What is it you don't understand? If a guest starts lying or "spinning" the details, that guest gets called on it. That doesn't happen on 95% of all shows on TV.

Some of the other quick segments on the show are either his opinion or facts he or his staff have dug up and the viewers know that.

What is being spun on his show?

Well, one example is the oft-repeated story of his call to boycott Pepsi.

His spin - he never called for a boycott. I dunno.... saying "I'm calling for all americans to say, hey, pepsi, i'm not drinking your stuff" and then claiming he never called for one? What, because he didn't actually use the word "boycott?"

That's spinning in a big way.

If he never used the word "boycott" then it wouldn't be a boycott. The only thing I remember him advocating for a boycott was on French made products.

Regarding Pepsi... who are these people or media outlets, etc., that are "oft-repeating" this story? You sure there is no spin on their part? Identify them and we will see.

If my memory serves me correctly he had a problem with Pepsi hiring Ludacris as a spokesman.... which if they had any sense of social responsibility they would never have even considered. I recall he wanted people to contact Pepsi and let them know they were outraged that they were using him in their marketing. A marketing campaign aimed at children no less.

I could be wrong, then again I don't see every show but I think that is what happened.

Hey.... How about a "Moby No Spin Zone". I detect a little spin in your anti-O'reilly post... and you even claimed you never watch him, so I don't know why you hate the guy so much.

This isn't calling for a boycott??

Quote:

Hey.... How about a "Moby No Spin Zone". I detect a little spin in your anti-O'reilly post... and you even claimed you never watch him, so I don't know why you hate the guy so much.

I've read his Talking Points, I've listened to him on the radio, and I've seen him talk in person.

I don't bother with him anymore.

No... Not an outright boycott. I think you are probably selectively quoting him by just picking one sentence in a larger speech to fit your argument. What was his entire statement? You would have to look at it in that context.

Besides, Pepsi makes so many products, a boycott of Pepsi would have to include numerous soft drinks, snacks, etc.

Ahh... come on.... you do bother with him. You never miss a chance to sling mud in his direction. Why? Because you don't like the fact that he is a widely watched TV personality who does not parrot the same liberal crap that all the other TV channels shovel at the public. For that he is the enemy of you and the entire left.

I don't agree with all of O'Reilly's political ideals but...... Anyone or anything that gets the left wing/liberal elite establishment all in a twist must be doing something correct.

Ok, then. If Clinton never used the word "blow job" then it wasn't one, was it?

Then NPR, Al Franken, and Michael Moore must be doing something right to be getting the right all in a twist.

Just for contrast, Gross interviews Al Franken .

A fair question Moby...
I actualy don't agree with O'reilly 100% of the time, but when people claim he lies, its always the same two things over and over, The Peabody thing and the % of Black/minority/whatever students in Florida colleges thing. Other than that, people tend to bash his manner and tone way more than what they have to say about his issues. I agree no show can be absolutlely spin free, its human nature to do it even when you dont intend to. I watch him every night, he gets on the Bush administration constantly about what they are doing wrong...IE WMD's, the secretive nature of the administration, the fact that hardly any members of this admin will appear on his show until very recently. What I think the left hates, is that he also will praise this administration when he feels they have done something right. This is something the more liberal media outlets will not do.

The guy has strong opinions about right and wrong. Even if I dont like them all of the time I still like someone who is willing to stick by his convictions even if it pisses people off. I like that he calls people on stuff. I have only seen him cut people mics a maybe five times in the 4 years I have been watching him. I will go to my grave thinking that Glick POS deserved alot worse. I mean, come on, he was trying to claim that the Bush administration somehow orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as a prelude to war. O'reilly cut his mic and ended the interview.

I have to agree...as much as I can't stand him as a person, there ARE some points which O'Reilly makes that, honestly, are pretty good...

However, Bill can't run and hide every time he's being debated. It just looks bad. Every time he doesn't have control of the mic, he throws a fit and storms off. If he'd control himself and play it a little more low key, more moderates such as myself might like him. But he has no sense of humor, and completly turns me off by his baby-ish bully tactics.

I'll agree there Wilmac, sometimes he does start to spout off about there being no spin and never lets his guest finish thier point, or worse yet, doesn't hear the point they are making because he is too busy getting in thier face. Sometimes he needs to be abrasive (Glick), and sometimes not. A point I recall is when NJ eliminated the postion of Poet Laureate because they wanted to oust Amile Baraka (SP). The man's point (he was a black state assemblyman) was this; Fine, get rid of Baraka, his poetry is divisive and racist and full of hatred, but dont get rid of the post of Poet Laureate itself. O'reilly was so busy with his point that Baraka needed to go, that he totally missed the assemblymans point. They were actually agreeing, but O'rielly kept pressing the issue that didnt need to be pressed because they were in agreement. I will say that I dont think O'reilly lies nearly (not even close) as much as his enemies say he does.

Hey WilPac...

There is nothing at all "moderate" about you. You are an admitted socialist and a leftist.

You tell an awful lot of lies about yourself. Who is the real WilPac?

Ok, you want to open a whole other can of worms, here's where I'm moderate:

I don't believe in abortion, except in cases where the mother's life is in danger, and in cases of rape.

I don't believe drugs should be legalized.

I believe that the tobacco companies have been wrongly sued by people that knew they would get cancer from smoking.

I think term limits are a good thing.

I think the unions have been corrupted, and need to be overhauled, reorganized, or abolished.

Any other topics you want to quiz me on? I'll be glad to share my views.

I meant tell us about yourself. You have lied about your location, your occupation. Tell us about your truck.

What the hell do you do for a living that gives you enough time to be here posting all day? The truth this time.

I am a news photographer. I have NOT lied about my location, as stated in an earlier post, I am currently working on a documentary about the blues, thus I am in Alabama. On Sunday I travel to Mississippi. My location will change at that time, as that is where I will be.

My X is a 2000 blue SE. I haven't done any mods to it, as a news photographer's salary doesn't really allow me to. I got it because it works well for loading all of my lights, cameras, and tripods, for shoots where I can't get the news van.

Anything else?

EDIT: I'm on the night crew. I post during the day because I'M NOT WORKING DURING THE DAY. Notice I rarely post on here at night. We're here in Alabama shooting interviews with Willie King (travelling with him to Arkansas tomorrow for his show), and if you've never been to Alabama, there's nothing to do down here.

I don't know if you've ever been to a blues bar, but they're not usually open during the day, Dipstick.

It's true that the people who smoke know it could someday lead to cancer (for about the past 20 years now), but they (the smokers) were lied to about how additive the poisonous substance nicotine really is. The tobacco companies knew this fact, added ammonia to speed the nicotine delivery process from the lungs into the blood stream (as well as a slew of other dangerous goodies), and even went as far as to genetically enhance tobacco plants to produce higher amounts of nicotine. The worst part about this story is many other people outside the tobacco companies also knew the additive properties of nicotine (including the government), yet for years did nothing about it.

The faster the tobacco industry dries up and blows away the better I say. It REALLY erks me that a known highly addictive carcinogen (tobacco), which also creates an additonal burden on our already stressed health care system, is allowed to be legally sold in this country. Really, besides producing jobs for the tobacco industry, what good comes from tobacco use?

So how about making alcohol illegal as well? I am a bit shocked that you believe this. How about marijuana, should it remain illegal?

Someone is still asleep I see. Alcohol is not a carcinogen (definitly not in the amounts the average person consumes), and I've never heard of anyone getting cancer from breathing second hand alcohol fumes, liver diease maybe, but not cancer. As for your marijuana statement (that one came from left field didn't it), what relvance does this comment have to my original argument about tobacco? Come back to the debate after you've have your morning coffee, and you have something intelligent to add.

:rolleyes:

I dont know about what "good" comes from it, but I do know that chewing tobacco is fun and tasty, and that cigarettes make you look cool.

I swear I think she was blowing him while he was talking. Quite a contrast.
"No! No!, I dont want it to be over!"

I could not agree more. I figured in order to be a "fair and balanced" listener, it would only be fair to listen to both interviews. The whole tone is different.