MEDIA ALERT: General Wesley Clark on Bill O'Reilly (FOX) tonight, Friday, 01/06/06 @ 7PM CST
Submitted by Kat on January 6, 2006 - 3:04pm.
General Wesley Clark on Bill O'Reilly (FOX) tonight, Friday, 01/06/06 @ 7PM CST
He will be on tonight at the top of the show 7PM Central Time. The length of the interview is undetermined.
8:00PM EST | 7:00PM CST | 6:00PM MST | 5:00PM PST
All times of scheduled programs on Fox are subject to change.
....but will record it and check everyone's comments before viewing. :/
George Bush has had his day and he's bollixed it up.
I love it when the General goes on O'Reilly. O'Reilly loves to challenge those who know more than he does. So what? It's easy to figure who'll come out on top. Getting the combative aspect aside, I like the fact that a lot of people will hear what General Clark will say. He comes across as one who is not partisan in national security areas. People need to hear what it takes to get out of a horrible mess in Iraq, and what we need to be looking for when it comes to Iran. I just wish General Clark had a bigger forum that he does now.
and I wish O'Reilly would start giving Clark time on issues other than Iraq or at least explore how Iraq, foreign policy, domestic and economic policy are all related. But O'Reilly burns me because he limits the discussion by "defining the issue" in the wrong terms to begin with. So his guest gets stuck with arguing a poorly defined issue and O'Reilly rarely lets his guest redefine that issue. When they do, he argues and loudmouths. That's when I turn the channel. It's a staged afair from then on and O'Reilly always "wins."
Lions & Tigers & Bears- Oh My! I enjoyed watching Letterman beat on O'Lielly last week. imho he's more than 60% crap.
Good of Wes to put himself out there.
Darn, wish he could say no to some shows, but I'm sure he cannot. It just gives O'Lielly credibility as if his show were actually a show or news or anything other than - what Letterman called it. :)
I hope O'Liar lets him finish his thoughts. Damn his hide, he's just obnoxious as hell. Wes continues to raise the bar for Starch! LOL! O'Liar needs a HUGE reality check!
When Wes was on the factor last time O'reilly got so flustered he accused the US airborne troops of the massacre of American GI's at Malmedy in WWII.
Whip that leprechaun but good tonight WES !!!
You know Bill will ask Wes what he thinks about Murtha's military statement and Pace's response in saying it's hurting recruiting and morale. Wes will say what he always does, "I love John Murtha, but I don't agree with him on this." Not much O'Reilly can do with that is there? Then Wes will turn the show in the direction of what he wants to talk about, which is Syria and Iran.
BOR's military record side by side with jon murtha's and compare and contrast-full disclosure, fair and balanced, right?????????
attacking the man, not his argument cuts both ways
That's exactly what the talking airhead did (BOR must be licking his Letterman wounds)--and Wes handled the interview masterfully, IMO! My 88-year-old lifelong-Repoublican mother, watching with me, really likes Wes--she says he's "honest and sincere, and a good man." Right on, Mom! (She was happy to vote for Kaine in the VA gov election, also.)
The General gets it right. Competence--What a concept!
The first word is "the," inserted after "shut." Use your imagination for the second word.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
I guess I'm the all-too-serious guy who would usually warn against such comments.
But I got a real good laugh out of it! I guess I need to be reminded, that most of the time, we should lighten up and not take ourselves too seriously.
Of course Gen. Clark would never say such a thing. Neither would I (I hope), it's not productive. But in my dreams ...
LOL! That's my view exactly. The fact that he doesn't use such language would make it even more impactful if he did!
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
I'd rather see BOR left speechless by Wes' dazzling brilliance. Wes enjoys sparring with the idiot nimrod talking heads. Go get 'em, Sir!
Do the sheeple BUY this stuff? The economy is "spectacular! GMAFB. Oh, it's "completely under control." Now I feel better.
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right. - Hunter/Garcia
it. newscasts for losers. granted CNN and MSNBC are biased, but fox is biased and their people suck---maybe 2 or 3 that do a good job
I'm watching for NO REASON!! It's on at 8pm my time... D'oh!!
Once in a while you get shown the light, In the strangest of places if you look at it right. - Hunter/Garcia
We should not advocate self torture, either.
But personally, I probably prefer the hammer, rather than suffer brutal and mental assaults of watching FAUXNews and their hosts - that's inhumane!
Please rate this up as it is dropping off. Remember, a lot of the people who no longer blog here blog at DailyKos:
can't enlist enough people with just our propaganda anymore and now we're going to .... "LOSE THE WAR"..... unless we have a ........draft?
Thanks. There was a Gingrich era? Glad I missed it.
Wes was right to say the president and the way he choses to use our military is responsible for people to decide to enlist or not. He was perfect.
Well, if there was anything good that came out of Gingrich's tenure after the republican gained control of congress during Clinton's term was pushing for the Balanced Budget ammendment and Pay as You Go legislation. They were as close to being fiscally conservtive as any group in recent memory.
The Reagan tax cut's had gutted federal revenue and ushered in more the two decades of large budget defcits through his two terms and G H.W Bush's term on into Clinton's Presidency The republicans claimed is was democratic spending that caused the deficits but I've read that even if Reagan got all the budget cuts he had called for, it only would have reduce the debt they racked up by 15%.
Clinton increased taxes during his first term, primarily on the top 2% income earners. The Wall Street Journal blasted him. Later, I think it was around 96, the WSJ wrote an article praising Clinton's policies for the drastic turnaround in the buget. The article gave his tax policy more the 50% of the credit and the Balanced Budget Ammendment and Pay as you go the credit for the rest of the turnaround.
Ooooh he's baiting him
"YOu wouldn't ever say anything like that would you?"
"It's more about how the armed forces is USED than what people SAY about it" - Wes Clark
So on point!
Why am I not surprised.
Nice color and sunset in LR.
"Deemphasize the sectarianism, we need to let the Sunnis feel franchised"-- Wes
We need a George Washington in Iraq-- Host guy
"The greatest weapon the US has is "truth, honesty and openness" "--- Brian Ross quoting a bush administration official on FOX News
People watch this stuff longer than five minutes without suffering head explosions??
is after they cut off a "contrarian" guest, they ramble on spewing their own opinions, unopposed and unchallenged, loaded with overgeneralizations and exagerations as if suddenly they get to tell you how it "really" is despite the counter opinions you half got to hear from the now distant "contrarian" guest. Pass the french fries.
"Enough is enough" can't apply in this case, because they never give the General enough time. Someone up-thread said the fauxistas always start with the wrong premise with leading questions...true. But Wes Clark has become very good at deciding how to get to the premise/answer that he wants. John Murtha has nothing to do with the rate of enlistment; it is bush's war. That is the message that must be sent to the American public.
Living in a very red area, it is a safe assumption that the parents of my students voted for bush. The seniors I know when talking about whether or not to enlist don't talk about John Murtha, they talk about the war. That is the reason, that as much as they would like to leave this mini-dogpatch, they will not be signing up.
That was the best answer regarding Murtha that I've heard a Democrat give. First, he defended Murtha's honor, but he also moved to the reality of the situation.
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.--J. V. Marley
on something one Congressman said. They act as if pointing out the situation makes it so. People aren't declining to enlist because somebody said it sucks. They decline because it does suck.
He kept asking Gen. Clark why Murtha would say that. He said it because that's how he feels.
Not being free to speak my mind about bush, I should take to wearing duct tape to school in protest. One of my students is a classic example of the General's excellent point. The child of a single mom, he's never met his father. He gets himself into all sorts of "fixes" but he loves his mom. Anyway, he's pretty smart and has talked to me quite a bit about becoming a Ranger. The Army would be a good fit for him, and they would be lucky to get him. But as I said, he is smart. When he talks about his plans, he always ends with: "I don't know...ya' know." Then I say: "The war..." and he answers "Yep"
The kids know.
You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.--J. V. Marley
I just look at that hosts face, and instinctively, I just want to deck him. But Clark looks past that, ... sees the fascade of ignorance and it's ugly consequences ... and appeals to my higher cognitive capabiliies to resign for truth.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Debate, Dialogue, Discussion, Disagreement - that's not wrong -that's not unpatriotic, that's one of the highest forms of patriotism and love of country, and we need to say it!" - Gen. Wesley Clark (US Ret.)
I agree with everyone. You can see he's honed and is continuing to hone his skills. He's the best at penetrating O'Reilly's pre-scripted plan and simultaneously he'slearning to talk to the Republicans. More and more are finally getting hip to the possibility that this Administration isn't what they thought. I guess its part of Bush's inherent corporate-ness; they should have read the fine print.
That's essentially a non-competition clause and those are always read restrictively. I hope he doesn't renew on those terms. jeeez.
That's no small feat. FAUX hosts/pundits, like Hannity, O'Reilly and the others are very deliberate with their scripted spin,..employing "leading the witness" tactics, to support their distorted views. Wes never follows their lead,.. like you said, he's learned alot about it,.... but that's why he's the best General for the Dems and against these neocons, now.
Even Dole can't rise up to his level. (ok.. I know, I know,...Defoliate Bush, should've said it.)
marginalize him when it suits their interests. That's when they just end the interview and we get to hear O'Reilly blather on about whatever point he wants to make, free from opposition.
When you shoot a remote you are looking into a blank, empty lens only. Sometimes there is a monitor off to the side but you dare not be looking at it or you look "shifty" in your own interview!
So fortunately for Wes, on these Little Rock feeds-- he doesn't have to see the pundits faces!
Oh no, I think my head will explode!