[adsi] Re: [them] Arctic ice cap oscillations have happened before

  • From: Milton Scritsmier <Milton_Scritsmier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: adsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 01:10:11 -0700

Ken Schmahl, P.E. wrote:
> to finish what Gmail rudely interrupted...
> All I know is, CNN and MSNBC have no Bill O'Reillys.

CNN's people generally have good journalistic standards even though they
 lean to the left. Every so often I see an excellent news report from
them that Fox would never do (and vice-versa from Fox). MSNBC, on the
other hand, is far worse than either Fox or CNN. You think O'Reilly is
bad? Consider Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann, for example.

> Even their worst
> can't hold a candle to that dog.  Surely you recognize him for what he is?

Once again, I have to ask how often you actually watch "The Factor".
Most people who never watch "The Factor" think O'Reilly is some kind of
right wing kook. Actually, he's a populist who sometimes caters too much
to getting an audience. Many of his views are not what you expect from a
right wing extremist. For example, he was on Bush's case for fumbling
the war two or three years ago, well before the rest of the Fox anchors
(but well after your liberal friends, of course). Just like you, every
time the price of oil goes up he blames it on the oil companies (in
fact, he has a running battle on this with Neil Cavuto, Fox's business
guru). He believes in civil unions for gays and gay adoption rather than
keeping kids in orphanages. Civil rights topics are common and the
racial makeup of his guests is far more diverse than his audience and
perhaps even more diverse than the US population at large. He actively
seeks guests whose opinions are the extreme opposite of his own. He has
a good sense of humor, even at his own expense at times. Every week he
has an ombudsman segment where he answers viewer criticisms head on.
None of this is what you would expect from a close-minded extreme right

But like many populists he's also hypersensitive to personal criticism.
He can bully his guests, shutting them down harshly at times if they
don't want to talk about what he wants to talk about. He often gets into
"campaign mode" where some moral issue or another occupies him for weeks
on end. Sometimes this is good (like helping get "Jessica's Law" passed
in as many states as possible), but sometimes he loses all objectivity.

Last spring he got on Boulder's case for forcing Boulder High School
students to attend a seminar with panelists who held extreme and
ridiculous views about sexuality and drugs. He did a good thing in
holding some Boulder public employees' feet to the fire (that never
happens here locally), but in doing so he did take some of the
panelist's comments out of context to force his point, something he
denies to this day. And he tried to paint this issue as part of a
national secular progressive plot to take over the minds of the nation's
kids. The truth is that many Boulder residents come here to get away
from what they see as an oppressive right wing world and build their own
private (and, yes, secular progressive) utopia. This includes raising
their kids the way they see fit, the same as elsewhere. Nobody here
cares very much about taking over the minds of all the kids in America.
And it's far from perfect here, as you've heard me complain many times.
So when O'Reilly got on Boulder's case, to the people here it looked
like the right wing America they had fled had come to invade their turf.
Of course their hackles were raised, and nobody here could ever admit
that maybe, just maybe O'Reilly had some valid points. O'Reilly never
understood this, or if he did he chose not to acknowledge this because
he was pursuing his own agenda.

So yeah, I think I do recognize O'Reilly for what he is. ;-)

Other related posts: