Dick Morris and Bill O'reilly to discuss Ron Paul's media coverage tonight

[Eric21ND]

Oreilly isn't stupid. Inviting Ron on and then atttacking him will only provoke the likes of Jon Stewart to respond. However, if Ron doesn't have a good explanation i.e. a press release, or some venue to explain his decision not to go on Oreilly, then he's on his own.

It will be interesting to see how the campaign, who has been riding the "media ignores Ron" wagon, handles this.

O'Reilly isn't very bright or well-read either, he's beyond reasoning with. His "interviews" are nothing but tirades.

We've seen it before. O'Reilly won't even allow Ron to finish a sentence. O'Reilly and the rest of the die hard interventionists think history started on 2001 or maybe 1979. They talk over Ron when he brings up our CIA involvement in 1953. Can you honestly say this won us votes in the GOP primary?

 

[Deborah K]

Maybe the grassroots could preemptively create a two or three minute video similar to the daily show video exposing bill using clips from the last interview and other things he's said over the years? We could easily spread that at the same time people would be researching ron because of this piece.

I nominate you to head it up! do it do it do it do it!

 

[Deborah K]

O'Reilly isn't very bright or well-read either, he's beyond reasoning with. His "interviews" are nothing but tirades.

We've seen it before. O'Reilly won't even allow Ron to finish a sentence. O'Reilly and the rest of the die hard interventionists think history started on 2001 or maybe 1979. They talk over Ron when he brings up our CIA involvement in 1953. Can you honestly say this won us votes in the GOP primary?

Times have changed since that interview. Ron has garnered much more interest and respect. Oreilly would be a fool to invite him on and then attack him. HOWEVER....Ron is fair game if he was invited and then didn't show up, and doesn't explain it. I don't care if his reason is because he doesn't like Oreilly's interviewing style, he has the right to snubb whomever he wants. I just want to hear him say it, especially in light of the fact that Oreilly's doing a segment on it.

 

[Eric21ND]

Like any of you wouldn't be scared to enter the No Spin Zone. I'm happy he's not going on the show, actually. Not many ever got out of there and lived to tell about it.

It's not about being "scared". There's no substantive debate to be had. Plus we're doing well without appearing on there so why go? I'd rather see Ron on sunday morning shows without a time sensitive format where he can express his ideas. One of the first rules of warfare is to choose the terrain where you pick your battles.

 

[Oddone]

Times have changed since that interview. Ron has garnered much more interest and respect. Oreilly would be a fool to invite him on and then attack him. HOWEVER....Ron is fair game if he was invited and then didn't show up, and doesn't explain it. I don't care if his reason is because he doesn't like Oreilly's interviewing style, he has the right to snubb whomever he wants. I just want to hear him say it, especially in light of the fact that Oreilly's doing a segment on it.

Times or not O'reilly hasn't changed.

 

[specsaregood]

Like any of you wouldn't be scared to enter the No Spin Zone. I'm happy he's not going on the show, actually. Not many ever got out of there and lived to tell about it.

Dr. Paul has proven he isn't scared of hostile formats; perhaps to his detriment. What is now proving is he isn't into wasting his time with people not interested in history lessons.

 

[Romulus]

Why would anyone want to even legitimize that show? Bill's just pissed 'cause Ron blew him off, and he should. BO is irrelevant and should be treated as such. No neocon viewers are going to magically converted by going on that show... lets get real.

And doesn't anyone thing Ron should go on Rachael Maddow? We learned that lesson from Rand already, not to go on these partisan hit piece traps.

 

[Eric21ND]

Times have changed since that interview. Ron has garnered much more interest and respect. Oreilly would be a fool to invite him on and then attack him. HOWEVER....Ron is fair game if he was invited and then didn't show up, and doesn't explain it. I don't care if his reason is because he doesn't like Oreilly's interviewing style, he has the right to snubb whomever he wants. I just want to hear him say it, especially in light of the fact that Oreilly's doing a segment on it.

I bet you would've advised Rand to continue booking the Rachel Maddow show during his campaign. We can do without these distraction-laced, gotcha-type interviews. Yes Maddow crowed and harped on Rand not coming on her show, but so what.

 

[Deborah K]

Times or not O'reilly hasn't changed.

It really doesn't matter if he's changed or not. As I've already stated, I'd rather see Ron go on his show, but it's his choice as to whom he snubbs. The problem is that Oreilly will eventually accuse him of "hiding under his desk" and that will not bode well for Ron, when you consider Oreilly's viewership. Which is why, given that Ron has complained about being ignored, he will need to explain his decision. I would like to see him do it BEFORE Oreilly's show airs tonight. It might aid in throwing a stick in Oreilly's spokes.

 

[Deborah K]

I bet you would've advised Rand to continue booking the Rachel Maddow show during his campaign. We can do without these distraction-laced, gotcha-type interviews. Yes Maddow crowed and harped on Rand not coming on her show, but so what.

She's a liberal. Not our target market at the moment.

 

[Deborah K]

Why would anyone want to even legitimize that show? Bill's just pissed 'cause Ron blew him off, and he should. BO is irrelevant and should be treated as such. No neocon viewers are going to magically converted by going on that show... lets get real.

And doesn't anyone thing Ron should go on Rachael Maddow? We learned that lesson from Rand already, not to go on these partisan hit piece traps.

Before I got perma-banned for defending Ron Paul, I was an avid and established poster on Oreilly's forums. I watched his show for almost 10 years before I came to my senses. Do not underestimate his audience. I am still friends with posters on his forum. There were and are many supporters there.

Edit: I was banned for viciously attacking someone who said very rude things about Ron. I've since learned not to be so mean....sort of....

 

[specsaregood]

She's a liberal. Not our target market at the moment.

So is O'Reilly.

 

[Deborah K]

So is O'Reilly.

Say wut?

 

[VIDEODROME]

Ron Paul should snub O'reilly by going on one of the competing networks for an interview.

 

[specsaregood]

Say wut?

He is a liberal, he supports a liberal foreign policy, a big federal government, a pervasive police state, taxes?
What is he conservative about?

 

[Deborah K]

He is a liberal, he supports a liberal foreign policy, a big federal government, a pervasive police state, taxes?
What is he conservative about?

Seems more of a neocon to me. But he is considered conservative and sees himself as a traditionalist. LOL.

http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/bill-oreilly

 

[specsaregood]

Seems more of a neocon to me. But he is considered conservative and sees himself as a traditionalist. LOL.

http://www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/bill-oreilly

So you agree, he isn't a conservative, and "traditionalist" is just a way for him to avoid admitting he is a liberal.

 

[Deborah K]

So you agree, he isn't a conservative, and "traditionalist" is just a way for him to avoid admitting he is a liberal.

I agree he is no conservative. But a liberal? ehhhhhh.....nahhhhhh.....neocon!

 

[Eric21ND]

He is a liberal, he supports a liberal foreign policy, a big federal government, a pervasive police state, taxes?
What is he conservative about?

^^^
This

 

[specsaregood]

I agree he is no conservative. But a liberal? ehhhhhh.....nahhhhhh.....neocon!

And neocons are just liberals that switched parties because they didn't think the democrats were war-mongering enough!