sad. Usually, you would expect the elderly to be smarter than that. I guess they want a crusader for their ideals, most of which are now dying out.
A lot of those old fuckers are collecting their checks on the backs of young workers. Can't really do anything about that but try and vote their kinda out of office.

[240 is Back]

Pretty sad. Usually, you would expect the elderly to be smarter than that. I guess they want a crusader for their ideals, most of which are now dying out.
A lot of those old fuckers are collecting their checks on the backs of young workers. Can't really do anything about that but try and vote their kinda out of office.

I rarely talk about race.  But in the case of the elderly, many of them are hard-molded racists.  They grew up using the N-word like it was their middle name, many of them fought the Germans, Nazis, Japanese, and Koreans, and they hate a lot of people and fear a lot of things.  Muslims just made their list, and they hate them now as the new nazis.

Plus many of them have that "My country, right or wrong" mindset.  That's groovy to be strong nationalists - but when "your country" decides to start sacrificing US lives, the Constitution has to pull rank.

most of them are just looking for a way to pass the time as they worry about health issues and the damn kids on their lawn.

[Deedee]

That's why I wrote that what he says is mainly irrelevant. Most of those who are listening to him are among the more "benign" members of society. The constitution is still safe.

[Camel Jockey]

I rarely talk about race.  But in the case of the elderly, many of them are hard-molded racists.  They grew up using the N-word like it was their middle name, many of them fought the Germans, Nazis, Japanese, and Koreans, and they hate a lot of people and fear a lot of things.  Muslims just made their list, and they hate them now as the new nazis.

Plus many of them have that "My country, right or wrong" mindset.  That's groovy to be strong nationalists - but when "your country" decides to start sacrificing US lives, the Constitution has to pull rank.

most of them are just looking for a way to pass the time as they worry about health issues and the damn kids on their lawn.

But the problem here is that these fuckers have entrenched their beliefs into the youth. For example, when you and I make certain points to certain members of these forums their replies reek of that very "my country is right no matter what" mindset that you mentioned above.
An example. When I tried to make certain points to al-gebra on Iran's nuclear program, all he did was call me an idiot and a two-faced punk. He also went on about the freedom and liberties in America as if that had anything to do with Iran's nuclear program. 

[240 is Back]

An example. When I tried to make certain points to al-gebra on Iran's nuclear program, all he did was call me an idiot and a two-faced punk.

She attacks the messenger, not the message, when she has no way to refute your point and just disagrees because it "feels wrong".

He also went on about the freedom and liberties in America as if that had anything to do with Iran's nuclear program. 

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic

[Al-Gebra]

typical Bangladeshi badmouthing . . . pl. show me the post where I called you an idiot and a two-faced punk.

[Al-Gebra]

Older people do tend vote more religiously, and that's a problem. But, they also have far less need for the kind of "products & stuff" that move ad dollars. These tend to get spent on programs that have a younger demographic 40-55. It's going to become a real dilemma for Billo and Company whose extreme vision repells younger people with income to spend.

hey, they're buying the "products and stuff" for their loving grandsons, and sending him on vacations to places where "grandpa and I went 29 years ago" and "here's a new camera, make sure you take lots of pictures."

old people rule. 

[Deedee]

hey, they're buying the "products and stuff" for their loving grandsons, and sending him on vacations to places where "grandpa and I went 29 years ago" and "here's a new camera, make sure you take lots of pictures."

old people rule. 

I agree that old people rule.    Hope gran and grampie went somewhere interesting 29 years ago.

But... chances are they aren't spending money on lash-extending mascara or SUVs?

[Al-Gebra]

But... chances are they aren't spending money on lash-extending mascara or SUVs?

 they did go to a lot of interesting places . . . travel is a wonderful thing if you can afford to do it right.

but to answer your question, they totally are. on one side, they both have SUVs . . . one has a Ford, but the other has a more exotic one.  she also spends a lot of money on makeup and jewelry.  and it seems like a lot of people their age do the same thing.  they're also the O'Reilly fans.  Everytime they bring him up, which is a lot . . . I just cut in and say "so what's that old sexual harassing goat up to these days?  But they still love me . . . and him. 

[Deedee]

Well your family seems to be a bit of an anomaly... which is a good thing. 

The other reason most advertisers go after a younger demographic as well, is in order to get that brand loyalty. Less effective the older the crowd. Still think the old sexually harrassing goat is going to find it tougher going in the next few years... old blowhard. 

[Al-Gebra]

i don't think my family is anomalous . . . a lot of older people of a particular class (women especially) are really into "staying young."  the people i know have all kinds of cool stuff . . . nice cars, giant HDTVs, top of the line DVD players and computers (don't really know how to use either), expensive golf clubs, time shares, vacation homes, grandchildren and children who they dote on and buy tons of shit for, plastic surgery, beauty products.  I have a hard time believing Madison Avenue doesn't target them. 

[240 is Back]

Still think the old sexually harrassing goat is going to find it tougher going in the next few years... old blowhard. 

You know what's going to be funny?

When public opinion of 911 changes for the mainstream.  You've got a mere 16% of Americans believing Bush had no forewarning.  That means 84% of American minds are open to the facts.

When pub opinion changes, Ruppert Murdoch and FOX will change their broadcasts to a more moderate republican viewpoint.  They'll have to.  And when they do, we'll see O'Reilly on the news, ranting like he does now... only then, he'll be screaming for the need for the new 911 Investigation.  After all his bashing, mocking, etc... when his handlers tell him to scream for a new investigation, he will.

No integrity.

[Deedee]

i don't think my family is anomalous . . . a lot of older people of a particular class (women especially) are really into "staying young."  the people i know have all kinds of cool stuff . . . nice cars, giant HDTVs, top of the line DVD players and computers (don't really know how to use either), expensive golf clubs, time shares, vacation homes, grandchildren and children who they dote on and buy tons of shit for, plastic surgery, beauty products.  I have a hard time believing Madison Avenue doesn't target them. 

"Of a particular class" being the key words. Mad Ave does target them to some extent, but the biggest profits still come from investing the biggest bang bucks during prime time, aimed at younger demographics.

[Deedee]

When pub opinion changes, Ruppert Murdoch and FOX will change their broadcasts to a more moderate republican viewpoint.  They'll have to.  And when they do, we'll see O'Reilly on the news, ranting like he does now... only then, he'll be screaming for the need for the new 911 Investigation.  After all his bashing, mocking, etc... when his handlers tell him to scream for a new investigation, he will.

No integrity.

If that happens, I'll be LMAO. Although wait... I probably won't because I refuse to have fox in my home. 

[240 is Back]

If that happens, I'll be LMAO. Although wait... I probably won't because I refuse to have fox in my home. 

The trend is undeniable - people are becoming skeptics of the official story.

The white house - instead of providing evidence to quell the worries of Americans - has decided to condemn anyone questioning the official story. 

911 Skeptics love our country - that is the thing they don't see.  We don't want a new investigation because we want to hurt anyone.  We believe a new investigation will flush out a few more rats who were in on 9/11, whether they are living in a flophouse in Jersey or a white house in DC.

The 911 Skeptics have, collectively, spent more money and WAY more time than the original 911 Commission spent on the investigation.  Is it not reasonable to think they might have discovered a few things which could shed some light on the events of that day?

[Deedee]

The trend is undeniable - people are becoming skeptics of the official story.

You mean Americans are becoming skeptics.  The questions you're asking were sparked around the world starting on September 15, 2001. It's old news. While everyone in America was worried about whether French Fries should be called Freedom Fries, and busy boycotting French products (crusade led by Bill O'Reilly) everyone else living in westernized countries knew the world was about to be thrown into a new turmoil. (Some kept a sense of humor. A best practice always)

http://www.parisbusinessreview.com/ 

Perhaps the rest of the world is more cynical. There isn't going to be a new investigation, no one is going to have to answer any questions or be made to "pay". Whether it was an inside job or not, a chain of events was unleashed and there is no going back. Instead of worrying about what happened that day, it would behoove anyone to stay on top of the world news and opinion... to get it from reputable sources easily available on-line to anyone with 8th grade reading comprehension. Rather than relying on editorial blather from propaganda pushing blowhards like O'Reilly, become informed enough to effect what happens tomorrow. I guess what you're doing is laudable in that obviously you're very sincere, it's just a little too late.

[240 is Back]

At the very least - if 95% of the US population knows it was a self-attack, it won't happen again.  Bush can pardon everyone and no one may ever be charged- but it won't be able to happen again once everyone knows.

[Hedgehog]

You mean Americans are becoming skeptics.  The questions you're asking were sparked around the world starting on September 15, 2001. It's old news. While everyone in America was worried about whether French Fries should be called Freedom Fries, and busy boycotting French products (crusade led by Bill O'Reilly) everyone else living in westernized countries knew the world was about to be thrown into a new turmoil. (Some kept a sense of humor. A best practice always)

http://www.parisbusinessreview.com/ 

Perhaps the rest of the world is more cynical. There isn't going to be a new investigation, no one is going to have to answer any questions or be made to "pay". Whether it was an inside job or not, a chain of events was unleashed and there is no going back. Instead of worrying about what happened that day, it would behoove anyone to stay on top of the world news and opinion... to get it from reputable sources easily available on-line to anyone with 8th grade reading comprehension. Rather than relying on editorial blather from propaganda pushing blowhards like O'Reilly, become informed enough to effect what happens tomorrow. I guess what you're doing is laudable in that obviously you're very sincere, it's just a little too late.

Good post.

Hopefully, many more along with 240 or bust, will try to get informed and have first-hand knowledge from multiple sources, rather than having political commentators telling them how to think and how to vote.

Olberman could be a reasonable man for all I care, but the format of his show is despicable as well. It's very one-sided. Political shows like his, and O'Reilly, have no value at all. They merely de-activate the viewer.

Bring on investigative journalism, and debates, with a neutral host. Is that so hard to do?

I like the McLaughlin Group, and sometimes 60 minutes, although Mike Wallace is very overrated IMO.

YIP
Zack