Did anyone catch her last night? I saw the last segments right before Miller and I thought she came across as very friendly. She clearly had him stumped with a few of her answers and the facial expressions on both of them were priceless.
I wonder how long it's going to be before O gets in there and answers some questions. FYI, Bill has him on tape agreeing to an interview. We'll see if he keeps his word.
The biggest loser in all of this though are the hate sites like dailykos who have been bascially threatening the candidates if they participate with Fox...what a ringing endorsement for the First Amendment these idiots are...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
The biggest loser in all of this though are the hate sites like dailykos who have been bascially threatening the candidates if they participate with Fox...what a ringing endorsement for the First Amendment these idiots are...
Countdown until moron AOX attacks you for attacking his treasured source of information..3...2...1
I thought she did extremely well last night. She was able to dodge the questions about how she would pay for Hil-Care, but she used humor and stood up well to O'Riley!
I was impressed.
Was a good interview...here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ISWUXT9V6g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9X_nnEJmHM
Too bad she didn't do that when, you know, she had a decent chance at gaining some sort of lead somewhere in the vote totals, delegate counts, states won, etc., etc.
Countdown to RM coming to defend his lady. 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Too bad she didn't do that when, you know, she had a decent chance at gaining some sort of lead somewhere in the vote totals, delegate counts, states won, etc., etc.
Countdown to RM coming to defend his lady. 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
He may not be able to comment at the moment. . .
(http://www.virginmedia.com/images/gruesome_scanners_431x300.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by Gaspar
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Too bad she didn't do that when, you know, she had a decent chance at gaining some sort of lead somewhere in the vote totals, delegate counts, states won, etc., etc.
Countdown to RM coming to defend his lady. 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
He may not be able to comment at the moment. . .
(http://www.virginmedia.com/images/gruesome_scanners_431x300.jpg)
Sick...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
...
The biggest loser in all of this though are the hate sites like dailykos who have been bascially threatening the candidates if they participate with Fox...what a ringing endorsement for the First Amendment these idiots are...
Actually, as a person who goes there from time to time, I can assure you that although Fox is indeed despised, there is hardly a consensus of opinion there on whether Dem candidates should be interviewed on the network.
There was considerable amount of praise for Obama appearing on "Fox News Sunday" last week because it's consistent with his message of gaining support from a wide spectrum of voters. This would include Fox News viewers.
Disclosure: Even though I go to DailyKos periodically, I find myself disagreeing with the posters there a good chunk of the time. Sort of like when I go to Michelle Malkin's or the Red State site. I guess I'm repelled by extremists of both sides.
Andrew Sullivan (a thoughtful libertarian / conservative) is probably closest to my views, although I'm not in agreement with him 100 percent, either.
My point was that they've been threatening both Democratic candidates with withholding money and support if they dared to talk with Fox.
Fox has incredibly high viewership and to think it wouldn't benefit any candidate to interact with them makes absolutely no sense.
As far as being despised, success tends to engender that in your competition. Alan Colmes had good commentary last night on how childish it is for candidates to avoid Fox, and although he's paid by Fox, he's an on-fire liberal...
Many far left people are contributors, and rarely do you see interviews or debates where the left isn't fairly represented by people like Bob Beckle, Harold Ford Jr., Geraldo, ect...
I enjoy Sullivan too, The Conservative Soul was a good read.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
My point was that they've been threatening both Democratic candidates with withholding money and support if they dared to talk with Fox.
That rings hollow. You think those same far-left people are gonna vote for or give money to McCain if Obama and Clinton go on Fox once in a while?
Me, neither.
I'm feeling pretty good about these slate of candidates that remain. At the least, we'll have someone in the White House that's a more thoughtful (not that it's hard compared to the current guy) and isn't in bed with the neo-conservative crazies.
Either way, it's apparent that the American people -- Republicans included -- think the nation's top leadership has gone far too right, and now the pendulum is swinging the other way. A few Republicans still complain that McCain is a RINO, but he's what the party desperately needed.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
My point was that they've been threatening both Democratic candidates with withholding money and support if they dared to talk with Fox.
Fox has incredibly high viewership and to think it wouldn't benefit any candidate to interact with them makes absolutely no sense.
As far as being despised, success tends to engender that in your competition. Alan Colmes had good commentary last night on how childish it is for candidates to avoid Fox, and although he's paid by Fox, he's an on-fire liberal...
Many far left people are contributors, and rarely do you see interviews or debates where the left isn't fairly represented by people like Bob Beckle, Harold Ford Jr., Geraldo, ect...
I enjoy Sullivan too, The Conservative Soul was a good read.
I would say that as the #1 cable news network with an international viewership, it would be very silly for any candidate to turn down an opportunity for that exposure.
These are presidential candidates. If they feel like they can't stand up to media scrutiny, they have no business being leader of the free world!
Obama's long-time boycott of Fox, culminating in an agreement to appear last week, that turned into a pathetic pander-fest is proof that once the vail is lifted, the wizard is only a charlatan.
On the other hand, Hillary's strong performance on O'Riley last night will likely boost her ratings with the undecided. More people view the O'Riley factor than any other show in that time-slot. She did a very good thing for herself!
By Marisa Guthrie -- Broadcasting & Cable, 1/4/2008 5:11:00 PM
Fox News Channel once again ended the year as cable's top news network, followed by CNN, with few radical ratings dips or surges for either network. But among the channels with smaller audience totals -- MSNBC, CNBC and CNN Headline News -- 2007 was a year of growth.
For the year in primetime, Fox News was the No. 6-ranked cable channel behind USA Network, TNT, ESPN, TBS and Lifetime Television. That's two notches higher than its ranking last year. CNN, its closest news competitor, was No. 26, down one.
Fox News was down 1% in total viewers in total day and 3% in the 25-54 demographic, but it still boasted most of the top-rated shows on cable news led by The O'Reilly Factor, which has been No. 1 in its 8 p.m. time slot for 85 consecutive months.Countries with Fox News viewership:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Fox_News_world_providers.PNG/800px-Fox_News_world_providers.PNG)
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
My point was that they've been threatening both Democratic candidates with withholding money and support if they dared to talk with Fox.
That rings hollow. You think those same far-left people are gonna vote for or give money to McCain if Obama and Clinton go on Fox once in a while?
Me, neither.
I'm feeling pretty good about these slate of candidates that remain. At the least, we'll have someone in the White House that's a more thoughtful (not that it's hard compared to the current guy) and isn't in bed with the neo-conservative crazies.
Either way, it's apparent that the American people -- Republicans included -- think the nation's top leadership has gone far too right, and now the pendulum is swinging the other way. A few Republicans still complain that McCain is a RINO, but he's what the party desperately needed.
I still think you're missing my point, or I'm not making myself clear. You do know that Soros, who owns media matters and moveon warned these candidates not to speak with Fox, and he controls massive amounts of money that pour through these 527s (Thanks McCain!).
If you don't believe me, watch for the Soros machine to turn against Clinton in the next week or two.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I still think you're missing my point, or I'm not making myself clear. You do know that Soros, who owns media matters and moveon warned these candidates not to speak with Fox, and he controls massive amounts of money that pour through these 527s (Thanks McCain!).
If you don't believe me, watch for the Soros machine to turn against Clinton in the next week or two.
[/quote]
Feh. Soros is given far too much credit.
Besides, both Clinton and Obama have spoken to Fox in the past week. Who's he gonna boycott?
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I still think you're missing my point, or I'm not making myself clear. You do know that Soros, who owns media matters and moveon warned these candidates not to speak with Fox, and he controls massive amounts of money that pour through these 527s (Thanks McCain!).
If you don't believe me, watch for the Soros machine to turn against Clinton in the next week or two.
Soros is no joke. He's incredibly wealthy and motivated, and it's not necessarily just him, he's created quite a media machine himself.
I think there's a real chance that he's going to withhold from both of them in the short term, though I think Clinton will bear much of the brunt because Obama is much more in line politically with Soros than Clinton is.
Feh. Soros is given far too much credit.
Besides, both Clinton and Obama have spoken to Fox in the past week. Who's he gonna boycott?
[/quote]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I still think you're missing my point, or I'm not making myself clear. You do know that Soros, who owns media matters and moveon warned these candidates not to speak with Fox, and he controls massive amounts of money that pour through these 527s (Thanks McCain!).
If you don't believe me, watch for the Soros machine to turn against Clinton in the next week or two.
Soros is no joke. He's incredibly wealthy and motivated, and it's not necessarily just him, he's created quite a media machine himself.
I think there's a real chance that he's going to withhold from both of them in the short term, though I think Clinton will bear much of the brunt because Obama is much more in line politically with Soros than Clinton is.
Feh. Soros is given far too much credit.
Besides, both Clinton and Obama have spoken to Fox in the past week. Who's he gonna boycott?
[/quote]
Soros has already dropped clinton. He's thrown all of his outlets behind Obama.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Too bad she didn't do that when, you know, she had a decent chance at gaining some sort of lead somewhere in the vote totals, delegate counts, states won, etc., etc.
Countdown to RM coming to defend his lady. 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
I didn't see the interview and am too busy to watch it completely right now.
signed,
Defensive Coordinator
You missed a good night for your candidate. Though she was, in my opinion, dead wrong on most of her comments, she came off well...I guess it runs in the family BADA BING!
Thanks, I'll be here all week.
Tune in tonight for part two...
Do not be fooled by this thread with regard to some posters building up enthusiasm for Billary or Faux News for that matter. Iplaw realizes midway through this thread that O was on Faux last weekend after claiming, "I wonder how long it's going to be before O gets in there and answers some questions. FYI, Bill has him on tape agreeing to an interview. We'll see if he keeps his word." So, from the git go of this silly thread we get an outlandish and untrue allegation. Then we see the originator's real intent of attacking that left wing media which is not even in the same league as Faux with regard to viewers and UNfairness.
It's obvious, the originator is a right wing nut neo con who is really just a dittohead.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/04/29/nondemocrats_will_decide_indiana.html
Non-Democrats Will Decide Indiana
More from the Howey-Gauge poll in Indiana: "The Democratic primary is going to be decided by non-Democrats. To be determined is which group -- Republicans or independents -- are going to decide this race."
The poll shows that self-identified Republicans favor Sen. Hillary Clinton, 50% to 44%, while independents favor Sen. Barack Obama, 54% to 38%.
Among Republicans, there "appears to be two kinds of Republicans: the 'Obamacans' as the Illinois senator likes to call them -- earnest Republicans deeply disappointed in their own party's performance on the budget, economy, social issues and the Iraq War -- and the Rush Limbaugh Republicans who are planning to crossover to vote for Sen. Clinton because they perceive her to be the weakest rival to U.S. Sen. John McCain in the November election."
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Do not be fooled by this thread with regard to some posters building up enthusiasm for Billary or Faux News for that matter. Iplaw realizes midway through this thread that O was on Faux last weekend after claiming, "I wonder how long it's going to be before O gets in there and answers some questions. FYI, Bill has him on tape agreeing to an interview. We'll see if he keeps his word." So, from the git go of this silly thread we get an outlandish and untrue allegation. Then we see the originator's real intent of attacking that left wing media which is not even in the same league as Faux with regard to viewers and UNfairness.
What exactly did I "realize" FauxTurd? The comment was fairly clear to anyone with even a less than stellar IQ. Obama has promised to go on Oreilly. I'll be interested to see if he's got the guts to follow through with his promise.
And yes, I have no problem attacking the "left wing" media if by that you mean the dailykos and similar FauxTurd related smear sites.
(http://www.houseofchuckles.com/lf/jw-0084.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Do not be fooled by this thread with regard to some posters building up enthusiasm for Billary or Faux News for that matter. Iplaw realizes midway through this thread that O was on Faux last weekend after claiming, "I wonder how long it's going to be before O gets in there and answers some questions. FYI, Bill has him on tape agreeing to an interview. We'll see if he keeps his word." So, from the git go of this silly thread we get an outlandish and untrue allegation. Then we see the originator's real intent of attacking that left wing media which is not even in the same league as Faux with regard to viewers and UNfairness.
What exactly did I "realize" FauxTurd? The comment was fairly clear to anyone with even a less than stellar IQ. Obama has promised to go on Oreilly. I'll be interested to see if he's got the guts to follow through with his promise.
And yes, I have no problem attacking the "left wing" media if by that you mean the dailykos and similar FauxTurd related smear sites.
(http://www.houseofchuckles.com/lf/jw-0084.gif)
O'lielly is not a credible journalist. He is a pervert from what I've seen of reports of his television show. I can't watch the piece of crappola.
So what if Obama does not sit with Billoh. It will verify to those few intellectual capacity voters around the country that our leader will not be manipulated. As far as the Billoh fan club, of which you belong, they won't vote for Barack no matter what. And the remainding voters could not recall what Billoh was about the previous night if by some small chance they did tune in....
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Do not be fooled by this thread with regard to some posters building up enthusiasm for Billary or Faux News for that matter. Iplaw realizes midway through this thread that O was on Faux last weekend after claiming, "I wonder how long it's going to be before O gets in there and answers some questions. FYI, Bill has him on tape agreeing to an interview. We'll see if he keeps his word." So, from the git go of this silly thread we get an outlandish and untrue allegation. Then we see the originator's real intent of attacking that left wing media which is not even in the same league as Faux with regard to viewers and UNfairness.
It's obvious, the originator is a right wing nut neo con who is really just a dittohead.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/04/29/nondemocrats_will_decide_indiana.html
Non-Democrats Will Decide Indiana
More from the Howey-Gauge poll in Indiana: "The Democratic primary is going to be decided by non-Democrats. To be determined is which group -- Republicans or independents -- are going to decide this race."
The poll shows that self-identified Republicans favor Sen. Hillary Clinton, 50% to 44%, while independents favor Sen. Barack Obama, 54% to 38%.
Among Republicans, there "appears to be two kinds of Republicans: the 'Obamacans' as the Illinois senator likes to call them -- earnest Republicans deeply disappointed in their own party's performance on the budget, economy, social issues and the Iraq War -- and the Rush Limbaugh Republicans who are planning to crossover to vote for Sen. Clinton because they perceive her to be the weakest rival to U.S. Sen. John McCain in the November election."
Hey brother, right now I'm for either of these candidates. May the best man or woman win! Let em both fight to the death.
This is entertainment!
Get off your shifty-eyed conspiracy podium. Stop with the labels and realize, your party is eating its own.
Blame Fox news, blame Rove, blame Bush, basically blame anything you can because it's too hard to admit that the fracture is taking place.
Hard liberal organizations are usually comprised of far more young people than moderate or conservative groups. This means more passion, emotion, and decision making based on basic emotions. FOTD it's apparent in the way you communicate and your basic lexicon complexity. You are passionate, and very emotional. You really believe in what you say, even if it makes no sense to the rest of us. That passion is an awesome thing if you ever learn to focus it.
Because of blind passion, there is a very strong "my team v.s. your team" sentiment within liberal groups. That is what we are seeing in this primary. Neither team is willing to throw in the towel for the good of the party. They will fight and ignore all logic and all pain, until one of them goes far enough to say or do something that forces them out of the race. They will then cry "Unfair," and continue to widen the rift in the party even after the primary is over.
You cannot with any confidence say that they wont FOTD!
What will be your response if Hillary wins the primary? Tell us now. What if Obama's character is assassinated in the most vile of ways. How will you react? Will you file in behind Hillary?
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
O'lielly is not a credible journalist. He is a pervert from what I've seen of reports of his television show. I can't watch the piece of crappola.
So what if Obama does not sit with Billoh. It will verify to those few intellectual capacity voters around the country that our leader will not be manipulated. As far as the Billoh fan club, of which you belong, they won't vote for Barack no matter what. And the remainding voters could not recall what Billoh was about the previous night if by some small chance they did tune in....
So let me get this right, you prefer a candidate that doesn't keep their word, as long as they lie to the right people?
Not keeping your word to someone who attacks you does not make a broken word.
Wevus....I will not file in behind Hillary. She is 8 more years after over 20 of Bushies and Clittons. No dynastys!
I am passionate. The country is on the lame path and needs to be centered.
quote:
Not keeping your word to someone who attacks you does not make a broken word.
That has to be the most ignorant statement I've ever read, and after reading most of your threads that's quite an accomplishment.
So, I give my word to you I will meet you for a beer. Then, I read a post from you that assaults anything intelligent while you tell others how bad a person I am. It would be totally justifiable not to meet you for the beer. Get it now?
This personal attacker has no tact.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Wevus....I will not file in behind Hillary. She is 8 more years after over 20 of Bushies and Clittons. No dynastys!
How'd I get in there? I didn't say anything!
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
So, I give my word to you I will meet you for a beer. Then, I read a post from you that assaults anything intelligent while you tell others how bad a person I am. It would be totally justifiable not to meet you for the beer. Get it now?
This personal attacker has no tact.
First, I'm not sure that rambling paragraph is even a complete thought, but your attempt at an analogy doesn't hold water. Do you have any proof that Oreilly has ever attacked Obama?
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
So, I give my word to you I will meet you for a beer. Then, I read a post from you that assaults anything intelligent while you tell others how bad a person I am. It would be totally justifiable not to meet you for the beer. Get it now?
This personal attacker has no tact.
No. You keep your word. Something as minor as someone saying something bad about you (sounds like something a high school girl would get upset about) is absolutely no grounds for breaking your word. Your an adult, those kinds of things should be irrelevant to you. (OMG, Becky... did you hear what Sally said about me to Rebecca?!) puleeeze. If an adult said something bad about you to others. I would soooo be there if I had said I would. It would show who is the better person that I would still keep my word, that those kinds of things are irrelevant to me. Just because someone else isnt a mature adult doesnt mean you have to play their game. You show them how a real adult behaves and thinks, set an example and keep your word.
Another good interview segment tonight. Questions were much harder and Bill wasn't coddling her like he did last night and she still looked okay. I think the questions about Pakistan shocked her as per the look on her face. I thought the questions about sanctuary cities were great.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Another good interview segment tonight. Questions were much harder and Bill wasn't coddling her like he did last night and she still looked okay. I think the questions about Pakistan shocked her as per the look on her face. I thought the questions about sanctuary cities were great.
I thought she did quite well too. O'Riley obviously opened her to some criticism, but overall I think she held here own.