--

These People Disgust Me

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/25/111726/936  - Bill O'Reilly's Website Investigated By Secret Service for Threats to Hillary's Life

<quote>
    If Hillary wins...  my guns are loaded.

    ...

    I didn't respect Stalin and I won't respect Halliary - they are cut from the same cloth.
</quote>
Permalink son of parnas 
July 26th, 2007 1:39am
Yea, I dont think a negative thing has been said towards any member of the republican party including Bush, Cheney or Bill O'Reilly on an internet forum.
Permalink Bot Berlin 
July 26th, 2007 1:48am
"FOX News' Bill O'Reilly has been attacking the liberal blog Daily Kos, and liberal blogs in general, over some extreme comments left by some of our visitors. It's interesting therefore that O'Reilly's own Web site contains some of the most hideous hate you've ever seen. Over"

But this is a good point, a little hypocrisy.
Permalink Bot Berlin 
July 26th, 2007 1:49am
The secret service are probably rolling their eyes. Unfortunately when somebody forwards something like this to them they're bound to investigate.
Permalink Send private email Colm 
July 26th, 2007 6:12am
O'Reilly also suffers from the problem of being a fairly prominent figure.  I mean, one of us goes off about how we're gonna whack <insert bozo here>, everyone writes us off as a tosser and doesn't think about it.  A guy with a TV and radio franchise starts having those views floating around on his site, people take notice.
Permalink Send private email Clay Dowling 
July 26th, 2007 8:25am
This is the sort of thing people who want The Fairness Doctrine re-introduced point to.

I'm beginning to think an entire Fairness Doctrine, managed by the FCC, is probably over-kill.  But I'm appalled that this kind of thing can go on, and even when CALLED on such blatant lies (Hillary and Lenin are the same) people merely sigh.

The Libel laws apparently are too big a gun for this sort of "commentary".  But there SHOULD be some recourse so that such blatant propaganda can be answered.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 26th, 2007 9:51am
Once you are famous, the libel laws change on you. Somebody would have to tell people you were a baby raping cannibal, and a whole lot of people would have to believe it and start attempting to assault you before you could even hope to make it to trial.
Permalink Send private email JoC 
July 26th, 2007 11:07am
> I'm beginning to think an entire Fairness Doctrine, managed by the FCC, is probably over-kill.

This confuses me. We see what the world has degenerated into without it. Yet it's over-kill. In what sense?
Permalink son of parnas 
July 26th, 2007 11:11am
"We see what the world has degenerated into without it."

Really? Give us some examples - what has the "world" degenerated into?
Permalink Cheers 
July 26th, 2007 11:18am
Well, George W. Bush would probably not have gotten elected without Rush Limbaugh.  Or re-elected, for that matter.  Swift-boats for truth probably would not have existed with the Fairness doctrine, and Kerry probably would have won.

The lack of the Fairness Doctrine has allowed both left and right propaganda and character assassination to move forward without limit.  I don't think either left or right propaganda can be 'balanced' together to find the truth.  I think the TRUTH is needed to 'balance' propaganda from either side.

The only reason I'm reluctant about the Fairness Doctrine is that it puts whoever heads the FCC (a political appointee) in charge of deciding what the sides are, and what is 'fair'.

In the Nixon administration, the Fairness Doctrine was used to stifle debate, for instance.

It was established in 1969, and was revoked in 1989 under Reagan, since the then head of the FCC felt it was "unconstitutional".  I would LOVE to see a few more studies of the kinds of debate before, during, and after the Fairness Doctrine.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 26th, 2007 11:35am
Keeping balance makes sense when you've only got two legs. Less so when you're a centipede.
Permalink strawdog soubriquet 
July 26th, 2007 11:47am
> Give us some examples - what has the "world" degenerated into?

Sure, please check back here in the year 20999.
Permalink son of parnas 
July 26th, 2007 12:18pm
"Sure, please check back here in the year 20999."

You make no sense.
Permalink Cheers 
July 26th, 2007 1:35pm
> You make no sense.

If not making sense to you is wrong then I don't want to be right.
Permalink son of parnas 
July 26th, 2007 2:02pm
I am not saying it is wrong, you idiot, it's just that your responses are often nonsensical.
Permalink Cheers 
July 26th, 2007 2:07pm
> you idiot, it's just that your responses are often nonsensical.

Perhaps you need to be more sensical then?
Permalink son of parnas 
July 26th, 2007 2:35pm
Yeah, 20999 is WAY too long.  2099 is more what I think SoP meant.

Personally, 2012 will probably be time enough for the Bush crows, which are starting to come home to roost, to be prosecuted for their crimes.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 26th, 2007 2:43pm
"Personally, 2012 will probably be time enough for the Bush crows"

But, but..what if SkyNet becomes self-aware before then?
Permalink Anonymous Asshat 
July 26th, 2007 4:43pm
Then the killer-robots come in, and tear the place down, and all bets are off.

Personally, I think getting hit by a Near-Earth-Object (NEO) is more likely than Sky-Net becoming aware, but then I was always a space jockey first.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 26th, 2007 5:18pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: July, 2007 Other topics: July, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics