I'll be on Bill Moyers' Journal tonight, discussing the Iraq War, the religious right, the presidential race, and other issues.
The fun starts at 9pm et. Go here for more details.
And go here for a full localized PBS schedule.
Gillespie on Bill Moyers' Journal Tonight, 9PM ET
Comments to "Gillespie on Bill Moyers' Journal Tonight, 9PM ET":
steveintheknow | May 11, 2007, 12:10pm | #
Sweet!!!Wine, cheetos, and an evening with Dr. Nick.
Yay!
Isaac Bartram | May 11, 2007, 12:15pm | #
I'd watch if there was anyway I could just hear Nick and not have to see or listen to that odious fucking self-righteous prick Moyers.Why Bother? The spin and editing are not friendly to debate. Moyers positions could have been phoned in last week. An empty char and open debate would be more interesting... Moyers is a shark who has jumped himself... PBS keeps flopping to claim relevance, but the audience shrinks with every cycle.. There is better stuff elsewhere online... Interesting, engaging, charming, and fun... Not PBS virtues.
GILMORE | May 11, 2007, 12:26pm | #
Bill Moyers rocks your world. You are just player haters.Nick, dont fail me with the Leather Jacket of Liberty.
The sad truth is, you get more balanced, relevant, and thoughtful discussions on PBS than any commercial broadcaster with all their conflicts of interest and pandering.
Warren | May 11, 2007, 12:56pm | #
I am a big fan of PBS. I even have a collection of "Thank You gifts" from stations all over the country.Bill Moyers is a self-absorbed, pin-headed, blow-hard.
Guy Montag | May 11, 2007, 1:03pm | #
Bill Moyers is why you missed the Reasonoid gathering? MOYERS?Well, your Major Award will be waiting for you anyway. This PBS stuff just makes it more appropriate :)
Frank_A | May 11, 2007, 1:04pm | #
Isaac Bartram | May 11, 2007, 12:15pm | #I'd watch if there was anyway I could just hear Nick and not have to see or listen to that odious fucking self-righteous prick Moyers.
Amen to that Mr. Bartram.
Gillespie, go kick his annoying, pansy, liberal ass!
Guy Montag | May 11, 2007, 1:05pm | #
The sad truth is, you get more balanced, relevant, and thoughtful discussions on PBS than any commercial broadcaster with all their conflicts of interest and pandering.Yea, mabe if you have a Che t-shirt and Nehru jacket.
OMG! Nick, you didn't wear the leather Nehru jacket did you?
joshua corning | May 11, 2007, 1:25pm | #
Hey Nick, be sure to ask Bill why he was outing gays working for the Goldwater campaign.Wear what ever t-shirt/leather jacket combo that you feel necessary.
Guy Montag | May 11, 2007, 1:26pm | #
Wear what ever t-shirt/leather jacket combo that you feel necessary.Just a suggestion, but I hope you wore the Punisher t-shirt.
Matt Groening | May 11, 2007, 1:31pm | #
Wine, cheetos, and an evening with Dr. Nick.Hello, everybody!!
Nick--Moyer's a pussy. You can take him. One punch to the head. Just one!
Show him you ain't no poser in that jacket.
Show him you ain't no poser in that jacket.
dhex | May 11, 2007, 1:52pm | #
yeah nick beat up senior citizens yeah!wait no scratch that. it's bad advice (tm).
Mike Espinoza | May 11, 2007, 3:10pm | #
Nick,I'm going to tell Bill O'Reilly that you've been cheating on him with that lefty Moyers.
kwais | May 11, 2007, 3:20pm | #
Be sure to mention Ron Paul, and how well he is doing and all.Oh, and good luck and all.
PBS Veteran | May 11, 2007, 5:06pm | #
"The sad truth is, you get more balanced, relevant, and thoughtful discussions on PBS than any commercial broadcaster with all their conflicts of interest and pandering."Not always. The News hour - yes. Washington week - yes. NBR - yes. Moyers - no f'ing way.
kevrob | May 11, 2007, 5:49pm | #
I hope Nick calls out Moyers and the other independent producers who churn out this stuff for PBS as the corporate welfare whores they are.Mentioning that a government-subsidized broadcasting service and stations licensed to state and local government entities ought to be considered unconstitutional should be on the menu, too.
Kevin
Guy Montag | May 11, 2007, 9:37pm | #
Great work Nick! You turned that segment into the only thing worthwhile in the whole show.crimethink | May 11, 2007, 9:40pm | #
It doesn't come on here till 10 ET for some reason...it looks like some retread of the McLaughlin Group is on right now. For those who've seen it already, did Moyers shut off Nick's mic at any point?GILMORE | May 11, 2007, 9:51pm | #
PBS Veteran | May 11, 2007, 5:06pm | #"The sad truth is, you get more balanced, relevant, and thoughtful discussions on PBS than any commercial broadcaster with all their conflicts of interest and pandering."
Not always. The News hour - yes. Washington week - yes. NBR - yes. Moyers - no f'ing way.
I agree. Also include Frontline - yes/mostly, Nova - yes, American Experience - yes, and cooking shows - yes :)
But Moyers show, Now, and other programs have a blatant and predictable liberal tilt.
I watch PBS almost exclusively (aside from sports really) and think (aside from the gov funding) it is pretty good deal for no commercials. The News Hour is the only good news show on TV IMHO.
I mean, you have to give them credit for at least acknowledging Nick in a serious way rather than as a counterpoint talking-head on some BS rhetoric show that calls itself 'journalism'...
GILMORE | May 11, 2007, 9:52pm | #
p.s. good job nick. The leather jacket did well tooGuy Montag | May 11, 2007, 10:00pm | #
It doesn't come on here till 10 ET for some reason...it looks like some retread of the McLaughlin Group is on right now. For those who've seen it already, did Moyers shut off Nick's mic at any point?No, he lets Nick talk pretty much as long as he wants.
You have to wait through a whole segment of Moyers hysteria over Regent University and how they are taking over the universe. He tries to bait Nick with some of that too.
Guy Montag | May 11, 2007, 10:14pm | #
Spoiler: Nick has an opportunity to gush over Ron Paul, but spares the viewers.I was excited to see a libertarian perspective on tv. Moyers asked Nick about what Prez candidate best embodied the libertarian view and Nick went over a list of the qualities that he would look for. All but his Immigration view seemed to fit Ron Paul to a T. Unfortunate that he did not mention him. No politician fits all the items on your wishlist, but Ron Paul is dead on all the biggies. As far as I know, no other candidates fit the noninterventionist, pro free trade, small government wishlist. A missed oportunity.. deliberate or staying above the fray?
joshua corning | May 11, 2007, 11:28pm | #
A missed oportunity.. deliberate or staying above the fray?I think I have read/heard Nick say like 4 times that he always votes for whoever the Libertarian party puts up. Ron Paul is running for the Republican ticket.
Pretty simple math there Paul W
I voted for Bednarik last time, and will support the Libertarian again... if Ron Paul is not the GOP candidate. Nick wasn't asked about the Libertarians. Who will that be? You have no idea at this point. They were talking about the debate candidates. If you support Libtarian ideas, is it better to have all the candidates be Libertarians????? Then you win no matter what. Better to have a candidate that you support 95% of their views and another that you like 90%, than the 95% and a 10%.... I sure would. A little math for you... simple.
Ken Shultz | May 11, 2007, 11:51pm | #
I think he played it beautifully. Moyers' has a broad audience, but it probably leans to the Democrats. If Gillespie came out backin' a Republican, some of those viewers might dismiss everything else he'd said. To a broad audience, I don't think Gillespie could have made a better pitch....makes me want to subscribe to the magazine all over again.
I did start thinkin' about the man in black thing again, specifically how it would work on the Charlie Rose show with that background. I guess they'd just have to do closeups.
crimethink | May 12, 2007, 12:11am | #
Is it me or have Nick's sideburns expanded?Admittedly, the last time I saw him on TV was in 2002 on ORly, so it's not like I've been keeping up.
Aresen | May 12, 2007, 12:53am | #
Good show, Nick. Even the leather jacket on those "square shoulders because he refuses to carry water for either party" came off ok.The comments about the contrast between the religeous right's purported influence and their actual achievements went very well, although I don't think Moyers got the implicit point that everyone - including those we dislike - having the right to speak out and make themselves heard.
GILMORE | May 12, 2007, 10:55am | #
crimethink | May 12, 2007, 12:11am | #Is it me or have Nick's sideburns expanded?
Ahh grasshopper. You are learning.
It is that your mind that has expanded to be able to perceive the sideburns of liberty in their full flower. Go forth now and ponder on this. And get me a beer.
Nick did well, i agree with the avoiding naming names candidate wise, good move given the time frame and need to stay on the big picture.
I also agree moyers had trouble with some of the basic positions of 'free speech, no coercion' type stuff. he seemed to assume a 'we must coerce them before they coerce us!' POV regarding the religious right.
Then again, a lot of people here sometimes get that way about religion. I really liked nick's parsing of the question of religion in public life, and thought he was far more charitable than other writers for the mag often are, here in the blog at least.
Akira MacKenzie | May 12, 2007, 1:13pm | #
Not a bad interview, but I dare say that Nick has his head in the sand about the Religious Right.Steven Andrew Miller | May 12, 2007, 2:37pm | #
Moyers' has a broad audience, but it probably leans to the Democrats.Probably?!
Matt W | May 12, 2007, 3:11pm | #
"I dare say that Nick has his head in the sand about the Religious Right."I think Nick had to provide a contrast with Moyers' overly paranoid view.
On the presidential level, the US has ~50% voter participation, and Dems/Repubs get ~50% of this pool each. In this sense, a small dedicated group of grassroots RR activists, who are less than 10% of the population, can make a decisive impact.
To me this is a different picture than Moyers' seemed to paint. He seems to think the RR is taking over 'mainstream' conservative politics in some way. I don't buy that. My inlaws are very religious and e.g. pro-life, but still think Robertson and Falwell are pretty crazy.
Good stuff, Nick. Good stuff.
I'm glad you didn't punch him in the head.
I'm glad you didn't punch him in the head.
Jim Wendelken | May 14, 2007, 10:21am | #
I've only read an article here and there on and can't say I'm a libertarian. Nick was good to hear from and I found his view on the Religious Right not being that worrisome comforting. Perhaps Moyers is a bit paranoid about them...I'm back and forth all the time. I am a big advocate of Moyers, biased as he may sometimes be, because he doesn't try to win an argument, he attempts to solicit the best response from his interviewees by asking questions that those who oppose them would ask. Questions that I would ask. If you pay attention to the time, Bill has about 5 to 10% of the talking time and Nick has 90 to 95%. Hate Bill Moyers or not, he gives all his guests room to speak their views clearly.