Why would anyone want O'Reilly off of the air?

 

I rarely agree with him but he's very entertaining.

Play us out, what does that mean to play us out?!

 

I don't know what this is, I've never seen this before! There's no words on it.

 

f***ing thing sucks!

Why would anyone want O'Reilly off of the air?

 

I rarely agree with him but he's very entertaining.

Play us out, what does that mean to play us out?!

 

I don't know what this is, I've never seen this before! There's no words on it.

 

f***ing thing sucks!

WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

Just one question.... Who is a bigger radical Keith or O'Rielly?

 

Olberman by default because he is an actual radical. O'Reilly is just a tabloid entertainer.

What, only right wingers can be 'entertainers', but not ideologues?

 

Ideaologue does not = radical

 

Alan Colmes is not a radical, Pat Buchanan is a radical; both are ideaologues. Both also happened to be entertainers as well.

 

O'Reilly does not advocate radical positions, much like Lou Dobbs he just spreads populist tripe (beat on oil companies, rail against government excess, bitch about judges that make errors, etc) and just better at it than the rest of his ilk.

True story -- A few weeks ago I was flipping channels and I saw O'Reilly calling out his guest -- Ann Coulter -- for her "Barack Hussein" obsession, always attaching his middle name at any opportunity. I almost crapped my pants. I was like, is this real? "I just think it's dopey," he kept saying. I was kind of proud of him like a mother is of her toddler learning to use the toilet.

 

I made the switch from CNN to MSNBC this year just because I'm sick of CNN's friggin Election Center... on primary election nights there were like 35 analysts and pundits in the room all scrambling for their talking points. And Amy Holmes annoys the crap out of me. Wolf Blitzer is the most annoying on live television -- he cant get a damn word out, he's always stuttering, "uh, uh, uh..."

 

I've always casually enjoyed Countdown and Olbermann's feud with O'Reilly. It's like MSNBC is the anti-FOX News...but at the same time, it's no better journalistically. But it's basically preaching to the choir like Fox...but without all the Bush propaganda. The loss of Tim Russert is a huge blow. My mom and I talked about how he should have been on the panel at the DNC...it wasn't the same without his professionalism.

 

By the way...MSNBC has given RACHEL MADDOW her OWN SHOW that will debut after Countdown next week. I'm so excited because she is fantastic. I think she will be the saving grace of the network. She's become wildly popular in a very short period of time. I thought I was alone in my admiration until I saw how nuts the people at the DNC went for her.

Rachel is awesome.

Rachel is awesome.

 

Seriously? I mean, yeah, anyone competent can look good in the cavalcade of f***tards that is MSNBC... but awesome?

Rachel is awesome.

Ew. I'd rather listen to Chris Matthews 24/7.

By the way...MSNBC has given RACHEL MADDOW her OWN SHOW that will debut after Countdown next week. I'm so excited because she is fantastic. I think she will be the saving grace of the network. She's become wildly popular in a very short period of time.

Keith Olbermann was supposed to be the saving grace of the network. He still fails to get numbers higher than O'Reilly's replays.

 

If she's the "saving grace" of MSNBC, rest assured it will piss off Keith's ginormous ego.

Rachel is awesome.

 

Seriously? I mean, yeah, anyone competent can look good in the cavalcade of f***tards that is MSNBC... but awesome?

 

She's one smart woman. Stanford graduate and a Rhodes Scholar. She's got the intellectual goods.

I know my girlfriend and I will be watching when Rachel's show debuts next week.

Rachel is awesome.

 

Seriously? I mean, yeah, anyone competent can look good in the cavalcade of f***tards that is MSNBC... but awesome?

 

She's one smart woman. Stanford graduate and a Rhodes Scholar. She's got the intellectual goods.

 

I am not saying that she isn't a savvy political reporter and keen-witted pundit, but she is a feature-guest / news contributors type person. I could be wrong because I haven't seen her new show (and I will check it out), but she wasn't even a big hit in radio time slots

She could be the most brilliant person in the world but that doesn't change the fact that she has an annoying TV personality.

 

Again, I'd much rather watch someone like Matthews.

Well, I like hearing commentary from smart, thoughtful people.

Well, I like hearing commentary from smart, thoughtful people.

To each his own, but I've never looked to cable news for intelligent commentary (not matter the educational background) due to the highly filtered message. Even the smartest person on those stations are at the mercy of cable executives.

I won't deny that, but if you're going to watch cable news then you might as well watch the shows hosted by the smarter, more thoughtful people on cable news. I prefer satellite radio in general, precisely because those hosts seem a cut or two above the ones on television. Bloomberg, NPR, NPR Talk, and Left for the most part have outstanding hosts.

I've noticed a difference (at least when she was providing commentary and not hosting on MSNBC) between Maddow's talk of issues on her show and on TV. However, when she announced on her radio show that she had been given a TV show to go along with it, she said that they didn't want her to tone things down for her show. I still think that MSNBC, which is owned by a MASSIVE corporation in GE, is probably pressuring their hosts in general to keep things under control.