anyone have this oreilly NPR thing thats not in streaming format?

[PatboyX]

or a link or something?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

? what thing?

CkG

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
? what thing?

CkG

he mentioned them being unfair or rude or something to him at the end of his show. then said it would be on his radio factor tomorrow or you could just listen to it online. but his website is super slow and im sure the file is HUGE

 

[SViscusi]

I remember he originally got his panties in a twist when they wouldn't review his first book. The guy just has a huge chip on his shoulder.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: SViscusi
I remember he originally got his panties in a twist when they wouldn't review his first book. The guy just has a huge chip on his shoulder.

which guy? oreilly or the fresh air dude?
i listen to NPR a lot while driving around at work but i dont really hear fresh air very much. judging by what i have heard and the shows around it, i find it hard to believe they really rallied against bill the way he suggested it...but...i would like to hear exactly what happened.
and his site is STILL loading.

good god!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: SViscusi
I remember he originally got his panties in a twist when they wouldn't review his first book. The guy just has a huge chip on his shoulder.

which guy? oreilly or the fresh air dude?
i listen to NPR a lot while driving around at work but i dont really hear fresh air very much. judging by what i have heard and the shows around it, i find it hard to believe they really rallied against bill the way he suggested it...but...i would like to hear exactly what happened.
and his site is STILL loading.

good god!

Billoreilly.com? It doesn't load for me at all. Something is borked.

CkG

 

[SViscusi]

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: SViscusi
I remember he originally got his panties in a twist when they wouldn't review his first book. The guy just has a huge chip on his shoulder.

which guy? oreilly or the fresh air dude?
i listen to NPR a lot while driving around at work but i dont really hear fresh air very much. judging by what i have heard and the shows around it, i find it hard to believe they really rallied against bill the way he suggested it...but...i would like to hear exactly what happened.
and his site is STILL loading.

good god!

It was O'reilly who got his panties in a bunch, I should have been more clear.

 

[PatboyX]

It was O'reilly who got his panties in a bunch, I should have been more clear.

thats what i assumed but, by the way he was talking, i didnt really know what happened (and i still dont) did anyone hear it? does the site work for anyone?

 

[PatboyX]

just started getting it working...seems like the start of the download is not the start of the interview...ill see if NPR has it up.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This isnt about Franken is it?

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
This isnt about Franken is it?

well, apparently he is brought up in the beginning. but its a 6 minute clip supposedly from today that all i can hear is the first 30 seconds.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

this sucks - i hear 3 seconds of talking and then have to wait 30 seconds for it to rebuffer

He needs a better webhost

CkG

 

[PatboyX]

well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

Yeah - the previous conversation might have helped - as it sits, he sounds overly defensive. He's got a point about the soundbites for the harpers though

CkG

 

[0roo0roo]

7pm tommorow. http://www.kqed.org/radio/daily-schedule.jsp?Month=10&Date=8&Year=2003&Format=long atleat n the bay area

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

"threw a tantrum"?
He got the host to admit that she is bias for Frankin and was out to get Oreilly. He never raised his voice.
The irony is she proved what oreilly's new book is about: who's looking out for you?: The host was looking out for Frankin--not fair and balenced reporting AKA THE PUBLIC/VIEWERS.

The host said Frankins book was satire--even though it is political mud slinging--and Oreilly's book is a how to book on how to help you determine if someone is trying to Fuq you over. Which deserves to have more critisim? According to the "non-bias" NPR host Oreilly needs to be critized more. If you're a liberal you can name call and slander people and NPR gives you a free ride. If you're not a liberal, then everything you say should be critized.

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

NOTE: Mudslinging is mudslinging, Frankin is a mudslinger. So it that annoying Rep blonde (dont know her name off the top of my head--but the one who wrote Slander) I can admit that ever though im a republican, why can't you admit that Frankin is a mudslinger and once you realize that, listen to the NPR-Oreilly interview again and you will see the truth--NPR=bias against non-liberals and Oreilly proved it on NPR. (If i was the host, I'd feel like an idiot.)

 

[kaizersose]

is there a transcript of this radio show anywhere? i checked the npr link above but it was just a schedule.

 

[smashp]

Oreiley is a blowhard that cant handle not controlling a situation. He isn't a debater, or out for intelligent discourse, but only Out for Him as the title of his book states. He yells louder and louder until the other person just says "Screw this".

He is a classic bully propagator.

 

[0roo0roo]

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

bull, the book is a satire, have you read it?

and soft on franklin? the fact is, franklin tore oreilly to shreds, and oreilly couldn't do anything but cling to his lies. oreilly has never refuted franklin, or appologized for his inaccuracies

when you've been discredited, and hold yourself up as a beacon of truth and fairness, yet are a hipocrite, of course a person is going to question you more harshly, if you pretend to hold yourself up to a higher standard, you should expect to be held up to the same standard. esp if you've wallowed in your lies.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Originally posted by: PatboyX
well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

"threw a tantrum"?
He got the host to admit that she is bias for Frankin and was out to get Oreilly. He never raised his voice.
The irony is she proved what oreilly's new book is about: who's looking out for you?: The host was looking out for Frankin--not fair and balenced reporting AKA THE PUBLIC/VIEWERS.

The host said Frankins book was satire--even though it is political mud slinging--and Oreilly's book is a how to book on how to help you determine if someone is trying to Fuq you over. Which deserves to have more critisim? According to the "non-bias" NPR host Oreilly needs to be critized more. If you're a liberal you can name call and slander people and NPR gives you a free ride. If you're not a liberal, then everything you say should be critized.

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

NOTE: Mudslinging is mudslinging, Frankin is a mudslinger. So it that annoying Rep blonde (dont know her name off the top of my head--but the one who wrote Slander) I can admit that ever though im a republican, why can't you admit that Frankin is a mudslinger and once you realize that, listen to the NPR-Oreilly interview again and you will see the truth--NPR=bias against non-liberals and Oreilly proved it on NPR. (If i was the host, I'd feel like an idiot.)

Hey Big jelly,

By your post i can see your one of those sheepist types that only has an origional thought when your told to do so. I know EVERY possible responce youve been brainwashed to provide as "Argument" or "Discussion" so dont bother and go tune in for your daily obedience lesson.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

bull, the book is a satire, have you read it?

and soft on franklin? the fact is, franklin tore oreilly to shreds, and oreilly couldn't do anything but cling to his lies. oreilly has never refuted franklin, or appologized for his inaccuracies

when you've been discredited, of course a person is going to question you seemingly more harshly, esp if you've wallowed in your lies.

Right on, The book was Pure Satire.

Although

If their wasnt truth interwoven with the Satire, The Right wouldnt feel threatened by Franken.

But The Said part is alot of the book is true, And the truth doesnt Lie.

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Originally posted by: PatboyX
well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

"threw a tantrum"?
He got the host to admit that she is bias for Frankin and was out to get Oreilly. He never raised his voice.
The irony is she proved what oreilly's new book is about: who's looking out for you?: The host was looking out for Frankin--not fair and balenced reporting AKA THE PUBLIC/VIEWERS.

The host said Frankins book was satire--even though it is political mud slinging--and Oreilly's book is a how to book on how to help you determine if someone is trying to Fuq you over. Which deserves to have more critisim? According to the "non-bias" NPR host Oreilly needs to be critized more. If you're a liberal you can name call and slander people and NPR gives you a free ride. If you're not a liberal, then everything you say should be critized.

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

NOTE: Mudslinging is mudslinging, Frankin is a mudslinger. So it that annoying Rep blonde (dont know her name off the top of my head--but the one who wrote Slander) I can admit that ever though im a republican, why can't you admit that Frankin is a mudslinger and once you realize that, listen to the NPR-Oreilly interview again and you will see the truth--NPR=bias against non-liberals and Oreilly proved it on NPR. (If i was the host, I'd feel like an idiot.)

Hey Big jelly,

By your post i can see your one of those sheepist types that only has an origional thought when your told to do so. I know EVERY possible responce youve been brainwashed to provide as "Argument" or "Discussion" so dont bother and go tune in for your daily obedience lesson.

and you're one of those brainwashed to respond to some by calling them brainwashed instead of proving where i am wrong--when you can't prove them wrong

 

[0roo0roo]

ok, big jelly, explain oreily's behavior when caught in a lie about his journalism awards, explain his lying about his lies on the journalism awards. explain why he'd LIE ABOUT JOURNALISM AWARDS. explain his lies about his upbringing. explain why he holds others to a high standards, yet holds himself to no standards and is outraged when others hold him to such standards.

 

[smashp]

NPR is a balanced show that focuses just as much on global social issues, politics, news, and current events as much as they focus on things of importance in the LOCAL community. That is balance. Yes, they have commentators and hosts that lean to eacch side of the spectrum. The Oreiley interview, which i have listened on, is another case of Oreiley filing to admit he made a fib, or fibs. Franken called him out to be a man and own up to his "Journalistic Mistakes". But In Oreileys mind, he is always right. He buys his Own Bullsh!t. Franken Book is Political Satire and is commenting on the Political Group in power right now and used their Own Words and ideologs against them. It painst them as Hypocrits as a whole ( Which isnt difficult) and shows errors in their logic. the book is satirical in the pure sence that it is written in the style of Those conservative bestsellers such as Bias, slander, and Hannities crap but in a comical nature with humor as the weapon.

Oreiley is upset mainly because franken made fun at his attempt of a Fiction novel and repeated the paragragh that oreiley worte Which goes against the core of Some of Blowhard Bills supposed beliefs.

Face It Bill Oreiley is a propagation tool, meant to draw in watchers on Fox at the Pretence that he is a Independent. After his show you are assalted By Hannity and his views which ironically (Purposely of course) are the same as the So called independent. This is a very very effective method of Brainwashing the non alert viewer.



Also I find it Ironic that The Reich, I mean right ONLY way to answer questions that are hard regarding statements is to paint them as Bias.

According to their logic, Anyone That opposes their Beliefs is Bias.

That alone makes THEM Bias.

Its a deflectionary method that gets them out of telling the truth or answering questions.

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Originally posted by: PatboyX
well, listened to it. he pretty much threw a tantrum. wish i got to hear the other moments from before the clip he posted.

edit:
i think he would have looked better if he played what had gone on before. as it stands, it looks like the host had a point to make by reading a comment and then he just jumped down her throat. also i noticed that she really didnt get to talk too much...so...i feel like he talked himself into a state and then just left.

"threw a tantrum"?
He got the host to admit that she is bias for Frankin and was out to get Oreilly. He never raised his voice.
The irony is she proved what oreilly's new book is about: who's looking out for you?: The host was looking out for Frankin--not fair and balenced reporting AKA THE PUBLIC/VIEWERS.

The host said Frankins book was satire--even though it is political mud slinging--and Oreilly's book is a how to book on how to help you determine if someone is trying to Fuq you over. Which deserves to have more critisim? According to the "non-bias" NPR host Oreilly needs to be critized more. If you're a liberal you can name call and slander people and NPR gives you a free ride. If you're not a liberal, then everything you say should be critized.

Conclusion, Oreilly and the NPR host battled with wits and the smartest person won--Oreilly. For those who don't believe that, listen to what Oreilly got the host to admit:
1.) she was soft on Frankin
2.) she called frankin's book satire , but its obvious to a non-bias person it is political mudslinging
3.) she admitted she treated Oreilly differently (much more harshly)
Therefore, Oreilly proved she was bias and therefore not looking out for you, the viewers, or fair and balenced reporting.

NOTE: Mudslinging is mudslinging, Frankin is a mudslinger. So it that annoying Rep blonde (dont know her name off the top of my head--but the one who wrote Slander) I can admit that ever though im a republican, why can't you admit that Frankin is a mudslinger and once you realize that, listen to the NPR-Oreilly interview again and you will see the truth--NPR=bias against non-liberals and Oreilly proved it on NPR. (If i was the host, I'd feel like an idiot.)

Just like to point out that NOONE has proven me wrong with requards to what Orielly got the woman to disprove. Or proven that Frakin is a mud slinger and when you take that into effect; OReilly makes strong and vaild arguments. And untill they do they are spinning and dodging the question. Like Oreilly pointed out instead of discussing the interview they are discussing Oreilly's character and this is suppost to be a post on the interview. (NOTE THE PERIOD)

I will record this; however, i dont have my own website to share this; if someone tells me how to host it, i will host the interview.