The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

27 January 2006

Why Do Liberals Appear On The O'Reilly Factor?

TAKE YOUR MARBLES

Lefties: Should We Turn Down O'Reilly?




Are so-called "progressives" increasingly afraid to appear on the FOX News Channel's O'Reilly Factor?

Since appearing in the Boston Phoenix nearly a week ago, the Radio Equalizer is baffled as to how this amazing piece, where liberals ponder whether to decline Factor appearances, fell through the cracks. It truly deserves to be highlighted.

While it clearly accuses O'Reilly of unfairness, there's also an admission that because leftists seemingly can't win the debate, perhaps they should take their marbles and go home. Is that the true state of liberalism today?

After years of campus political correctness, where multi-sided discussions have been all but shut down, perhaps this is the unfortunate end result: liberals with lousy debating skills.

As certain as 12 Dunkin' Donuts locations in every New England town, serial FOX-basher David Brock emerges in the middle of Mark Jurkowitz's piece:


David Brock, president of the liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America — which is frequently critical of O’Reilly and gave him its 2004 “Misinformer of the Year” award — says, “I often feel he’s also getting a fair amount of guests who are lured on to that show for a one-time appearance and then get the stuffing beaten out of them.”

Silverglate, a skilled and experienced debater, has made three appearances, once when he took a position similar to that of O’Reilly, once when they partially agreed, and once when they were clearly at odds.

In that latter instance, “it was quite an experience,” he says. “I didn’t get a word in edgewise.... I vowed [that next time] I was going to take a more aggressive approach.” That helps explain his tenacious performance last week.

Lawrence Walters, another free-speech attorney who’s been on the Factor about a half-dozen times, says “the vast majority of the time he’s completely opposed to what I’m saying. He’s in control of the mike. He does a lot of interrupting.”

“A lot of progressives won’t go on his show,” he adds.

“I can’t tell you how many times I’ve winced or cringed when I’ve seen people go on there and not do well,” adds Steve Rendall, a senior analyst for the liberal media watchdog FAIR, who had been on the Factor seven times, but says he was never brought back after a contentious 2003 appearance.



While there are at least two quoted liberals who defend appearing on the show, the overall tone remains clear: because you'll get creamed, it's foolish to accept an O'Reilly Factor invitation.

Since it's the same as a wishy-washy young woman with a cheating boyfriend calling Dr. Laura and expecting an easy time, why don't our fellow "progressives" know better? That seems to be the best analogy.

As for Rendall's situation, unless he was given a reason, how does he know why he wasn't brought back on the show? Seven opportunities to appear on national television with a critic and the complaint is that there wasn't an eighth? To the Radio Equalizer, that many visits seems especially open-minded.

By contrast, how often does Al Franken invite any of us onto his radio show?

Perhaps the real problem is the structure of Boston's stuffy, antiquated Old Media, where the weekly "alternative" Phoenix resides in a dark, dingy basement. Like it or not, O'Reilly's show has helped to create the new media as we know it today.

Watched by millions nightly, its aim from day one was to establish Bill as the anti-Larry King, where softball questions and an unprepped host have long made for the very definition of bad television. For some reason, establishment liberal media types still can't figure out why O'Reilly routinely creams his CNN counterpart in the ratings.

To beat FOX at this point, Larry would have to kidnap Elvis from his South American hideaway and haul him into the studio.


It boils down to this: Bill O'Reilly isn't supposed to be nice. Don't take it personally. Quickly getting down to the bottom line, it's about cutting through the crap. That's why they're watching.

Even with those of us on the same side of an issue, he's harsh. Before both of my recent appearances, there have been stern lectures from O'Reilly about having facts straight and staying on-topic.

By design, absolutely nobody gets their rear end kissed on the O'Reilly Factor. That's because the alternative is low-rated, outdated King-style rubbish.

While it does take guts, anyone on the left turning down O'Reilly out of fear is a coward. As even the Phoenix piece admits, that's because his audience comes from a variety of backgrounds and viewpoints. Why not take the opportunity to possibly win over a few people?

Thanks for your continued support of the Radio Equalizer's work through Amazon orders that begin with clicks on the right-hand side. My top picks appear in the upper corner.

Top O'Reilly photo: Canadian Press, with Letterman: CBS, King with Kagan: David A Lunde for the Radio Equalizer

17 Comments:

  • How do:

    I am compelled to repost- just to inforom readers of just how large a fraud you are:

    Notice the dim one's own bio on this very page-- "compared to Rush in TIME magazine..." ever wonder what that article actually said....


    It's entitled:

    Austin Nevada: Conspiracy USA, in the middle of nowhere where the highway is empty it all fits together.

    "The drive-time talk jock (out here it's always drive time) is the inflammatory Brian Maloney, who makes Rush Limbaugh sound like Alan Alda. Maloney tends to open his monologues with the question that prefaces most conspiracy rants: "Don't you find it interesting that...?" For Maloney, who preaches that President Clinton is an "agent of influence" for the Chinese, there seems to be no such thing as a meaningless coincidence... When a caller nominates Charlton Heston for Speaker of the House, it is not a joke."

    It really does all fit together doesn't it. You loon. /laughter

    p.s. I make $850,000.00 annually on AAR plus merchandising! That's exactly 850,000 dollars plus merchandising more than Maloney made in radio last year!

    p.p.s. For posting this, Dan Goldberg and George Soros just gave me a raise! I now make 850,005.00 plus merchandising! Someday, Brian, if you keep hanging out with your racist freind Malkin, maybe you'll make $5 in radio!

    By Blogger samseder, at 27 January, 2006 03:18  

  • after all the crap i have read here, this is by far the biggest load of shit i've ever seen on this page. you actually have the audacity to say that liberals have poor debating skills? if you want to talk about getting "creamed" why don't you watch the videos of the 2004 presidential elections. even though kerry lost (and i'm not one of those conspiracy nuts who thinks the election was stolen), he kicked w's ass in those debates, and, if my memory serves me correctly, that would mean that a liberal out-debated the "most powerful" conservative in the country. i'd LOVE to see anyone on this page try to refute that.

    By Blogger liberal outlaw, at 27 January, 2006 09:46  

  • Honestly Brian, do you read what you post?

    The article says O'Reilly doesn't let his opponents get a word in edgewise. It doesn't say liberals don't debate well, it says they're generally not as big a blowhard as Bill is. The reason it didn't get covered is that it's hardly news.

    In other news, Bill stated on his broadcast the other night that outside of NYC, Air America isn't doing well and proceeded to cherry pick ratings in the manner that you criticized AAR for doing in a post a few days ago.

    Why then, was AAR's San Diego affiliate featured in a Clear Channel press release entitled "Clear Channel Radio Stations in Top 25 Markets Continue to Gain Listeners" this morning?

    From the release:

    Progressive talk KLSD serving San Diego, CA, increased its AQH share among adults 25-54 by 50%, compared to its first book in the format.

    You can read it here:

    http://www.clearchannel.com/Radio/PressRelease.aspx?PressReleaseID=1516

    Also - where was the admission that Franken is beating the stuffing out of Bill on the air?

    If simply disregarding facts that don't support your premise is what you think makes a good debator, you should be tipping your hat to Stalin, Hitler, and everyone else in history that preferred to just steamroll opposition instead of try to use rational thought to solve conflicts.

    By Blogger Lyin' Baloney, at 27 January, 2006 10:17  

  • Brian - you really must think you readers are idiots if they believe what you just posted. If Bill O'Reilly is so fair and balanced why does he have David Brock on his show? There's a simple reason - Bill is just a bully and a coward. Iv'e heard any number of liberal talk show hosts say they'd go on Bill's show - but Bill won't invite them. It's not the No Spin zone - it is the No Spine Zone. Go have a Falafel.

    By Blogger Robert, at 27 January, 2006 10:52  

  • Let's not forget that O'Lielly has that great forensic skill. Just yell "Shut Up" when you're getting your clock cleaned.

    By Blogger Dick Tuck, at 27 January, 2006 11:01  

  • Isn't about time everyone take a deep breath? Last weekend I listened to an interview with James Carville, Paul Begala & Mary Matalin on Meet the press. Despite the expressions of diametrically opposing positions related to a number of volatile issues, the discussion was delightfully civil. The left could learn alot from James Carville and his wife's public appearances. One can respectfully disagree without the childish emotionalism that comes from the perception that a distinction can't be drawn between the individual and what he/she has to say.

    By Blogger Pat Spinelli, at 27 January, 2006 11:03  

  • By samseder, at 27 January, 2006 03:18

    Do you use any of that money for spelling and grammar lessons?

    Oh and playing the race card is not a debate skill.

    By Blogger BCB, at 27 January, 2006 11:13  

  • Sam Seder:
    "I make $850,000.00 annually on AAR plus merchandising!"


    Well, now we know who got all the Gloria Wise money...

    ;-)

    By Blogger Lokki, at 27 January, 2006 13:25  

  • Wow, Brian. You really don't want to have any semblance of credibility, do you? However, it is obvious you're pining for more Factor appearances.

    I mean, c'mon, the day after your appearance you post a dishonest story that improperly inflate o'reilly's supposed debating skills?

    What a friggin' joke - but, please, don't stop. I'm getting addicted to your daily dose of rampant stupidity.

    Meanwhile, your "welcome" post seems to have been more than a bit superfluous...doesn't seem anyone more is posting in your favor...not that reasonable people should ever do so...

    By Blogger TJ, at 27 January, 2006 15:10  

  • Yo. You can't barely hold 2000 hits even when you go on tv?

    Scroll back to the time when you wrote about me- hits through the roof.

    Guess that's why I get the big money and you get zero.

    By Blogger samseder, at 27 January, 2006 21:06  

  • That O'Reilly can do some sweet talking...

    OCTOBER 13--Hours after Bill O'Reilly accused her of a multimillion dollar shakedown attempt, a female Fox News producer fired back at the TV star today, filing a lawsuit claiming that he subjected her to repeated instances of sexual harassment and spoke often, and explicitly, to her about phone sex, vibrators, threesomes, masturbation, the loss of his virginity, and sexual fantasies. Below you'll find a copy of {Andrea Mackris's} complaint, an incredible page-turner that quotes O'Reilly, 55, on all sorts of lewd matters. Based on the extensive quotations cited in the complaint, it appears a safe bet that Mackris, 33, recorded some of O'Reilly's more steamy soliloquies. }

    Link to O'Reilly Hit With Sex Harass Suit

    By Blogger pbrauer, at 27 January, 2006 22:44  

  • Nice to see you here, Sam. I love your show and the incredible information you present. I've recorded and clipped the interview with the doctor you did tonight, for my elderly parents who've both being soaked for statin drugs. I finally got my dad off them and on a couple of remedial supplements, and his exhaustion and enervation are much improved.

    Maloney, you do shame to a fine clann taking up with that liar and bully O'Reilly. Is mac dalba thú. Cut the malarkey and rid yourself of that racist mad dog Michelle and join the love on the left. Step up, be more than a pretty face. Do the Irish proud.

    Oh, and I was going to say, Al has had Byron York on his show, and he tried to be nice, Al did, that is, and York was just after showing his arse. I hear him on Diane Rehm all the time, and he just shills for the administration. To be fair, he was on this morning and was mostly just saying what he thought the Bushies were trying to accomplish with their latest strategies wrt the NSA etc., and didn't try to justify or defend what they were doing. That was quite a departure, he was very clear that he wasn't defending them, although he didn't turn on them either. James Fallows mopped the floor with him, nevertheless.

    By Blogger Jeany, at 27 January, 2006 22:48  

  • Looks like the folks at AAR are bored out of their minds! Snide, scared, obnoxious, rarely amusing, easily provoked.... their meds must be low right now...

    Thanks for the great work Brian. You and Michelle are obviously hitting some touchy buttons with your fact finding mission to shed some light on some dark corners - which tells all of us that you are headed in the right direction. Keep it up, you have our support.

    Having the chance to read the meltdowns from the AAR crowd is just considered a bonus... :-}

    By Blogger wise_n_texas, at 28 January, 2006 00:52  

  • I'll agree that King is a joke, but I just can't take O'Reilly. He's loud, angry, and just seems to love himself too much. If he didn't wear his conservatism on his sleave, and if he cursed more, I'd mistake him for an AAR host. ;)
    And, to the faux-seder, how sad would it be if picking fights with a blogger is all he's up for? And then to be ignored like a fruit fly?

    By Blogger SCSIwuzzy, at 28 January, 2006 22:54  

  • The problem with the article is that liberals don't understand that O'Reilly doesn't interrupt because he's trying to dominate the debate. He interrupts when the guests are going off topic or spouting off talking points. I think the usual Brian-bashing posters and the examples in Michelle Malkin's "Unhinged" clearly display that liberals cannot debate at all. Insults, racism and profanities are not debate.

    By Blogger Dr. T, at 29 January, 2006 13:47  

  • The problem with O'Reilly {among other things) is that he is an outright liar. Consider the following link:
    War on Christmas Fraud Exposed: The Silent Night “Rewrite” That Wasn’t

    Oh, and I suppose O'Reilly wasn't "unhinged" when he told Franken to "Shutup, Shutup" at the book fair a couple of years ago.

    By Blogger pbrauer, at 29 January, 2006 17:58  

  • Wow...it looks like the moonbats tripled their daily assignment of people to leave comment page flames. They're better-organized than the Salvation Army. You must be doing good work here. Keep it up.

    By Blogger Darin, at 31 January, 2006 08:15  

Post a Comment

<< Home



 
Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger