• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Randi and O'Reilly?

Nihilanth

Thinker
Nihilanth
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
131
EDIT: Sorry if this posts twice, but I don't think it will. It didn't seem to take the first time.

Did I read the little addendum to the commentary correctly? Did it actually say that James Randi might be appearing on the O'Reilly Factor? If so...God's/Eris'/howling-darkness-of-oblivion's sake, WHY!?!

The show isn't a forum for rational ideas. It's an excuse for Raging Bill to scream at whoever is seated in front of him. I mean, if whatever they're going to talk about is something Mr. Hypertension agrees with, then fine. They can sit and talk about how right they are. But if it's not, then it's just going to be O'Reilly screaming without letting Randi get a word in edgewise. I mean, I appreciate that Randi's got the guts to go on the show, but there's brave and there's just damned RECKLESS.

Anyone know what he's going on the show for, if he is?

Oh, but the CNN thing is cool.
 
Right, but what I'm saying is that O'Reilly's audience isn't going to be learning about ANYTHING. Poor Randi's gonna be cut off every time he opens his mouth. And, I hate to generalize, but it SEEMS that most of the people that make a habit of watching the show aren't exactly open to new ideas.

Of course, I could be jumping the gun. I don't pay much attention to Bill O'Reilly; I find him way too unpleasant. Perhaps in addition to being a loudmouth jackass, he's also a paragon of skepticism. In which case him and Randi will get along just fine. But I doubt it.
 
Randi is much smarter than O'Reilly and Randi has even made people look like fools on their own shows, I'd love to see the same for Bill. Still, I can't recommend going on that man's show. He has all the power to edit and such so if you don't agree with him he'll made his sheep audience dislike you even more. If Randi doesn't do well. It just gives Randi and the JREF a bad image to millions who have never heard of him, not that it really matters.

When I was younger I watched his show. Billy will make a joke out of the segment. I wouldn't say this for many but maybe Randi can pull it off but just going in there and talking without some plan isn't going to work.
 
Yeah, exactly. If Randi somehow manages to get his two cents in, O'Reilly'll just edit the hell out of it or just cut the segment short, like he did with that son of the guy who died in the WTC. Seriously, I think it's a bad idea considering the cards are stacked against him.
 
Nihilanth said:
Yeah, exactly. If Randi somehow manages to get his two cents in, O'Reilly'll just edit the hell out of it or just cut the segment short, like he did with that son of the guy who died in the WTC. Seriously, I think it's a bad idea considering the cards are stacked against him.
Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YgOLjHIwCs&mode=related&search=

Here's Bill going nuts at kid whose father died in 9/11. That's what happens when you disagree with Bill. This video reminds me of how low Bill is, yelling at the kid to shut up. :boggled:

Randi better be prepared...
 
I may eat my words here, but I think Bill may be sympathetic to Randi. I really do. That's assuming he's talking about the Hornbeck case. That's what we're talking about, right?

Bill is kind of a right wing kook, but I don't see him buying into psychics.

We'll see.
 
I agree with JLam. At this writing, the appearance, if it happened, is past, and I missed it, but for all the things I dislike about O'Reilly politically, I can't see him coming down on the side of Sylvia Browne when the other choice is James Randi.
 
What? Already past, you say? Damn my eyes, I wish I had TV. Anyone here know what happened? Did it degenerate into a fistfight? If so, I'd hate to say, but I think O'Reilly would win that one. Crazy beats rational anyday.
 
I don't think it's happened yet. He and Robert Lancaster were on Anderson Cooper last night (which was excellent) but I don't think he's been on O'Reilly yet.

I think it is possible to get your point across on O'Reilly even if he does bluster away. Lori Lippman Brown talked about doing just that at TAM yesterday. She's been on the show several times and I think O'Reilly has been criticized for letting her views come across.

She also said she got the most vile hate mail she'd ever received after going on his show.
 
He wasn't on O'reilly - I taped all three of the shows mentioned (suggestion made that Brown - a product from Uranus Corp. - might be brought up - a distinct possibility digestive systemwise - on Larry King show) and only AC that I noticed.
 
I hate Bill Oreilly, but as long as randi steers clear of religion I imagine they'd probably get along. Randi (I'm sure) disagree's with 9/11 conspiracy theorists as does Bill, however for different reasons. I doubt Bill buys into ALL psychic nonsense etc...

I imagine if politics is brought up there would be major differences, I imagine if religion is brought up there would be major differences, but if he's merely being brought on to talk about skepticism when it relates to psychics/9/11 whatever... then I think it'll be fine.

But would it hurt skeptics more to be seen as aligned with Bill, or to be shut down by him?
 
Randi would be out of his mind to turn down an invitation to the O'Reilly show. The audience is huge. And what's this about all the editing? I thought most of those interviews were live and as is. What O'Reilly does do sometimes is spin by not giving others an adequate change to state their views but all the guest has to do is point that out to the audience and it greatly lessens the effect.

All the people that won't go on O'Reilly because they think he's mean are crazy because he's going to be a lot more mean if they don't go on and let O'Reilly bash them unopposed. All it takes is somebody that is articulate and can think on his feet. The problem with O'Reilly is that he often steers clear of those kinds of guests and instead books dopes or sycophants. I'd absolutely love to see Randi get a slot on the show although I wouldn't bet on it happening.
 
I doubt that I'm alone having the opinion that when people avoid answering simple direct questions (not trick questions, of course) it's because they realize that the truth is something they would rather not expose. That's why I think Randi would show up, if invited. For example, recently when one of OJ's attorneys was asked if he himself felt that OJ committed the famous double murder, he kept answering a different question. Whether one likes O'Reilley or not, truth is I have seen some guests actually make him change his opinion on some topics -- the problem is, I all too often see people on his show that cannot argue their way out of a paper bag; and at no time have I seen anyone use the claim that it is the responsibility of the person making the claim to present the proof of argument. Of course, if Randi accepts and Bill chooses not to have him on, Randi can add another clock alongside Sylvia's -- so my money's on his having Randi show up. And I don't think it would turn into the big O'Reilley bash many think here would happen -- my question is, what basically is it that is prompting this meeting of the minds?
 
What prompted his invitation (or offer) to appear on The O'Reilly Factor is the fact that Sylvia Browne was approached about the Shawn Hornbeck situation on The Montel Williams Show a while back, where she proceeded to say that a dark skinned (but not Black) man with long, dark, dreadlocks was responsible for kidnapping him, and that Shawn was "no longer with us". O'Reilly just had a segment on the Hornbeck story today (January 23, 2007) where he mentioned this incident in disgust.

For all you O'Reilly haters on here who love to talk about how dishonest and evil he is without ever having watched his program outside of the cherry-picked clips on YouTube, or for those who base their opinion of him on what you managed to glean from the Daily Show or David Letterman, here's the exact presentation from O'Reilly on tonight's program, word for word:

[shows clip of Sylvia Browne referenced above]

"Now you can imagine how the Hornbeck family who was listening to that garbage felt after hearing it. Yet Ms. Browne continues her career and Montel Williams continues to put her on the air. Now, we called Montel; he has no comment. [pointing at camera] That's not gonna cut it, sir. It's your responsibility. That's GARBAGE.

On the serious reporting front, Newsweek magazine..."

You get the drift. O'Reilly is a warrior against this sort of thing, and many of you should be ashamed for dismissing him so readily. Of course he and Randi won't see eye-to-eye on everything. Thank goodness for that. But to completely discount the man because of what you read on smear web sites is to do yourself a disservice. I expected better from the JREF Forum members.
 
O'Reilly is a nutball, and most of us come to that conclusion by watching his show, not from websites.
 
I see, so you speak for the majority of the members of this site, or just for the majority of those from this site who dislike Bill O'Reilly? Regardless, can you tell me exactly how you can say with confidence that "most" of that group came to the conclusion that he is a "nutball" by watching his show?
 
ChrisPowers said:
I see, so you speak for the majority of the members of this site, or just for the majority of those from this site who dislike Bill O'Reilly? Regardless, can you tell me exactly how you can say with confidence that "most" of that group came to the conclusion that he is a "nutball" by watching his show?
Click to expand...

For those that dislikehim. I know because they've posted as much.
 
We'll forget for a second the incredibly unlikely scenario that you've managed to observe enough of the opinions of all the members of the JREF Forums who dislike O'Reilly and have posted whether or not they're basing that opinion on having watched his show to be able to definitively say what "most" of that group thinks.

I am still of the opinion that the majority of those who purport to dislike him do so as a result of things they've seen, heard, and read about him outside of his actual show. They'd consider themselves traitors, or they'd be embarrassed to watch the program when "everybody knows" he's dishonest and a cheerleader for Bush, etc.

Obviously, this is my opinion and I could very well be wrong. We have a difference of opinion; please do not continue to respond unless you have something constructive to say. I'm not looking to get into a tit for tat argument on the Internet about something so inconsequential.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom