 |
 |
Krugman Head to Head with O'Reilly
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York City
Status:
Offline
|
|
So Krugman and O'Reilly butted heads on Russert's show on CNBC, and O'Reilly got schooled by all accounts. I missed the show because I didn't hear about it until after the fact, but it was pretty funny to hear Franken debrief Krugman on the the radio this morning. I got the transcript off Nexis and I have to say that O'Reilly is a moron. He lied a bunch of times in ways that Krugman couldn't dispute because there was no way to check the source. He clearly doesn't have much of a problem with lying. He might even be konfabulating on the spot. Anyways, here is my favorite section of the transcript:
Mr. O'REILLY: Mediamatters. Oh, my--that's like me calling some Klan operation.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Hey.
Mr. O'REILLY: Why don't I call the Ku Klux Klan?
Prof. KRUGMAN: Here we go. Here we go. Here we go.
RUSSERT: Read the quote. Read the quote and...
Mr. O'REILLY: What a bunch of garbage, mediamatters.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Yeah, the quote is, 'So this is the United States, who has freed the world from communism, freed the world from fascism, from the axis powers, freed the Pacific from Japanese, OK? All of this, but according to Moore we bring sadness and misery to places all around the globe.'
Mr. O'REILLY: That's right. He said that.
Prof. KRUGMAN: 'This says Michael Moore. He believes this. He believes that we are an evil country.' Now I saw a film, a flawed film, a lot of things that were overstated...
Mr. O'REILLY: OK. Read...
Prof. KRUGMAN: ...but I think that there were a lot of things in that film that showed that this is a guy who really does love his country.
Mr. O'REILLY: All right. You want to think he loves his country, you go (unintelligible).
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
O'Reilly is such a douche. How exactly is that propaganda if he said it? Did he just think if he screamed and moaned over Krugman he would just stop talking about it? Boy, you could even see the guy squirm. I always thought O'Reilly was a hack. This cements it for me.
I should to Ogre Stomp™ his ass.
By the way, that MP4 was great quality. Fo' serious.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
So Krugman and O'Reilly butted heads on Russert's show on CNBC, and O'Reilly got schooled by all accounts. I missed the show because I didn't hear about it until after the fact, but it was pretty funny to hear Franken debrief Krugman on the the radio this morning. I got the transcript off Nexis and I have to say that O'Reilly is a moron. He lied a bunch of times in ways that Krugman couldn't dispute because there was no way to check the source. He clearly doesn't have much of a problem with lying. He might even be konfabulating on the spot. Anyways, here is my favorite section of the transcript:
Mr. O'REILLY: Mediamatters. Oh, my--that's like me calling some Klan operation.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Hey.
Mr. O'REILLY: Why don't I call the Ku Klux Klan?
Prof. KRUGMAN: Here we go. Here we go. Here we go.
RUSSERT: Read the quote. Read the quote and...
Mr. O'REILLY: What a bunch of garbage, mediamatters.
Prof. KRUGMAN: Yeah, the quote is, 'So this is the United States, who has freed the world from communism, freed the world from fascism, from the axis powers, freed the Pacific from Japanese, OK? All of this, but according to Moore we bring sadness and misery to places all around the globe.'
Mr. O'REILLY: That's right. He said that.
Prof. KRUGMAN: 'This says Michael Moore. He believes this. He believes that we are an evil country.' Now I saw a film, a flawed film, a lot of things that were overstated...
Mr. O'REILLY: OK. Read...
Prof. KRUGMAN: ...but I think that there were a lot of things in that film that showed that this is a guy who really does love his country.
Mr. O'REILLY: All right. You want to think he loves his country, you go (unintelligible).
O'Reilly came off as the big obnoxious bully that he is. Good for Krugman for not being intimidated by that jerk.
Here's the clip of that particular encounter: http://mediamatters.org/static/video...t-20040807.mp4
By the way, here's O'Reilly saying Michael Moore hates America: http://mediamatters.org/static/audio...y-20040628.mp3 (I don't see why you'd need to be "objective" when O'Reilly himself is saying it.)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Dis
Status:
Offline
|
|
I would love to see O'Reilly try his windbag routine on a mike that was loudness capped. That way, no matter how loud he got, the TV audience wouldn't hear his voice go significantly above conversational levels. It's hard to shout someone down if you're literally unable to shout. It would be tricky to rig it up without distorting his voice, but worth it, IMHO.
It would be really interesting to see and hear. I bet his head would explode with trying in vain to shout the other person down, the person who could safely ignore his bluster without worrying if he'll be heard.
BlackGriffen
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New York City
Status:
Offline
|
|
I want to see him and Franken do a debate. Franken issues the challenge over and over, but I think O'Reilly is too much of a bitch to take him up on it.
Moore was a little bit disappointing, not because he lost the debate, which I'm not sure he did, but because the entire back and forth was stymied by a semantic difference. O'Reilly said you have to know the truth to lie, and that Bush was working with bad intel, Moore said saying things that are not the truth is how lying is defined. I side with O'Reilly's definition of lying there, but I think if Bush can't be proven to have lied outright to take us to war, there were still diverse implicit lies, bendings of the truth, half-truths and an overabundance of willful ignorance that got the nation thinking it was a good idea to go to Iraq. It's hard to make the argument that the troops over there are fighting for our safety and freedom when it is now clear that Saddam posed no threat to us or any of our allies. If Moore had made that argument and O'Reilly had stuck to the rules that Moore asked for it would have been a much more interesting conversation.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Axo1ot1:
I want to see him and Franken do a debate. Franken issues the challenge over and over, but I think O'Reilly is too much of a bitch to take him up on it.
Moore was a little bit disappointing, not because he lost the debate, which I'm not sure he did, but because the entire back and forth was stymied by a semantic difference. O'Reilly said you have to know the truth to lie, and that Bush was working with bad intel, Moore said saying things that are not the truth is how lying is defined. I side with O'Reilly's definition of lying there, but I think if Bush can't be proven to have lied outright to take us to war, there were still diverse implicit lies, bendings of the truth, half-truths and an overabundance of willful ignorance that got the nation thinking it was a good idea to go to Iraq. It's hard to make the argument that the troops over there are fighting for our safety and freedom when it is now clear that Saddam posed no threat to us or any of our allies. If Moore had made that argument and O'Reilly had stuck to the rules that Moore asked for it would have been a much more interesting conversation.
Here's one: http://www.booktv.org/ram/feature/0603/btv060803_4.ram. You have to go in a little bit.
Two funny parts are at 48:00 and around 15:52 (just keep watching.)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Frickersville
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status:
Offline
|
|
At least he had a decent backbone compared to NYT guy. Who put the **** over the video?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status:
Online
|
|
O'Lielly's main tactics are to be brazen, while pumping out spin, which he hopes will then intimidate his guests. If it doesn't work, as with Krugman, he makes stuff up. That's why he works at Fox.
A "decent backbone" doesn't mean squat when you have no defensible positions.
|
|
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status:
Offline
|
|
Right.
"Next on CNN: American troops kill Afghani Children (delightful emphasis)"
Wolf Blitzer.
I'm not sure why there's a hate toward FOX. More people watch it because it's not full of as much **** as MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, etc.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
lol
And there you have it. That did it for me. The forum is much better with CreepingIdiocy on ignore, guys. 
Awesome.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Interstellar Overdrive
Status:
Offline
|
|
Demonhood? Please. I can't help it. He's just asking for it, being the jerk he's acting like right now. I could make a stupid joke about your name, but I won't. So.  .
But you have me on ignore, right?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator  Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status:
Offline
|
|
watch the name calling and stick to discussing the issue at hand boys.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
