How did Krugman do against O'Liely?

[LostInAnomie]

I didn't get to see it.

Details please.

[rocktivity]

1. I didn't see it, either, but I'll offer my prediction:

Bill won on volume while Paul won on facts.

:headbang:
rocknation

[LittleApple81]

2. IMHO, not good. You don't get into a pissing contest with a skunk.

O'Reilly controlled "the discussion" yelled, called Krugman a "leftist", questioned his research sources, all of this at the highest volume he could muster. NO DECENT, EDUCATED, INTELLECTUAL, PREPARED person who is not ready to attack back and tell O'Reilly to shut up should be willing to share a "discussion" panel with him. ESPECIALLY IF IT IS "MODERATED" BY SOMEBODY LIKE MR. POTATOFACE!!! he allowed O'Reilly to do whatever he wanted...
Krugman had good points but could not battle with the same tools: obnoxiousness, lack of a "moderator" and his own unwillingness to sink to O'Reilly's level.

[wtmusic]

12. Russert was fine

He let them control the debate, and O'Reilly did so by making himself look very stupid.

Yelling and "attacking back" are often counterproductive.

[buycitgo]

15. AMEN!!!!! saw it

could not BELIEVE Russert just SAT there on his big fat oozing ASS

why was he even THERE?

he just let OLielly go on and on and on

that guy REALLY is a psychopath

Krugman did as well as anyone, who didn't resort to the tactics you so aptly mention, could

I only wish he'd come up with this, at the point that ass started some screed on definition: Sir, here's my pocket webster's. would you please look up the word PROJECTION. And I don't mean as in movie theater

my sister was watching with me, and couldn't believe what a psycho this guy is

[redstateblues]

38. TV Performer Vs. Writer/Professor - Not Really A Fair Fight

Having said that I do think Krugman is the best columnist on the national scene

[ParisFrance]

32. How can you say O'Reilly won?

O'Reilly looked like the student while Krugman was the teacher. He answered every point of O'Reilly's critcism and gave his own points and critcism where Bill only could say "you're right you have all the answers". Bill would also call an occasional cheap shot by Krugman. Bill has never made a cheap shot on his show has he? Krugman looked nervous , but that could be how he always acts or when you have a guy who looks twice your size yelling at you that could also cause nervousness.

[pookastew]

37. Agreed.

I wish someone would just drop O'Reilly like a stone.

Sorry for not being an "anti-violence" liberal--I just ain't. I'm a northeast hockey-playing liberal. And I can tell you that big blowhards like O'Reilly--like all bullies--are chickens.

His downfall will be that he's starting to believe he's actually a bona fide commentator, and not just a propagandist. Which means soon he'll walk into something he can't handle.

What has to happen is for someone to bait him into something, then knock him into next week. Wish it could be me.

And Drudge would be next. Would love to bump into that guy coming out of a club at 2am.

You know, that's really all these guys understand. That, and money.

[seemslikeadream]

3. SHUT UP! SHUT UP! JUST SHUT UP!

[LostInAnomie]

4. Did he really bring out his standard "SHUT UP!"?

That to me proves that you are losing an argument.

[wtmusic]

8. No 'shut ups', and Krugman did fine

O'Reilly came off like a big obnoxious bully (as usual) and Krugman, though a bit rattled by a man who is much larger than he yelling at him, was the voice of reason and logic. Best line: "You're a very difficult man to have a reasonable conversation with." :D

[seemslikeadream]

13. Sorry I just meant O'liely was being himself

n/t

[ThomWV]

21. I Watched OutFoxed Last Night

I have never watched FOX nextwork and I will not watch it. I can tell you this though, if that mother fucker suck his finger in my face and yelled "Shut UP" I'd break his god damned finger off.

Thom

[seemslikeadream]

28. He did wag his finger in Paul's face

If he had done that to me I would have spit in his ugly face!

[CatWoman]

5. we report, you decide

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2176195

[Stew225]

9. O'Reilly is in that category of people who

desperately need their ass kicked for the good of humanity.

[sendero]

36. Somebody...

... send Skittles :)

[IdaBriggs]

6. Krugman was Good, O'Reilly was Performing.

I think Krugman did a good job. His hands were shaking sometimes, which I think had to do with his adrenaline level (based on what I saw on Celebrity Poker the other day!), and he got some good facts out there, AND didn't look like a moron. O'Reilly kept "erupting" with what appeared to be "fake outrage" which kind of made him look like an idiot. I also thought he had a couple of interesting points, which was good to see, but Krugman made more sense. I loved it when Krugman smacked O'Reilly down on "turning off the mike" to which O'Reilly could only say "cheap shot!" O'Reilly used that line several times when he was losing on issues, but to be fair, Krugman did use a few BUT ONLY AFTER he was attacked by O'Reilly. I thought the victim routine was entertaining. Definitely worth watching.

[tabasco]

25. Krugman did fine. He was not intimidated.

He called O'Reilly on lies. O'Reilly got huffy puffy which made himself look silly. Krugman presented facts that showed that O'Reilly was lying and grandstanding. I don't think Krugman was afraid or intimidated at all. I'm his newest fan and I'm going to buy his book.

[CatWoman]

29. I sent the DU thread to Al Franken

for his show on Monday.

[buycitgo]

31. was that the one with the transcript of Outfoxed that caught

him in ANOTHER LIE?

the one about him claiming that they edited out the words "about your sex life," or something like that, leaving only SHUT UP on the film?

the transcript provided shows that they INCLUDED the very words he so excitedly claimed to be excised

he went REALLY CRAZY over that point

poor Paul had no chance on that one

OReilly is DANGEROUS

is he on medication?

if not, he needs some thorazine, haldol, or other STRONG antipsychotic

[minkyboodle]

40. good catch

I went and watched the docu afterwards and I'm sure he didn't cut him off after sex he said "shutup about sex" I believe (going on last night's memory). You can't win in a debate against O'Leily when you let him set the rules and dominate like Russert did.

[IdaBriggs]

34. Me Too!

I didn't know anything about him prior to this show. (Embarrassing but true fact.) I also liked him (Krugman) bluntly saying "that's a lie." On O'Reilly, my mother-in-law has a tendency to do the "subtle insult" nonsense, and then she also gets all upset when you call her on it and goes into the "I'm such a victim" thing. We think she has some borderline personality disorder, but I'm thinking O'Reilly does it as "performance art." We are all trained to try to calm people who are upset down, so its kind of a manipulative tactic. :) Ida

[Tracer]

7. No, he didn't tell Paul to SHUT UP, but...

... he might as well have.

Yelling, screaming, ranting at top volume Ñ while making no sense.

Paul had facts and figures, but was out-FOXed by O'Reilly's shouting.

[zulchzulu]

10. I wanna be on Bill O'Liely!

I was thinking of making a Flash game where Bill is forced to perform lewd acts with Osama's big member. Send the page to him. I'd love to be on his show and spit in his face or urinate on his desk while the interview is happening (near the end). Every response would be screamed at the top of my lungs. Maybe turn to the camera while he's blabbing and point at him and call him an asshole. Maybe have a t-shirt that has something on the back saying O'Liely is an asshole. Make it a classic.

[SemperEadem]

57. perhaps the tactic should be

to antagonize him to the point that Oliely strokes out.

[slor]

11. Well, Krugman did well to stay...

alive. If anyone watched this and walked away thinking o'liely is not a crazed maniacal freak, they are wrong.

[codegreen]

14. Krugman was too timid and scared. should have stood up more to the bully

like when Krugman was supposed to get response time, Oreilly would bluster and mock everything he said, and take up most of the time.
"oh, MEDIA MATTERS! next time do your own research!" (whatever the hell that means. wonder if Oreilly does all his own 'research' and doesn't use any other resources at all?)


Krugman, we love ya but do try to be less squirrelly next time please.

[spotbird]

33. O'Really said Russert would put him in his place if he were

out of line (or words to that effect).

Krugman replied, "You think so? I don't."

That sort of summed it up, there was no moderator and O'Really just screamed nonsense when he was cornered. If the debate can be measured by who was the loudest and dominated the conversation O'Really won hands down. Krugman is just too intellectual to attempt to win an argument by screaming his opponent down, which is where Franken has an advantage, Franken will respond in kind.

That said, Krugman had facts to support his views and naturally all O'Really had was bluster.

[mccormack98]

41. Good post. Russert needed to stop O' Butthead's screaming

Russert needed to intervene. They often argued over facts - which was stupid. For example, they argued over the 2000 Florida vote recount. There isn't room for dispute there - but Russert let O'Reilly argue about "oranges" (ie what would the outcome be if Gore had recounted his four counties) while Krugman was arguing "apples" (what would have happened if all counties had been recounted as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court.) Bottom line: Krugman was right. His data was relevant to the "who'd have actually won" question while O'Fuckhead's was relevant to only some bullshit, academic, whatif kinda question. Russert could have simply asked "If SCOTUS had not intervened, what would have happened?" I suspect that question would have caused O'Reilly's sphincter to contract and thereby end his outbursts.

Bill

[Feanorcurufinwe]

48. And they cut the camera to Russert just at that point

sitting as motionless and useless as a boil on Rush Limbaugh's ass. He looked totally clueless.

The whole thing was a laugh-fest!

[Pallas180]

51. I strongly disagree. He showed himself to be a normal person whihc

the loudmouth didnt.

Russert looked terribly distressed.

[kstewart33]

16. Frustrating to watch

I don't watch O'Reilly's show so I came away thinking this guy is impossible to talk to because if he cannot reason his way through a discussion, he'll just blow you off your feet with an insulting personal attack that is way overblown and way too aggressive. In short, the guy is a brute.

That showed bigtime. For O'Reilly fans, it was a-ok. But for anyone else who hasn't seen the Bill schtick, it must have been quite unpleasant.

[Cat Atomic]

17. If you read a transcript, you'd think Krugman won. But on TV he lost.

Television is about appearance, and I thought Krugman seemed afraid and uncertain. O'Reilly came off as 5 times the asshole he usually is. He really dominated the segment in television way.

Krugman is a very intelligent man, and he's infinitely more qualified and honest than Bill O'Reilly, but TV isn't about what you say. It's about how you look when you say it.

I think Krugman lost on television, and won in print.

[mccormack98]

44. Kinda agree BUT

only as pertains to the average viewer. The Red Meat O'Reilly fans probably enjoyed it. Red Meat Dems like myself did not. I found it frustrating that Russert allowed the conversation to devolve into a name-calling slugfest.

But I also thought "How is this playing with educated Republicans?" I'll bet some of them found this distasteful and shameful. O'Reilly looked like a plodding dullard in the face of real argument.

The war is not for the hearts and souls of the Red Meat Republicans. It is for the Repubs and Indendents who really want what's best for this country. I'll bet lots of Repubs were turned off by O'Reilly's performance. He didn't seem up to the task of real debate.

[spotbird]

56. Isn't "educated Republican" an oxymoron?

[Bush was AWOL]

18. O'Reilly appeared to win

because of his bullying and shouting, but he was such an ass and off on so many of his comments that any educated person would come to the conclusion that he is nothing more than a loud mouth asshole.

[graywarrior]

20. The looks Krugman gave O'Liely was

exactly the looks I got years ago when I went through my manic rages when I didn't get my own way. I recognize mental illness when I see it. O'Liely is sick.

[CatWoman]

I just sent this to OReilly:

[e-mail]

Saw you last night on Russert, specifically, you "debating" Paul Krugman.

You, "sir (I use that word loosely)" are nothing more than a blowhard and an impostor.

It was painful watching you prove to the world what a class A piece of filth you are.

All you did was scream and try to intimidate Mr. Krugman. What a loser. Did your mother teach you anything about manners, and not pointing your finger in people's faces? Where did you learn your debating skills? In the bully's corner of the schoolyard?

I suppose there's a certain segment of the population that laps your garbage up. Which only reinforces to me that Fox News watchers are dangerous, misinformed people.

You have no value whatsoever to rational, thinking Americans.

None.

Al Franken is right about you.

Paul Krugman is right about you.

Did I mention that you suck?

Stick to writing porn. Not that you know much about that, but you are not as distasteful in that forum as when you are trying to debate people armed with facts.

[Toby109]

39. Beautiful!

Especially the part about the porn. Spot on!

:hi:

[CatWoman]

42. Tom!!!

:hi:

I just ordered "Outfoxed" and "Hunting of the President".

They won't come until next month.

Hope you'll come over and watch them with me.

:D

[Toby109]

55. Sounds like fun

Let me know when, OK?

Tom

[Strelnikov_]

19. Reminded Me Of An Episode Of 'Da Ali G' Show

The propagandist making ridiculous, sweeping generalizations and the academic trying to provide a reasoned response but being shouted down or unable to respond due to the sheer ignorance of the propagandist.

Dr. Krugman looked like, well, an academic, and the propagandist looked like the thug he is.

I agree with others that have posted that these 'debates' are exercises in futility. They are not debates, but shouting matches, and the thug will always look like they came out on top to the uninformed. Cudo's to Dr. Krugman for at least trying, though.

The parts where they were 'debating' economic policy was particularly entertaining considering Dr. Krugman is a highly regarded economist and the propagandist is, well, a propagandist. I guess this keeps with the conservative theme of denegrating eduction and intellect.

The whole episode reminded me of when Dr. Krugman was 'debating' Jesse Ventura on the Bill Maher show last season. They were discussing farm subsidies with Dr. Krugman laying out some of the problems with subsidies as they relate to international trade (his specialty area). Basically, 'The Bodys' response was to shout him down along the lines of 'well Mr. Economist, maybe that's how it works in academia, but in the real world . . '.

[otohara]

22. O'Really Calling Krugman One Name After Another

O'Really was in pitbull mode moments after the show started - insulting Krugman and of course The New York Times.

Paul Krugman got a few digs in about how it's impossible to have a decent discussion w/ O'Really and shook his head a lot.

I don't know why Paul Krugman would agree to sit in the same room with Bill O'Really.

[Selwynn]

23. He did the best that could be done while Bill freaked out and went insane

[UCLA02]

24. Replay?

Anyone know if it will still be replayed this weekend?

[nostamj]

26. I wonder if Bill would come to my show.....

To the tune of “Bill Baily”

YOU’RE JUST A CLOWN O’REILLY
BILL, PLEASE SIT DOWN!
WE’RE DIZZY FROM YOUR SPINNING!

YOU LET AL FRANKEN BAIT YOU
AND PLAYED THE FOOL
THE DEVIL GOT HIS DUE

THE POMPOUS PRETENTIOUS RAVINGS
THAT MAKE UP YOUR SHTICK
IS JUST ANOTHER RIGHT WING RANT
YOUR SHOW ON FOX–
JON STEWART MOCKS
O’REILLY WON’T YOU PLEASE SHUT UP

[King Coal]

27. LostInAnomie, If you have cable, check the listings, I think it will be on

again. I watched it three times, and clearly Krugman won. O'Reilly's weakness is his temper, and he lost it several times. Not being a person even slightly afraid of being punched in the face, I would love to be on a talk show with O'Reilly just to bait him into violence. Believe me, I know just what buttons to push. O'Reilly will get his. One thing I do know for a fact is that what goes around, does come around. We have not heard the rest of this story. O'Reilly will be bragging next week on how he bested Krugman. It will be interesting to hear what others, (Franken, Randi, Malloy, Stewart, Maher, etc) will have to say. He needs to be challenged to debate more often, and with other people not so meek as PK. Can you imagine him trying that with Moore. Moore already handed him his ass, and, I'm sure, would serve it to him in a wheelbarrrow if he were bullied.

[dogman]

30. It depends on your outlook.

Pacifists will say Krugman won. Bullies will say O'Vilely won. So it probably is in between and resolved nothing. It would have been impossible for Krugman to keep up with the venom spewed his way and present a reasonable response. One would expect in a true debate one side would not be held to response but would be able to put forth ideas. O'Vilely simply dismisses and spews. Too nauseating to gain much perspective.

[noise626]

35. Using an opponents anger against him...

I think that Krugman did very well actually. Like a good counter puncher, he simply laid back in the cut and allowed O'Really to be, well, O'Really. IMHO, it would do no good to try to out-shout him, because you would not be able to get the FACTS on the record, and it would instead degenerate into a screaming match where nothing gets accomplished (although it would be fun, I admit :evilgrin: ).

O'Really is far too egotistical and stupid to realize that you never go in to a fight angry. Never. You will always lose, because by not being able to control yourself, you will expend energy incorrectly and do stupid things. The whole "do your own Research, PAL!" at the end was a classic example of doing oneself in :)

To me, it was kinda like watching a Brazilian ju-jitsu master fight a guy bigger than him....let the big guy do all the work, hit him where it hurts the most when he's exhausted, and then take him out.

Amazing :)

pax
ant

[SemperEadem]

58. the philosophy behind Judo--using an opponent's aggression against him

The most effective thing anyone can do to O'Reilly when he begins that bullshit is to stop the interview right there, say you were under the impression that you were to have a reasoned, intelligent conversation with this person, not to be fielding overly-boorish emotional paroxisms, take the mike off and leave the set and the building.

There is nothing anyone can do to stop you. Oh, he may spit and sputter, blah blah blah, but one thing is for certain: the director is going to start freaking out because the blocking of the show just went into the shitter on his watch and he's got to wake up and do his job. There is no script to read from and they have to wing it and not make the situation look more stupid than it already does. They then have to throw to a commercial break, figure out how to proceed once the two minute thirty second break is over; spend thousands on overtime pay to keep the crew in order to reshoot the segment, throw the whole post-production scheduling out of whack and really piss the crew off for intruding into their off time.

I would love to be at the post-mortem of that show!!!

If more people who were faced with this situation would just do this, the powers that be--the accounting department--will snatch his coattail and tell him to chill the fuck out because it's costing them too much to support his viewpoint.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

43. OReilly did alot of out of control screaming and lost his temper several

times, Krugman had the facts at hand, reasoned arguments, and citations that proved OReilly's lack of credibility.

So, those who think out of control screaming is impressive, think OReilly kicked Krugman's ass. I just thought OReilly made an idiot out of himself, and Krugman did a good job of presenting his case.

[saracat]

45. Russert won.

By having a show everyone is talking about.BTW Russert did the usual media whore crap by allowing O'Lielly to close and added to the winning impression with the polite "see you next week ,Bill" to O'lielly and no comment to Krugman. I think Krugman was too polite by far but he never decended to O'lielly's level, and Krugman appeared factually sound and Bill was bellicose. In that sense, Krugman won.

[medeak]

46. Krugman going on O'Reilly show?

just saw blurb on Fox O'Reilly saying he was coming on. Why would Krugman ask for more bullying?

Maybe he thinks he will be ready for him this time?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

52. No, OReilly is going to show edits that make him look good.

[medeak]

53. thanks...won't bother watching then!

[Zhade]

47. I couldn't even finish watching it - got too pissed off!

I love Krugman. TGU is a terrific book. But man, he looked so scared at the beginning of the show! I saw him shaking. Made me sad.

O'Lielly (who was HERE at a work function last week, though I didn't see him) is such a fucking LIAR. I lost count of the bullshit half-truths he kept throwing at Krugman.

Good on the K for calling him on a lie, though of course O'Lielly couldn't care less. And since this was my first time in years seeing Russert's show, let me just reaffirm: whore. Total fucking whore.

[Pallas180]

50. I liked when Krugman quietly said"It's impossible to have a rational

conversation with you."

I didn't think O REilly came out the winner. He showed himself for
the loud flannelmouthed practicer of personal politic destruction that
he is.

He kep throwing personal insults at Krugman, which Krugman laughed
off , ignored and kept going.

O'REilly looked like the bully and asshole that he is.

[medeak]

49. Is O'Reilly married?

off topic...but all I could find in bio is that he lives in Long Island and his friends are "guys" from the first grade.

can't imagine a woman living with such an angry fellow.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

54. Anyone have VIDEO of this?

I wanted to see it but couldn't.

Hopefully someone can post a video online. Or, does anyone know when/where it will air again?