Goddamn,

Am still watching this special on the Belgian TV on a Jeremy Glick appearing in the O'Reilly show. What a piece of shit host, that O'Reilly, putting the guy down like a piece of shit because he signed some bill that is against the US invading other countries. The way that guy disrespects another human being's opinion is totally unbelieveable. [b]Unbelieveable[/b].

Anyone against the war in Iraq is considered an enemy of the state by him, telling Martin Sheen nobody's going to watch his series because of his stance on that, too.

Just saw a guy stating at the 277 dead soldiers count that soldiers have the same chance of dying as peope in Florida, which is roughly just as big?? WTF?? In Geeographical size maybe, but in population?

Sorry guys, I know CNN may be biased and Europe is very Liberal (and thus my political view), but Fox as a legitimate source for any news on Iraq, Osama or Bush is a no-go. I've never seen something like this. Never. I'm shocked by this kind of 'news-bringing'.

Martin Sheen is a die hard socialist. fuck him.

Heheh. Socialism is better than communism.

Re: The O'Reilly show

and communism is better than the soviet system, which was not communism.

communism is a great idea that is unfortunately seemingly impossible in practice.

and right on Yao. Just be glad you're not surrounded by people who utilize Fox as their primary (or only) "news" source.

Re: The O'Reilly show

i've seen it too, i've actually downloaded it a few days before the broadcast. but anyhow i was shocked too with alot of the things fox seem to do. the personal views and actual news are not separated properly. that makes it extremely hard to know what are actual facs.

Re: The O'Reilly show

I agree that O'reilly's definitely biased and can be an asshole. I've heard that lots of people at Fox don't even like him. There was an interesting piece about O'reilly in Rolling stone magazine a few weeks back that sort of attacked him.

But, his aggressive style and bullying tactics are why people watch him. It'll be interesting to see his behavior and how his show does ratings wise after his scandal and the election.

Probably, yeah,

But this guy should not portray himself as a real non-biased interviewer, which he claims to be as far as I know. Invite someone of whom he KNOWS he has a different opinion than he himself does, and then trying to verbally kick him in the nuts, that's just sick and lame.

Easy scoring, as we say it here. And that's no compliment.

As far as Fox news, NBC, ABC CNN and every other major news network out there is concerned, the only thing that is important is ratings. Period. They get advertisers based upon THEIR RATINGS! So giving in depth, informative, complete NEWS isn't a priority. As far as the U.S. public is concerned, they want to be entertained. Real news isn't entertainment-it can be somewhat bland and boring. Case-in-point: Who really cares what the outcome is of the Peterson trial, but him? Will it have and bearing on anybody but him? No, but to Americans, it's a lot more entertaining than 100,000 people being slaughtered in Darfur. One story gets high ratings, the other doesn't. So it's a no-brainer for all news agencies. Bill O'Reilly is a jerk but because of how he is, he gets ratings and that's what's matters in that industry. That's what has happened to objective, to the point journalism in our country. A very sad state of affairs.

it is very difficult for me not to think about kicking that guys ass

it is very very hard

i cannot watch him...

seems like hes on tv all the time though

[quote=Yao]Heheh. Socialism is better than communism.[/quote]

:lol: If you're part of the ruling elite. I'd rather be a middle class American anyday, than a middle class EU citizen. You people get your asses raped left and right but you're assholes have gotten so loose from years of pounding, you don't even seem to notice anymore. :wink:

BTW thats a shot at your overly controlling and protectionistic government not at your individual citizens.

My ass is so tight...it hurts.

I think the idea of one Europe isn't that bad, in the end this world will be divided in just a few very big political/economical blocks. But it's rather like communism: the theory looks nice, but in practice it will never work I guess.

But...how about the overly controlling and protectionistic government? Please explain, short and simple? I know about the raping thing (corruption almost as bad as in any 3rd world country :mrgreen: ).

[quote=mylexicon][quote=Yao]Heheh. Socialism is better than communism.[/quote]

:lol: If you're part of the ruling elite. I'd rather be a middle class American anyday, than a middle class EU citizen. You people get your asses raped left and right but you're assholes have gotten so loose from years of pounding, you don't even seem to notice anymore. :wink:

BTW thats a shot at your overly controlling and protectionistic government not at your individual citizens.[/quote]

the basic tenants of communism and socialism are good...

we need to get rid of money first, then use this Marx's model of dialectial materialism in a more idealistic way...philosophical

money has absolutely nothing to do with the species flourishing or survival

it is an abstraction...it is only historically relevant...

we must be purged of it

So you wanna go back to stone-age trade? Get real.

Marx was a fucking twat. He concentrated solely on the Industrialized countries, and ignored the developing countries alltogether. He was very negative about them, but he should have studied them thoroughly. His book was based on a view that included only the West and the US, it was a very narrow-minded attempt. I don't reject hsi thoughts alltogether, but his ideas are by far not as well thought over as people like to think.

Re: The O'Reilly show

you're right, bill o reilly is a complete tool, he is pretty much the opposite mirror image of michael moore, i wish i had picture of this guy similar to my avatar as well. the only difference is this guy is on TV and can make movies. moore can but doesnt have a TV show. they are both opinionated morons who cant see the other side. we should lock them in a room together and bind thier hands so they cant hurt each other. then listen to the arguements.

That would be fun...

O'Reilly is all or nothing. I normally disagree with him, but he is usually pretty accurate on the factual bases for his arguments. At times, however, he can be a complete prick. You never know what you're going to get with him...

yao and sightless

so ultimately youre advocating nihilism?

you dig out your college philosophy text books or what sacredawe?

:lol: he's been trying.

[quote=sacredawe78]yao and sightless

so ultimately youre advocating nihilism?[/quote]

Sacredawe, can you please stop dropping names of philosophical/political/religious schools of thought?

It's boring and pointless. It shows a desire to look knowledgable over a desire to actually BE knowledgable.

I still haven't seen one coherent post from you. State how you feel without saying any of these words: capitalism, nihilism, calvinism, mercantilism, socialism, or any other ism. See if you can do it.

Re: The O'Reilly show

point made in certain PM's throughout the day.

PUT THE THESAURUS AWAY!!!!!

either that, or Hofstra University is looking for a qualified teacher.

[url]www.hosftra.edu[/url]

You forgot fatalism, and stoicism. He used others over and over too with his whole utopian society pipe dream. I'm too lazy to go back and reference them, but you get the point there sacred, now Say "AWE" :lol:

OK, now I'll try not to bash Sacred anymore.

I promise. I'll try.

Re: The O'Reilly show

word of the day

7 entries found for ism. ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (zm) n. Informal A distinctive doctrine, system, or theory: ?Formalism, by being an ?ism,? kills form by hugging it to death? (Peter Viereck).

-ism suff. Action; process; practice: terrorism. Characteristic behavior or quality: heroism.

State; condition; quality: pauperism. State or condition resulting from an excess of something specified: strychninism. Distinctive or characteristic trait: Latinism.

Doctrine; theory; system of principles: pacifism. An attitude of prejudice against a given group: racism

ism

\Ism, n. [See ism, above.] A doctrine or theory; especially, a wild or visionary theory. --E. Everett.

i wont go on. sry. :oops:

too many isms for you guys???

not trying to sound smart or knowledgeable for the sake of it...it just happened that isms are good ways of describing overarching themes

is that not what we have been discussing?

still tactless as ever..reducing yourself to such bullshit constantly

You're using technical terms here mate. Not everyone is a universitary student here, and even if they were, keeping your conversation plain and simple with just a few commonly used -isms would be favourable.

I am not a nihilist as far as I know. My friends think I'm all kinds of things, including a total whacko and oversexed, but not a nihilist. :Naughty:

To be really honest: I don't know where I stand. I don't advocate one thing or another, I only advocate that what I think is best for any given society. And of course that can differ per situation.

I'm still in a learning process, I'll take my time to get to know the things I need to know.

^yep.

Except, i'd venture to guess that most of us here are university educated, or at least intelligent enough to make an argument for what we believe in, or we wouldn't be browsing the political section on a music site.

i don't even label myself that much, beyond voting mostly republican, i just live and make decisions. Call it what you want, evil, nihilist, whatever you will, labels matter not to me in the grand scheme of things, and that's where i live.

i took all those tree hugging philosophy classes, slept through most of them, because you could always just bullshit your way through the tests. Still maintained a 3.0, and didn't even study. lol. Philosophy majors. :roll:

there are easy philosophy courses, then there are difficult ones

philosophy is our most basic science...it may seem trite to some, but it really isnt

it is through philosophy that we will change this world for the better and only through philosophy

guess you would call someone like Nietzsche or Aristotle a moron huh?

philosophy appeals to math and science, as you probably think it isnt

Leibniz was a philosopher...helped elucidate fluxiions (calculus) and also created the binary system...guess he was a moron too??

the presocratics like Parmenides, Thales, Anaximander, etc...they all basically helped bring about some of things today we take completely for granted....they were the first in the west to really start using reason and break away from Homer and Hesiod's mythology and using science

guess they were morons huh?

i don't like to measure people by what majors they are...i think the educational system sucks here...

im pretty sure the majority of majors are business oriented anyway

there was a survey done at the university of florida a few years ago...and about 85% of the people students said they were only taking classes because it would get them a good job

its a business training camp...if you judge people based on their majors or college training...you've really lowered your standards

read some of Nietzche's criticisms of scholasticm and his comparison to what real education is

education is a life long agenda...it has nothing to do with sticking to cultural conventions as they are and getting a degree so you can get some lame job

a "philosopher" realized that...not some number crunching faithful pedant who got a degree in chemcial engineering and his now working at Dow creating a more scenty fresh laundry detergent or some MBA drone on the apprentice sucking Donald Trump's dick to get realized

he didn't say anything about any of those philosophers being "morons," you used that label.

i didn't go to college for a business major, or so a degree would get me a job. i went to college for myself, to learn about something i enjoyed, and didn't think once about what sort of job placement i was going to get because of it.

It was merely stated that philosophy is easy. I personally don't see how one could spend 4 years studying homer and neitzche, although i consider them both to be brilliant. To each his own.

Yeah well: bread keeps you alive, thoughts don't okay? Mind if I see to that basic need before sharing any thoughts I might have on any given subject with you?

And don't assume too much, we don't call philosophers in general morons. I doubt if there is anyone here saying Nietzsche is a moron. He came up with some decent thoughts, you haven't. In fact, you seem to be convincing us of your views & points without appreciating the fact that we DO care about what's going on, but deal with it in our own individual ways. You don't own wisdom, but you act like you do. So far, you haven't earned much respect IMO in discussions with this attitude.

Quotes:

• its a business training camp...if you judge people based on their majors or college training...you've really lowered your standards.

• education is a life long agenda...it has nothing to do with sticking to cultural conventions as they are and getting a degree so you can get some lame job.

• still tactless as ever..reducing yourself to such bullshit constantly.

Thanx for treating us like barely evolved primates sacred. We don't know shit and don't know how to reason, but with you acting as our saviour and bright light while we dwell in darkness in the universe filled with stars full of knowledge and wisdom, we may ultimately end up using forks and knives instead of our hands while we have dinner.

:Respect:

:Stupid:

Do I sound sarcastic? Noooo....!!??

[quote=EvenSteven]he didn't say anything about any of those philosophers being "morons," you used that label.

i didn't go to college for a business major, or so a degree would get me a job. i went to college for myself, to learn about something i enjoyed, and didn't think once about what sort of job placement i was going to get because of it.

It was merely stated that philosophy is easy. I personally don't see how one could spend 4 years studying homer and neitzche, although i consider them both to be brilliant. To each his own.[/quote]

There are easy and hard philosophy classes. And finally, I'll agree with Sacredawe on something. We need a whole lot more philosphy study going on in this world. All scientists and engineers should be required to take a couple of ethics and aesthetics courses.

Without ethics, you get scientists that worship technological advancement for it's own sake, damn the consequences. That's caused us enough problems already. It would be nice to have scientists that grasped the impact of the things they do before they were done.

I was a math major and a philosophy minor, and my upper level philosophy classes were almost as challenging as the upper level math courses. Those classes were unforgettable, and there was no way I was sleeping through them. Best class ever was called Death. Rocked!

At kleast he is honest and says what he belives and not what some network tells him to say like most of the news reporters today

"During the course of Defendant Bill O'Reilly's sexual rant, it became clear that he was using a vibrator on himself, and that he ejaculated. Plaintiff was repulsed." -From a lawsuit filed against Bill O'Reilly

so what he was having fun. still does not make him a bad news reporter.

stick to the issue lobie. :|

Thats like saying Clinton was a bad president for the SOLE reason that he got head from someone other then his wife. It amazes me that you liberals will not only defend Clinton, but make it seem like he is even more amazing because he got head.

And yet Bill O'Reilly becomes a hell spawn for doing something similar even when it has no merit on his ability as a reporter.

You don't see the hypocrisy here? I guess I shouldn't be suprised since hypocrisy is the epitome of the liberal line of thinking.

"you can't see what you are"

:lol:

[quote=Civic_Zen] And yet Bill O'Reilly becomes a hell spawn for doing something similar even when it has no merit on his ability as a reporter.

[/quote]

Say what? With Clinton, we're talking about consensual sex between two adults. With OReilly, we're talking about a sexual harrassment suit filed by the producer of the show against Bill. How is that similar at all?

I also never made any claims about Oreilly's talent at what he does, I just found that quote rather amusing.

fine ... you are off the hook.

i was just giving you a tuff one buddy. :wink:

xoxoxox,

Dominik

A bit off-topic:

I happened to be listening to the O'Reilley Factor yesterday, and he went on this rant about how people's sexual activities are nobody's business but their own, and how people don't like to hear about other people's sexual exploits, desires, fantasies, etc.

Guess he learned that the hard way, eh? :Naughty:

[quote=LobsterClan] Say what? With Clinton, we're talking about consensual sex between two adults. With OReilly, we're talking about a sexual harrassment suit filed by the producer of the show against Bill. How is that similar at all?

I also never made any claims about Oreilly's talent at what he does, I just found that quote rather amusing.[/quote]

Upon reading about the new Bill O'Reilly legal case on the Internet, I thought for a moment that I was reading the Starr Report. But upon further review, it was more like the famous Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas situation! Oops, shows you how much I care about this stupid shit.

I realize the claims, I think she's just pissed because Bill was no good in bed. Seriously though, you made it seem like your argument against Bill was this whole lawsuit.

I can almost guarentee, that just like the Hill/Thomas situation, these verbal (thats all they are) allegations will never be proven. Words, thats all they are.