T Nation

Moore v. O'Reilly

Anyone see the interview last night?

Moore is an idiot both on film and in interviews.

O’Reilly needs to learn how to think on his feet and not get flustered.

Rainjack,

I saw most of it.

I’v never been a huge fan of O’Reilly, and I expected that he’d have done more homework to press Moore.

Moore was exceptionally weak and was primed for someone to shred him. O’Reilly missed an opportunity to force Moore into addressing his material and statements.

Honestly, I think O’Reilly just wanted to get Moore on his show to create some buzz - but didn’t want to really go after him. Shame.

Although, if O’Reilly had been prepared to push really hard, Moore probably would have walked off the set. When Moore is pressed to defend himself verbally and extemporaneously, he is pathetic.

All in all, rather disappointing. I’d rather see Moore take on other various challengers like Christopher Hitchens, who have offered numerous times to take Moore on.

I give Moore one thing - he’s savvy enough not to get into a debate with a real heavyweight.

I thought it was interesting to see Moore still say Bush lied after all of the investigations (9/11 commission, Senate Intelligence Committee and Lord Byron British Intelligence) say that he didn’t.

There are people on that 9/11 commission that absolutely dislike everything about Bush, but they can’t say that he lied.

I tend to believe three seperate non-partisan investigations over Moore.

I look at it like this. If I hired a couple of private investigators to go out and see if my wife was cheating on me and all three came back and said yes, would you believe them or would you ignore them and leave it alone?

What do you all think?

Here’s the transcript (partial, and edited for clarity according to the Fox website) – decide for yourselves:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.html

The other night my wife and I went to dinner with another couple. He’s a very conservative attorney. She’s a very liberal insurance agent.

The conversation on the way home from dinner (about a 90 mile drive)consisted of her lashing out against my friend and me over our politics.

She had no logical support for any of her accusations, and when confronted with logical proof dispelling her beliefs, launched a defense almost exactly like that of Moore’s last night.

I’m coming to the conclusion that many liberals, in the absence of logic, resort to the most emotional, vitriolic, and personal of attacks.

Of course, it could have been the vodka.

As O’Reilly correctly pointed out Moore is an idealogue and no matter how rational the argument they will never change their mind.

Unfortunately this describes the majority of the Democratic party leadership. My guess is that Moore’s asssociation with the democrats will cost them 3-4% of the elcorate.

The issue about “sending your kid to die in Fallujah” was weak and silly. Children are not chatell property in our society. We don’t send them anywhere. If my son felt strongly about joing the military and defending the country he would have my blessing. But hey he is only 10.

O’Reily has a .45 caliber mouth but only a .22 brain. He is little more than a reactionary with some conservative core principles owing mainly to his Catholic upbringing and work/tax experience. If you thought that interview was bad, you should have seen the one he did with Cornell West a year or so ago. West (the Ivy league prof. who looks like Buckwheat) has little formal education (he was awarded honorary degrees to teach), writes books as full of lies and nutty conspiracy theories as Moore, records the occasional hip hop album and grants all of his students who don’t challenge his nut ball anti-Americanism A’s. He requires only one paper from them and doesn’t even require they attend class (he seldom does either - he has teaching assistants). The Board of Regents got fed up when he wished our troops to die by the millions in Afghanistan, and tried to fire him. O’Reilly gave him a softball interview, knew nothing about him and granted him enough legitimacy to keep his job. So, this blatantly anti-Semitic and anti-American propagandist is still indoctrinating the “best and brightest”. The real best and brightest are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are the heroes who sacrifice all so that narcissists like us can piss away our time on the internet and spend our energies in the gym as opposed to fighting for our own lives and freedoms. O’Reily should be bitch slapped and Moore and West should be tried for treason or sedition as the case may be. No one questions their right to say stupid things, but Hezbollah has agreed to distribute Moore’s film in the Mid - East. Hezbollah was the Islamic terrorist group responsible for the greatest number of American casualties pre-9/11. They will use Moore to recruit terrorists to kill us. Moore knows this and is glad to help - that is treason!

Rainjack,

Never underestimate the vodka.

But that brings up a good point.

I’ve been waiting on reasonable, committed liberals to denounce Moore. After all, one can admit that all the conspiracies and dubious claims of sinister deceit for the sake of imperalism are absolute nonsense and still be against Bush, his policies, and the war. No one has to turn in their liberal identification card to say that clowns like Moore act in bad faith and hurt their cause.

After all, if all the horseshit Moore peddles against Bush is iron-clad ‘slam-dunk’ evidence as he and his sycophants suggest, then why is no one at the Democratic National Convention bothering to use it? Why is everyone at the DNC wanting to have a policy-debate instead of a public indictment of Bush?

The answer we all know - independent voters aren’tr buying what the Left wing is selling, and if Dems want to win they better at least talk it, even though they don’t walk it.

Anyone who trusts Moore - and I mean this in a non-partisan way, seriously - is a fool.

I think whenever you have someone who is so partisan no matter what the facts state, they are going to disagree. That’s one reason that I did not see Moores movie. From what I have heard I missed nothing.

Some of the debate on this forum gets just as silly as Moores film apparently is. Facts mean nothing to the staunch partisans.

You understand with your head, but you hate with your heart! When your heart is so full of hate facts to the contrary mean very little.

[quote]conservativejud wrote:
(he was awarded honorary degrees to teach)[/quote]

Sounds like a good racket. Wish I was dishonest enough to get in on it.

Not really. Treason is a direct action against the country. Moore is only acting indirectly, by disseminating information – which is his right under the first amendment, even if that information is untrue.

I like Michael Moore, as an entertainer. He’s funny. He’s a decent writer, and he asks questions that should get us to think very long and hard about who we are and what the hell we are doing. Then he answers them with big loads of bullshit, which is still funny, but bullshit is bullshit.

Because unlike Team Bush, the Dems want to run a positive campaign based on their ideas and their record. Bush is going negative because his record stinks and he only has one idea… tax cuts.

Looks to me like O’Reilly was bested. Surprised? Moore is a smart guy and O’Reilly is a tool and mostly swagger. O’Reilly claimed that he’d be willing to sacrifice his own life, in order to quiet the Fallujah uprising… what a load of bullshit!!

This seems to be an unedited copy of the transcript:
http://www.drudgereportArchives.com/data/2004/07/28/20040728_004802_dnc4.htm

The claim that “Bush didn’t lie” because he was simply repeating false information is a weak excuse. The UN weapons inspectors were there in Iraq, on the ground, and they knew the score better than anyone. Bush CHOSE to ignore the information from Hans Blix, Scott Ritter and other experts on the ground in Iraq, because it didn’t conform to Team Bush’s preconceived desire to attack. Anything that didn’t conform to that narrow viewpoint was ignored.

Kind of like how Bush’s many excuses for his poor leadership conforms to a preconceived desire that Bush is an ethical leader. Anything that doesn’t conform to that narrow viewpoint is ignored.

Thunder -

I agree. There seems to be some sort of bait and switch going on at this year’s DNC.

Kennedy, Dean, both Clintons, Mrs. Kerry - all of them in a major league move to the quiter, gentler side of the party.

It’s almost scary. What do you believe? The rhetoric? The voting records? The propaganda leading up to the convention?

I find it very telling that they refused to let Moore speak at the convention this year, yet gave him box seats right next to Carter Monday night.

When will the Republicans call attention to the 500 pound gorilla in the living room?

Lumpy,

You always wind up bringing a knife to a gunfight.

“Because unlike Team Bush, the Dems want to run a positive campaign based on their ideas and their record. Bush is going negative because his record stinks and he only has one idea… tax cuts.”

Dems want to run a positive campaign not because they suddenly have become moderates, but because they are trying to court votes of independent voters. They can’t do that if they apply the loony Leftism that has been playing as the major plank of Democratic politics up to this Convention.

But yes, the Dems definitely want to clean up the Bush-hating act, but it’s not a true representation of where the party is right now.

Despite your usual unsubstantiated claim of Bush’s poor record, there are quite a few things for the GOP to tout. Economic recovery, impact on terror, Medicare expansion, spending on AIDS, and Campaign Finance Reform.

“Looks to me like O’Reilly was bested.”

Well, you obviously didn’t see the interview. O’Reilly was flat and predictable, but Moore is a horrible speaker and is not articulate.

“Surprised? Moore is a smart guy and O’Reilly is a tool and mostly swagger.”

I agree on O’Reilly, but Moore is not clever or sharp. It’s no surprise Moore won’t step on stage with a guy like Chris Hitchens - he’s plum overmatched.

“O’Reilly claimed that he’d be willing to sacrifice his own life, in order to quiet the Fallujah uprising… what a load of bullshit!!”

I don’t doubt O’Reilly would serve his country if we needed him. I doubt Moore would serve if asked, but he’d never be asked - I think you have to be able to do a pushup.

“The claim that “Bush didn’t lie” because he was simply repeating false information is a weak excuse.”

This has been refuted - easily - ad nauseum, but you just can’t bring yourself to absorbing reason. Everything from the 9/11 commission stating that there was no willful manipulation to foreign intelligence from Russia and the UK backing the same claims that the US had, there is no evidence of lying.

And, John Kerry, a veteran of intelligence commitees throughout his service in the Senate who had access to the same data as Bush’s executive agencies, came to the same conclusions as Bush. As did vice-presidential hopeful John Edwards, who co-sponsored the bill authorizing war.

So, if Bush ‘lied’, then why did his political opponents ‘lie’ too? What did they have to gain? Edwards was on Hardball during the Democratic nomination telling Chris Matthews he’d go it alone in Iraq if hew were put in Bush’s position.

Your claim of ‘Bush lied!’ has become nothing more than a hollow, shrill cry of Chicken Little proportions. It’s empty, it’s impotent, and it’s over.

There is nothing more sad than seeing someone clinging to a dead idea so desperately, having gambled all their political capital on it.

“Kind of like how Bush’s many excuses for his poor leadership conforms to a preconceived desire that Bush is an ethical leader. Anything that doesn’t conform to that narrow viewpoint is ignored.”

Bush is a rather moral leader, and he can be rather stubborn, and thankfully so. This moral relativism you hope for, this situational morality approach you whine for is no way to make decisions on war and peace, especially at the highest level. What you suggest, Lumpy, is nothing short of nihilism.

No thanks.

Oh, bullshit.

http://blog.johnkerry.com/ says:

“The Bush-Cheney campaign is running one of the most negative and misleading campaigns ever.”

How is that not a negative statement?

Furthermore, when you go look at Kerry’s national security plan (which was selected because it was the top item on his agenda – http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/ for those of you following along), he’s got some nice boring and meaningless phrases:

“Launch And Lead A New Era Of Alliances”

“Modernize The World’s Most Powerful Military To Meet New Threats”

“Deploy All That Is In America’s Arsenal”

“Free America From Its Dangerous Dependence On Mideast Oil”

And what does all of that mean?

Well, first, we’ll ally ourselves with some other countries. Then we’ll upgrade and mobilise our military. And then we’ll use every last bit of that military might to accomplish our goals… and the MAJOR goal, of course, is to do something about the middle east.

Hey! That sounds pretty familiar!

Rainjack,

I’ve said for a couple of years now the Democratic Party must resist the tractor beam from the Far Left of the Party. I believe in a strong Democratic Party - it’s good for the country - but there is a difference between ‘doing it’ and ‘being it’.

Right now, the attitude is ‘do it’ - moderate for the sake of it while on camera. It’s not genuine - it’s an act to court the independent vote.

They need to ‘be it’ and actually believe in left-of-center politics.

It’s going to be a damn close election, in my view - anyone who says their man is surely going to win and they know it is a liar and a fool. I think it’s going to be tight.

But that being said, I think Moore’s presence hurts the Dems and the GOP will exploit it. Let’s face it, it’s hard to act moderate and centrist when you’ve got a left-wing radical in your back pocket and his popcorn propaganda has been the symbol for your campaign up till the Convention started.

Can’t be a moderate when you’re in bed with radicals.

Btw, ‘500 pound gorilla’ - loved it. The mother of all puns.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I find it very telling that they refused to let Moore speak at the convention this year, yet gave him box seats right next to Carter Monday night.
[/quote]

Umm has Moore EVER given a speech at a convention? Please let me know.

As far as bait and switch, wait until the GOP convention, when politicians who don’t even agree with the basic GOP platform, are the keynote speakers. (Giuliani and Shwarzenegger are both pro-choice and pro-gay rights). They should really have Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, and Ann Coulter speak (maybe Rick Santorum will speak on how God Hates Gays?). These are the real Bush Republicans.

Maybe they can bring out Pat Buchanon, to talk about America’s Culture War again, since that was such a big hit last time? Since Nancy Reagan will snub appearing at the GOP convention, there seems to be a spot open.

Moore has an explicit agreement to work with an enemy of the United States in the War on Terror. He is giving aid and comfort to the enemy by helping them recruit and by spreading their propaganda. All in all, not much different than what Benedict Arnold did, at least in spirit. He should be hanged.

BTW: Moore (aka Dr. Goebbels) insisted that the debate with O’Reilly not be edited. Moore knows, more than anyone, how to make someone look like a jackass with skillful editing.

[quote]Lumpy wrote:
As far as bait and switch, wait until the GOP convention, when politicians who don’t even agree with the basic GOP platform, are the keynote speakers. (Giuliani and Shwarzenegger are both pro-choice and pro-gay rights). They should really have Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, and Ann Coulter speak (maybe Rick Santorum will speak on how God Hates Gays?). These are the real Bush Republicans.

Maybe they can bring out Pat Buchanon, to talk about America’s Culture War again, since that was such a big hit last time? Since Nancy Reagan will snub appearing at the GOP convention, there seems to be a spot open.[/quote]

Since when did you become an expert on the Republican platform?

Moore has been courted by EVERYONE on the left. They invited him to the convention. Dean and Moore had a love-fest yesterday, yet they want him to be quiet when the cameras are rolling.

But why am I even wasting my time trying to dicuss this with you? Sadly, your ideologically challenged mind is already made up.

Hello friends,

I’ve watched some of the Democratic Convention. The rhetoric is unbelievable. Ted Kennedy talking about anything is a disgrace. Jimmy Carter chiding anyone on foreign/domestic policy is a joke. Clinton talking about “strength” brings me back to the “Wag the Dog” days. Remember the aspirin factory in Sudan?

I’m having fun watching Kerry and company try to sound “moderate.”

Democrats are the party of smoke and mirrors. Sounds like Lumpy is inhaling all of it.

See you in November!!!

JeffR