Originally Posted By alexbook I'm reading Bill O'Reilly's new book, "Culture Warrior." I'll post a full review later in the week, but in the meantime here are a few interesting nuggets. (Sorry for quoting whole paragraphs, but I don't want anybody saying I took these "out of context".) >>However, traditional warriors would be wise to avoid and, indeed, criticize personal attacks against the left that derive from conservatives. Taking and seizing the high ground is imperative in any military campaign and it is vital in the culture war. In addition to speaking out against the Swift Boaters, I criticized people trying to smear Ted Kennedy and anti-Iraq war congressman John Murtha. I also scolded Ann Coulter for writing that some left-leaning 9/11 widows were "enjoying" the aftermath of their husbands' deaths. That was way over the line, in my opinion. You can make your point without being mean-spirited.<< >>That being said, the traditional warrior would be well advised to avoid personal attacks and over-the-top rhetoric. Sure, that kind of thing makes the savage running the "Savage Nation" on the radio millions, but irresponsible bomb-throwing doesn't further the traditional cause. The traditionalist warrior should expect to be slimed and defamed and mocked, and should fight back with facts and rational argument. That takes courage and self-restraint. Believe me, I often want to deck those who attack me. That's a natural reaction. But the effective warrior knows the battle will not be won in the mud or by losing control.<< >>A good battle plan merits repetition. So, again, defining all liberals as secular-progressives is a huge tactical mistake. You see conservatives falling into this error every day, especially on talk radio. At this point, traditionalists of all strips need to understand who the real enemy is and cultivate all the allies they can get.<< ----- Obligatory cheap shot: One wonders if this author has ever seen a little TV show called "The Factor".
Originally Posted By DAR It would be good if he practiced what he preached, but it's sound advice no matter where you fall politically. And here's an example of a personal attack being used. Yesterday I'm at my parents house to watch some football and have dinner. At halftime, my father, sister and I take the dog for a walk. They start to tell me about this house that has the usual anti-Bush slogans. One said Worst, with the w shaped how you'd see it on the campaign flyers. And I kind of laughed at it. But there's another signed that stated "What a bleeping idiot." Again the W was the same font. Now it's this person's right to think this. It's his home and if he wants to place that sign in his window fine. However, there are plenty of kids that live in the neighborhood, so I think it's rather inappropriate. And two like I told my father and sister(who aren't fans of the President) it shows this person's level of reasoning.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>the traditional warrior would be well advised to avoid personal attacks<< and in the next sentence... >>the savage running the "Savage Nation"<< Hmmm...
Originally Posted By fkurucz ^^Well, FWIW, Michael Savage's radio show generates a lot of heat and little light. He is basically a troll with his own radio show.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan No argument. I just thought the positioning of the two statements was funny.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I like Bill O'Reilly and I couldn't help but think of some posters here with some of the comments... and while all TV-news- radio pundits let some personal type stuff in ( they are only human) - I see O'Reilly as one of the fairest conservatives. Perfect, well who is , but I do believe he tries to practice what he preaches. just IMHO. --find me another convservative host that will takes shots at other conservatives ( especially further right ones) when it is warranted.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 O'Reilly's not horrible as far as such loudmouth pundits go, but he IS perfectly capable of getting something in his craw and getting really personal about it. He's almost Jeckyl and Hydish... sometimes he practices what he preaches, sometimes all that just goes out the window.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 No, a little worse, I'd say. The man definitely has a temper, and I've seen him get VERY petty. Yeah, we're all subject to that, but there are pundits who practice what he preaches better than he does, IMO. Maybe not of the loudmouth variety, but definitely of the quieter, William Buckley on the right or Bill Moyers on the left variety.
Originally Posted By DlandJB I don't think O'Reilly has the same intellectual depth as Buckley and Moyers, but he is a huge step above Coulter, North, Liddy and the other screamers. They all use a time honored tradition of dehumanization of the opposition. Using catch phrases and words that take some of the humanity out of the individuals and reduce them to stereotypes that are easy to hate or dismiss. It does no one -- neither side any great service to do this. We've seen plenty of examples of that on these boards. The last couple of days, however, I'd say that the rhetoric here has come down a notch or two, and that is a nice change.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>No argument. I just thought the positioning of the two statements was funny.<< I have heard Savage refer to him as "The Leprecaun" while he accuses him of being a phony sell out.
Originally Posted By DAR I think if O'Reilly ever got into a scuffle he could more than old his own, the guy is like 6'5.
Originally Posted By mele <<The last couple of days, however, I'd say that the rhetoric here has come down a notch or two, and that is a nice change.>> Hm, I think one of WE's most popular people has been gone the past couple of days. That's probably why things have been calmer.
