"Red Eye" host Greg Gutfeld marvelously blasted the insufferable Keith Olbermann Friday for his "homoerotic obsession with Bill O'Reilly."
This deliciously came hours after the "Countdown" host bashed former Nixon administration figure Chuck Colson for having the nerve to speak out in favor of California's Proposition 8 which defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
What really caught the ire of Gutfeld and company was a false assertion Olbermann made on air Wednesday about what transpired on a recent "Red Eye" (video embedded right, partial transcript below the fold):
KEITH OLBERMANN, HOST: But our winner Bill O. or somebody working on his behalf, FOX's show "Red Eye" he's sometimes very funny, sometimes very crass, sometimes very stupid and last night it was very censored internally. Check out this clip from David Bienenstock, the senior editor of "High Times" magazine guesting on the program, the guy who gets censored here is "Red Eye" writer and producer Bill Schultz.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID BIENENSTOCK, "HIGH TIMES" SENIOR EDITOR: Well, a couple minutes ago I was in your greenroom and it definitely lived up to the name so I'm ready to go. FOX news has the best weed in the world. I was really surprised by that.
BILL SCHULTZ, WRITER/PRODUCER: ( bleep ) does not like it when you get into his personal stash. I'm calling security.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: Bienenstock says what he heard bleepy Schultz say was "Mr. O'Reilly does not like it when you get into his personal stash sir, I'm calling security" and they bleeped his name. The dark side here, these "Red Eye" guys don't need me defending them, they work for FOX, they got enough problems. But in bleeping the obvious joke about Bill O., there's the unintended bright side. Somebody somewhere heard that and just assumed that what Schultz had said had been so horrible that it had to have been bleeped must have been "Mr. Murdoch does not like it when you get into his personal stash, sir." Billo the bleep. Today's worst person in the world!
The problem is that O'Reilly had nothing to do with this bleeping, and Gutfeld on Friday called Olbermann out for making this assumption (h/t Johnny Dollar):
Yah gotta love it!
As an interesting postscript, Olbermann for more than a month has been chiding California voters, and anybody else that had the nerve to support that state's Proposition 8.
He did one of his infamous "Special Comments" about this matter on November 10, and has addressed the proposition at least ten times since including Thursday:
Mr. Bush has handed out 24 more presidential citizens medals created nearly 40 years ago to honor Americans who have performed exemplary deeds of service for the nation. Muhammad Ali got one. So did Bob Dole and Archibald Cox and Chuck Colson from Watergate, Richard Nixon's special counsel, a primary figure at the committee to re-elect the president. The guy who hired Howard Hunt and Gordon Liddy to break into the office of Daniel Ellsberg psychiatrist. Then wanted to bomb the Brookings Institution, then planned out the Watergate break-in, then became the first Nixon Administration figure to go to prison. That Chuck Colson.
It's OK because he later found religion. And as a minister he advised Governor George W. Bush, coordinated political moves with James Dobson and Pat Robertson, signed a cleric's letter supporting the invasion of Iraq and spoke out in favor of Prop 8. To paraphrase Woody Allen, I didn't know they gave out awards for that kind of person, just earplugs.
Makes you wonder if Gutfeld is right about the cause of Olbermann's obsession with O'Reilly, not that there's anything wrong with that.
*****Update: The Daily Gut has a transcript of what Gutfeld said Friday morning, including what was bleeped. It's NOT what Olbermann thought!
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
In the battle of cutting
December 13, 2008 - 11:50 ET by Chris NormanIn the battle of cutting humor, I'd put my money on Gutfeld. He takes no prisoners.
Chris -- South Park
December 13, 2008 - 12:08 ET by Jack BauerChris -- South Park conservative Gutfeld is the funniest/wittiest/fastest thinking guy on TV. Close second is his lefty/liberal sidekick Bill Shultz. The libertarian Andy Levy has his moments too.
The scatalogically hilarious Red Eye makes you realize just how monumentally unfunny Jon Stewart and his fifty writers truly are.
I hope the dumb Olbermann really tries to take on the Red Eye team.
They will crush his ego day after day. Olbermann is about as funny as a clown choking on a ballon animal he just made for his mother-in-law. Though that is pretty funny, now I think about it.,
Jack, Agreed and your
December 13, 2008 - 12:25 ET by Chris NormanJack,
Agreed and your "clown" reference to Gutfeld's humor is duly noted. :)
I didn't used to understand some of his guests purpose on the show, now I realize that some of them are purely decorative. I really like "TV's Andy Levy" - do you know what else he does at Fox?
Having been a Red Eye fan
December 13, 2008 - 12:48 ET by Jack BauerHaving been a Red Eye fan for over a year I have gleaned some background on the regular trio of funsters.
They all make random appearances on Fox shows for humor commentaries. Andy (ex-Armed forces) got the gig simply because Greg liked the comments he posted on Greg's columns on Huffpo. GG is on at 9am eastern tomorrow (Sunday).
Schultz I think worked with GG onh Maxim, or some lad's mag.
The show is laugh out loud genius, IMHO. Despite 70% guests being libs/Obama supporters, GG's conservative take rules the show. And he is, of course, way way sharper than he pretends to be.
Ah. I assumed Levy was a
December 13, 2008 - 14:17 ET by Chris NormanAh. I assumed Levy was a writer or producer for Fox. Well, he should be. The guy is funnier than a bus load of whoopee cushions. I say, bring Gutfeld out of the wee hours, even if they have to tone him down a smidgen. He's sharp and funny. He's likely to turn off a few old fashion viewers, so maybe at 11:00 PM or so. I think he used to be on an hour earlier before they bumped him back in favor of another showing of Special Report (at least here in MST).
Jack, and just in case you
December 13, 2008 - 15:36 ET by ConservativeRexJack, and just in case you miss his show, you can catch his gregalogue on the www.dailygut.com
I also have been watching this show since it started. I've even got 'em watching it at work in the 2AM slot.
It even makes all the lefty's at work laugh.
Hysterical
December 13, 2008 - 12:44 ET by BronxBomberGreg Gutfeld tearing Olberman a new one was really an enjoyable watch
...looks like a great show... just too late for me...man, I'm getting old....<:~(
We gotta find a new planet...
just too late
December 13, 2008 - 16:06 ET by jcheneyIt's too late for me, except on the weekends when it is on around 9:00 pacific time (reruns).
You can watch the videos on hulu.
Gotta love Greg.
Made for DVR
December 13, 2008 - 17:37 ET by iiiireaderMy husband and I "discovered" Red Eye during the days just prior to the election when we were having troubled sleep and turned on the TV really late (2am here in Texas.) We were thrilled to find a comedy commentary show that allowed both sides to have their say - how novel.
It is on late - so we DVR it and watch it the next evening just before heading to bed. It's great to spend the last part of the evening laughing. The Gregalogues are some of the best commentaries I've heard in years - humorous or serious.
I agree. Gutfeld will make
December 13, 2008 - 17:22 ET by celatorI agree. Gutfeld will make shredded turnip out of Olbermann. As would the others on Red Eye, as well.
Is it any secret that Keith
December 13, 2008 - 12:59 ET by ckc1227Is it any secret that Keith lusts for O'reilly? I made that observation months ago. It's probably why he performs so poorly with the ladies, if you get my drift. He just doesn't have it in him to give it his all, when it's Bill he really wants to be with.
"Libs never let you down. You don't have to talk to one very long before the stupid comes out."
Queef
December 13, 2008 - 13:07 ET by charlietexasWho watches Queef anyway??? He's got nerve talking about anyones sex life....doesn't he "meat" women on the internet, has his way with the stupid woman and never calls them again........?? what a guy.
I hear hes not very well endowed. Mentally or otherwise.
mom
One of the ladies he met
December 13, 2008 - 17:24 ET by celatorOne of the ladies he met somewhere or other was interviewed--last year or so--and noted that she called him "thumbtack", for obvious reasons.
cel... LOL..I said same
December 13, 2008 - 17:49 ET by bigtimercel...
LOL..I said same thing below..referring to the thumbtacks...hehehee
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
ROFLMAO! Nothing like
December 13, 2008 - 13:14 ET by bigtimerROFLMAO!
Nothing like morning laughs!
GG got Olbie good along with the rest of the crew...I've watched Red-Eye on and off from the beginning...the longer it has been on the better it gets in my opinion.
I loved Greg's response to Olbie with all the bleeps inserted, it was fun to imagine...after-all there have been a heck of a lot of rumors about the little guy...something about thumb-tacks....hehehee
Good job Red-Eye!
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
ReD EyE Guy
December 13, 2008 - 13:26 ET by OklahomaIsShapedFunnyWe DVR Red Eye frequently and watch it in the decent evening hours.
Yes, the is real conservative comedy.
http://www.dailygut.com/ ....for Gutfeld's writing
http://activitypit.ning.com/ ... Red Eye fan site... watch video of the show and do message board with other fans.
This is first time I've seen the show references on NB... I'm very happy and I hope this brings new viewers to the show.
It airs on FOX in the middle of the night (2am Central)
Show are all new 5 days a week... they show 2 best-of-the-week shows on Sat. and Sun. nights.
You need to see some episodes when they have Alan Colmes on as a guest... the dude cannot hang, his complete void of humor is exposed.
Thanks again for bringing this to NewsBusters!!
Are you talking about the
December 13, 2008 - 14:09 ET by fitzfongAre you talking about the episode when Colmes appeared alongside his sister-in-law, Monica Crowley? I didn't think he was that bad. Supposedly he used to be a stand-up comedian. I've always told my wife that Alan Colmes looks like a cross between an undertaker and a corpse.
O'Reilly kind of bores me, but I do enjoy Red Eye when I get a chance to watch. I wonder if Gutfeld conjured up some Olby auditioning to be O'Reilly's "houseboy" joke.
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
fitzfong.blogspot.com
Caught that earlier on
December 13, 2008 - 13:26 ET by motherbeltCaught that earlier on Olbbermann Watch and nearly choked on my coffee!
Gutfield put the bait out there and Olbermann rose to it like a trout!
More like a BIG MOUTH bass.
December 13, 2008 - 20:41 ET by brerolMore like a BIG MOUTH bass.
Olberman more like a catfish....
December 13, 2008 - 22:54 ET by Laffing at libs and leftiesA bottom feeder. Marl Levin has used the thumbtack remark on his radio program.
I don't have cable so don't watch Red Eyes.... Oh well...
What I have a hard time with
December 13, 2008 - 13:37 ET by MrSnugglesWhat I have a hard time with here is how Olbermann seems to think Colson is the devil and all his deeds are evil, yet Ayers who ACTUALLY BOMBED PLACES is a saint and a man that should be revered.
MrSnuggles... Excellent
December 13, 2008 - 14:27 ET by bigtimerMrSnuggles...
Excellent point....
Yet the msm has this filthy terrorist who should be behind bars on their networks whoring his book...it has been beyond sanity, plus despicable.
Says a lot about the networks, the left, the enemy within...now doesn't it?
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Keith gets low ratings in bed...
December 13, 2008 - 14:57 ET by gregfaheyhttp://www.nypost.co...
Olbo the Closeted may indeed have ahem, "trouble". Trying so hard to be hetero he just can't seem to do it. With visions of Bill and Dick dancing in his head, he just can't seem to step up the plate can he?
The Wuss
December 13, 2008 - 17:53 ET by brerolOlberman is one big wuss. The man (if we can call him that) does not have the balls to allow a opposing view on his show. But if you are looking for a patronizing, snide, cynicale point of view then Olberman is the one to tune into.
Olbertwit and his O'Reilly obsession...
December 13, 2008 - 19:05 ET by PrairieSkyI've said for a long time now that Olby needs therapy (seriously) and that he seems absolutely obsessed with Bill O'Reilly. As far as the motivation(s) behind Olbertwit's obsession, I'm not going there...
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
Maybe Olby and O'Reilly
December 13, 2008 - 20:12 ET by JerMaybe Olby and O'Reilly could sign up for group therapy. Billo's mocking and insulting behavior directed at his competitors and other networks, as well as his infantile chest-thumping over his ratings and popularity, have been a long-standing staple of The Factor. And, for the past couple of years, O'Reilly's vendetta against NBC and MSNBC, and his relentless attacks on its president and its parent company, General Electric, have bordered on monomania.
No doubt this has contributed to Olbermann's tedious and excessive response.
Jer
Sorry, But O'Reilly has not
December 13, 2008 - 20:23 ET by oilcanSorry, But O'Reilly has not ever named Olbermann in any of his comments. It's Olbermann who thumps his chest when he eek's out a ratings win, which happens once ever two or three weeks. Usually, it's because O'Reilly is off that night. Nary a night passes when Olbermann puts up some big lie, heisted from a blue blog about O'Reilly. Well document at olbermannwatch.com.
Wow, I found where Olby
December 13, 2008 - 20:47 ET by Clear thinkerWow, I found where Olby goes camping... Eco-Hippies Cry Over Dead Tree
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
"Sorry, But O'Reilly has not
December 13, 2008 - 21:34 ET by Jer"Sorry, But O'Reilly has not ever named Olbermann in any of his comments."
I didn't say that he had and am aware that O'Reilly studiously avoids mentioning his name. My point was simply that O'Reilly has been engaging in these embarrassing antics long before Olbermann even had a show.
The behavior of both is silly and juvenile.
Jer
Get a clue
December 13, 2008 - 21:31 ET by brerolOn the same level as Olberman? Not even close. If it were then O'reillys ratings would be down in the cellar next to Olbermans.
Well, I must admit I rarely
December 13, 2008 - 21:43 ET by JerWell, I must admit I rarely watch Olbermann, but his behavior in this area would have to be pretty egregious to be worse than O'Reilly's. Ratings have nothing to do with it.
Jer
Jer
December 13, 2008 - 21:58 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Just wondering, when you call O'Reilly as bad as Olbermann, don't you give the former any additional respect for at least allowing people to come on his program to voice an opposing view?
After all, it's one thing to trash politicians you disagree with. However, isn't it far more reprehensible to do it without allowing anyone on to defend the actions of those you're serially debasing?
Just wondering. ns
Noel... First things
December 13, 2008 - 22:15 ET by JerNoel... First things first--congratulations to Brandon for his victory and reaching a new "high"!
As far as O'Reilly vs. Olbermann, I really can't say who is worse. I simply haven't watched the latter all that much. With regard to the format of the respective shows, I've previously noted here that I favor allowing guests on with opposing viewpoints, and O'Reilly deserves credit for doing so. That said, O'Reilly's claim that he is equally tough with conservatives and liberals is absolute hogwash.
Jer
Jer
December 13, 2008 - 22:28 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Thanks about Brandon.
Is BOR equally tough on conservatives and liberals? Honestly, I don't know. I don't really watch The Factor much. These personality driven opinion shows with a lot of shouting and name calling really don't do it for me. I can take about five minutes before I've got to change the channel.
My only point was that at least BOR brings on opposing views. Olbermann doesn't, which in my mind makes anyone that watches his program a weak-minded simpleton that needs his/her own view of the world fortified by those that agree with him/her.
In the end, isn't that what Olbermann and the Netroots are all about?
By contrast, as much as liberals piss and moan about Fox News, at least that network has liberal pundits on virtually every program virtually every hour to express the leftwing view. You certainly can't say that MSNBC or CNN have conservatives on virtually every program virtually every hour, can you? ns
I've said it before, and
December 13, 2008 - 23:36 ET by JerI've said it before, and I'll say it again: If I were the architect of the media universe, there would be perfect ideological equilibrium [and NewsBusters would be out of business].
I'll concede a liberal tilt, although I've never thought the imbalance to be as dramatic as conservatives insist. Yes, liberals piss and moan about Fox News. I do too--but not because I am opposed to the dissemination of conservative views. My beef is with the network's ludicrous claim to be "fair and balanced."
In all honesty, I wish CNN had additional conservative commentators. But, even when that was the case--Crossfire and Capitol Gang were reasonably balanced--the right still complained about the Communist News Network. The same with PBS...In the 80's and 90's, the conservative pundits probably outnumbered the liberals, but that didn't satisfy its critics who claimed the network was a monolithic news organ for the left. MSNBC was also hammered by the right even when its nightly lineup was evenly divided between conservative and liberal hosts [and one of the "liberals", Chris Matthews, had voted for Bush.]
I guess what I'm saying is that "balance" like beauty is often in the eye of the beholder.
Jer
Jer
December 14, 2008 - 00:19 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Well, I've contended that Fox is right-leaning, but nowhere near as far to the right as MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC are to the left. As such, in my view, Fox is FAR more fair and balanced than those five. Frankly, it's not even close.
You think all because CNN had Capitol Gang and Crossfire on a few years ago that made them balanced? These two shows countered all the bias on display all the other hours of the day?
As for conservatives outnumbering liberals on PBS in the '80s and '90s, conservatives like who? David Gergen? Some conservative. He's to the left of David Brooks, and Brooks admitted to me at the RNC that he was NEVER as conservative as the folks at the Weekly Standard thought.
As for MSNBC, I believe that network was far more balanced before Bush was elected. However, they made a huge turn to the left after 9/11, and have continued that move since.
In the end, Jer, I seek balance just as much as you do. I don't see it anywhere. Fox is right-leaning, and everything else is left-leaning. It's all advocacy journalism now, and no real truth.
What a shame. ns
I was going to post earlier
December 14, 2008 - 00:30 ET by bigtimerI was going to post earlier to Jer...didn't know if you were here or not Noel, any decided not to because Jer and I went back and forth somewhat last night...
Nevertheless...I watched Capitol Gang and Crossfire more years than I would like to count...if anybody thinks those shows were fair and balanced...I have some beachfront property for sale here in Mt. and on the high desert in Ca.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt... Compare Capitol
December 14, 2008 - 00:53 ET by Jerbt...
Compare Capitol Gang and Crossfire with the ostensibly balanced Hannity & Colmes. The former shows on CNN introduced neutral topics, or would al least alternate the ideologically-tilted ones, whereupon they would be fairly debated between equals. No so with H & C which is modeled after the Globetrotters vs. Washington Gernerals contests. The topics and agenda are consistently presented from the conservative perspective, that is, typically it will be announced that "you're not going to believe the latest Democrat outrage" or what "Reid and Pelosi said today", etc. After which, Holmes and a Democrat spokesman will be given the opportunity to explain the transgression, while Hannity demands an apology from them. That is Fox's idea of "fair and balanced".
Jer
Hey Jer... Short and to
December 14, 2008 - 01:00 ET by bigtimerHey Jer...
Short and to the point...
BS!
I'm not in the mood to go back and forth with you, that is why I was ready to post to you earlier, before Noel did, then decided better of it..but heck Jer, I love you and all that, but there are nights I just don't feel like going tit-for-tat with you...and tonight is one of them.
You see what you want...I will too.
Go ahead...try to get the last word...as you always do...tonight is the night for ya friend. ;-)
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Okay bt, last word... I'm
December 14, 2008 - 01:31 ET by JerOkay bt, last word...
I'm not in the mood to argue either--it's getting too close to Christmas. In fact, in the spirit of the holiday season, and due to the precipitous decline in California real estate values, I might be willing to take that property off your hands for nothing--just to relieve you of the tax obligation. How's that for fairness?
Take care, Jer
Roaring with laughter here
December 14, 2008 - 01:37 ET by bigtimerRoaring with laughter here Jer...
You take the cake.
One thing about it...you prove what a typical liberal you are.
Love ya' anyway...most of the time that is.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
This isn't a last word thing, bt...
December 14, 2008 - 01:50 ET by JerThis isn't a last word thing, bt...
I just wanted to thank you in advance for the cake. I plan to keep it and eat it, too--just like the "typical liberal".
Now I mean it...bye for now, Jer
Sweet Dreams Jer...with
December 14, 2008 - 01:58 ET by bigtimerSweet Dreams Jer...with sugar on top. ;-)
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
I pretty much watch
December 14, 2008 - 08:31 ET by oilcanI pretty much watch O'Reilly every night and the mischaracertization of his persona that he is a eviscerant shouting loon is something MSM critics like to put forth. It's easy to arrive at that conclusion when all you see are youtube clips catching O'Reilly at his worst or best. He's not perfect by a long shot, but at least he never puts himself out as a "journalist".
More importantly, unlike Olbermann, he doesn't have an ever running string of bobbing heads who agree with every statement or bloated dissertation he spits out.
That said, it's not that I personally want to watch a show that's going to preach what I want to hear, but I do like watching a show that gives me what I need to hear. Those are rare and far apart.
Olbmerman lifts a lot of his "facts" from unchecked blue blogs and posts to the Kos, even while on break during his show. Bad or good? I'm not to judge, but his leanings are definitely to hard left.
It's funny to have seen him call the administration an equivalent Nazi organization for backing FISA, but when Obama voted yes to extend the bill, Olby was reaching to wells of nirvana to stretch his opinion to liking FISA.
Having been a fairly regular Factor viewer
December 14, 2008 - 19:32 ET by JerHaving been a fairly regular Factor viewer for the past ten years, I believe I'm reasonably qualified to assess the O'Reilly persona. "Hubristic buffoon" and "blustering charlatan" are descriptions which come to mind, although "eviscerant loon" does have a nice ring to it--I'm just not sure what it means.
Actually, his show is frequently entertaining, and Bill is not only intelligent and well-prepared, but also quite capable of conducting excellent, probative and informative interviews. He is also quite capable of being a self-absorbed hack. But my overriding objection is his penchant for proclaiming ideological neutrality--a contention which is laughably, palpably absurd.
My Olbermann experience [since his ESPN days] very likely doesn't exceed 45 minutes in toto, and I find his over-the-top antics extremely offputting.
Jer
Jer
December 14, 2008 - 12:09 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
There are 24 hours in a day. Why does H&C determine the fairness of Fox? Also, Capitol Gang was aired on Saturdays, and Crossfire was taken off the air due to low ratings. As such, why do you think those two programs countered all the other biased hours broadcast on CNN every week?
As for what you believe occurs on H&C, don't you think it's better than what happens on MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and ABC news broadcasts wherein a conservative is RARELY present to offer the Republican side? At least Colmes and another liberal are ALWAYS given equal time to present the liberal side. In fact, it's even done with a clock so as to ensure equal time.
Name another network that does that, Jer. I'll wait. ns
Noel...fair and balanced Fox News
December 14, 2008 - 21:19 ET by JerWhy does H&C determine the fairness of Fox?
It doesn't in and of itself. But H&C and O'Reilly's Factor are the Mon-Fri primetime flagship programs of Fox, both of which are purported to validate the "fair and balance" motto adopted by the network. However, the claim is bogus. O'Reilly is about as ideologically neutral as you or I, and the alleged balance of H&C is a myth.
In fact, it's [H&C] done with a clock so as to ensure equal time.
Really? That must be a recent innovation. In the past, when I watched the show more frequently, it certainly wasn't the case, and there were numerous occasions the "liberals" were outnumbered and were time-shorted. The reverse was never the case. Reiterating what I mentioned earlier, the agenda/format of H&C was always rigged against liberals/Democrats. The latter were constantly the "accused" while Shawn acted as the prosecutor and Colmes the outgunned court-appointed criminal defense attorney. Hannity would badger the liberal "guests", i.e."defendants" to disavow and/or apologize for some Democratic transgression and admonish them to dispense with any "talking points". That has always been the operative dynamic of the show--hardly fair or balanced.
Capitol Gang was aired on Saturdays, and Crossfire was taken off the air due to low ratings. As such, why do you think those two programs countered all the other biased hours broadcast on CNN every week?
Capitol Gang for a time aired on both Saturdays and Sundays, and Crossfire five nights a week. Both shows presented reasonably level playing fields--none of this one side always being put on the defensive, which is my problem with the aforementioned Fox programs. I regret the demise of both of these CNN shows. "Did they counter all the other biased hours broadcast on CNN every week?" Are you saying all the other programming was biased, or just the preponderance? I'll concede the latter but not the former.
...don't you think it's better than what happens on MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, and ABC news broadcasts wherein a conservative is RARELY present to offer the Republican side?
I would take issue with the word "rarely". Conservatives [both as guests or regular panelists] are frequently affored the opportunity to offer their side. Do I think they are shortchanged? "Yes." Do I wish there were more conservatives on the other networks. I'll repeat (or paraphrase) what I said in an earlier post: "Absolutely."
Jer
Jer
December 14, 2008 - 23:00 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Since the program's inception, the hosts of H&C are on a clock just like a debate. A light goes off when their time is up. That's when the other takes over. Been doing it since day one. You sure you've seen this show?
Is the rest of CNN biased? Um, yes. Their attempt at fair and balanced was "Crossfire" and "Capitol Gang" which are now gone.
As for conservatives appearing on the other networks, name the conservative contributor to CBS who regularly appears on the "Evening News" and the "Early Show."
Next, name the conservative on ABC who regularly appears on "World News" and "GMA."
The token conservative at NBC is Pat Buchanan who does sometimes appear on the "Today" show. However, he's rarely on the "Nightly News."
Care to refute this? ns
Care to refute this?
December 14, 2008 - 23:56 ET by JerCare to refute this?
Yes...thanks for the opportunity.
You sure you've seen this show?
Indeed, numerous times. I am aware they take turns. I'm also aware there have been many times--because of the number and ideological configuration of the guest line-up [or perhaps Hannity's exceeding his allotted time]--that the liberal viewpoint has received short shrift. I have verified a couple of the more egregious cases by personally timing segments. It may not be the norm, but it does happen. In any event, my objection lies more with the format which I described above, rather than a strict adherence to equal time requirements.
CNN has always had conservative hosts and contributors. At one time, the arch-conservative Bob Novak was on virtually every day of the week. Remember Evans and Novak? Even Rowland Evans was a conservative-leaning Democrat. The late Barbara Olson was a frequent guest, along with Jonah Goldberg, Delroy Murdock, Kate O'Beirne, Mona Charen, John Sununu, Tucker Carlson, Delroy Murdock, Pat Buchanan, and continuing with Glen Beck, Bill Bennett and so on. And Lou Dobbs is certainly no liberal.
Do I wish they had a larger conservative presence now? You bet.
As far as CBS and ABC evening news and their respective morning shows...I don't watch them. Of course you're aware George Will is a long-time staple of This Week, and Meet the Press often has Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, or Michael Murphy. In the morning, I watched Fox & Friends until recently [not a liberal in sight]. Lately, I have been watching Morning Joe--Scarborough is a conservative Republican, and Pat Buchanan is a near-regular. Tucker Carlson shows up from time to time also. As such, I'm not too familiar with the other morning shows, but I know they frequently have Republican guests.
PBS until the recent past was loaded with conservative commentators. There are fewer now, but still a fair representation.
Jer
Jer
December 15, 2008 - 00:09 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
So, because there are occasions that Hannity actually speaks for more of the broadcast than Colmes, that refutes the fact that they are indeed timed, and do try to give each other equal time? So, the outliers are the rule rather than the exception.
Fascinating refutation, counselor.
As for the ABC and CBS morning shows, I didn't ask whether or not you watched them. I asked you to name the conservative pundits that regularly appear on those networks' morning and evening news programs. The fact is there aren't any. George Will appears on "This Week." That's it. Do you see that as a problem for the balance of these networks' news programming?
Let's understand that most people in America get their television news from the three broadcast networks. Add up the viewership of FNC, CNN, and MSNBC, and the total isn't equal to the number of folks that watch any of the network evening news broadcasts. That's how powerful ABC, CBS, and NBC news are. And, between them, there is virtually NO conservative contribution.
Is this America or the Soviet Union? ns
Addressing only part of my
December 15, 2008 - 01:59 ET by JerAddressing only part of my argument hardly qualifies as a refutation either. For example, if the Clinton-hating Dick Morris is the sole guest in a segment--even if he is questioned for the same length of time by both Hannity and Colmes--his and Hannity's viewpoint will have been inordinately weighted. Your contention rests on the assumption that perfect ideological symmetry exists during the discussions of each topic on any given show. That assumption is simply not borne out by the facts.
Once again, you have avoided commenting on my principle objection concerning the political slant of the subjects on H&C and the manner in which they are introduced. I take it your silence indicates agreement.
Newscasts aren't opinion shows, so the politics of a reporter or correspondent should be irrelevant. As for the size of the audiences, what are Limbaugh's numbers? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they are larger than the networks' evening news telecasts combined. Does he provide any liberal contribution? Talk about being powerful...
Finally, Noel, for decades the prevailing media was Republican in its orientation. That started changing in the last half of the previous century. There are pendulum swings. That's permitted in America--not the Soviet Union.
Jer
footnote: My reference to Limbaugh and liberal contribution should have specified "guests" on his show. I know that he occasionally takes calls from those with dissenting opinions.
Jer
December 15, 2008 - 11:02 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
For decades the prevailing media was Republican in its orientation? Which decades, Jer? Were either of us alive? ns
Noel... I thought my
December 15, 2008 - 12:27 ET by JerNoel...
I thought my statement that it began changing in the "last half of the previous century" [i.e. roughly sometime after the 1950's] would give you a clue--viz., the decades preceding and leading up to the 50's]. The civil rights movement, Vietnam, and Watergate played a major role in the ideological shift. I was young and alive.
Jer
Jer
December 15, 2008 - 12:44 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Sorry. I'm pretty swamped and am half-reading comments. Forgive me.
So, the media, in your view, was tilted to the right six decades ago before the overwhelming majority of people on this planet were born, as well as before the advent of cable television and the Internet. How does this relate to our discussion at all?
Forgive me: who cares?
Are you suggesting because less than a handful of national television networks tilted to the right (in your view) 60 years ago that makes it okay for virtually every media outlet today to spread liberal propaganda? Is that your point? ns
Noel... I realize you're
December 15, 2008 - 16:28 ET by JerNoel... I realize you're probably pretty swamped, so of course I forgive you. But, honestly, I am beginning to wonder if you are even half-reading my comments.
You recently accused me, because of a slightly critical comment regarding the President [on a policy matter], of being just another "Bush-hater"--despite my numerous expressions of admiration for him and his family since I first began posting at NB a year and a half ago.
Now, you suggest or at least strongly imply that I endorse the spreading of "liberal propaganda" by the media. In this thread alone, as well as many times in the past, I have repeatedly stated the following: I concede there is a liberal tilt in the mainstream media. I wish that it were otherwise. I would prefer additional conservative voices, and if it were in my power, there would be perfect balancing between the dissemination of conservative and liberal viewpoints.
The predominant media sixty years ago (and prior thereto) was print, and the major newspapers were mostly Republican owned and controlled. Whether or not there was a similar hue and cry then about "the conservative media" as there is now about the "liberal media" I'm not sure, but I tend to doubt it, at least not with the same level of intensity.
Fortunately, we live in a free democratic-republic and not in a totalitarian society with a state-controlled media. Conservatives certainly haven't been completely shut out of the media over the past few decades, and, politically, Republicans have done pretty well during that time.
Jer
Sorry Jer, but I don't agree that whatever perceived...
December 13, 2008 - 22:31 ET by PrairieSkytransgressions that you may ascribe to O'Reilly, equal the unending stream of nonsensical bile that is spewed by Olbermann. And are you seriously blaming O'Reilly for Olbermann's ridiculous rantings? Olbermann certainly has the right to disagree with anything that anyone says or does, but he regularly goes completely off the deep end.
Whether or not you approve of O'Reilly's style and on air performance is up to you. I don't agree with everything that he says, but as far as his issues with NBC, MSNBC and Immelman, I believe that O'Reilly has highlighted some legitimate reasons for his gripes. Whether or not you agree with him on this is also up to you. If you find O'Reilly objectionable, do what I do as it concerns Olbertwit...
Change the channel.
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
Intellectual laziness
December 14, 2008 - 01:58 ET by nkviking75"And as a minister he [Colson] advised Governor George W. Bush..."
Olbermann commits the common MSM mistake of calling any prominent evangelical leader a "minister" and/or an "evangelist". Chuck Colson is neither. (See his bio from the Prison Fellowship website.) He's a man who founded Prison Fellowship to reach out to prisoners and their families after his own experience in prison. And speaking of that, Colson long ago owned up to his crimes, paid his debt to society, and has turned his life around in a big way. He deserves the honors he gets.
Olbermann is intellectually lazy. Earplugs for Colson? Nah. Let's jam the signal from MSNBC when ol' Keef is on.
Welcome to the era of unity, you racist!
nk... You got it...I'm
December 14, 2008 - 02:05 ET by bigtimernk...
You got it...I'm with you...all the way.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh