Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Sun-Times)   Roger Ebert: "I am not interested in discussing Bill O'Reilly's politics here. That would open a hornet's nest. I am more concerned about the danger he and others like him represent to a civil and peaceful society"   (blogs.suntimes.com) divider line 551
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

22630 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jun 2009 at 2:03 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



551 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-06-22 01:35:43 AM  
GAT_00: Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly.

Yeah, and they found copies of Doom and Quake on the Columbine shooters' PCs. So Jack Thompson was right, huh?

Please don't judge me by the books on my shelf, and I'll extend the same courtesy to you.
 
2009-06-22 01:49:47 AM  
GORDON: blatant idiocy

HOLY BARKING A$$CRACKERS

GIANT FLAMING TUBA EXPLOSION
 
2009-06-22 01:59:38 AM  
Cerebral Ballsy: I merely said Ebert IS sexy to people who are turned on by brains.

Well, I don't find Ebert sexy, but he's an old-school Chicago Catholic boy who more often than not writes pure sense for me, and that's why I like him. I can't say I always agree with his movie reviews, because sometimes he's just off. He let his politics get in the way of his review of "Team America", or maybe he was just too old to appreciate it.

But yes, intelligence is a turn on. I'm still somewhat confused as to why you thought my post was a criticism of Ebert or O'Reily - it was a side note for the thread. I had no interest in the "debate" because there wasn't a debate going on.

And on Fark, the quickest way to get a response is to post a photo of a woman. I'll confess to posting that one because on a GIS for "hot chick" it was the first one I found that I could hotlink to. I built the post around that.

Go me :)
 
2009-06-22 02:09:43 AM  
Cerebral Ballsy: you know who I've thought was sexy? Richard Dawkins. The guy has to be 30 years my senior, but I'd do him. Oh yeah.

I would not do Richard Dawkins. And you need to think about this: his behavior towards the religious is the same you see in old people towards minorities. He's just picked a different target. Like old racists, he's figuring that it's time to tell the world what he really thinks, PC be damned.

That's fine, but it's not intelligence. It's balls.

Admit it, you like him because he's tweaking what you see as the establishment. He's thumbing his nose at people who have hurt you in the past, or are hurting you now. He's a comrade.

That's all good, but you should ask yourself why you care so much in the first place.
 
2009-06-22 02:12:51 AM  
belowner: That's all good, but you should ask yourself why you care so much in the first place.

Because it's harmful to Western society and civilization as a whole to have a majority of its members believe in the Tooth Fairy?

Or did you mean to ask a different question altogether?
 
2009-06-22 02:29:30 AM  
Nocens: He's going to act all outraged and Ebert will get an invite to come explain himself. Ebert, for all his bluster here will gladly accept. You're going to watch and cheer on Ebert.

Ebert is currently physically unable to speak. Your prediction is unlikely.
 
2009-06-22 02:38:03 AM  
zefal: Where is this "civil and peaceful society" he talks about? Let me guess it's on MSNBC!

Here's roger ebert being civil:

"That the president of the United States cannot get himself from his bulletproof Cadillac limousine to lunch with the queen without being caught in the rain is perhaps an insight into his need for a missile shield.... George W. Bush was so indifferent to the world that in the years before he became president he made only two overseas trips, both for business, neither for curiosity. No wonder he wants to beak the missile treaty, alienate NATO, ignore global warming and reinstall Russia and China as enemies: Those foreign countries scarcely exist in his imagination. Why go to Australia when you have the Outback Steakhouse right here at home?... The Times [of London] ... said Bush gave a 'pep talk' to children about the advantages of reading over television. The children did not ask him to name the last book he had read. Just good manners, I guess."

/it is about O'Reilly's politics




I'm now officially embarrassed that I attempted to view this objectively.


My instincts were correct -- it's squelch and marginalize those who disagree with your political ideology. Consider your ideology as "right" and "intelligent" and all others as "wrong," "stupid" and/or "dangerous."

Obama et al have been attempting this crap with Limbaugh ever since Obama was inaugurated.

It strikes me as an odd thing for a president to care about, or trifle over.

Even if Obama's characterization that Fox News is devoted to attacking him on a continual basis, which I don't concede is true at all, what if it was? Why does he care?

What, we can't have one media outlet that doesn't marvel and devote hours to his every fly swat and $40,000 dinner date to NYC?
 
2009-06-22 02:38:38 AM  
Damn_Conservative_Media: Spoonfed'sBuddy: Weaver95: I don't see the lefties going around hoping someone kills people they don't like. O'Reilly and crew though...yeah, they seem pretty happy that Tiller got popped. So yes, while 'the lefties' can be pretty weird with all their neo-commie 'tax the rich' rhetoric, they aren't going around saying we should get all French Revolution on wall street. So far, the violence has come from the right. THAT is why they get more attention.

It happenned plenty of times when Bush was in office. If I only had a dollar for every wish of death upon GWB...

... you'd be broke?

Did it really?

References please?

I can't recall anyone seriously discussing that... any real calls for anything like that.


'Real' calls?
Doesn't that depend on the forum? Keith Olbermann or Chris Mathews didn't make threats or wish bodily harm on the President. The closest thing in a so-called mainstream venue that I can think of was Bill Maher talking about the thwarted assasination attempt of Vice President Cheney, Maher didn't exactly express regret the hit didn't go through, but he made some remark about the world being a better place if Cheney was dead. One might agree with that concept, but it is bordering on wishing harm upon others. However, leave the mainstream venues, venture into the blogs and stuff....yeah, I think you'd find those things at least hinted at.
 
2009-06-22 03:03:25 AM  
All Apologies: All Apologies: GeneralJim

All Apologies: GeneralJim: Really. We should stop mincing around, and just confine anyone who disagrees with the President. You'd have to be crazy to criticize.

Gen. Jim

/ Worked for Stalin... Castro... Chavez... OBAMA in 2009!


Right, cause that's what Ebert and the libruls have been calling for.


Yes, some of them. Seems kind of ironic if you examine the meaning of the word "liberal." One would THINK that liberals would favor allowing everyone their fair say, and attempt to get their way by convincing others. That certainly doesn't fit TODAY'S 'liberals.' Today's liberals are not liberal at all, they're just leftist.


This is another problem with right wing discourse. They'd rather argue against actions that aren't being undertaken than deal with what is actually being said.

Technically a strawman, yes, but so insanely common that it's replaced actual discourse between liberals and conservatives.

Conservatives are arguing with their liberal imaginary friends I guess.


Really? So that whole "fairness doctrine" was in my imagination? And, it was only a nightmare that Henry Waxman (D-CA) wanted to apply those same standards to the Internets? There isn't a motion to remove AMS credentials from any weather professional who refuses to endorse the party line on man-caused global warming, a disproved theory?

There are ALWAYS those who want to win by shutting up the opposition. I am not a Republican, and I know they will do that if they are able as well. It is required to pimp-slap every attempt to do so, because there only needs to be one win to start repression as a national sport. Eternal vigilance, and all that.

But there's a mindset that only leftists and extreme rightists share, and that is the belief that there is something wrong with people who disagree with them, based, apparently, solely on that disagreement. Now, as I see it, the far-right jackasses have the excuse of having a perverted version of religion to blame, but there's no excuse I find valid for something like a third of people, the middle-leftists, that is, to think anyone to the right of middle-left must be brain damaged.

You see that theme continuously... this thread being no exception. "I don't think nationalizing the car companies is a good idea." "AHA! So, you want to shoot abortionists, huh?" I have to say that I give the right of center people the win in dealing with AN IDEA more than lumping all "THEM" together. Again, not that it's all one-sided, but in my experience, the leftists are much more likely to do all those ugly things than the rightists. That is, the average leftist acts MORE like an extremist than the average rightist. Extremism is serious business -- leave it to the professionals.


Gen. Jim
 
2009-06-22 03:19:20 AM  
TheyHaveTheInternetOnComputersNow: GeneralJim Yeah, that's the problem. Everyone SAYS it, no one acts on it. Stewart, Ebert, and everyone else who makes that observation goes on being a divisive "I'm right everyone else is stupid, brainwashed or corrupt" douchebag immediately after.


I dunno. Stewart and Bill Maher have already attacked Obama as a man who isn't all that much different than Bush. Personally I think we need more people like them.

I'm like the South Park guys. I'm not saying I have the answers but I damn sure know where the problems are.


You attribute the above to me, when it was CommandantVonThrash... apologies for any spelling errors...

But, I agree for the most part, so I'll answer. Stewart's as funny as hell, and Maher is a total dick to anyone in power. I approve, and agree that we should have more. But, herein lies the problem. This was seen as WAY edgy, OMG, he's criticizing the Messiah. Bollocks.

I seem to remember some time back there was a guy from a rightist publication that got into a press conference with President GWB. He asked a couple of softball questions. Everybody went nuts, and started researching HIM. Turns out he's gay, or something like that, which, according to the leftist press was bad, in his case. Do you remember that?

Well, his 'crime' was that he wasn't biased against GWB, and did not ask whatever he could to trip him up, or give him a PR black eye. Hello? Like Obama's press coverage? Two comics have DARED to say something critical of Obama? Oh, the horror. Rabid leftist journalists would say ANYTHING about GWB, and finding ONE who did not was news. See a pattern?

I'm all in favor of tough questions for Presidents. But the whole "Sir, are you REALLY the anti-Christ, or are you simply evil incarnate?" questions asked of GWB tended to obscure the REAL questions that SHOULD have been asked, such as ones about his retarded fiscal policies.

Again, note that it is news if COMICS make jokes at the President's expense now, and news if a reporter asked a softball question or two of GWB. Reporters and comics should be going for the President's jugular, not his glans.

Gen. Jim
 
2009-06-22 03:37:02 AM  
I'm a Fark Independent. I'm a Farker and a registered Independent in Maine. I don't see Democrats and Republicans as the same. I vote Green locally. I want hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, outdoor photography, etc., to be enjoyed for generations to come. I'm willing to work towards that goal. I'm willing to help clean up this mess we're in. I view us all as sailors on the good ship Earth as she sails through space. I think we've a thin biosphere some are hell bent on damaging. Beyond that I want a government that is accountable, effective, and fair. I don't care if that government is big or small.

I voted for President Obama. I couldn't vote for Candidate McCain after he selected Governor Palin to be his Vice President.

I don't think all Republicans are bad. I think Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) does a fine job as one of our Senators, for example. She remains respected by her constituents. I also voted for Maine State Senator Beth Edmonds (D-Freeport) once. She did well too.

I think the GOP has been hijacked by religious fundamentalists and represents a clear and present danger to humanity. I think the GOP has become a cancer that must be utterly cut out and destroyed. I'll work against any ideology that forces the delusions of its fundamentalist base upon me.

Republicans are wrong, and it doesn't matter if some can't admit it. I doubt I'm alone.
 
2009-06-22 03:43:36 AM  
images.cheezburger.com

/thatisall
 
2009-06-22 04:26:53 AM  
FTFA: "Much has been said recently about the possible influence of O'Reilly on the murder of Dr. George Tiller by Scott Roeder. "

Anyone in the same media blame the shooting death of Army recruiter Pvt. William Long on Code Pink?
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com
i486.photobucket.com

Both theories are equally retarded, yet only one has been raised.
Just sayin'.
 
2009-06-22 04:57:27 AM  
Stupid Guitar: p51d007: LOL...Ebert is another one of those washed up hasbeens.
Ever since Gene Siskel died, that stupid show of his has gone down the tubes. Run it on PBS...no one else would watch it but those that watch GOVERNMENT controlled TV.



Hey, ease up on Ebert! After all, he wrote the screenplay for this film classic, and for that he has my unwavering respect.

/" it's my happening and it freaks me out!"- Z-man


Ebert is a man after my own heart, loves deep dish pizza (pity he can't eat it anymore), loves movies, and loves big boobies.

Hell, I practically am Roger Ebert, except younger, healthier, not very fat, and a hell of a lot less cool and more poor.

Le sigh.
 
2009-06-22 04:59:36 AM  
tallguywithglasseson: Nocens: He's going to act all outraged and Ebert will get an invite to come explain himself. Ebert, for all his bluster here will gladly accept. You're going to watch and cheer on Ebert.

Ebert is currently physically unable to speak. Your prediction is unlikely.


"PULL THE PLUG ON HIS SPEECH SYNTHESIZER! Cut him off! Cut him off!"
 
2009-06-22 06:38:24 AM  
Choosing between the right and left is like choosing between boiling lava vs. scalding acid. You're both nuts.
 
2009-06-22 08:20:44 AM  
limboslam: FTFA: "Much has been said recently about the possible influence of O'Reilly on the murder of Dr. George Tiller by Scott Roeder. "

Anyone in the same media blame the shooting death of Army recruiter Pvt. William Long on Code Pink?

Both theories are equally retarded, yet only one has been raised.
Just sayin'.


not really,

you must be aware that BillO has quite a larger platform and history of singling this one man out or you are being willfully obtuse
 
2009-06-22 08:27:22 AM  
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Communists and Obama supporters, et al:


We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that we want a divorce.
I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion like East of the Mississippi and West of the Mississippi. That will not be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a logical agreement by considering the Mexican Border. You want to support the illegal aliens and we don't. So why don't you take the West and learn to deal with it! After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, Nancy Pelosi and her Congress along with Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all of them).

We'll keep the capitalism, destroy the greedy corporations, shut down crooked pharmaceutical companies, shut down Wall Street corruption and force Wal-Mart to "BUY AMERICAN MADE". You can have your beloved homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, fire greedy CEO's and properly educate the backbone of our country, the Patriotic rednecks and Blue Collar workers. We'll keep the Bible-Belt and give you CNN and Hollywood Communists. (See! West is best for you!) Please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.


We will fire the MBA's and Greedy Politicians that have destroyed our Manufacturing plants. We will replace them with Ethical Technical Experts that know how to run a manufacturing plant and make a profit. We want the homeless and the 50% drop outs from our schools. We will create Manufacturing jobs and train them to be the best in the world. That includes cleaning up our stone-age school system and making it fun to learn something you can build on. We need Engineers and Doctors: NOT Lawyers and Crooked MBA's!

You can make under the table deals with Russia, Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us with every thing in our arsenal... You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them NUKES to boost their protection and security. We will not occupy foreign countries and tell them how to live...let them copy America's way of life only if they have the intelligence to do so!

We'll keep our Christian values (Catholics are Included!). You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N... But we will no longer be paying the bill. America is going Vertical! Spanish will not be spoken in our schools or public places...We are Americans! There will be no second language. Period!

We'll re-engineer and design fuel efficient SUVs, pickup trucks, sexy small cars and eliminate oversized luxury cars like the Big Three Manufacturers today and can't sell. You can take every Foreign Manufactured vehicle you can find to the West Coast. That includes foreign made Big Three products!

Manufacturing plants will be able to give everyone healthcare but not for life like the UNIONS demand. We'll continue to believe healthcare is not a luxury and not something the Government controls. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum-Ba-Ya or We Are the World.

We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty and Outsourcing your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our English language, our name and our flag. You can keep Free Trade and believing that "The World is Flat!" Right New York Times?

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you winner takes all regarding which one of us will need whose help in 10 years.


Sincerely,

An American Patriot!
 
2009-06-22 08:35:43 AM  
Man, a whole bunch of stupid going on in here...........
 
2009-06-22 08:39:35 AM  
Bunch of left wing tards are angry because no one will watch or listen to their left wing programs. Angry because Fox is kicking the crap out of their favorite America-hating networks on a nightly basis. It is so funny to watch.

O'Reilly is too religious for my tastes, but he simply talks common sense. Fark hates him because they hate Fox for being in the middle, and hate anyone who does not blindly suck Obama's ass.

Why don't you just make a network to compete? Oh that's right, alot of Americans are tired of American hating assholes on TV.

So funny.
 
2009-06-22 09:00:34 AM  
Bill O'Reilly is a relevant journalist.

Boxing is a sport.
 
2009-06-22 09:00:42 AM  
Blhack: One of these is not like the other.

Did you find the one that didn't fit?


Yes. I would only do one of them.
 
2009-06-22 09:25:25 AM  
That was an awesome article.
Very well said.
 
2009-06-22 09:35:43 AM  
Cheeses H Rice: Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Communists and Obama supporters, et al:
citizens who disagree with my "side"

We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that we want a divorce.
I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion like East of the Mississippi and West of the Mississippi. That will not be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a logical agreement by considering the Mexican Border. You want to support the illegal aliens and we don't. So why don't you take the West and learn to deal with it! After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, Nancy Pelosi and her Congress along with Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all of them).

We'll keep the capitalism, destroy the greedy corporations, shut down crooked pharmaceutical companies, shut down Wall Street corruption and force Wal-Mart to "BUY AMERICAN MADE". You can have your beloved homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, fire greedy CEO's and properly educate the backbone of our country, the Patriotic rednecks and Blue Collar workers. We'll keep the Bible-Belt and give you CNN and Hollywood Communists. (See! West is best for you!) Please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.


We will fire the MBA's and Greedy Politicians that have destroyed our Manufacturing plants. We will replace them with Ethical Technical Experts that know how to run a manufacturing plant and make a profit. We want the homeless and the 50% drop outs from our schools. We will create Manufacturing jobs and train them to be the best in the world. That includes cleaning up our stone-age school system and making it fun to learn something you can build on. We need Engineers and Doctors: NOT Lawyers and Crooked MBA's!

You can make under the table deals with Russia, Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us with every thing in our arsenal... You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them NUKES to boost their protection and security. We will not occupy foreign countries and tell them how to live...let them copy America's way of life only if they have the intelligence to do so!

We'll keep our Christian values (Catholics are Included!). You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N... But we will no longer be paying the bill. America is going Vertical! Spanish will not be spoken in our schools or public places...We are Americans! There will be no second language. Period!

We'll re-engineer and design fuel efficient SUVs, pickup trucks, sexy small cars and eliminate oversized luxury cars like the Big Three Manufacturers today and can't sell. You can take every Foreign Manufactured vehicle you can find to the West Coast. That includes foreign made Big Three products!

Manufacturing plants will be able to give everyone healthcare but not for life like the UNIONS demand. We'll continue to believe healthcare is not a luxury and not something the Government controls. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum-Ba-Ya or We Are the World.

We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty and Outsourcing your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our English language, our name and our flag. You can keep Free Trade and believing that "The World is Flat!" Right New York Times?

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you winner takes all regarding which one of us will need whose help in 10 years.
I watch WAY to much O'Reilly.


Sincerely,

An American Patriot! myopic idiot.

FTFY
 
2009-06-22 10:02:04 AM  
oobiedoobie: Poor, poor Roger. Trying to be relevant in a time when once again no one cares to hear his tripe.



O'Reilly a danger to civil and peaceful society? Sounds like 'ol little Rog is jealous of someone's success or he has a problem with free speech.


O'Reilly is given a large soap box upon which he has demonstrated a lack of civility in political discourse on a monumental scale. That is a threat to a civil society. It has nothing to do with free speech, it has everything to do with hate speech and Orwellian Double-Speak.

If your ideas are so correct and powerful, just speak and all will listen. If you have to deliver them with an angry side show and stack the deck in your favor, maybe you're wrong.
 
2009-06-22 10:07:53 AM  
Thunderpipes: Bunch of left wing tards are angry because no one will watch or listen to their left wing programs. Angry because Fox is kicking the crap out of their favorite America-hating networks on a nightly basis. It is so funny to watch.

O'Reilly is too religious for my tastes, but he simply talks common sense. Fark hates him because they hate Fox for being in the middle, and hate anyone who does not blindly suck Obama's ass.

Why don't you just make a network to compete? Oh that's right, alot of Americans are tired of American hating assholes on TV.

So funny.


No, not funny, sad. His common sense only seems like common sense because he carefully packages it that way. If you would READ you might see the cracks in the logic, the misplaced quotes, the half truths, the straw men. Gather knowledge and unspin the spin. It's not about Obama, it's about mistaking vitriolic commentary for news.

Bill is not looking out for you. He's looking out for himself.
 
2009-06-22 10:45:42 AM  
Most of the right-winged douche-bags like O'Rielly would have fit right in with Joe Stalin. Hot heads and bullies fit in there, its doesn't matter what flag they are flying. O'Rielly and anyone who takes him serious is un-American in my book. Same goes for Rush and his fans.
 
2009-06-22 10:54:45 AM  
feckingmorons: A Windy City newspaper hack that does not like anyone who criticizes the One?

Amazing.


Fecking moron.
 
2009-06-22 11:04:17 AM  
Your_Huckleberry: 'Real' calls?
Doesn't that depend on the forum? Keith Olbermann or Chris Mathews didn't make threats or wish bodily harm on the President. The closest thing in a so-called mainstream venue that I can think of was Bill Maher talking about the thwarted assasination attempt of Vice President Cheney, Maher didn't exactly express regret the hit didn't go through, but he made some remark about the world being a better place if Cheney was dead. One might agree with that concept, but it is bordering on wishing harm upon others. However, leave the mainstream venues, venture into the blogs and stuff....yeah, I think you'd find those things at least hinted at.


Let's not forget about that movie that "hypothesized" what would happen if W was offed.

It was a terrible movie anyway. It was basically just policoporn for the leftists.
 
2009-06-22 11:05:37 AM  
Cheeses H Rice: Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Communists and Obama supporters, et al:

Dear unoriginal "thinker",

While your ability to Copy and Paste is amply demonstrated here, do you have any actual content to add to the discussion? Or will you be copypasting all of your responses?
 
2009-06-22 11:31:10 AM  
Olympus Mons: Most of the right-winged douche-bags like O'Rielly would have fit right in with Joe Stalin. Hot heads and bullies fit in there, its doesn't matter what flag they are flying. O'Rielly and anyone who takes him serious is un-American in my book. Same goes for Rush and his fans.

And yet idiots like you are all for Obama and people like Sotomayor literally taking away your rights. You are an idiot, and a fool. You will not be happy until government controls your life 100% from cradle to grave will you?

Farking sheeple.
 
2009-06-22 11:47:23 AM  
Thunderpipes: idiots like you are all for Obama and people like Sotomayor literally taking away your rights.

[Citation Needed]
 
2009-06-22 11:54:22 AM  
Well, I think he's right. Every word.

Regardless of your personal politics, there's a rapidly increasing void of substance, civility, and intelligence. Not just in the media, but in the general population. People in general are ruder, more shallow, and just dumber than those who came before.

Things to enlighten and enrich have been devalued to the point where most people not only don't seek them, but they wouldn't know what to do with them if they found them.
 
2009-06-22 12:00:34 PM  
Peace in a sociaty can only exist when the social class of the 'haves' and 'have nots' no longer exist.
-Neruos

You have to give up capitalism to have harmony.
-Neruos

If you argue either comment as wrong then you do not want peace.
 
2009-06-22 12:18:45 PM  
Ctrl-Alt-Del: Thunderpipes: idiots like you are all for Obama and people like Sotomayor literally taking away your rights.

[Citation Needed]


Please don't feed the trolls.
 
2009-06-22 01:11:03 PM  
Nocens:
[...]
Pole smoke all you like. Here's how it goes down...

Bill's stooges scour the media looking for hit pieces for Bill to call out. He's going to act all outraged and Ebert will get an invite to come explain himself. Ebert, for all his bluster here will gladly accept. You're going to watch and cheer on Ebert. Bill's usual audience will cheer Bill on for bashing the evil liberal. Bill gets a couple ratings points higher for the night. Ebert gets more readers for a couple months before he's forgotten again or he pulls the same ploy on another commentator. I'll have changed the channel the first five minutes in. The rest of you, being the hypocrites that you are, will watch it to the end.

As for his movie reviews, no he still has no relevance. Despite your inept personal shots, Ebert's reader base was far higher when Siskel was alive. It's dropped steadily ever since. Since the internet's blossoming, it's been diluted even further to the point of, does he still do them? Is Ebert still alive? Does he even still do that book? My google movie gadget I don't think has ever pulled an Ebert review. Relevance? Yes, it's gone, sport. Deal with it, keep pole smoking for your favorite pretentious douche-bag, whichever it is.

As far as reading comprehension, it's all right there between the O'Reilly video clips Ebert claims not to be focusing on. I understand your problem though, it's that damn conservative media. Stay tuned in, get your outrage out, boost those ratings.

You're just as predictable and your entertainment ends here, chief.


Hahaha, I'm so glad I came back to this thread. This little content-less tantrum made my day.
 
2009-06-22 01:14:11 PM  
Complicit: I was trying to make this argument to a peer just last week. Ebert put into words far better than I did.

Every time I read one of his pieces, I am envious of his ability to articulate himself.
 
2009-06-22 01:28:20 PM  
PapermonkeyExpress: Civil discourse is dead. Our society is so polarized as to make a rational discussion of any topic impossible.

Each side is so utterly convinced of their own cause's righteousness as to be blind to anything else.

Statement: Obama's wrong
Response: You are a farking ignorant idiot.

Counterstatement: Republican's are wrong
Response: You are a terrorist.

It's like watching two retards try to dance.


i296.photobucket.com
 
2009-06-22 02:51:50 PM  
That's nice Eeb. We don't like O'Reilly either. Agree with most of what you said, in fact.

But we don't want to hear it from you. Go back to doing what you're paid for, giving crappy meaningless reviews to the horrible shiat Hollywood produces. And we'll go back to ignoring you.
 
2009-06-22 04:03:16 PM  
aharown: Go back to doing what you're paid for, giving crappy meaningless reviews to the horrible shiat Hollywood produces. And we'll go back to ignoring you.

Pulitzer offers polite disagreement on your assessment of his film-critic career:

Link (new window)

As does the DGA:

Link (new window)

And the Emmys did seem to think he was worth mentioning from 1984-88 and a few times after that too:

Link (new window)

As did some guy names Martin Scorcese who had a pavilion names for Ebert:
Link (new window) (new window)

"I can't think of anyone else who deserves it as much," Scorsese said. "Your name has become synonymous with the love of cinema... which you shared with the world and continue to share.
"Over the years [you provided] very strong support and comradeship, even during difficult times - and criticism! Which I always found to be very well thought out,"




Agree with him or not, politically or even in the popcorn line, I couldn't bear to potentially have this thread end with that flippantly gross mis-assessment of his career or his insights on film...
 
2009-06-22 04:19:27 PM  
Weaver95: SpeshilEdjukashin: Is the left sane? Which is worse, complaining about a new president who is trampling the constitution, or blindly following him screaming about hope and change?

I don't see the lefties going around hoping someone kills people they don't like. O'Reilly and crew though...yeah, they seem pretty happy that Tiller got popped. So yes, while 'the lefties' can be pretty weird with all their neo-commie 'tax the rich' rhetoric, they aren't going around saying we should get all French Revolution on wall street. So far, the violence has come from the right. THAT is why they get more attention.


THIS. I used to consider myself pretty moderate. But in the past 10 or 15 years, the Republican party has pushed itself so far to the right that I find myself hating everything they stand for.

I liked it when Republicans advocated fiscal responsibility and didn't obsess over "moral issues." The Republican party has mainstreamed the sometimes hateful rhetoric of people like O'Reilly, Glen Beck and Michael Savage.

They did it to whip up their base and hold power for a while, and it worked. But now they've lost control of the beast. They've given these guys (along with that hag Ann Coulter) a megaphone for so long that the base no longer identifies with the once-mainstream of the party. The Republican base has been pushed so far to the right that they now see things in moral absolutes. You can't compromise when the opposite side is evil.

I could vote for a guy like McCain, but when he allies himself with the likes of Sarah Palin and the jihadist wing of the Republican party, I cringe. The Republicans need to purge the batshiate crazies out of their party if they ever want a vote from me again.
 
2009-06-22 05:04:12 PM  
Free speech for Ebert, but f--- those who don't agree with his worldview? For that, he gets a DUMBASS tag.
 
2009-06-22 05:21:28 PM  
An open comment to Roger Ebert: Shut up fat ass and go back to doing bad movie reviews.
 
2009-06-22 05:22:24 PM  
jake3988: feckingmorons 2009-06-21 11:48:33 AM A Windy City newspaper hack that does not like anyone who criticizes the One? Amazing.
===========================================

I hope you're kidding. If not, screw off dorkbag.

No, I hope YOU are kidding. If not, bite me dorkbag.
 
2009-06-22 05:41:43 PM  
just2quixotic: Weaver95: FlyingPig: If the Democrats hold Congress in 2010 I think we'll be seeing more forthrightness from Obama regarding gay marriage and the like. Progressives are upset that he's not taking enough of a stand, but right now he still has political capital to lose if he goes too far.

I've been saying this for nearly 2 years now - NONE of this is about Obama or the Democrats. This is all about the Republicans. they have drifted so far from their principals that they've triggered a schism within the party. It's fiscal conservatives against radical religious right wingers in a fight to the death over what it means to be a 'Conservative Republican'. While this quiet civil war rages behind closed doors, the Democrats have a free hand to do whatever they want, so long as they do so fairly quietly and avoid uniting the Republicans against them.

For what it's worth, I think the fundies are going to win the fight. They've got control over key positions, and they would rather see the party destroyed than reach a compromise with what they see as evil incarnate. The fiscal conservatives are routinely ejected from local gatherings, their concerns are marginalized (or outright ignored), they find it difficult to get candidates elected without paying homage to Christian fanatics, and they find it easier every year to just leave the RNC rather than fight to help a party that hates them for their efforts.

____________________

This has a lot to do with our winner take all voting system. They really should be two (or three) separate parties (and the Democrats should be multiple separate parties.) Then everyone would have to get together and make reasoned compromises with their opponents. Compromises that would make no one truly happy but would marginalize the extremists and be better for the country than allowing the extremists of either side to run things.

/We need several reforms:
1. Term limits for our Congress Critters (They only have one or two good ideas, which we can get out of them in two terms or less - after that, they are just leaches in it for the money, power, and influence.)
2. We need to reform the voting system. E.G. Instant Runoff Voting (new window)
3. An end to Politician controlled Gerrymandering (new window)
4. An end to the ridiculous legal notion that corporations are people giving their CEOs extra power and influence in their attempts to purchase a Congress critter
5. A Constitutional Amendment declaring the the stupid SCOTUS decision declaring money is free speech (new window) is WRONG! The ability to purchase a Congress Critter is NOT Free speech (You can even spot the oxymoron in there, purchasing a Congress critter may be relatively cheap, but it ain't free.)
6. An enforcement of the anti trust laws in respect to our Mass media corporations (5 corporations control over 90% of everything you see and hear (new window))
7. Sensible public finance of campaign laws. Enough of the Wealth purchasing the laws they want at the expense of everyone else!
8. An end to the gate-keeping done by the powerful members of the two parties. I want more choice! I don't want a few powerful people choosing which candidates they will support in the primaries and thereby determining who has the financing to become the candidate. The Iranians have something similar, the candidates are preselected before they can ever vote for someone. The people who select our candidates are just better at hiding their influence.



//If you think that most of the members of Congress are out of touch, but your Congress critter is a "good one" you haven't been paying attention.


Terms limits are bad idea. The desire to be re-elected is a good way to keep a politician in line, provided you reform the system to keep him accountable to the will of the people, and not the corporations.
 
2009-06-22 07:21:01 PM  
GibbyTheMole: Well, I think he's right. Every word.

Regardless of your personal politics, there's a rapidly increasing void of substance, civility, and intelligence. Not just in the media, but in the general population. People in general are ruder, more shallow, and just dumber than those who came before.

Things to enlighten and enrich have been devalued to the point where most people not only don't seek them, but they wouldn't know what to do with them if they found them.


/me reads thread
No, really? I don't believe it for one second. :P

============

Some of the comments on the site itself hit the issue on the head -- when it comes right down to it many news networks are just as interested in making money as they are actually reporting. Since they broadcast on a national scale, they don't need to reach a huge percentage of the overall viewership because they can reach so many members of what is otherwise a small section of a very large population. Percentages are small but actual numbers are high. If you sold a product for a penny profit and everyone in the world bought it, you'd be a multimillionaire.

Thus it's not about trying to advance an argument, it's trying to get the people who already agree with you more outraged, so they keep paying attention and supporting all the horses you back, be they commercial or political. "Mobilizing the base" if you will.

One reason I feel I can say that the political right is better at this than the left is that voter turnout for all but these most recent elections has been fairly low. At least, this is what I've always heard and would love numbers, either way.

Incidentally, for the haters: He DID mention Olbermann and other left-wing pundits, though he didn't focus on them because they didn't say that the paper needed to be shut down. Basically the only diffence between what we have now and Crossfire, which in retrospect most realize was a pretty bad idea, is that now the opposing sides are on different channels.
 
2009-06-22 08:33:00 PM  
Then quit whining and do something about it.shiat son.
 
2009-06-22 08:57:20 PM  
Thunderpipes: Olympus Mons: Most of the right-winged douche-bags like O'Rielly would have fit right in with Joe Stalin. Hot heads and bullies fit in there, its doesn't matter what flag they are flying. O'Rielly and anyone who takes him serious is un-American in my book. Same goes for Rush and his fans.

And yet idiots like you are all for Obama and people like Sotomayor literally taking away your rights. You are an idiot, and a fool. You will not be happy until government controls your life 100% from cradle to grave will you?

Farking sheeple.


Wow, I've been away from Fark for a while after most of the douchebags kinda peetered out....but this guy.

Dude if you're real, you're amazing.

How do you even function on a daily basis?
 
2009-06-24 05:06:15 AM  
Neruos: Peace in a sociaty can only exist when the social class of the 'haves' and 'have nots' no longer exist.
-Neruos

You have to give up capitalism to have harmony.
-Neruos

If you argue either comment as wrong then you do not want peace.


- Neuros is a farking douche.

- Neuros is clearly psychotic.

If you argue that either comment is wrong [FTFY] then you are a psychotic douche.

Gen. Jim

/ Not as dumb as comment makes me seem -- I'm just echoing douchebaggery.
 
2009-06-24 05:15:21 AM  
Zumaki: Complicit: I was trying to make this argument to a peer just last week. Ebert put into words far better than I did.

Every time I read one of his pieces, I am envious of his ability to articulate himself.


Oh, he has mad 'self-articulating' skillz... Just don't stand TOO close while he, uh, 'articulates.'

img73.imageshack.us

Gen. Jim
 
Displayed 50 of 551 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report