OReilly Trounces Krugman

[Utah]

I just watched Riley and Krugman go at it on Tim Russert. ORiley absolutely crushed Krugman.

Krugman was like a dear in headlights. Its a little unfair because Krugman is a columnist and OReilly is a commentator. However, OReilly killed Krugman on substance as well. Their was simply no meat to Krugman's arguments. It was awesome seeing OReilly scream at Krugman "Do your own research!!"

{it was obviously a reply since it was on late satursay night. However, I hadnt seen it yet}

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
It was awesome seeing OReilly scream at Krugman "Do your own research!!"


[/ QUOTE ]

I find this very difficult to believe. O'Reilly is the king of wildly inaccurate statements made in haste, and he's attacking Krugman, one of the most substantive economic columnists in the country? We all know where Krugman stands politically but his work is really thorough.

I'd like to see a transcript of this. I have a feeling that 'trounced' actually means 'overpowered via sheer volume.'

NT

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling that 'trounced' actually means 'overpowered via sheer volume.'

[/ QUOTE ]

You're actually right there, O'Reilly got very animated to say the least, but only when Krugman took cheap shots at him or at Fox News. That got Bill very riled.

At those points, I thought O'Reilly might have been on the verge on smacking Krugman. I think Krugman might have had the same thought: He was shaking like a leaf, literally. Watch his hands when he called O'Reilly a liar and Bill sat up quickly and defended himself with "passion."

Ten

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
At those points, I thought O'Reilly might have been on the verge on smacking Krugman.

[/ QUOTE ]

Other people have said similar things after debating O'Reilly. The man strikes me as unstable.

[ QUOTE ]
Watch his hands when he called O'Reilly a liar and Bill sat up quickly and defended himself with "passion."


[/ QUOTE ]

O'Reilly is a liar, and he always defends himself this way - by yelling.

NT

[Utah]

"O'Reilly is a liar, and he always defends himself this way - by yelling."

Regardless of whether OReilly is a loud mouth (he is) he crushed Krugman. Krugman called him a liar, OReilly told him to back it up with facts, Krugman quoted some left wing nut group and that is when OReilly told him to do his own research. Krugman told OReilly he does the same and OReilly said he never got his facts from Right Wing Hate Groups.

I thought Krugman looked quite stupid after this exchange.

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
O'Reilly is a liar

[/ QUOTE ]

What has he lied about? Seriously, not "mistated, mistaken, or jokingly stated," but truly lied about?

Ten

[cardcounter0]

Winning two Peabody Awards.

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
Winning two Peabody Awards.

[/ QUOTE ]

O'Reilly had thought that the show Inside Edition had won Peobody Awards until pointed out to him by Al Franken. Franken told him to call Peobody and O'Reilly did. Then O'Reilly called Franken back and made a correction, that he thougt it was a Peobody awards and it was a Polk award.

Now cardcounter or nothumb, you can go ahead and list the three occasion in four years that O'Reilly mentioned the Peobody Awards. He said basically the same thing each time. But he corrected himself once it was brought to his attention.

I asked for not "mistated, mistaken, or jokingly stated," but truly lied about? What you have mentioned was a mistaken fact, not an intentional lie. You have to admit that O'Reilly is a smart man. Would he intentionally lie about such an easily provable fact? Come on...

Ten

[cardcounter0]

Yeah, Come on.... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

The Peabody Award is one of the most prestigious awards a TV journalist could possibly win.

I went around and told people I had one two Nobel Peace Prizes in High School. In fact, I had just won one Bobel Perfect Attendace Award, while that's not quite true either, another guy won the award the year after I had left class.

But I really wasn't lying about winning the Nobel Peace Prize (or two), it was just a big misunderstanding. I mean Bobel, Nobel, just a big mistake.

I think the fact that the lie was repeated many times, and went for so long without being detected says something about how 'easily' provable it was.
[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[TenPercenter]

[ QUOTE ]
went for so long without being detected says something about how 'easily' provable it was.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that it was NOT easily provable?

Ten