Danille
Palo High School

Or he could be like me, I hate O’Reilly and do not make a point to watch him, but I may listen to parts here and there. From these snippets, I can figure out when he is speaking out of his butthole and when he is a mouthpiece. Mr. Letterman may have watched just enough to get a similar gut feel.

No it isn’t.

I haven’t watched him since a few months after Sept. 11, 2001 when he started in on the Bush-bashing schtick. I don’t need to patronize morons with TV shows and, as his ratings over the past decade have proved, most Americans agree with me.

Bottom line: Letterman’s just an angry old man who’s day in the sun has long past, the result of which are the kinds of bilious displays the likes of which we witnessed this past week. He deserves as much attention as the local crank who writes weekly letters to the local newspaper editor bitching about nothing in particular.

Guess, his anti-conservative “feeling” was so strong, he felt he didn’t need check the views of the person he was attacking.

O’Reilly is definitely arroggant and annoying at times, but I find the lefts assumption that conservatives automatically spew crap is even more so.

I get all my news from the internet now. It’s just as timely and far more informative. I don’t think I watch more than 20 minutes of tv a week now. And allthough I’m a former TV addict, I don’t miss it a bit.

And because I have found Letterman far less entertaining, far less funny in fact, than he was in the 1980s and 1990s. I watch his show about as often as I watch O’Reilly’s.

No name calling needed, dude.

The problem with your observation is that is was vapid, off-point, and sounded more like talking points from the DNC and the land of LibLeft than anything meaningful to the discussion. I made a stale, insubstantial post to underscore yours. I thought you’d get it given your rants elsewhere. Vapid.

We’ll go slow.

Reread GP’s post. His point, among many, is that when the LibLeft demeans sensible discourse from conservatives by characterizing it as “crap”, DaveyL tries to be a serious social commentator rather than what he actually is: a tv late night show host and sometime comedian. Good God, he’s swimming in the shallow end of the pool.

Like many in the LaLaMSM land, he takes himself seriously and dude, that’s where JonStewart and others fall short of their gift. They think reading someone else’s material makes them insightful, hip, or meaningful. It’s only tv. And it’s tv for the late night crowd.

RealValues, what bugged you about GPs post is that he’s right. You and the blogroll compatroits you huddle with miss the primary political trend of the last 30 yrs –America is moving to the right in the political spectrum. And you can’t handle it. You scream, foam, vent and decry the shear market support FoxNews, conservatives, and other “right wing” issues garner. It bugs you. It torments you.

That’s why your and your blogroll compatriots are still nailed to the wall and squirming. And you don’t like it.

Slow enough for you? I mean get serious, dude. In your first post –dismissing GPs observation– you did exactly what GP was pointing out. Kettle… pot… both black? GP offered in his post that DaveyL and others like him are “clueless” as to what conservative ideas are or why they dominant our culture –and you don’t get it, either.

But it’s cool. Rant on with the DNC talking points.

I found Rush a few years ago, shortly after the War started. I was so depressed by what I was hearing on the tv news. One day a light bulb went off in my head. I remembered that my dad listened to am radio and was generally a happy guy. Somehow my mind made a connection there which led me to WLS talk radio in Chicago and a nice line up of conservative talk radio. It was such a huge relief to hear Rush talk about our country’s efforts in a positive and optimistic way. And I found it plain entertaining to hear him put silly reporters and democrats in their place. My general mood really improved!

I became ever more disenchanted with the left which I had always felt I must be a part of. Since college I’d heard that Republicans, Conservatives and especially Rush are horrible, evil people. It was the constant drum beat of anti-right propaganda from the left that had me mired in the non-sense of a left-thinking world view for far too long. What a waste of time and energy!

I still listen to Rush and now I watch O’Reilly regularly. I don’t always agree with them. But I find them entertaining. I do like how O’Reilly keeps guests on point. That can be lots of work when dealing with a leftist!

I found Letterman to be pretty unpleasant. I especially disliked his smug assertion that Bill has no right to criticize Cindy Sheehan because he has not also lost a son in combat. What a stupid standard! But it’s what I’ve come to expect from the left. It’s just another thread in a web of tactics to stifle expression of opinion.

I always think of a good line from Monty Python that sums up this situation perfectly:

“Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.”

I don’t mean to put down anyone who likes O’Reilly. I concede that, with a thin market for conservative voices out there, he probably manages to do some good.

I like Rush more today than I did, say, 10-15 years ago. It’s probably mostly me having changed in my politics; his liberal-bashing makes more sense to me today. But I also believe Rush himself has improved, or learned not to do some of his (former) worst excesses.

Sean Hannity I like a little bit, although, I wish like hell he would (1) stop talking over his guests, (2) stop ‘dumbing it down’ or repeating the same talking points so relentlessly.

We all know gay people, and/or Left-liberals, who refer to Rush and Sean as “hate radio”. I tell those folks openly: sorry, but have you listened to the shows? Nuh-uh.

Such people keep claiming that Rush/Sean say gay-negative things, but in about 18 months of semi-regular listening (let’s say a couple hours a week), I personally have yet to hear them even so much as mention a gay topic.

And yeah they bash Left-liberal views a lot - but never anything that would deny a liberal’s First Amendment rights. Sean Hannity is sometimes even kind and sympathetic (though still disagreeing) with liberal callers and guests.

Still, I think that the guy does do more to present all sides of an issue much more than many other pundit shows do - and O’Reilly also will take positions that “traditional conservatives” would disavow. More than many, he seems to contemplate issues and try to weigh them fairly - not come to some canned response to them.

What I most love, however, about those who routinely slam O’Reilly & Rush and other conservatives is that these slammers don’t even listen to the evil demons’ shows! “Oh, you’re sooooooooo unfair to people on your show,” they squeal. And how do they know this? Because others tell them so!

Geesh.

That said, I’ve always thought that Bill O’Reilly was a pompous windbag, and this doesn’t change that. But when Letterman said, (paraphrasing), “I don’t have a clue what you’re talking about, but I think 60% of what you say is crap,” that illustrates leftist debate perfectly: “I don’t care what the facts are, I just feel that you’re wrong.”

I think people who are ruled by feelings can’t be persuaded by facts. Similarly, people who base their positions on facts are unlikely to be persuaded by ‘feelings.’