I wouldn't call that treating her gently. If he really wanted to be gentle with her, he would interrupt her, preferably before she could say anything. It's the only way to avoid having her look like an idiot.
Yeah, compare it to when Hannity interviews her. LOL Hannity will ask her stuff and then let her start to speak but when she hangs on a word or something he'll jump in and finish thoughts for her and she'll just respond with "Yup!" It's ridiculous. As for O'Reilly, he is definitely CENTER right. He's for comprehensive immigration reform (basically measured amnesty after the border is secured) and I believe he supports gay adoption, possibly marriage (not really sure on marriage). He's also mellowed out a lot in recent years. Heck, if you watch his show you wouldn't be sure anymore that he doesn't support Obama.
I never really liked OReilly since he just always seemed like a jackass. I do watch him from time to time and he has actually toned it down quite a lot. He use to just interrupt people and scream them down. I think he has just mellowed over the years.
I wonder if O'Reilly "mellowing out" is a function of the fact that guys like Beck getting so ridiculous that O'Reilly just decided he can't compete for that audience and would rather carve out another niche.
I actually liked his multi-part interview with Obama. It was engaging and mostly respectful, and unless the guy (O'Reilly) is completely fake, he convinced me that he ended up respecting Obama at some level. The Palin phenomenon will never cease to elude me. I wish I had studied more political history b/c I'm sure there are great parallels with lessons learned out there. I've studied, for instance, Eva Peron, but there are really no similarities once you get beyond the idea of "attractive woman in politics."
He's never competed for that crazy conspiracy theory right wing audience though. I mean he himself can get a little jazzed up (WE'LL DO IT LIVE!) and start screaming down guests, but he's never been the radical political voice that will rally the far right into a tizzy. I think he's been incredibly fair to Obama. He has argued with Dick Morris a lot about him. He also continually says he likes Obama the person and refuses to agree with the right wing conspiracies. He went after the birthers call them idiots. He got into a spat with Rush Limbaugh because he boldly stated he does not believe Obama to be a socialist. As for Palin, it's amazing really. I don't see how people can watch her and think she's smart enough to be counted on.
You'd be better off studying Dan Quayle. That seems like a more appropriate parallel. Except that Quayle may have been smarter than Palin, if you can believe that....
I can't stand O'Reilly, but he's not an idiot. He has to realize that if she is what conservatives have to champion their cause, they have little hope in the next presidential election. Worse yet, she makes the party look like idiots by representing them in this fashion. She's divisive in their ranks, and that will only hurt them in the long run, whether she's a candidate or not. Her getting time to throw in her two cents isn't doing conservatives any favors, and I suspect that while he did give her more respect than he did to, say, Jon Stewart, he was smart enough to take her to task when she couldn't hold her own on a topic that she pretends to know something about when actually she obviously is just there to bash the current administration. If the GOP wants people to get behind them, they need to start bringing solutions to the table... on something.... anything... instead of pointing fingers. Being a critic doesn't make one capable of filling the shoes of those they would criticize... even if they are good at criticism, which she is not. Perhaps the conservative base is starting to realize they need to bring more to the table, and are starting by distancing themselves from some of the neoconservative movement. My thoughts are, it's too late, they had no consistency to their perspective among 'members,' and the division between the old GOP mentality and tea partiers has already occurred.
Fair point, lol. Ever since B-Bob brought it up I'm really struggling to come up with a comparison. I thought Harding, but that is really a way more apt comparison for Bush II.
If what he meant by "cult of personality" was a cult of followers, then yeah, I guess the Quayle comparison doesn't really fit. I guess I was just thinking in terms of brain power... I share everyone's bewilderment as to why this lady continues to have such a following. It is truly one of the great mysteries of our time. She and her ilk (teabaggers/talk-radio listeners) have basically made me turn my back on own party. All I can do is wait for them to hopefully one day figure out what a hollow TWIT she is and find someone else to rally behind.
Ya he used to ape**** if someone brought up a good point. The funniest I've ever seen is when he and Geraldo went at it. LOL :grin: He has toned it down A LOT. I'm sure his ratings are takin a hit though.
It's just so painful to watch her. Just like with the Couric interview, I come close to feeling sorry for Palin, because she's so obviously out of her depth.
This is what I believe. I also think he sensed a turn to the left in this country in Bush's second term and has morphed himself to fit. He probably got tired of seeing himself getting destroyed on the Daily Show and Colbert Report almost every night too. I'm a little surprised he still has such a big audience. He isn't loony enough for the 70 year racists anymore so I'm not sure who is watching him.
Sadly, as long as she says anything negative about Obama, she will have her fair share of real americans following her around the country. All of the sudden Palin has turned into a toxic avenger? What happened to drill baby drill?
The only other video I've come across recently that comes close to being as painful as this one is... http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2010/06/the_sports_upda_45.html
