Being Bill O'Reilly Means Never Having to say Sorry

[Mr Manifesto]

On 18 March 2003, O'Reilly said on Good Morning America:

"if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again."

Nothing new there. But did you know that, rather than completely ignore the issues, BOR has been giving himself extensions?

5 Jun 2003 On The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly declares: "Reasonable people are faced with two conclusions -- one, that the intelligence was wrong, or, two, that more time is needed to find the weapons. Talking Points just asks one thing from President Bush: an update on the situation in the next few weeks. That's a very reasonable request, and one the President must take seriously if he wants to advance the cause of the USA throughout the world. In the end, if the intelligence was faulty, some people have to be fired. If, God forbid, the intelligence was contrived, and I don't believe that, but if it is proven, then Congressional action must be taken."

11 Jun 2003 On The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly declares: "It is possible the President did lie, but most of the credible evidence points to wishful thinking on WMDs, rather than outright deception. By the way, the President must tell us his feelings on the guerrilla action in Iraq and the WMDs, or risk losing popularity... We the people deserve an extensive update from the President before he goes on summer vacation. This is not a partisan issue. This is a people issue. There are things we have the right to know about, and the President must tell us."

31 Jul 2003 On The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly declares: "We're confused about the WMDs. And Mr. Bush has an obligation to clear this up by the end of the year."

8 Oct 2003 During his appearance on the National Public Radio interview program Fresh Air, Bill O'Reilly declares: "Well, certainly the WMD situation is troubling, okay. All Americans should demand within the next nine months -- before the Presidential candidate, uh candidates, really swing in -- for an explanation of what exactly happened. Americans will accept mistakes if mistakes were made honestly, but it needs to be defined by the Bush administration why the intelligence was faulty. And, uh, you know, there is no spin on that. They have to do it."

Rotten.com (http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/pundits/bill-oreilly/)

Now, maybe he has already apologised. I can't access his website at the moment. It certainly would be puzzling if he didn't- surely with a head as big as his it wouldn't hurt to eat a little crow?

Maybe he and JAR could start a club together.

[Zero]

Being O'Reilly means never having to tell the truth, be polite to people, or stop drinking Irsh whiskey.

[subgenius]

Its called being hoisted upon your own petard.

Have you seen him on other people's talk shows? The guy is unglued.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by subgenius
Its called being hoisted upon your own petard.

Have you seen him on other people's talk shows? The guy is unglued.

I've only heard about his appearances on other talk shows, and from what I can gather, he spends more time walking out of them than talking.

[American]

I am deeply attracted by your bitter, sullen, pouty, liberal finger-pointing, foot-stomping, forever-moaning, meaningless, child-like views. Are you a married man? Let me know 'cause I live in massachusetts and us gays can get married now if you are interested....

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by subgenius
Its called being hoisted upon your own petard.

Have you seen him on other people's talk shows? The guy is unglued.

I didn't. But I just wonder: there are actually talk shows where talk show hosts interview other talk show hosts??????

[Hexxenhammer]

Originally posted by Skeptic


I didn't. But I just wonder: there are actually talk shows where talk show hosts interview other talk show hosts?????? Bill walked out of an interview he was doing with Terry Gross on NPR.

[davefoc]

Mr Manifesto,

I'm not quite sure I see your point.

I didn't see anything that you quoted there that sounded like BOR was acting in an out of control partisan way. It seemed like his comments on WMD were fairly reasonable throughout.

I guess you think it's a problem that based on his first statement that he didn't say something like:

"I apologize to the nation and I will not trust the Bush administration again."

OK, he didn't say that, but completely candid mea culpas by prominent personalities are very rare and if you criticize BOR for not doing it you could level the same kind of criticism at almost every other public personality.

He has said that the WMD's don't seem to exist and that the Bush administration needs to discuss openly why they were so wrong. Personally, I think those were adequate and reasonable statements. I think BOR might be criticized for some other stuff but I personally think your criticism here is excessive.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Hexxenhammer
Bill walked out of an interview he was doing with Terry Gross on NPR.

Just checked out a few web pages. Apparently, O'Reilly walked out after accusing the interviewer of "bullying and hostility".

For all I know that's true, but, boy, talk about the pot calling the kettle black... did O'Reilly ever interview anybody WITHOUT bullying and being hostile to them???

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Just checked out a few web pages. Apparently, O'Reilly walked out after accusing the interviewer of "bullying and hostility".

For all I know that's true, but, boy, talk about the pot calling the kettle black... did O'Reilly ever interview anybody WITHOUT bullying and being hostile to them???

What the? Skeptic, did the Pod People get you? I thought you were all for the continued dominance of the right wing and cheap-labor conservatism and the Greatness of the USA No Matter What and the Might makes Right stuff and all that. You okay, buddy?

[davefoc]

I know just a little bit more about this incident. I listened to part of the interview on NPR, I have heard NPR's apology over the interview and I have heard BOR's spin on it.

I was surprised at how inept the interviewer was. She had apparently read the Al Franken book and the interview consisted of her reading an anti-BOR passage and BOR responding. This sequence was repeated numerous times. She didn't seem to have the knowledge to discuss any of BOR's responses, she just seemed to be able to go back to the book and read another passage attacking BOR. Apparently BOR was there to discuss his book and at some point in time he got pissed and walked off.

The interviewer was proud enough of her style that she was bragging about the interview the next day and was proudly announcing that she was going to replay the whole interview.

Apparently, her boss didn't agree with her assessment of her interview and wrote BOR a letter agreeing that the interview was not fair and apologizing for it.

I don't want to come off here as the great BOR defender here, I just think that the guy acted reasonably in this case.

[Cain]

I heard the interview with Terry Gross. Bill O'Reilly just constantly needs to prove to the world that he's a big blubbering vagina (http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=bill_oreilly).

I'm glad somebody's finally sending him Johnson and Johnson "no more tear" shampoo along with a box of tampons.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by LFTKBS


What the? Skeptic, did the Pod People get you? I thought you were all for the continued dominance of the right wing and cheap-labor conservatism and the Greatness of the USA No Matter What and the Might makes Right stuff and all that. You okay, buddy?

Thanks for the compliment, but more seriously, my view of O'Reilly is the same as G. B. Shaw's: "I'm not responsible for every idiot who agrees with me".

Yes, LFTKBS, I am quite aware that--generally speaking--"right wingers" tend to be less nice, more crude, less educated, and so on, than the "enlightened" left. The left's got 95% of all important intellectuals--the right's got Bill O'Reilly and FOX news.

However, just because nicer people hold certain views doesn't mean they are correct. On the contrary: whenever the "right" group of people is unanimous about something, it's pretty certain they're wrong, since the real reason for holding the view in question tends to be social acceptance, not reality.

P.S.

To Cain: I laughed so hard at Maddox's site you linked to nearly fell of my chair. Site of the month...

[corplinx]

Criticisms of Bill O'Reilly usually fall into these categories:
A. he is a rude egomaniac
B. he is a Bush apologist
C. he is a right winger

Only the first criticism I find any substance in. My wife (a die hard democrat) watches his show and sometimes I am forced to watch it with her in the name of quality time.

He bashes Bush for versious reasons including border security, he often bashes Jeb Bush over whatever the latest evil in Florida is. On his own values he is pretty much like a union democrat with a few religious conservative viewpoints. However, he is not down the line any ideology that I can detect.

Of the million reasons to hate Bill O'Reilly, why make two of them that are mere assertion based on kneejerk extrapolation?

[Zero]

Originally posted by corplinx
Criticisms of Bill O'Reilly usually fall into these categories:
A. he is a rude egomaniac
B. he is a Bush apologist
C. he is a right winger

Only the first criticism I find any substance in. My wife (a die hard democrat) watches his show and sometimes I am forced to watch it with her in the name of quality time.

He bashes Bush for versious reasons including border security, he often bashes Jeb Bush over whatever the latest evil in Florida is. On his own values he is pretty much like a union democrat with a few religious conservative viewpoints. However, he is not down the line any ideology that I can detect.

Of the million reasons to hate Bill O'Reilly, why make two of them that are mere assertion based on kneejerk extrapolation? What, that he bashes Bush for not being nearly as retarded as he is?:p

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by corplinx
Criticisms of Bill O'Reilly usually fall into these categories:
A. he is a rude egomaniac
B. he is a Bush apologist
C. he is a right winger

Only the first criticism I find any substance in. My wife (a die hard democrat) watches his show and sometimes I am forced to watch it with her in the name of quality time.

He bashes Bush for versious reasons including border security, he often bashes Jeb Bush over whatever the latest evil in Florida is. On his own values he is pretty much like a union democrat with a few religious conservative viewpoints. However, he is not down the line any ideology that I can detect.

Of the million reasons to hate Bill O'Reilly, why make two of them that are mere assertion based on kneejerk extrapolation?

This sounds awfully close to being a strawman. Who said they hate Bush because he's a Bush apologist? Or a right winger (O'Reillysucks.com and other web sites might, but I haven't seen anyone in this forum hate him for that reason, and certainly not in this thread)?

The reason that I, personally, hate O'Reilly is because there have been too many occasions where he is a hypocrite, or treated his viewers like they are stupid, or where he's just plainly a loud-mouth. Idiots like him have no place in discourse on any subject. Yet he seems to expect people to take his TV show personally. His politics are irrelevant in this case.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
The reason that I, personally, hate O'Reilly is because there have been too many occasions where he is a hypocrite, or treated his viewers like they are stupid, or where he's just plainly a loud-mouth. Idiots like him have no place in discourse on any subject. Hear, hear. BOR is a waking library of logical and argumentative fallacies. Yeah, I don't agree with most of his opinions, but it's his inability to engage in an actual debate with someone who does not agree with him is very hypocritical and antithetical to the proported purpse of his show.

It's all smoke and mirrors.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by corplinx
Criticisms of Bill O'Reilly usually fall into these categories:
A. he is a rude egomaniac
B. he is a Bush apologist
C. he is a right winger



HOW DARE YOU! Bill is not a right winger! Hes a self declared independant !!!!

Of course if it walks like a duck.......

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Tmy


HOW DARE YOU! Bill is not a right winger! Hes a self declared independant !!!!Yeah!!! He even criticizes the president on his immigration policy! How many right-wingers would do that?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Tmy


HOW DARE YOU! Bill is not a right winger! Hes a self declared independant !!!!

Of course if it walks like a duck....... Yeah, except that Al Franken dug up his voter registration, and he registered Republican.

[Cain]

I believe the _Washington Post_ originally found out about O'Reilly's party affiliation and confronted him with it an interview. O'Reilly said he had no idea, and that the registrar must've messed up. Then maybe it was NPR that actually dug up the registration with a little dash next to Republican.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Zero
Yeah, except that Al Franken dug up his voter registration, and he registered Republican. He "debunks" that on his radio show. He didn't mean to check the Republican box on his voter registration. It was a mistake. Someone else checked the box for him.

Welcome to the No Spin Zone*









*assuming you always rotate clockwise.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Upchurch
He "debunks" that on his radio show. He didn't mean to check the Republican box on his voter registration. It was a mistake. Someone else checked the box for him.

Welcome to the No Spin Zone*









*assuming you always rotate clockwise. Right...and Clinton didn't inhale, either,

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Zero
Right...and Clinton didn't inhale, either,

I actually tend to believe Clinton on that one. He didn't inhale--that's why he didn't enjoy it! He didn't do it right! :D

[Monketey Ghost]

Didn't inhale... that's like cooking an excellent meal and not eating it.

[Frank Newgent]

Originally posted by Cleon


I actually tend to believe Clinton on that one. He didn't inhale--that's why he didn't enjoy it! He didn't do it right! :D
Isn't coughing the same as not inhaling?

[Nasarius]

Originally posted by Frank Newgent

Isn't coughing the same as not inhaling?

Nah. Contrary to popular opinion among stoners, THC absorption is actually quite fast. However, it's worth noting that for many people, marijuana will have no effect on them the first few times they smoke. *shrug*
But I think we're getting a bit off topic :)

So:
Bill O'Reilly sucks!

[gnome]

I am often amazed at how much (not just on Bill's show) arguments with useless, misdirected or fallacious points are presented as debate and gobbled up as entertainment gleefully.

Don't people get enough of that in real life?

An argument is a connected series of statements to establish a proposition... not just an automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says!
[/python]

Arrgh, sometimes I feel like that guy, I really do.

[Tmy]

Bill is a witch hunter

His latest victim is the judge who didnt throw the Sarasota killer in jail after he didnt pay his court costs from a drug case.

Bill is trying to make it seem like the Judge ignored the law and is at fault for the girls death. And that he should have tossed him in jail cause he did it before. Of cousre he was AQUITTED of that charge,but Bill still thinks that the judge shouldve used that as a reason to jail him. So Bill wants to punish people for crimes they were aquitted of.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Tmy
Bill is a witch hunter Or rather, a "secularist" hunter.

What is it with these types who want to find those different than themselves and "get rid" of them in the name of perserving our country/religion/whatever? *sigh*

[Skeptic]

In addition, today Bill "ego the size of Montana" O'Reilly wrote in the New York Daily News that--after meeting Paris Hilton in a superbowl party--that she is an airhead with no education.

Well, can't argue with that, but what is the reason he gives? She didn't know who the president was? She couldn't multiply 3 and 17? No. The reason is... (drum roll, please)... she didn't recognize HIM:

Paris Hilton and I hung out together at the Super Bowl. Well, that may be overstating things. Twice I happened to find myself next to her at parties, but the woman had no idea who your humble correspondent was. Instead, her vacant look clearly signaled to the world the essence of her philosophical outlook: "Here I am."

"Humble correspondent" my ass. While Paris Hilton might have other claims to airheadedness except for this, since when is not recognizing Bill O'Reilly a sign of being "ignorant"? You'd think not recognizing, say, Lincoln or Einstein would be more serious... but then again, they didn't have their daily TV show!

Oh, and by the way... if he hates "Hollywood culture" so friggin' much, why does he go to their superbowl parties?

[subgenius]

Hell hath frozen over:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative television news anchor Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday he was now skeptical about the Bush administration and apologized to viewers for supporting prewar claims that Iraq (news - web sites) had weapons of mass destruction.

The anchor of his own show on Fox News said he was sorry he gave the U.S. government the benefit of the doubt that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s weapons program poised an imminent threat, the main reason cited for going to war.

"I was wrong. I am not pleased about it at all and I think all Americans should be concerned about this," O'Reilly said in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America."

"What do you want me to do, go over and kiss the camera?" asked O'Reilly, who had promised rival ABC last year he would publicly apologize if weapons were not found.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040210/people_nm/campaign_bush_oreilly_dc_3

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by subgenius
Hell hath frozen over:No. Way.

:jaw:

[Zero]

Wow...just wow.

[Cain]

While critical of President Bush (news - web sites), O'Reilly said he did not think the president intentionally lied. Rather, O'Reilly blamed CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton (news - web sites).

"I don't know why Tenet still has his job."

You have no idea why Tenet still has his job? Geez, what possible reason could there be? Hmmmm....

Shouldn't we see some of that trademark O'Reilly outrage?

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by subgenius
Hell hath frozen over:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040210/people_nm/campaign_bush_oreilly_dc_3

"Let's not go around sucking each other's d***s yet, gentlemen. There's a big difference between "I will not trust the Bush administration again" and "I am more skeptical."

I guess it's a start, but I remember pre-war when he said that anti-war liberals were traitors.

[Skeptic]

I don't understand why O'Reilly's opinion is news. He's a journalist, for goodness' sake. He's suspposed to ask OTHER people their views.

A journalist telling you their opinion is like a general's driver directing troops, or a surgeon's secretary performing an operation.

And this man keeps ranting about "celebrity culture" where people are "famous for being famous, not due to their achievements".

Ah well.

P.S.

Say what you will about Larry King, but he lets the people he invites on the show talk, and he realizes that their opinion is why people watch the show, not his opinion.

The price to pay for this is that when kooks and frauds are on his show (like Sylvia Browne), he lets them talk, too. But you can't deny he lets Randi talk as well--a lot more than the usual lot given to skeptics.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Skeptic
I don't understand why O'Reilly's opinion is news. He's a journalist, for goodness' sake.Not really. He's an entertainer. A celebrity. He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is.

[Cain]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Say what you will about Larry King, but he lets the people he invites on the show talk, and he realizes that their opinion is why people watch the show, not his opinion.

The price to pay for this is that when kooks and frauds are on his show (like Sylvia Browne), he lets them talk, too. But you can't deny he lets Randi talk as well--a lot more than the usual lot given to skeptics.

Yeah, but Larry King (now especially) mostly deals in celebrity gossip. I don't have a problem with his softballs. The people up at the plate just aren't worth watching. Yesterday, for example, he had Anna Nicole Smith on. *Click*

Originally posted by Upchurch
He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is.

But Jon Stewart's fake news show is infinitely better.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Not really. He's an entertainer. A celebrity. He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is.

That, sir, is an insult to Jon Stewart. Stewart is way more of a journalist than O'Reilly; at least Stewart is honest enough to let you know up front he shouldn't be taken that seriously.

[zakur]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Not really. He's an entertainer. A celebrity. He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is. But O'Reilly won a Peabody award!

Oh wait...it was a Polk not a Peabody.

Oh wait...his previous employer Inside Edition won the Polk, after he had left the show.

Never mind.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Not really. He's an entertainer. A celebrity. He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is.

Same question applies: why should anybody care about O'Reilly's political opinions any more than they care about Stewart's or Michael Jackson's or Bob Hope's?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Cleon

That, sir, is an insult to Jon Stewart. Appologies to Jon Stewart.

They play different characters, but they're in the same business, at least.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Skeptic

Same question applies: why should anybody care about O'Reilly's political opinions any more than they care about Stewart's or Michael Jackson's or Bob Hope's? People should care what O'Reilly says for the same reason they care about what Joey said to Pheobe on last night. (I don't know, I don't watch "Friends" anymore).

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by subgenius
Hell hath frozen over:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative television news anchor Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday he was now skeptical about the Bush administration and apologized to viewers for supporting prewar claims that Iraq (news - web sites) had weapons of mass destruction.

The anchor of his own show on Fox News said he was sorry he gave the U.S. government the benefit of the doubt that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s weapons program poised an imminent threat, the main reason cited for going to war.

"I was wrong. I am not pleased about it at all and I think all Americans should be concerned about this," O'Reilly said in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America."

"What do you want me to do, go over and kiss the camera?" asked O'Reilly, who had promised rival ABC last year he would publicly apologize if weapons were not found.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040210/people_nm/campaign_bush_oreilly_dc_3

:jaw:

Never thought I'd see the day. Bush's intel has taken some big scalps.

[corplinx]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative television news anchor Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday ...... "

Notice the "conservative" label.

Bill O'Reilly's show to me is the cable news equivalent of pro-wrestling. However, this attempt to paint him as a convservative is just pitiful.

Didn't Bernard Goldblum(sp?) write a book about how some news orgs add these conservative tags but rarely label someone liberal?

Mind you, I don't buy into left-wing media conspiracy crap but to me this is an obvious case of bias.

The sad part is, Bill is no conservative (only on some issues) so I think its bad journalism in that it is also incorrect.

[subgenius]

Bill is no conservative.
"Earth to corp. Earth to corp."
You really just love to dance on the point of a pin, don't you?

[clk]

Originally posted by corplinx


The sad part is, Bill is no conservative (only on some issues) so I think its bad journalism in that it is also incorrect.

I disagree. As far as I can tell, the only issue he is liberal on is being against the death penalty. I mean, is that really such a big issue? Determining whether we're going to let murders rot in prison or kill them early? Not really. He may have liberal positions on other trivial issues, but I'm not sure.
I think the fact that he was a registered Republican proves beyond a doubt that he is a conservative. That, and his lavish praise of Bush, coupled with his obsessive hatred of the Clintons. Sure, O'Reilly disagrees with Bush on some issues, but I'm sure you could say the same of Rush Limbaugh.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by clk


I disagree. As far as I can tell, the only issue he is liberal on is being against the death penalty. I mean, is that really such a big issue? Determining whether we're going to let murders rot in prison or kill them early? Not really. He may have liberal positions on other trivial issues, but I'm not sure.
I think the fact that he was a registered Republican proves beyond a doubt that he is a conservative. That, and his lavish praise of Bush, coupled with his obsessive hatred of the Clintons. Sure, O'Reilly disagrees with Bush on some issues, but I'm sure you could say the same of Rush Limbaugh.

Mind you, I only get to see his show when the wife guilt trips me by saying we need to spend quality time but.....

he has some progressive and moderate viewpoints on gay issues
he is not for limited government as far as i can tell
he supports progressive homelessness programs
he does his porn/rap/music decency message out of a leftist "think of the children" mantra instead of the conservative "we think this is wrong so we want to censor it" attitude

The thing is, I think people believe O'Reilly is some kind of conservative because he of his style, not because of his beliefs.

Rush Limbaugh bashes Bush because he isn't conservative enough, that certainly isnt the case with O'Reilly.

[clk]

Originally posted by corplinx

The thing is, I think people believe O'Reilly is some kind of conservative because he of his style, not because of his beliefs.


That's an interesting point. It kind of begs the question: "how do you define conservatism?" If a person behaves like a conservative, but has liberal beliefs, is he a conservative or liberal? If a person behaves like a liberal but has conservative beliefs, is he a liberal or conservative?

I think BOR definitely acts like a conservative, even if he has a few liberal positions, as you pointed out.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Not really. He's an entertainer. A celebrity. He's as much a journalist as Jon Stewart is.

There is a radio talk show host in Australia, Allan Jones, who seems to be very similar to O'Reilly. He acts like a journalist, in that he presents current affairs, and so does another host called John Laws.

They were busted doing 'journalistic' pieces that sounded like editorial on Australian companies, that actually turned out to be paid promotions. Now, a journalist who was paid to sing the praises of a company is doing something that is offensive to the regulatory board. Their defense was that, despite the fact that there shows appear to be poor quality journalism, they are in fact just entertainers. Therefore, no offense was committed.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic


Thanks for the compliment, but more seriously, my view of O'Reilly is the same as G. B. Shaw's: "I'm not responsible for every idiot who agrees with me".

Yes, LFTKBS, I am quite aware that--generally speaking--"right wingers" tend to be less nice, more crude, less educated, and so on, than the "enlightened" left. The left's got 95% of all important intellectuals--the right's got Bill O'Reilly and FOX news.

However, just because nicer people hold certain views doesn't mean they are correct. On the contrary: whenever the "right" group of people is unanimous about something, it's pretty certain they're wrong, since the real reason for holding the view in question tends to be social acceptance, not reality.

P.S.

To Cain: I laughed so hard at Maddox's site you linked to nearly fell of my chair. Site of the month...

Then I guess that A. Hitler is not such a bad person after all.