Tuesday, July 27, 2004
Politics: O'Reilly v. Hollywood
O'Reilly interviewed Ben Affleck tonight. Gret, another Hollywood elitist? Not quite. I was impressed with Affleck's candor and charisma, things that his movies have lacked for some time now, and I have to say that I have a newfound respect for him.
As O'Reilly put it, "he gets it." Unlike the typical Hollywood liberal, Affleck argued his position with substance. He laid out the issues that mattered most to him, and he didn't resort to vitriolic attacks.
When asked his personal feelings toward President Bush, Affleck shied away from the hatred expressed by his peers. He labeled Bush "collegial and affable," as well as "patriotic." That doesn't mean that he agrees with most of Bush's policy, but he he offered respectful debate instead of smug quips.
So what issues concern Affleck? The economy, veterans' benefits and the need for multi-lateral action in the War on Terror (including any pre-emptive action in other nations). O'Reilly also posed the same question to Affleck that he did to Ralph Nader last night (If you had multiple reports from foreign intelligence agencies that placed WMDs in Saddam's arsenal, how would you act?) and Affleck, unlike a defensive Nader, responded with a much more poised response. He would seek out true coalitions before acting.
Now I don't necessarily mesh with Affleck's views here. I like Bush's progress with the economy, I think veterans are in good hands with the administration, and I refuse to place international relations above American security. But he's willing to discuss the issues in a civilized manner, because of what he believes, and I can at least respect that.
O'Reilly also hosted Michael Moore. I was busy giving my Indian roommate a civics lesson, though, so I missed it. If you saw it, I'd be interested to hear any thoughts you might have, so don't be afraid of the comments section.
|
As O'Reilly put it, "he gets it." Unlike the typical Hollywood liberal, Affleck argued his position with substance. He laid out the issues that mattered most to him, and he didn't resort to vitriolic attacks.
When asked his personal feelings toward President Bush, Affleck shied away from the hatred expressed by his peers. He labeled Bush "collegial and affable," as well as "patriotic." That doesn't mean that he agrees with most of Bush's policy, but he he offered respectful debate instead of smug quips.
So what issues concern Affleck? The economy, veterans' benefits and the need for multi-lateral action in the War on Terror (including any pre-emptive action in other nations). O'Reilly also posed the same question to Affleck that he did to Ralph Nader last night (If you had multiple reports from foreign intelligence agencies that placed WMDs in Saddam's arsenal, how would you act?) and Affleck, unlike a defensive Nader, responded with a much more poised response. He would seek out true coalitions before acting.
Now I don't necessarily mesh with Affleck's views here. I like Bush's progress with the economy, I think veterans are in good hands with the administration, and I refuse to place international relations above American security. But he's willing to discuss the issues in a civilized manner, because of what he believes, and I can at least respect that.
O'Reilly also hosted Michael Moore. I was busy giving my Indian roommate a civics lesson, though, so I missed it. If you saw it, I'd be interested to hear any thoughts you might have, so don't be afraid of the comments section.
Longhorn Sites
Astros Sites