I am posting to declare an intellectual war on these three men. I live in Massachusetts, and the three of these men run back to back to back on a conservative talk radio station, 96.9. I find the ignorance of these men to astounding. My favorite thing said by any of these men was when Jay Severn called liberalism a "mental disorder" which is absolutely absurd.

It is astonishing that these men have been given radio shows with their obvious ignorance blaring like a siren. I doubt that any of these men has ever read any books, articles, or anything about political theory. They are simply tools of the shallow maintsream political culture that we have in America today.

Bill O'Reilly is a putz. I say that not because of his beliefs, but rather in how he presents them and himself...

http://www.defendingthetruth.com/showthread.php?t=1639 (Bill O'Reilly: Siccing the Fox News Security...)

I like Jay Severin the most. I myself live in Massachusetts and I tune into 96.9 on a regular basis. I usually laugh at O'Reilly and Graham, but I find that Severin makes the most sense in politics. He considers himself a libertarian and he does not support Bush's war in Iraq, and many other things...just to make sure you understand that he's not a diehard Republican.

I believe a couple other members on these forums listen to Severin.

In response to your support for Jay Severin...I have never heard him say anything that suggests he does not support Bush and his war on terror, and as I said earlier, he regards liberalism as a mental disorder. Of course he is referring to the Democrats who are completely useless, but his statement is still without merit.

I find that Jay Serevin, in the same way O'Reilly and Graham do, talks about useless mainstream media topics that bring up no real debate. In addition, if he were truly a libertarian, he would be denouncing our entire system of economics and government.

You may want to pay closer attention.
Jay was in favor of the war before the status of WMDs was known.
Jay has ferociously criticized Bush’s policy on Iraq war for risking the lives of US troops unnecessarily after it was found that there was no weapons of mass destruction.

Severin maintains that US should use weapons of mass destruction as a primary and sole weapon and all the US had to do was “drop a nuke on Afghanistan and Iraq, instead of putting Americans soldiers at risk unnecessarily (In Jay Severin has issues January 23, 2006).”

Nuke them and get out is how I belive he put it. He also points out that Nuking does not necessary mean nuclear weapons.

He does support the Patriot act if that is what you are refering to

If it quacks like a duck, Onthefence...

On the other hand, AnarchyintheUS, I really doubt you could "declare intellectual war" on the guys since they probably don't even know that you exist, or care.

Can a person really declare intellectual war on somebody who is not armed with one?

I don't see how this statement supports your point. You are saying he would rather fiercely bomb to hell a sovereign nation than have our troops be killed. THIS IS STILL A WAR!!! I don't see how that means that he does not support the war in Iraq if he stil believes in continuing in one way or another.

This intellectual war is more of a joke than anything else. I would gladly debate them if I ever had the opportunity, but the intellectual war is more of a playful joke

I wouldn't want to debate those nutters. I have more constructive things to do with my time. All they do is shout at people who disagree with them until those people are cowed into silence. It's a disgraceful mockery of the art of debate.