O'Reilly v. Michael Moore

[streetsoldier]

Bill should have cut him off more quickly...in this instance, "Moore is less".

[abajan]

I take it you're talking about Bill O'Oreilly of Fox News Network who likes to tell his guests "I'll give you the last word" and then, after the guest takes him up on the offer, still sticks in his own last word?

That Bill O'Reilly? Did he do that to Michael Moore too?

***Edited to correct spelling of guest***

Wow! I watch Bill O'Reilly often and when he gives his guests the last word, they always get the last word. Funny...I guess I happened to miss those few episodes that you're talking about. And I'm sure you don't mean a comment like "thank you for coming" or something like that.

However, there are plenty of times when I think he should comment to some ridiculous statement but unfortunately he gave his guest the last word.


Anyway, I wasn't home and missed O'Reilly tonight. I'm going to tape it when it reruns at 3am though and watch it tomorrow.

No, I don't mean a comment like "Thank you for coming". He just loves to stick in some smart @ss remark at the end.

[Kiko]

Bill should have cut him off more quickly...

Oh, he tried and did cut him off a few times, Soldier. The usual mo.

MM was very composed and it almost seemed like he allowed it to happen. He did make Bill look like a horses's arse, imho.

But maybe that's a part of the plan to expose his duplicious nature?

O'Reilly's 'No-Spin' Control Prompts Guest to Cry Foul

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 30, 2004; Page C03


When he appeared on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News Channel show last week, Georgetown law professor David Cole was impressed that the hard-charging host played, as part of his opening commentary, "a balanced sound bite" from the chairman of the 9/11 commission.

Cole was less impressed when an aggravated O'Reilly stopped the taping of "The O'Reilly Factor" and killed the sound bite. And when Cole brought up the incident during his interview, he says, O'Reilly "exploded," called him an SOB and declared he would never be invited back.

O'Reilly says a left-wing academic is using a minor staff mistake to try to discredit the program. "We're trying to be fair," he says. "We're trying to give the other point of view so people can see who has the stronger argument. It's really depressing that the discourse has sunk to this level."

The heated words -- which were edited out of the program seen by viewers -- involved O'Reilly's criticism of the New York Times and its coverage of the controversy over whether there were links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.

In kicking off what he called "no-spin coverage" of the issue, O'Reilly began the show by saying that "the Times and other newspapers have been under heavy fire for their misleading headlines, basically saying there was no link" between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

As Cole listened from Washington, the program played a clip of commission chairman Thomas Kean saying: "There is no evidence that we can find whatsoever that Iraq or Saddam Hussein participated in any way in attacks on the United States -- in other words, on 9/11. What we do say, however, is there were contacts between Iraq and Saddam Hussein, excuse me, al-Qaeda."

O'Reilly complained that this was the wrong sound bite. In retaping the commentary, he paraphrased one of Kean's points but not the other: "Governor Thomas Kean says definitely there was a connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda. And he's the 9/11 investigative chief, but that's not enough for the Times."

"I was sort of astonished he would do it so brazenly in front of guests," says Cole, an activist attorney who has challenged the USA Patriot Act in court.

O'Reilly calls "totally absurd" the suggestion that he cut the sound bite "because it didn't fit my thesis." A producer had simply selected a clip that wasn't right for the segment, he says.

But Cole says: "Here he is castigating the New York Times for misleading its readers, and he was misleading his viewers. I wish the show had been live because I'd love for his viewers to see what he was up to."

What viewers saw was a lively debate among O'Reilly, Cole and Mark Jacobson, an Ohio State instructor who helped shape the Pentagon's policy on Guantanamo Bay prisoners. The only clue that there was a blowup at the end of the interview -- when Cole was asked to leave -- is that O'Reilly didn't thank his guests, ending the segment instead with a closing comment.

"We make mistakes because we bring in people who are trying to cause trouble," he says of Cole. "I thought he was a rational person."

Cole was just getting started. He discussed the matter on the Air America radio show of the commentator's most vocal critic, Al Franken. He also submitted an op-ed piece about the incident to several news organizations, including The Washington Post, and still hopes it will be published.

O'Reilly sees this as part of "a pretty well organized campaign" on the left to monitor his television and radio shows. He cited an appearance on "The O'Reilly Factor" last week by John Podesta, former chief of staff in the Clinton White House, who now heads a liberal think tank called the Center for American Progress.

Podesta complained that "you compare Bill Moyers to Mao Zedong. You say that's a joke. You compare Al Franken to Joseph Goebbels, you know, the Nazi propagandist."

"That was Michael Moore, by the way," said O'Reilly, adding that such comments were often satirical. "I said that Michael Moore is a propagandist and so is Joseph Goebbels. And then I explained what propaganda is."

"It's a two-way street here, buddy," Podesta said at one point. "You do this all the time as well, you label people, you smear people."

O'Reilly also cites what he calls a false claim by Moore, in publicizing his film "Fahrenheit 9/11," that O'Reilly had "banned" him after a contentious interview. The host insists that is not the case and typical of his liberal detractors.

"They're trying to say that we're liars," says O'Reilly. "If you can't beat 'em, slime 'em."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Jun29.html

The whole Faux gang is walking a slippery slope, but whatcha gonna do with media bias? Sift it out for ourselves, I suppose.

My favorite newsy is Lou Dobbs, Moneyline, on CNN. Never once have I heard him raise his voice.

[Lindaloo]

You should love the media Kiko, they do happen to support your point of view.

[southerngale]

Made Bill look like a horse's arse? That is hilarious!! Michael Moore looked like an idiot - because he is one. As I watched, I could not believe that anyone in the world gives this joker the time of day. Could someone please explain to him what a lie is? lol

Overall I think O'Reilly was too soft on this moron.

[j]

I think O'reilly was just playing his cards for future interviews SG. He has been trying to get this moron on the show for some time now.

I think he will have him for lunch eventually when the timing is right.

[Guest]

If you missed it last night, like I did, you can read the full transcript and watch a video clip of it here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.html
...Jennifer...

[southerngale]

Yeah, Michael Moore kept refusing to come on the show...he cornered him on a street and got him to appear. lol

He didn't want to face O'Reilly, just like many others who think they would have a hard time in the No Spin Zone.

[j]

Just watched it again....Yup...MM is a complete idiot. I don't know how anybody (besides the Hollywood crowd because they are all idiots too), can listen to this guy and embrace his ideals. He clearly hates Bush and refuses to admit that Bush DID NOT LIE!!!

O'reilly wins by a knockout!

[Guest]

Just watched it again....Yup...MM is a complete idiot. I don't know how anybody (besides the Hollywood crowd because they are all idiots too), can listen to this guy and embrace his ideals. He clearly hates Bush and refuses to admit that Bush DID NOT LIE!!!

O'reilly wins by a knockout!

MM is a poor advocate for those against the war.

Primarily because he is uncharismatic and focuses on red herring issues.

Some of his points are good ones, but they are often lost in the mess.

[Kiko]

You should love the media Kiko, they do happen to support your point of view.

Not when I hear the hate and viciousness being spewed, I don't love them very much.

But you're right, I should. Maybe if the media had a little more lovin', they'd snap out of it? Maybe it would catch on and the whole frickin' world would be as one?

...imagine

Reminds me of a littlle tune from my generation:
http://www.geocities.com/kiko_christmas/Imagine/

[SacrydDreamz]

Just watched it again....Yup...MM is a complete idiot. I don't know how anybody (besides the Hollywood crowd because they are all idiots too), can listen to this guy and embrace his ideals. He clearly hates Bush and refuses to admit that Bush DID NOT LIE!!!

O'reilly wins by a knockout!

MM is a poor advocate for those against the war.

Primarily because he is uncharismatic and focuses on red herring issues.

Some of his points are good ones, but they are often lost in the mess.

I agree.

In now way did MM make O'Reilly look like a horse's arse, nor did O'Reilly stick it to him. I'd call it a draw really, they both brought up valid points of view.... though I cannot for the life of me understand why MM referred to those fighting in Iraq as children..... last I checked an 18 year old was not a child.

[Kiko]

Do you have any kids, SacrydDreamz?

Your babies will ALWAYS be your children.

Mine's 18 and I can't imagine him as anything but my child. Oh, he's well on his way to manhood (and I can't wait, it's been a rocky road), but when MM said 'children', I took it as meaning your sons and daughters.

Fine if they decide to join the military and serve their country (I did, my dad had a fit), but nothing, no amount of maturity, stops them from being the babies you once held and cherish every day.