• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

O’Reilly tells conservatives to stop ‘bashing’ Obama

MrVicchio said:
Don't allow others to cast CPAC as something it is not...

It's a rally event, what do you expect?
Click to expand...

I didn't allow anything. I believe the CPAC is a sham too, but I wouldn't respond in a "holier than thou" attitude.
 
Bill O' Reilly is a "turncoat" he betrayed my trust, he's gone limp in his delivery of the true news, I am very unsatisfied Bill O' Reilly !!!! Bill O' Reilly let me down in his latest performance of news, now I will be forced to turn on a real news reporter man that's giving it to me hard & cold factually. Bill O' Reilly you are just a member of the Keith Olberman crispy creme endorsement club. DAMN YOU SIR !!!!
 
O'Reilly panders to Obama from what I can see in order to his next interview lined up.

I do agree that bashing is the wrong tactic because it is a Liberal tactic and Liberals will use it in rebuttal attacks.

Best thing to do is what Glenn Beck did. Point out facts and then stress what I have been saying for over a year study history and what it tells us will result from Obama style plans and actions. We don't have to bash to tell the and point out the truth and Obama and his minions can't handle the truth.

Ever notice how they act the messenger because they can't stand up to the facts.

Obams is a socialist and his programs and plans are socialist and they have always failed every time they are tried.

We just need to say here is what Obama plans, and here is what happened in history the last time it was tried and this is the result. You decide if it worked.

I get tired of O'Reilly in about 30 seconds and have to turn it off he's no Conservative just a shameless opportunist.
 
There was something said at this CPAC convention by one of the speakers calling Obama a cocaine user. I wish O'Reilly would have added that clip to his footage of Obama bashing.
 
I admit that I have become an O'Reilly Fan. No clue how it happened but it did:)
 
Councilman said:
O'Reilly panders to Obama from what I can see in order to his next interview lined up.

I do agree that bashing is the wrong tactic because it is a Liberal tactic and Liberals will use it in rebuttal attacks.

Best thing to do is what Glenn Beck did. Point out facts and then stress what I have been saying for over a year study history and what it tells us will result from Obama style plans and actions. We don't have to bash to tell the and point out the truth and Obama and his minions can't handle the truth.

Ever notice how they act the messenger because they can't stand up to the facts.

Obams is a socialist and his programs and plans are socialist and they have always failed every time they are tried.

We just need to say here is what Obama plans, and here is what happened in history the last time it was tried and this is the result. You decide if it worked.

I get tired of O'Reilly in about 30 seconds and have to turn it off he's no Conservative just a shameless opportunist.
Click to expand...

Best thing do to is do what Glenn Beck did? You gotta be kidding me:rofl

Beck is a fruitcake and proves it every show:2razz:

Also Bill has never claimed to be a Conservative.
 
Kali said:
Best thing do to is do what Glenn Beck did? You gotta be kidding me:rofl

Beck is a fruitcake and proves it every show:2razz:

Also Bill has never claimed to be a Conservative.
Click to expand...

Even if he was I find some humor in that fact some one is complaining a pundit on the Fair and Balanced Network isn't Conservative enough.
 
megaprogman said:
I don't know where it comes from, my best guess is that it stems from people who, for some reason unknown to me, are unable to see liberals as reasonable human beings. So instead of two principled opponents who have different ideas, they see politics as normal people vs horrible degenerates. Unfortunately this sort of insanity seems to have invaded mainstream politics on the right with people such as Beck, Bachmann, and Limbaugh
Click to expand...

It likely comes from extreme ignorance and lack of education. Remember, these are often the same people who are in the Cult of Reagan. Except Reagan essentially did the same thing, exploding government, going on a stimulus spending binge and exploding the debt all while pressuring the Fed to be extremely loose with the money supply. I bring this up constantly and all I get is cricket noises from these people. Even more amusing, I bring up how a large portion of the stimulus was tax relief. I even cite how the bonus depreciation is identical to Bush that got us partially out of the 2002 recession and no Obama basher even acknowledges it.

It's highly questionable if these people even care about reality anymore. Obama in many ways is a copy of Bush, enacting the same fiscal policies. Bush pushed through a very socialized drug bill. Apparently when a Republican enacts an actual socialist bill, it's okay, but when a Democrat pushes a very-NOT-socialist bill, it's socialist. These people define words as they see fit without any actual understanding of the terms.

What I don't get is why these people aren't in arms over Republicans pushing for more funding for the VA. The VA is by definition of how it works socialized medicine. The state controls the means of production by hiring the doctors, owning the hospitals and directly providing the medical services. So apparently Republicans asking for more funding of a socialized medical system is okay and is noble. But at the same time socialized medicine is evil.

Huh. Ignorance and lack of education right there.
 
obvious Child said:
It likely comes from extreme ignorance and lack of education. Remember, these are often the same people who are in the Cult of Reagan. Except Reagan essentially did the same thing, exploding government, going on a stimulus spending binge and exploding the debt all while pressuring the Fed to be extremely loose with the money supply. I bring this up constantly and all I get is cricket noises from these people. Even more amusing, I bring up how a large portion of the stimulus was tax relief. I even cite how the bonus depreciation is identical to Bush that got us partially out of the 2002 recession and no Obama basher even acknowledges it.

It's highly questionable if these people even care about reality anymore. Obama in many ways is a copy of Bush, enacting the same fiscal policies. Bush pushed through a very socialized drug bill. Apparently when a Republican enacts an actual socialist bill, it's okay, but when a Democrat pushes a very-NOT-socialist bill, it's socialist. These people define words as they see fit without any actual understanding of the terms.

What I don't get is why these people aren't in arms over Republicans pushing for more funding for the VA. The VA is by definition of how it works socialized medicine. The state controls the means of production by hiring the doctors, owning the hospitals and directly providing the medical services. So apparently Republicans asking for more funding of a socialized medical system is okay and is noble. But at the same time socialized medicine is evil.

Huh. Ignorance and lack of education right there.
Click to expand...

Ignorance and lack of education? Do you always talk down to people that disagree with you? You really are blinded by an ideology and if you want to really see or hear ignorance here is an example

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ojd13kZlCA"]YouTube- Obama Stash[/ame]

This seems to be the rule with Obama voters or at least enough to put him in the WH.

It does seem you have a distorted view as to the role of Govt. Obviously you prefer to re-write history instead of actually reading and understanding history.

Your distortion of the Reagan years is a perfect example but there is an entire tread devoted to refuting your anti Reagan claims and there are non partisan sites such as BEA.gov, BLS.gov, U.S. Treasury which refute your statements.

Apparently you don't find it hypocritical to point out your problems with Reagan and Bush but ignore when Obama implements Reagan and Bush policies.

Both understood you empower people not the govt. to create jobs.

Both understood that taxpayers keeping more of their own money stimulates and grows the economy as well as govt. revenue.

Both understand the obligations owed to our military thus the VA funding.

Both understand personal responsibility thus provided tax cuts to allow people to need less govt.

There are parts of the stimulus that were good but most of it was payment to pet programs of the Democrats but you ignore that reality. You can always use the cafeteria style approach with Bush and Reagan but ignore that same tactic when it comes to Obama.

I know know a few others who are part of the 6% that believe the stimulus plan actually created jobs.
 
There are parts of the stimulus that were good but most of it was payment to pet programs of the Democrats but you ignore that reality. You can always use the cafeteria style approach with Bush and Reagan but ignore that same tactic when it comes to Obama.
Click to expand...

could you please expound on this?
 
liblady said:
could you please expound on this?
Click to expand...

Read the Obama stimulus plan and compare it to Reagan/Bush's. The claim was made that there were tax cuts in the Obama plan so it should be easy to compare those tax cuts to Reagan/Bush's. The Stimulus plan signed by Obama was 800 billion dollars, the Reagan and Bush stimulus plans were mostly tax cuts that grew govt. revenue thus cost the govt. nothing.

Tell me what is stimulative about this and why it was such an emergency that had to be passed immediately? This isn't a stimulus package as much as it is a State of the Union speech which outlines Budgetary requirements.

Specific Provisions

$180 billion to states to expand unemployment benefitsWSJ.com: Partisan Rancor Seeps Into Talks on Stimulus Plan (January 24, 2009)6

Upgrade 10,000 schoolsMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Make federal buildings more energy efficientMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Triple undergraduate and graduate science fellowshipsMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Shift to electronic medical recordsMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Invest in preventative health careMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Add 3,000 miles of electrical linesMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

One-time $300 payment to senior citizensWSJ.com: Partisan Rancor Seeps Into Talks on Stimulus Plan (January 24, 2009)6

$8 billion investment in high-speed rail, to put people to work improving tracks, crossing and signal repairNew York Times: Slice of Stimulus
Package Will Go to Faster Trains (February 20, 2009)11
$2 billion for energy department projectsSeattle Times: Stimulus package to create 4,400 jobs at Hanford (February 20, 2009)12
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
As far as I can tell, there are some (not all) conservatives that for some reason believe that liberals are following some sort of planned conspiracy to fundamentally alter the fabric of the country. Try listening to Rush Limbaugh, hes constantly going on about this sort of thing.

I don't know where it comes from, my best guess is that it stems from people who, for some reason unknown to me, are unable to see liberals as reasonable human beings. So instead of two principled opponents who have different ideas, they see politics as normal people vs horrible degenerates. Unfortunately this sort of insanity seems to have invaded mainstream politics on the right with people such as Beck, Bachmann, and Limbaugh.

I am sure that the frenzy is good for the base, but the side effect is that it also attracts extremists and removes possibilities for rational discourse, common ground, and compromise. Just as one cannot negotiate with criminals, these people believe you cannot negotiate with liberals. Another side effect is that you also lose the ability to criticize policy, instead you spend your time criticizing whole ideologies.

I don't pretend to understand it, but that's how it looks from my perspective at least.
Click to expand...

In political terms, it's called "Talking Right", and the Republican/Conservative party has it down to a science! They've learned exactly how to use certain key words or phrases and spin things exactly how they want people to hear them. Nevermind that what they say might be a half-truth or completely false. The Republican party has become the masters of political talk. And to be fair, the Democrats are starting to finally establish their own brand of political jargon, but Republicans have a big advantage from learning how to twist and manipulate political speak for decades.

Regardless, what you've pointed out is so very true. There does seem to be more and more hate-speak coming from the Republican camp than any real substance. And using venues like CPAC to foster such hatred insntead of focusing in on the issues this country truly needs to have addressed doesn't do their party much good at all.
 
Objective Voice said:
In political terms, it's called "Talking Right", and the Republican/Conservative party has it down to a science! They've learned exactly how to use certain key words or phrases and spin things exactly how they want people to hear them. Nevermind that what they say might be a half-truth or completely false. The Republican party has become the masters of political talk. And to be fair, the Democrats are starting to finally establish their own brand of political jargon, but Republicans have a big advantage from learning how to twist and manipulate political speak for decades.

Regardless, what you've pointed out is so very true. There does seem to be more and more hate-speak coming from the Republican camp than any real substance. And using venues like CPAC to foster such hatred insntead of focusing in on the issues this country truly needs to have addressed doesn't do their party much good at all.
Click to expand...




Example?


:lol:
 
Well, let's use the idea of Socialism. It's a word and ideaology Conservatives use to strike fear into the American people. But what many people are starting to learn is that there have been aspects of Socialism in the country for years, i.e., Medicare, the Railroad Retirement System, the VA, even the U.S. Postal Service. But many people (particularly those who oppose Pres. Obama) actually believe that he's really trying to impose Socialism on this country on a massive scale and there's just no proof to that whatsoever.

Conservatives keep spouting off how the Obama Administration is trying to take away rights from the people, but what law/bill has he signed that does that? If anything, he has signed laws that help the American people gain better consumer protection for themselves, thus giving them a stronger voice, i.e., the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act, 2009, as one example.

I see no evidence of the types of things the opposition claims this President is doing on such a grand scale that warrants the levels of fear Republicans/Conservatives are aspousing to. IMO, it's a shame they'd stoop to such levels that do nothing except divide this country more and more.
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
Well, let's use the idea of Socialism. It's a word and ideaology Conservatives use to strike fear into the American people. But what many people are starting to learn is that there have been aspects of Socialism in the country for years, i.e., Medicare, the Railroad Retirement System, the VA, even the U.S. Postal Service. But many people (particularly those who oppose Pres. Obama) actually believe that he's really trying to impose Socialism on this country on a massive scale and there's just no proof to that whatsoever.

Conservatives keep spouting off how the Obama Administration is trying to take away rights from the people, but what law/bill has he signed that does that? If anything, he has signed laws that help the American people gain better consumer protection for themselves, thus giving them a stronger voice, i.e., the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act, 2009, as one example.

I see no evidence of the types of things the opposition claims this President is doing on such a grand scale that warrants the levels of fear Republicans/Conservatives are aspousing to. IMO, it's a shame they'd stoop to such levels that do nothing except divide this country more and more.
Click to expand...

What do you call the massive spending Obama is doing when he took over GM/Chrysler, created a Pay Czar, and funded a stimulus program that stimulated nothing other than the growth of govt. and unions.

All these put us closer to socialism and govt. control including redistribution of wealth.

Specific Provisions

$180 billion to states to expand unemployment benefitsWSJ.com: Partisan Rancor Seeps Into Talks on Stimulus Plan (January 24, 2009)6

Upgrade 10,000 schoolsMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Make federal buildings more energy efficientMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Triple undergraduate and graduate science fellowshipsMSNBC.com: Obama:

Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Shift to electronic medical recordsMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Invest in preventative health careMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

Add 3,000 miles of electrical linesMSNBC.com: Obama: Stimulus plan means lower power bills (January 24, 2009)5

One-time $300 payment to senior citizensWSJ.com: Partisan Rancor Seeps Into Talks on Stimulus Plan (January 24, 2009)6

$8 billion investment in high-speed rail, to put people to work improving tracks, crossing and signal repairNew York Times: Slice of Stimulus Package Will Go to Faster Trains (February 20, 2009)11

$2 billion for energy department projectsSeattle Times: Stimulus package to create 4,400 jobs at Hanford (February 20, 2009)12
 
danarhea said:
O’Reilly tells conservatives to stop ‘bashing’ Obama: ‘Does Obama bashing accomplish anything?’




And you know what? O'Reilly is absolutely right. Americans don't want to hear how Obama is an illegal alien, or a Nazi, or a Socialist, or how he makes baby Jesus cry. They want to know how his programs are going to impact their bottom lines. But, the message of Obama's spending binge is being drowned out by the crazy and silly.

O'Reilly has a very good point, and it would behoove Republicans to listen to it, for their own good. Let's stop this silliness, and start getting real and honest.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

O'Reilly is absolutely correct. Ranting on about how Obama is a Nazi, a Marxist, an illegal alien, and so on just detracts from the issue of growth of government spending and that trillion plus deficit. Such outlandish claims just make Obama's opponents look silly.


No doubt the mainstream conservatives will address the issues and leave the far out nonsense alone, but there are those out there who will continue to rant and rave and make the rest look bad. Meanwhile, the government just keeps getting bigger and more expensive.
 
bicycleman said:
I guess you like him because he seems to lean toward the left. Now, he didn't do that when Bush was President, but since Obama is in office, and there is talk of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, then now he is all of a sudden changing his political stance. Don't trust anybody like that.
Click to expand...

Another wing-nut conspiracy theorist.

The left isn't abolishing talk radio, taking your guns, your bible or forcing your child to watch gay porn at school. Who really falls for this stuff? You?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Gone, he never left.


He's anti-gun, environmentalist, pro-choice, and anti-death penalty.....
Click to expand...

Rev, I don't know if any of this is true.

O'Reilly went after Tiller, which would lead me to believe he's not pro-choice.

He routinely makes fun of environmentalists and rips on cap-and-trade constantly.

I have never heard him say anything about gun control.

If he's anti-death penalty, I would be shocked. Although if he is, I would say he's in the "natural life" Catholic category, which would mean he is pro-life.

I'll need to see some evidence to substatiate these claims.

I can't believe you guys think O'Reilly is liberal. His guest host is Laura Ingraham and his two "regulars" are Dick Morris and Karl Rove. Really?
 
kansaswhig said:
Rev, I don't know if any of this is true.

O'Reilly went after Tiller, which would lead me to believe he's not pro-choice.

He routinely makes fun of environmentalists and rips on cap-and-trade constantly.

I have never heard him say anything about gun control.

If he's anti-death penalty, I would be shocked. Although if he is, I would say he's in the "natural life" Catholic category, which would mean he is pro-life.

I'll need to see some evidence to substatiate these claims.

I can't believe you guys think O'Reilly is liberal. His guest host is Laura Ingraham and his two "regulars" are Dick Morris and Karl Rove. Really?
Click to expand...

This post illustrates another problem with the conservative movement. What, exactly, do environmentalism, gun control, abortion, and the death penalty have in common? What does it have to do with the unbridled growth of big government?

We need to focus our attention on what really matters, and what matters is the out of control spending in Washington. Unless we can somehow begin to get that under control, it won't matter much whether the death penalty is an option or not.
 
Dittohead not! said:
This post illustrates another problem with the conservative movement. What, exactly, do environmentalism, gun control, abortion, and the death penalty have in common? What does it have to do with the unbridled growth of big government?

We need to focus our attention on what really matters, and what matters is the out of control spending in Washington. Unless we can somehow begin to get that under control, it won't matter much whether the death penalty is an option or not.
Click to expand...

I agree, those are issues that those with little understanding of politics get focused on as some sort of "test" of loyalty.

That's the problem I have with parties in general. If you can't check every block then you are invalidated as a candidate. So stupid.
 
kansaswhig said:
Rev, I don't know if any of this is true.

O'Reilly went after Tiller, which would lead me to believe he's not pro-choice.

He routinely makes fun of environmentalists and rips on cap-and-trade constantly.

I have never heard him say anything about gun control.

If he's anti-death penalty, I would be shocked. Although if he is, I would say he's in the "natural life" Catholic category, which would mean he is pro-life.

I'll need to see some evidence to substatiate these claims.

I can't believe you guys think O'Reilly is liberal. His guest host is Laura Ingraham and his two "regulars" are Dick Morris and Karl Rove. Really?
Click to expand...


Prepare to be shocked.

Work or die
 
kansaswhig said:
Rev, I don't know if any of this is true.

O'Reilly went after Tiller, which would lead me to believe he's not pro-choice.

He routinely makes fun of environmentalists and rips on cap-and-trade constantly.

I have never heard him say anything about gun control.

If he's anti-death penalty, I would be shocked. Although if he is, I would say he's in the "natural life" Catholic category, which would mean he is pro-life.

I'll need to see some evidence to substatiate these claims.

I can't believe you guys think O'Reilly is liberal. His guest host is Laura Ingraham and his two "regulars" are Dick Morris and Karl Rove. Really?
Click to expand...





I've heard him spout many liberal things. the gun thing was a big one.



I don't think hes a "liberal", he's very "center".... and a little left
 
Conservative said:
What do you call the massive spending Obama is doing when he took over GM/Chrysler, created a Pay Czar, and funded a stimulus program that stimulated nothing other than the growth of govt. and unions.

All these put us closer to socialism and govt. control including redistribution of wealth.
Click to expand...

See, now all you've done is rehash/cut-n-paste alot of talking points we've all seen over a dozen times before that really don't provide concrete evidence of a government takeover of anything. It's been a while since I've looked into the GM issue, but as I understand the governments take on it they "own" a majority stake in bonds, not stock options. So, while it may have a "strong voice" in what this auto giant does, it clearly doesn't own it. About the only thing the government has in this matter is a seat on the Board of Directors. And while I understand the concern here, I think it's blown way out of proportion.

As to the ARRA, it's a 2-year program that did nothing to "control" any level of state-government as so many have wrongfully claimed. If you're shelling out millions of tax payer dollars, shouldn't the government be allowed to oversee who gets the money, how it is spent and police it to ensure it's being used for the exact expressed purposes it was intended for? Okay, granted, the Obama Admin could have done a much better job of tracking the funds, etc., etc., but I don't blame them for putting so many controls on it. If they hadn't you guys would really be on his butt for being even more "irresponsible". :roll: As to your claim of the ARRA growing government, it did nothing of the sort. If anything, it allowed those state and federal employees to remain on their jobs OR allowed state/federal agencies to hire temp/contract workers to get some tasks done. But no new branch of government has been created under the ARRA. False claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom