<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>

From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
O'Reilly declares WAR!

July 21, 2004 7:34 AM

Here's the full transcript of last night's O'Reilly Factor: "Tonight, war has broken out between the Fox News Channel and The New York Times."

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: THE O'REILLY FACTOR is on. Tonight, war has broken out between the Fox News Channel and "The New York Times." We'll fill you in on that. Canada continues its strange behavior. That country OK's Al Jazeera, but still will not allow Fox News. A judge rules New York City police cannot search bags outside the Republican convention. Is that insane or what? And we'll examine the Linda Ronstadt-Michael Moore controversy in Las Vegas.

Caution, you're about to enter a no-spin zone. THE FACTOR begins right now.

Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thank you for watching us tonight.

It's war between Fox News and "The New York Times." That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points" memo. For months, I've been telling you that "The Times" has become a brochure for the far left in America. The paper consistently uses its news pages to promote its liberal editorial position and uses its columnists to smear high-profile people with whom the paper disagrees.

Item -- book reviewer Janet Maslin gave glowing tribute to Stewart Smalley's defamation. When I mailed Maslin proof the man was lying, proof, she ignored the evidence completely.

Item -- Frank Rich accused me of taking bribes from Mel Gibson over "The Passion" controversy. Rich couldn't produce any evidence of that. And on the same subject, "The Times" had to issue a printed retraction when one of their reporters wrote that Gibson "deployed" me.

Item -- "The Times" has run 46 front-page stories about the Abu Ghraib scandal, far more than any major American paper and is using the issue to directly hammer the Bush administration.

Now "The New York Times" is attacking Fox News by legitimizing rank propaganda. Today film reviewer A.O. Scott, who loved the Moore movie, gleefully attacked FNC using the distorted work of an ultra liberal filmmaker. By the way, that guy's so-called movie was called anything but fair and balanced by "The Chicago Trib."

But Scott doesn't care about fairness. He simply wants to demonize Fox News.

For example, he puts forth that a man named Jeremy Glick was the victim of a "belligerent, boorish interview by me," your humble correspondent. Glick, whose father was killed at the World Trade Center, is described by Scott as someone "who came to oppose the administration's military response to 9/11." Scott makes the man seem very sympathetic.

But who is this guy, really? Well, on this program, Glick said President Bush and his father were responsible for his father's death. He said George W. Bush pulled off a coup to get elected. He implied the USA itself was a terrorist nation. And he called his father's death at the hands of an al Qaeda "alleged assassination."

He said America itself was responsible for the 9/11 attack because it is an imperialistic, aggressive nation. Glick was dismissed from THE FACTOR because he was completely off the wall. Security actually had to take the guy out of the building, he was that out of control.

Yet this is the man that "The New York Times" and other far-left elements are holding up as an abused innocent. Of course A.O. Scott is hiding under his desk. We called him tonight. Come on the program. Oh, no. Can't do that. He's a coward as well as a propagandist.

So enough's enough. And I am issuing this challenge directly to "The New York Times." I will debate any "Times" editor or columnist on the Charlie Rose PBS program. I talked with Mr. Rose this morning. He's happy to moderate such an event. So I'm calling these sleazy guys out. We'll let you know what happens. Do you think they'll show up? Yes, sure. And that's the memo.

More from the archive in Media, Outfoxed.

O'Reilly declares WAR! (07.21.2004)

Next Entry: Doonesbury continues, Murdoch "amused" (07.21.2004)
Previous Entry: O'Reilly attacks NY Times over Outfoxed (07.20.2004)

Read the 103 comments.

keith:

ha ha - wonder if he'll walk out again like he did to Terry Gross.

Thu Jul 22 2004 10:48 AM


WLW:

I hope someone from the Times takes up the challenge. Otherwise, this blowhard will crow about how he initimidated the Times, yadda yadda yadda.

Thu Jul 22 2004 10:56 AM


mike:

I think Paul Krugman would be a terrific opponent for Senor O'Reilly.

Thu Jul 22 2004 4:58 PM


Andrew Cholakian:

Krugman would flatten O'Reilly like a pancake. I'd love to see that day.

Thu Jul 22 2004 5:07 PM


gator:

Fox News and O'Reilly are real "Axis of Evils."
Oops, there are more garbage propagandists like
Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Fri Jul 23 2004 4:40 AM


Scott:

Sadly, in the UK we're deprived of the genius that is Bill O'reilly. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but this is the same Bill O'reilly that told Jeremy Glick: "No. 1, I don't really care what you think" and told him to "keep your mouth shut when you sit here exploiting those people (9/11 families, of which is is one) and this after having to gaul to tell Mr Glick that he (Bill) knew what his (Glick's) father would think "what upsets me is I don't think your father would be approving of this". This guy really is a monumental prick.

Fri Jul 23 2004 5:16 AM


prh99:

As usually O'Reilly is stuck in his own little world where Fox and the GOP can do no wrong, and anyone who says otherwise is part of some far left conspiracy. Maybe one day Bill can pry his head out of Murdock's a$$. I can't believe anyone actually listens to O'Reilly.

Fri Jul 23 2004 3:41 PM


Dave:

Personally, I would like to see O'Reilly up against Kurt Vonnegut. Vonnegut would satirize him on live TV.

Sat Jul 24 2004 8:55 PM


Sick Mind Fraud:

maybe his reality check has bounced?

Sat Jul 24 2004 11:47 PM


Liberals are wrecking the country:

I think Bill is fantastic. He's a traditionalist who has seen this country turn from one of greatness to one filled with fanatics who want to turn it into a country with no boundaries, morals, or values. Go Bill! You rock!

Sun Jul 25 2004 2:49 PM


LPN:

Why is it okay for someone to express their opinions only if they are on the far left? Let the man talk. If you really don't like him, don't watch him. Don't listen to him. No one is forcing you to.

Mon Jul 26 2004 6:16 AM


Edgarthefish:

This is pointless. Arguing for the left or right is divisive and without justification. Morals, boundaries, and values are all illusory in nature. We as humans only contruct such things so we can satiate our ego's desires and wants. The truth is what you make it. Perception is in the end all you can rely on. Fact's and statistics are all just manipulations. Remember, 40% of all statistics are false. We only try create this loose systems to help relieve the seemingly endless loneliness we as humans endure, but when in fact if you let go. Remove yourself from the ever present self awareness you feel and you will eventually be unburdened by the world and finally come in contact with the true presence of nature and perhaps in the end you will gain some true atonement and happiness from it all.

Tue Jul 27 2004 2:57 PM


Bill O'reilly- the reason im ashamed to be irish:

Bill O'reilly should be put in an institution. He never outdebates the guests on his show but rather drowns them out by getting ten words out for their one. The idea that he calls his show the no-spin zone infuriates me. Id like to cut off his head and spin it like a draddle. This is the same guy who boycoted the fox network because it put on the "Method and Red" show. The show is as harmless, but horribly written. I'm sure it will be canceled because its offel, but yo will hear O'reilly bragging that it was canceled because of him and his boycott. Somebody needs to shut this ugly man up and do it now!!!!

Tue Jul 27 2004 8:23 PM


conservatives are racists:

What is wrong with this country when the conservative republicans have transformed the meaning of the world liberal from one who fights for the betterment of our socity and worked to end social injustices like segregation into a term meaning democratic fanatic. Conservatives are just racists in disguise. The hate minorities and the underprivelaged and care only about the wealthy. well i have knews for u mother fuckers- this country soon will have more minorities than whites. And by 2100 we will be mostly bi-racial. So lock ur doors u white mo fo's. Cause the year of the monorities is upon us.!

Tue Jul 27 2004 8:29 PM


Jill:

Anyone who opposes abortion is a fool. Thats right u conservative bastards. my daughter was raped by an older man when she was 12. She became pregnent. She got an abortion. How is that wrong? Should a 12 year old who did nothing wrong except have the misfortune of being raped have to have the baby? absolutly not! And if u say other wise george W. Bush u can suck ur daddy's cock u draft dodging pig

Tue Jul 27 2004 8:32 PM


Charles:

Jill: George Bush isn't against abortion of births caused by rape, incest and those that endanger the mother's life.
As for O'Reilly: I want to ask if there is anyone who has watched his show objectively here? You cannot say "America itself was responsible for the 9/11 attack because it is an imperialistic, aggressive nation," without losing credibility. It's flat out wrong. America must defend herself against evil Muslim terrorists who if were not blowing up their own people and our soldiers in Iraq, would be upon the American heartland laying waste to our buildings and the innocents in them.
Therefore I ask you how you can argue with O'Reilly that Fox News Channel is not fair and balanced when they, in all devotion to fairness, root out the spin doctors and radical idealists that come on his show? If they allowed every far-left wacko to spit their garbage on the air, it wouldn't be fair and balanced.

Wed Jul 28 2004 8:09 AM


Duncan:

Charlses: interesting point. I had never looked at it quite that way. So you are saying that Bill O'reilly is the counterbalance to the "far-left wacko's" you speak of. Hmm Ill give you that, but by that token Bill O'reilly is a far-right wacko. No arguement here, but I seriously doubt he would agree with that rational.
Being a rather staunch liberal, I have some friends who are way out in Left field. My perspective is obvioulsy far closer to theirs than Bill's but I think they are both missing the picture. Im not one to push some spineless middle road. The political/Social/Sexual/etc discourse is healthy, but we need to remember that we have ears as well as vocal chords. Screaming at eachother does absolutley nothing but push people away. Self-serving. .maybe but productive it is not. The uber-left and neo-cons on the right are so focused on railroading an agenda, refuting the other, or worse of all destroying reputations with character assinations and lies, that its embarrasing that they represent the american people.
As far as O'reilly goes, I was surprised when I watched his show the other day at how he never raised his voice. I havent watched his show much, and Im sure he is capable of turning up the volume, but my impression of him had been a loud and angry blow-hard, so I was pleasantly surprised. Beyond that I was appalled, he was condescending, mean, dismissive, and rude would be the biggest understatement of the year. He made numerous remarks about everything ranging from the French to Gay marriage, and the whole time he would state his opinion as direct fact.
This being the land of the free he certainly has the right to speak his mind. It just worries me that many peoople view him as a viable source of information.

how on earth does he get away with the punch line "No Spin Zone".


Wed Jul 28 2004 11:12 AM


duncan:

Charles, no disprespect in misspelling your name.

Wed Jul 28 2004 11:14 AM


Dustin:

The lack of fairness in the world becomes painfully evident when you realize that countless innocent, decent people are killed and mamed in terrible accidents everyday...yet Bill O'Reilly still makes it to work.

Wed Jul 28 2004 12:55 PM


Concerned Liberal:

It is heartening to see people decry Bill O'Reilly for the conservative fool he is.

But it only weakens your position when you cheer for the equally dishonest and profit-motivated jackass Michael Moore.

If you want to take a valid stance you have to disavow dishonesty regardless of whether or not it appears to support your position.

Revoke Michael Moore's Oscar. Kick Bill O'Reilly off the air. Let's get some intelligent debate before we all kill ourselves.

Wed Jul 28 2004 2:17 PM


Anna:

O'Reilly and Michael Moore are both hotheads.

I find it discouraging that our nation has become so partisan that every single debate includes one "right-wing whacko" and one "left-wing nutjob." What happened to debating issues for the sake of the issue and not in defense of W or of Michael Moore? If we spent less time attacking and more time discussing, we might be a little more united as a nation...or at least more willing to see the other side.

Thu Jul 29 2004 8:14 AM


madsonv:

Well, it all fine and good to express an opinion - but if your opinion is coloured by a certain politcal stance then this should be declared.

Bill O'Reilly is a pompous, overzealous, asshole. Where the hell does he get off inviting people on his show and telling them to shutup when he doesn't aggree with their statements. Freedom of speech, fair and balanced. This type of reporting is a typical example of the problems the US faces today.

Remove this man from your TV sets - boycott now.

By the way, I am a left wing neo-republican.

Fri Jul 30 2004 8:11 AM


Dan R:

O'Reilly definitely broke the last straw for me (just figuratively, there never was one ;-) ) with his formidable, insightful view on the Iraqi people (yeah - the ones we went out to liberate, if I recall correctly):

http://mediamatters.org/items/200406180005

Don't miss the link to the audio clip above the title.

Sat Jul 31 2004 5:50 AM


Jennifer:

O'Reilly is a disgrace and an idiot. He has to tell people to shut up and cut their mikes...it is the only way he can win an argument! It is impossible to listen to him and not be deeply offended. I am a white, heterosexual, Christian. I am also a liberal Democrat who believes deeply in valuing the diversity of all people and in treating all people with respect. Quite frankly I see none of the Christian values I was taught in Bill O'Reilly. As a patriotic American I will defend his right to express his views (no matter how strongly I disagree), but for FNC to call this legitimate news is an outrage as far as I am concerned.

Sat Jul 31 2004 11:29 AM


joe:

Micheal Moore never broadcasts his information as "news" nor does he say he is non-partisan. I would also imagine that no one (not even himself) has ever called him fair and ballanced. That is where the danger lies...

Tue Aug 3 2004 1:09 PM


ts:

Jeremy Glick is a sweet kid who lost his father; Bill O'Reilly is a vicious prick who abused Glick on his show, told him to shut up, cut off his mike, and then lied repeatedly about Glick's views and his statements and everything else that took place on that show.

Charles writes "If they allowed every far-left wacko to spit their garbage on the air, it wouldn't be fair and balanced."

This is satire, right? I mean, can anyone be *that* stupid?

Tue Aug 3 2004 5:45 PM


ts:

"As a patriotic American I will defend his right to express his views ..."

There's quite a myth here. Do you have the right to a TV program where you can express your views? I think not. So why does Bill O'Reilly? The fact is, he doesn't. He has the right to go out and publish a broadsheet and sell it on the street corner -- that's what the founding fathers had in mind. But what we have instead is that the *public* airwaves have been given away, to megacorporations, who then hire jackasses like Bill O'Reilly who convince people to vote for corrupt politicians who give those megacorporations tax breaks and free airwaves (think Michael Powell) and around we go again on our descent into fascist hell (look it up -- fascism is all about the connection between corporations and government). There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that sanctions such a giveaway or gives Bill O'Reilly the right to broadcast on public airwaves, or to tell others trying to speak on those airwaves to "Shut up! Just shut up!"

Tue Aug 3 2004 5:54 PM


ts:

'I find it discouraging that our nation has become so partisan that every single debate includes one "right-wing whacko" and one "left-wing nutjob."'

Have you ever actually watched TV? 99% of the wackos and nutjobs are right wingers. Meanwhile, Jeremy Glick is neither. Nor for that matter, is Michael Moore, but he's irrelvant since he DOESN'T HAVE A PRIME-TIME TV SHOW. Moore comes by his 1st amendment rights honestly, not by abusing the airwaves, which are a public trust, and the licensees have a responsibility to that trust. This tweedledum-tweedledee notion that there is some sort of parity between the left and right is a result of ignorance and intellectual laziness.

Tue Aug 3 2004 6:00 PM


ts:

"Revoke Michael Moore's Oscar. Kick Bill O'Reilly off the air."

Moore's Oscar is a privately given award, O'Reilly is on the public airwaves, and both your concern and your liberalism are phony.

Tue Aug 3 2004 6:03 PM


Ron K:

I'll give you a "No-Spin Zone". Bill O'Reilly is much more than just a prick - he is a very dangerous person. I was quite taken by the No Spin Zone when I retired and had more time to watch the tube. Then I saw the Angela Davis "interview". She - the HUB of the wheel of diversity and one of the most effective oppression fighters in history - goes on the Factor only to be treated with vast disrespect by the host. Of course she is used to disrespect, that's what she has opened herself up to to win small steps of progress in the long and tedious process of establishing diversity in America. It's not nice to say un-nice things about Pres. Reagan but he was just another ass hole in the life of Angela when her fired her from UCLA (in that wonderful Senator McCarthy style) for being a "Communist"! Then there was Dr. Al-Arian. His life was made very difficult - if not ruined - by Bill. Bill got help on that one from the Govenor of Florida and his Bros Administration. Anyhow, even some conservatives are pissed off at Bill for barking the "Shut-up" order when he can't deal with reality. Bill is a man to be ignored.

Tue Aug 3 2004 11:18 PM


Dave:

Bill O'Rielly, Rush, Sean and the rest of the conservative journalists are only behaving in this matter to attract attention to themselves and stand out in the crowd. Journalism is inherently liberal and if they ever played by traditional rules, none of them would really stand out. None of them will ever be a reincarnation of Walter Cronkite no matter how hard they try.

To be fair, no news network is "fair and balanced" and reports objectively. It's up to you, gentle reader to sniff out the BS that is floating around today.

But what does amazes me is that no matter how dumb you are, if you proclaim a conservative agenda, people will listen to you and even elect you (does Dan Quayle come to mine anyone?).

Wed Aug 4 2004 7:51 AM


Dave:

Sorry, I should have put quotes around "amazes" for a better play on Quayle.

Wed Aug 4 2004 7:59 AM


john:

bill o'rielly would not be a problem if he and fox would just admit they are not partisan and have republican views, but they will not do that. I think that is spin mr. o'rielly.

Wed Aug 4 2004 9:53 AM


EB:

Wanna know why people listen to O'Reilly, Fox News, GWB? Why "the other side" of these debates seems crazy--no matter which side you're on?

Read George Lakoff's book, _Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think_.

Lakoff offers the most insightful, most helpful analysis of our seemingly bizarre political culture that I've encountered. I'm still annoyed by "the other side", but at least I have a better understanding of *why*.

Wed Aug 4 2004 2:54 PM


Daniel:

"Sadly, in the UK we're deprived of the genius that is Bill O'reilly. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but this is the same Bill O'reilly that told Jeremy Glick: "No. 1, I don't really care what you think" and told him to "keep your mouth shut when you sit here exploiting those people (9/11 families, of which is is one) and this after having to gaul to tell Mr Glick that he (Bill) knew what his (Glick's) father would think "what upsets me is I don't think your father would be approving of this". This guy really is a monumental prick."

Actually, Scott, if you had seen the interview, Jeremy Glick accused O'Reilly of using 9/11 for his own purposes. It was then after that he said that he didn't care what he thought.

Thu Aug 5 2004 5:29 AM


Kyle:

What has me dismayed about O'Reilly is the transformation I have seen in my father-in-law. I'm not arguing for straight cause/effect, but rather a strong correlation.

He began watching Fox News shortly after 9/11, because he was "upset" with the major networks'/CNN's/NPR's coverage of the catastrophe (He never has really clarified what upset him about those other networks' coverage, by the way). That got my guard up a little, because at that time, I knew Fox News as little more than the "We hate Bill Clinton Network".

My father-in-law had always been a man who believed in valuing other people and their views. However, since he began watching Fox News, he has come to the conclusion that Islam cannot be considered a peaceful religion, ever; this in spite of what even "El presidente" (as he calls W) has said with regards to tolerance. Outright bigotry is something I had never before seen from my father-in-law.

Next, I notice his conversations have all become political. He cannot see/hear/experience anything without making some allusion to liberals and their damning our society to hell. I'm serious when I say that. It makes it very uncomfortable to be around him after a while. He just doesn't quit. I keep reminding him that I'm a liberal, and I break every generalization he brings up. He just doesn't buy it. I sometimes wonder what he really thinks of me. Hmmm. . .

Another thing I've noticed about my father-in-law is he is "right" (as in "correct). The Right is always "right". Anything else is moronic, a waste of time, and even dangerous to our society as a whole. He and I have had many heated arguments over this "It's W's way or the highway for you liberals" type of thought.

He defends O'Reilly's viewpoints, although he hasn't taken too long a draught of O'Reilly's Kool-Aid. In other words, he doesn't buy O'Reilly 100% of the time (more like 85-90%). Every time we are at his house, he just _has_ to turn the television over to Fox News to get a glimpse of the show, just to "see who's on tonight". He knows my wife and I hate the show because of its extreme viewpoints, but he's either like an alcoholic heeding the call to drink, or he's just trying to piss us off.

My father-in-law can have his views. I love him very much, and I will not replace that love with my dislike for his views. I just cannot believe how one-sided his thought processes have become, especially when considering how he thought and behaved before 9/11. I can't change him or his views, and he sure as hell isn't going to be changing mine. I just wish things wouldn't have to be so political whenever we are together. I realize that's the state of the country as a whole right now, but O'Reilly is an angry man who gets my father-in-law angry, too (in agreement). That's what pisses me off. He's a very smart man, but he lets O'Reilly lead him around like a pig with a snout ring.

Thu Aug 5 2004 9:58 AM


EB:

Sounds familiar. My in-laws created a similar situation for me.

I understand the dynamic much better now that I've read Lakoff's book (_Moral Politics_, touted above). Understanding is a step toward change and resolution, and I'm starting to use Lakoff's moral frame technique to figure out how to talk to my in-laws more effectively.

As you can see, I'm really impressed by Lakoff's insight--so much so that I even post twice in the same blog about it. :)

Cheers, and good luck with your in-laws.

Thu Aug 5 2004 9:01 PM


Jim Gilliam:

Ditto on the Lakoff book. Arianna was nearly mesmerized by it while she was writing Fanatics & Fools. We had to hear about it practically every day at the office. Moral Politics is pretty much the "it" book amongst the leftie hollywood crowd.

Thu Aug 5 2004 9:07 PM


Kyle:

Thanks for the suggestions; I'll give the book a look. :-) It has been so frustrating at times with them.

Isn't insomnia great? 8-}

Sat Aug 7 2004 12:34 AM


Gamble Crane:

The greatest strength of America is the right of its citizens to debate the salient issues. Using pejoratives in the debate demeans you and demeans your point of view. Read your history for your facts, don't just regurgitate what you friends say, your college professors, or your favorite pundit. The words of our great American leaders in the past tell more about what is happening today than you will learn from the intelligentsia spouting half-truths and outright lies about one and other. If you're an fanatic about the viewpoints of either party, without checking the facts independently, you stunt your intellectual growth. If you don't like research, check out the Economist. They don't allow normal advertisements--it originates from the UK and they are pretty centrist in their opinions. Example - They supported Bill Clinton for president in both elections, and they asked him to resign after he lied to the grand jury. That seems a pretty balanced point of view from people who wish to view the world in a fair manner. The Economist also asked Rumsfeld to resign on their front cover because of the prison scandal. The Economist seems to take both major parties to task when needed. However, cool-aid drinkers on both side should ask why they feel the need for someone to feed them their political point of view without acknowledging that perhaps that source is not perfect. Believing that your intellectual guru is perfect might not be exactly correct? The world is gray, not black and white. When you've lived the 89 years I have on this earth, you'll understand. Keep America free from an uninformed citizenship and don't be afraid or too lazy to think and research for yourself from independent sources. Have a great life.

Sun Aug 8 2004 6:32 AM


Kyle:

Wow. I like how Andrew said: "Krugman would flatten O'Reilly like a pancake." HAHA. Anyone who saw that interview saw Krugman get ripped a new one! He looked like a deer in headlights. Half the time, he didn't even know how to respond to what Bill was asking him! And most of the time, Krugman just looked at Russert and wouldn't acknoledge that Bill was staring right at him. And when Bill would accuse him of something or bring up a point, Krugman would just say "Oh, please" or "come on", never debating the point or
repudiating what he said. Then, he would look to Tim for help and just say "Back to my point. . ." He was intimidated the whole time. Wish I could see more of this stuff more often. Go Bill!

Sun Aug 8 2004 2:31 PM


neil graham:

Why does the Right always abuse the left?
Why does the Left dismiss (as idiots) the Right?

We Australians are lucky that Murdoch left the country before he completely destroyed the media.
Example:
ABC(government owned) headline - "Woman killed in car accident".
Murdoch Press: "Grannykiller on the loose"

Which one treats you like a moron??

Mon Aug 9 2004 5:18 AM


Erik:

Look , y'all... Bill O'reilly SMASHES the competition for one good reason. People want to watch his show. Why? Because he has common sense, and he appeals to moderates in EACH party. If you have a problem with him, it is because you are not a moderate. Don't watch his show then, and you will live a happy activist life.

Mon Aug 9 2004 9:21 PM


Mike:

“What the public does is not to express its opinions but to align itself for or against a proposal. If that theory is accepted, we must abandon the notion that democratic government can be the direct expression of the will of the people. We must abandon the notion that the people govern. Instead, we must adopt the theory that, by their occasional mobilisations as a majority, people support or oppose the individuals who actually govern. We must say that the popular will does not direct continuously but that it intervenes occasionally.” Walter Lippman

Mon Aug 9 2004 9:43 PM


Mike:

In other words mobilize, inform your friends and get like-minded people to vote.....the incompetency and the whoring of our government to corporate interests must be addressed

Mon Aug 9 2004 9:47 PM


Gary:

Certainly Krugman looked like a deer in headlights at times, but O'Reilly was acting like a bully on a playground. He proved through his actions how incompetent and unprofessional he is. His approach to arguing points is to be belligerent. I ignored everything he said and will gladly go out and buy Krugman's book!

Tue Aug 10 2004 6:48 AM


mag:

I have a theory, republicans fix the screwed up economy when they take over from the dems. the economy takes about 6 or 8 yrs to come back...just as the dems take over, they ride the wave and turn it back over after they screwed it up. then take credit for a great economy and accuse the republicans of screwing it up. Clinton was the luckiest president ever....i hope he thanks old Ronnie when he goes to bed at nite.
O'reilly cut that lib into bite size pieces and ate him alive. the guy was pissing in his pants!
have a nice day

Tue Aug 10 2004 10:01 AM


Charles:

ts: Anyone who listens to you could be *that* stupid.

Tue Aug 10 2004 11:09 AM


Charles:

Further more, anyone who lies and makes such horrendous accusations that America is an "imperialistic, aggressive nation" certainly deserves to have his mic shut off or told to leave. If you're promoting lies and unfounded accusations, ts, which you are, such as:

"But what we have instead is that the *public* airwaves have been given away, to megacorporations, who then hire jackasses like Bill O'Reilly who convince people to vote for corrupt politicians who give those megacorporations tax breaks and free airwaves (think Michael Powell) and around we go again on our descent into fascist hell (look it up -- fascism is all about the connection between corporations and government)."

I mean, where do you get this stuff? Sitting up too late wishing you had some significance in life other than posting lies and accusations on a blatantly biased forum where truth is no longer taken at face value but assumptions? If you've watched Fox recently you'd see no one is outright promoting Bush. In fact, several reporters have been quite critical of Bush on the handling of the Iraq war.

One last note is you won't convince *anyone* through slander and accusations. It stands to demoralize you.

I'd also like to state that I agree with Neil Graham that Fox headlines are pathetic.

Tue Aug 10 2004 11:43 AM


I pay taxes for you loosers:

Used to be a Democrat until you turned the party into a Socialist party that would make Fidel and Lenin proud.

You are loosers. You don't believe in individual rights. You want more and more of my hard earned money so you loosers can stay home and watch Jerry Springer.

How much more do you want, 50,60, 70, 80% of what I earn? You want it all, don't you? Its never enough!!

Here's your model liberal...

If it moves, tax it.
If it continues to move, regulate it.
If it stops moving, subsidize it.

The looser formula.

Show me ONE country that has taxed themselves into prosperity.

Remember, you can't make the poor rich by making the rich poor. It has NEVER worked and will never work.

Your answers to everything is MORE money, MORE government...all on the backs of people that produce and work.

If you don't get your way, you will file a lawsuit and sue your way into money. Ask John Edwards. He didn't make or produce anything except lawsuits. Thanks as now we all have to pay for legal extortion expenses in everything from colder coffee to warning labels!

Wait to you get a real job and pay real taxes! You will see...it happened to me and my former DemoRAT friends. They woke up...I did!

Didn't JFK state, "Ask not what your country can do, but what you can do for your country."

You liberals don't do anything except DEMAND your country take care of you!! Totally against what JFK stood for...and he was a fiscal conservative and even cut taxes.

The ones that it didn't happend to are the loosers that want and take money from those that work!

Put a big L on your head for liberal looser...because that is what you represent, the loosers of America.

AND IF YOU HATE IT SO MUCH HERE, GET THE FUCK ON OF HERE AND HEAD TO FRANCE and start praying to Allah...for he is the religion of peace!

Yeah, right!

Tue Aug 10 2004 4:16 PM


Kyle:

Wow, I didn't know we were so "loose". ;-)

It's spelled l-o-s-e-r, Loser!

Don't talk about Liberals' taking away individual rights when your beloved party is wishing to pass a law that would define who could have state-recognized unions and who could not. Don't talk about individual rights when the GOP is wishing to sponsor a national identity card. Don't talk about individual rights when we have many people who have disappeared from our midst (as in here in the USA) who are either in Guantonamo or the brig of some ship in International waters (some of whom still have no idea why they have been arrested).

The conservative way of looking at things:
1. If it moves, charge it for moving.
2. If it continues moving, charge it a subscription rate to allow it to continue.
3. If it isn't moving, either a) charge it rent; b) bulldoze it so the new gas station can be built, or c) Sell it.
4. No money to pay? You're just plain lazy, stupid!

I'm still waiting to hear some specific examples of how Lenin would be proud of the Democrats? This is a common theme thrown about by foaming-at-the-mouth conservatives. I have to scratch my head each time. Democrats still support capitalism, but they do not see it as the panacea conservatives do. I believe a good balance of government oversight/corporate freedom can be had; it doesn't have to be either/or. Both sides are prone to excess, given enough rope.

Are there people in this country who hate America? Yes, but I'm afraid they aren't all on the left side of the fence. Just because we may differ in our approaches in how this land should be governed does not mean we love "France" and want to worship "Allah", although there is nothing wrong with any of those things. One can like and/or appreciate those things and still be a good member of society here in the USA. You should turn off the talk-radio and actually allow yourself the chance to get to know these "liberals" that O'Reilly and co. have taught you to hate; you might be surprised.

What a troll.

Tue Aug 10 2004 5:14 PM


I love it. . .:

"AND IF YOU HATE IT SO MUCH HERE, GET THE FUCK ON OF HERE"

Great reasoning there, Einstein! "On" of here? :-D

You are either:
1. 15, and wanting to yank folks' chains
2. Troll
3. Both of the above.

Tue Aug 10 2004 5:22 PM


Praise Allah:

Death to the infidels. Using Allah's name in this forum is wrong for he is of peace. It is Isreal's fault and they have caused death to our brothers. Look how many Jews stayed home on 9/11 for they knew of the attack. Therefore, we will push them into the sea and kill all Americans that have caused use to fight for Allah.

Can't wait to die for Allah.

Wed Aug 11 2004 3:09 PM


Dude:

To the "Praise Allah" Dude: Sorry to feed the troll, but come on! How pathetic!

Wed Aug 11 2004 9:09 PM


Hey Mr Allah...:

Mister Praise Allah...

In a nut shell, go to hell. You Muslims are responsible for over 95% of the world's fighting and wars. Of course, I am a infidel and if you want to see Allah so much, ask me or your closest Marine, and we will help you.

The only thing the Arabic society has EVER contributed to mankind is the "1 to 9" number system (even though zero had to be added later...duh!!). You may have been the height of civilization 5,000 years ago, but you have been going downward ever since.

You're just lucky that you sitting on most of the world's oil, but then again, you wouldn't have known that until the West found it for you and spent billions helping you get it out of your wasteland.

Of course, you always blame the Jew for all of your problem because that is all you know. They kicked your ass in 1967 and again in 1973 because face it, they are smarter than you...aways are and aways will be.

Praise Allah...I don't so. Mohammed or however you spell that idiot's name will keep you in the dark ages, your women in berka's, and your mankind advancement equal to farm animals.

I am just glad that our troops have our bombers 10 minutes away instead of 10 hours away. I am prepared to fight you, and gladly help you see Allah anytime and anywhere.

The Olympics are coming up and I remember as a kid watching your Muslim brothers ruined the 1972 Olympic Games...all for your stupid Allah.

Just look up how many terrorist activities have taken place since the 1972 Olympics in Munich all because of Islam...the religion of peace.

Muslim men walking around in dirty night shirts...still looks like nothing has changed over the last 5000 years!

Thu Aug 12 2004 2:11 PM


Lidia Serrano:

Bill,
We watch your program every day and hate it when you are absent. The program is not the same without you. There is no one else on t.v. that tells it better.

Thu Aug 12 2004 5:53 PM


Keyser:

Yes, Bill is a right-wing thinking hypocrite, but just consider how boring political journalism would be if he were not around for us to decry.

Sat Aug 14 2004 6:31 PM


ilyich:

all i care about is the truth (remember "truth is beauty, beauty truth," etc.?) and when i watch guys like O'reilly i can only think back to the children's story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"-- i disbelieve most of what he says because i know he has lied in the past. does he know he's lying? he uses the word "propaganda" all the time when describing the views of the left, but explain to me what he does if not disseminate propaganda? i don't want lies from either side, and if you think he's honest in his reports, you're a sucker.

Mon Aug 16 2004 9:37 PM


Aaron:

I'm not a conservative nor a liberal exactly, but I do know that anyone who destorts truth is not my information source. Bill does horrible work in keeping his sanity together, but so does Al Sharpton.

As for the person who wrote about the "primative religion" of Islam, I might not agree with you (or just about anything said on FNC) but I would die for your right to say it. As for free speech not included in TV or radio...bullshit. Speech is speech. That is why I'm not a fan of these new FCC "crackdowns". People should be allowed to say what they want to say.

Either you support free speech or you don't, and if you say you support free-speech that means you protect the people you disagree with more than your own views. That is why I do not like O'reilly. He says he's a patriot, but if he did he would allow debate on his show instead of attempting to destroy someone's personal and professional life or views.

One more thing, even if you don't like Micheal Moore you can at least give him respect for comeing out any saying that he is biased and more or less a propagandist. Unlike FNC or Rush.

Tue Aug 17 2004 3:19 PM


Setting the record straight:

"Hey Mr. Allah" wrote this above: "You Muslims are responsible for over 95% of the world's fighting and wars."

Those of you who are Muslim need to just face it: the man who wrote the above lines is no ignoramus. He knows what's what.

He knows, for instance, that Muslims were responsible for the bloodiest century in the history of the world.

He has called you on the fact that that great Muslim president Theodore Roosevelt started the 20th century off by slaughtering unarmed Christians by the 100,000's in the Philippines (a country that was named, incidentally, for a terrible Muslim colonialist).

He knows that German Muslims then continued the bloody new tradition, fighting British and other Western Muslims in the trenches of Western Europe in 1914-1919 in what is still one of the bloodiest wars in history.

He knows how anti-semitic Muslims are (he even said so), and that they proved it in 1933 when they came to power in Germany and formed the National Islamic Party, setting up death camps all over Eastern Europe in an attempt to rid the world of Jews.

He knows that powerful U. S. Muslims invented the atomic bomb and used it to incinerate two whole cities in Japan, touching off a nuclear arms race against the powerful Muslims of the Soviet Union that threatened to annihilate all life on the planet, and threatens us still.

That bright, virtuous man knows that another Muslim president named Lyndon B. Johnson invaded Vietnam in 1965, beginning another of the bloodiest wars in history.

No, you Muslims can't pull anything over on the guy who signs himself "Hey Mr. Allah." He knows what's what. He's no ignoramus.

Wed Aug 18 2004 7:44 PM


Sweet Jimmy:

I like O'Reilly. I love how the left calls everyone who has balls a bully. He might get mad and be a jerk at times but overall he is a pretty fair guy. That Paul Krugman is pretty annoying, he was on Dennis Miller show.

Wed Aug 18 2004 9:50 PM


Sweet Jimmy:

Forgot one thing, That Shut Up video of Bill is bunch of garbage. If you notice, most of the Shut Ups are not directed to the guest. They cut out the part at the beginning where he explains he only said Shut Up to one guest. I agree its a funny clip, but lets face it, it's just edited crap to make Bill look bad. I'm making a video right now of Paul Krugman (sp?) humping a goat.

Wed Aug 18 2004 9:55 PM


Keyser:

For every Michael Moore, there must be a Bill O'Reilly, otherwise there'd be no debates/arguments/slanging-matchs worth listening to.

Sat Aug 21 2004 7:30 AM


Jen Roberts:

Problem: I saw Farenheit 9/11 twice - I don't remember the Jeremy Glick thing being in there.

It was in "Stuart Smalley"'s book though. I've got the paperback and my boyfriend has the hardcover.

If anyone can remind me where the Jeremy Glick thing is in the movie, please do so.

I feel bad for Bill O'Reilly. What has happened to the man to make him this outright mean?

Sat Aug 21 2004 10:44 PM


John:

I don't understand this forum or the people on it, perhaps we're losing our humanity, or perhaps I'm just too liberal for you.

* You either respect everyone or you respect no-one.
* You either talk to somebody without first listening.
* You can't bomb people into submisson, or else we would have lost WW2.
* To declare war on "Islam" or any other religion is a war you will ulimatley fail. Instead of fighting religions, fight poverty. Instead of fighting wars, fight disease. Instead of fighting wars because a people are different, find a common ground and talk.

Watch "The Great Dictator" for the end speech. Am I a liberal for believing in humanity? I guess I must be. Then the world is lost.

Sun Aug 22 2004 2:44 AM


Mike Van Wagoner:

I wonder how much your tax rebate was, now thanks to people like you, I don't have to work to feed my family, because I can't find a job, you guys give me food stamps,

Mon Aug 23 2004 10:20 AM


jr:

I don't know what to do about Facist like O'Rielly

I watched his show a few times. Now I just boycott the Facist Network. I refuse to watch anything on any Fox owned channel.

Knowing that people listen to this idiot and actually think he is "Fair and Balanced" is depressing.


Sun Aug 29 2004 2:06 PM


Bryce:

Im sure Fox news is facist, it must be why they are #1 in cable news, thanks jr. I didn't think about that before.

Tue Aug 31 2004 2:46 PM


Parash:

Mr. O'Reilley is the best there is!!!!!!! And dont' you guys out there ever forget it.
Go FoxNews go! You are the best in the cable news department.
And remember if you're the best,you'll always have those trying to pull you down to their pathetic level of mediocrity.
And F#$K Off !!! the Allah man...go meet him in hell.

Sun Sep 5 2004 3:16 PM


Jizzo_TheClown:

Sometimes murder doesn't look like such a bad idea.

Mon Sep 6 2004 1:31 AM


J. Kahn:

You people need to quit your complaining. Fox News may appear ultra conservative to some, but that's only because the rest of the major news organizations border being liberal. If the country is evenly divided between liberals and conservatives, then why does Fox News draw more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined? I never saw Bill O'Reilly pull a stunt like Dan Rather and CBS Evening News. I couldn't even imagine what the far left would be saying if this had been done to John Kerry(and no the swift boat ads are not the same thing).

I am quite sure that if any of you guys actually watched the O'Reilly Factor objectively, you would appreciate what he does. He protects those who cannot protect themselves. Just look into the case of little Rilya Wilson. My point is that Bill O'Reilly has more on his agenda than partisan politics(i.e. Michael Moore, Al Franken, Rush Limbaugh), he is actually trying to look out for others. Say what you may, but if you actually read some of his books and looked at what he does you could not possibly make these charges.

Fri Sep 17 2004 1:39 AM


J:

I have no love of Bush, nor do I intend to vote for him in November. But I think about as much of Kerry as I do of Bush, so I won't vote for him either. I don't give a rats behind if all my vote is doing is supporting either Bush or Kerry. At least I won't have that mark on my soul of voting for either man.

At the same time, I cannot stand the gasbags on either side of things. I'm talking the various Adolf's here. Adolf Hannity. Adolf O'Rielly. Adolf Limbaugh. Adolf Coulter. Adolf Moore. Adolf Franken. And so on. They treat anyone who does not kiss their rear ends and disagree with them in any way as morons. None of them report any actual news - only their opinions and obvious rear end kissing and parroting of their party lines.

I think the bigger danger to this country is the two main political parties. The United States is a tree that is strong enough to stand external attacks. But the Republican and Democratic parties are the equivalent of root rot. They are destroying our country from the inside out, and will be the destruction of all of us if this keeps going too much longer. The two parties not only want to rot in hell, but they want the rest of us to join them!

Fri Sep 17 2004 10:10 PM


casey:

Fox news and Bill O. are on cable, dont you all get it, its all the left wing stations, cbs,abc and nbc which are on public airwaves

Get a clue

Sun Sep 26 2004 12:23 AM


Null:

Some Lamer named Charles Said,
"I want to ask if there is anyone who has watched his show objectively here? You cannot say "America itself was responsible for the 9/11 attack because it is an imperialistic, aggressive nation," without losing credibility. It's flat out wrong. America must defend herself against evil Muslim terrorists who if were not blowing up their own people and our soldiers in Iraq, would be upon the American heartland laying waste to our buildings and the innocents in them."

Are you retarded? or just some teenager with no clue?

Are you trying to say that America has done nothing to provoke attack out of the Middle East before 9/11 and that we are just reacting and defending ourselves?

That is soo short sited and incorrect, that all I can conclude is, you are retarded Charles.

America is an EXTREMEMLY!!!!!!!!! imperialistic and aggressive nation and anyone who thinks otherwise is living in an ignorant world.

Take a good look at the wars we have been in since America was founded, http://www.multied.com/wars.html

Look at America change the courses of the world serveral times to the point where it's the only superpower, which now is working towards removing democracy from US soil and exporting it to other countries as a means to bring influence and control over them.

Look at the ways America has undermined countries and governments, and just work with whats currently public knowledge, nevermind the thousand years or so of secret societies influence and control over all major braches of government and society nor the classified documents detailing our real history in other palces.

Your just like Bill O'Reilly with his dellusional picture of America, it's Government, it's actions, what it represents to other people in the world, you bring arguments to the table with zero proof or fact to backup a single word spoken from ur oral shitter.

I have seen the O'Reilly show enough to know he's full of crap, spins everything to his own views or brute forces you into silence or agreement.

If you had any true understanding of American and World history, you hold your tongue on praising this country for it's actions in the world courts, cause its failing miserably at convincing anyone of anything, including the American people.

Wed Oct 6 2004 4:01 PM


Bush4TehWin:

Wow - this is a libtard circle jerk if I ever saw one!!

Fri Oct 8 2004 5:03 AM


takeAmericaback:

Fellow Americans,why even discuss O'Reilly?He is not worthy of our time and efforts.Do not allow your intelligence to grovel.Only two things are truly needed "today"
a:Clarity of mind.
b:Kindness/Compassion from the heart.
The answer as to how you must vote will result naturally.
Kerry/Edwards the vehicle to take America back from the "Hate Mongers"narrowminded creatures thst have sprung all over.
Think of your kids and their kids and so on!
AMERICA HOW IT'S MEANT TO BE

Mon Oct 25 2004 8:51 AM


Jeremy:

I have been reading the comments here and they strike me as eerily like the debate about the proposed EU justice minister, Buttiglione, who made remarks about homosexuality being a sin and womens place being in the home. The response varies in defence for him, or O'Rielly, occurs from 2 types of people:
1) Those people who are ignorant prigs, truly unable to comprehend reality. They like Rielly. I will not get through to these people, they have been brainwashed by fox news.
2) Those who say "let him speak" and "he balances out the left".

Coming from Australia, I think the first thing to note is "the Left" in America is right wing here. It's astounding what "Left Wing" is these days in the US. But, coming back to the point. There are 2 problems with the latter defence.
1) there is very little left wing coverage in the US media. Especially on prime time television. so he is not counterbalancing anything. No Left wing commentator gets the sort of coverage fox news boasts, or close. That said, if someone has a good example I'll hear it out.
2) It is one thing to counter balance, it is quite another to misrepresent the facts. Outfoxed neatly summarises this point for me.
3) The problem with Buttiglione was that his views clash with EU policy, and with his ability to be perceived as an impartial policy implementer. The same applies here. He seems unable to leave his views outside of his work, or to distinguish between the news and his opinions. therefore he is violating the standards of journalism that other civilised countries expect.

Surprisingly when you bomb peoples countries and pursue a foriegn policy that inflicts terrible hardships upon people, they will get angry about it. Arabs didn't just wake up and decide to bomb you, nor did the IRA in the UK for that matter. I could get into a lengthly debate about this, but I sense it is wasted here.

As an ancillary point, I think that man is a horrible, horrible person, and a coward and only invites people who he can shout down or who will agree with him. His invitation to "come tonight" was rightly refused. You don't just call people and say "be here in 20 minutes", you schedule them. And you can be sure he'll make rules that prevent him getting trapped, or just yell whoever it is down.

Dear lord, if I hadn't seen Outfoxed, I'd swear the transcript is satire. What a joke. I am thoroughly resigned to a Bush victory. what an appalling system.

Wed Oct 27 2004 6:31 PM


Martin Henry:

We have a pretty hard interviewer over here, his name is Jeremy Paxman, he works for the BBC, O'Reilly is fond of saying that "The No Spin Zone" is a tough venue...

Why? Because there a dim witted blowhard who is fond of shouting "cut his mike" when he's losing an argument?...

If he was interviewed by Paxman he'd be reduced to tears in no time...

Mon Nov 8 2004 10:53 AM


Keyser:

Paxman reducing O'Reilly to tears?, I would'nt mind seeing that, though I'd have to see it to believe it (he's a little too boorish and thick skinned).

Thu Dec 2 2004 4:26 PM


Allahsucks:

The so called religion of peace is full of a bunch of whacked out maniacs. SCREW ALLAH. SCREW MOHAMMAD. If we get hit with another September 11 type attack, say goodby to Mecca and Medina. We'll kill ten million of you scumbags.

Tue Dec 7 2004 2:36 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Allahsucks is the posterboy for condom use. For a second there i thought he was talking about Evangelical christianity. My bad. Actually let me just try it on for size.. im curious.

Ahahahem....

The so called religion of peace is full of a bunch of whacked out maniacs. SCREW GOD. SCREW JESUS CHRIST. If the U.S. invades another country that did not attack it, say goodbye to New Jersey and Los Angeles and the local Wal-Mart in Rhapahanock County. We'll kill ten million of you religious rednecks.

Hmmmm.... interesting. Almost felt natural. Hmpf.

Tue Dec 7 2004 9:06 PM


njguardsman:

Mike Mike Mike,

We have learned from our "mistakes" (Crusades) aside from whats happening in Ireland, "we" are not out to make the world "CONVERT or DIE" (contrary to popular belief)

Fri Dec 10 2004 5:55 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

Funny, i thought thats exactly what the venomous right wing bitch Ann Coulter was advocating.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them all them all to christianity"

Her books seem to do very well with the right so dont tell me she's an isolated incident.

Sat Dec 11 2004 1:56 PM


njguardsman:

She (Coulter) is a commentator, NOT a religious leader. Get Back to me when the Pope declares a holy war against non-believers.

Sun Dec 12 2004 5:25 AM


Mike of the Great White North:

And you can get back to me when the Pope actually sanctions the invasion of Iraq as a 'Just' war.

There is no central religious figure in Islam right now, save for maybe Osama but he's not a Caliph yet. So if your talking about all the vile spewing in the madrassas, the equivalent is the vile the Pat Robertson, Jerry Fartwell and Billy Graham spew. And if you dont think they incite holy war rhetoric your obviously not listening close enough.

Anyways, im almost lost in how we got here. I was simply pointing out to that loser 5 posts up (allahsucks) that he's an F'n tard. Islam is a religion of peace in as all religions are supposed to be. It only takes a couple of wackos to distort the underlying message and pervert the message. Its been done with all religions but you cant use a blanket statement like he did without being rightly called a F'n tard.

And yes, some people follow Coulter's spew religiously.

Sun Dec 12 2004 3:39 PM


njguardsman:

Oh so now you're sanctioning religion in politics (Iran), Pat Robertson is promoting his religion, the madrassas promote mainly hatred of the U.S. & Israel.

Please tell me when Ann Coulter started her own religion, ultimately the fanatics are to blame (in any religion) that commit these acts of mass murder and genocide.

P.S. The Pope is not a politician, weather he sanctions the War On Terror or not is of no concern to those who know what needs to be done.

Tue Dec 14 2004 1:35 PM


Mike of the Great White North:

Excuse me while my neck gets whiplash from a doubletake.... WHA?

Explain to me exactly where i said, or what phrase i wrote that alluded to sanctioning religion in politics? Lemme clear something up once and for all just in case anyones confused. I believe 100% in seperation of church and state, unless you are the vatican, to which its a country unto itself. I do not tell people which religion they can or cannot practice, but in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS do i want religion or church of any denomination dictating to me how i will live my life, through either the pulpit or politics.

Also you can sit there and claim Pat Robertson is 'promoting' his religion. Fine. Then Osama is promoting his firebrand version of Islam. You cant make the claim of nuetrality on Robertson. His guests are frequently staunch supporters or backers of expanionist Greater Israel, or during Fartwells infamous moment of calling Mohammed a terrorist. Basically calling your religious icon a terrorist and giving free reign to a belligerant occupier to crush more muslims while expanding illegal settlements is tantamount to a promotion of hatred against muslims.

And Coulter's still a bitch. But i can agree with you about the fanatics.

Ahem, correct yourself NJ, i said the Pope didn't sanction the 'war in iraq', while well propogandized, is not in anyway connected to the 'war on terror'

Tue Dec 14 2004 5:17 PM


Donna Demore:

I agee with your stand on immigration. =If any congressmen or senators votes against a immigration law, they should be turned out of office-democrat or repubican. Take THEIR job away and see how they like it.

Tue Apr 26 2005 12:18 PM


Joedae:

Bill orielly and others are just complete lunatics. Yes they may be sane and know what they are saying but they told what to say. They are told what to talk about and how to twist things. Things should not be twisted and presented to favor one side or the other. They should be presented with a neutral view not far left or right.

Tue May 31 2005 5:25 AM


carleen:

About the missing teen in Aruba. Why doesn't some one see what a psychic has to say? It can't hurt.

Wed Jul 6 2005 10:03 PM


Devin Leonard:

Bill O'Reilly is a typical panty wearing GOP pussy, as are most of the losers who watch his show.

Like Dick Cheney and that fat boy Sean Hannity, O'Reilly is a "Chickenhawk" who thinks war is great...as long as he doesen't have to go fight.

As a 25 year old former Marine with service in Kosovo and Sierra Leone, I am disgusted by these types of cowards.
Not only is O'Reilly an insult to America, he is an insult to all of us REAL Irish.
As for the people on this board who support him, well, they are equally cowardly and traitors to America.

Sat Jul 30 2005 9:00 AM


Sam B. Laden:

The trouble with America and the Middle East is that we continue to occupy it with our military forces. It's a burden to American taxpayers and a thorn in the sides of Arab countries. Our troops have become mercenaries and police officers for the US oil industry.

Pull out of the Middle East. Israel has enough nukes to fend off its enemies. They'll just have to follow the rules in order to be respected there. If they continue to murder non-Jews and steal land, it's their problem, not the United States.

Thu Aug 11 2005 1:10 PM


Harry Balzer:

The Democrats and Republicans continue to dupe the American Taxpayers with their phony, staged arguements and rants against each other's parties. Left and Right-wing talk show hosts do the same thing. You don't see what happens after the cameras are turned off, but I have. I've worked for numerous news stations as a cameraman and see how bogus it all is.

Bill O'Reilly and Al Frankin are in it for the ratings. They put their mouths where the money is.

The shows are structured much like the Howard Stern Show, where callers are screened and rehearsed, as well as guests. The objective of talk show hosts is the same; ratings. Political Howard Stern is not my idea of fair and balanced media.

Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly really need to mature. Child-men in nice suits do not make fair and balanced political mouth-pieces.

Thu Aug 11 2005 1:26 PM


Anonymous:

iwonder as i type this if it will ever be read.
the usa is always sends help to other countries and i not saying anything about this but THIS COUNTRY CAN USE HELP ALSO, LOOK AT THE DAMAGE KATHRINE HAS CAUSE AND THE EXPENSE THIS HAS CAUSED AND THE HELP NEEDED.I WONDER IF THIS COUNTRY WILL BE OFFERED ANY HELP FROM OTHER COUNTRIES AS OTHER COUNTRIES EXPECT HELP WE THE PEOPLE OF THE USA. ROMA COLLINS ROBBINSVILLE NC

Wed Aug 31 2005 2:34 PM


Steve:

The post of Thu Aug 11 2005 01:10 PM by

SAM B. LADEN = uSAMa Bin LADEN
nice try

The trouble with America and the Middle East is that we continue to occupy it with our military forces. It's a burden to American taxpayers and a thorn in the sides of Arab countries. Our troops have become mercenaries and police officers for the US oil industry.

Pull out of the Middle East. Israel has enough nukes to fend off its enemies. They'll just have to follow the rules in order to be respected there. If they continue to murder non-Jews and steal land, it's their problem, not the United States.

Thu Oct 20 2005 5:41 AM


Kurt:

Wow why don’t you liberal idiots go play salty cracker and take a notice at the rest of the nation, i.e. the majority that is conservative, or did you forget we control the government, maybe Bill is right? ooops no that cant be, that would mean your wrong. Why don’t you take some of your own advices and open your eyes a lot more people believe differently than liberals like you that is why Bush is a two term president and that is why you have no chance in 2008. Also this is going to kill you AMERICA HAS A 95% EMPLOYMENT RATE UNDER A CONSERVATIVE!!! OOOOOOHHHHHH THE SKY IS FALLING. Get a life and get your heads out of your asses.

Fri Dec 30 2005 1:14 AM


Nicholai:

Did you hear about the new Bill O Reilly parody? I think it's coming out next month.. And it's called God's Will

Tue Feb 21 2006 2:19 PM


Paul:

Do You guys think the rumours about the new parody of Bill O Reilly?(I honestly hope so :D ) I can't wait to see it !

Wed Feb 22 2006 5:01 AM


will:

yada yada yada/from portland or San Frandisco

Fri Mar 24 2006 12:42 AM


MalcolmD:

With all my respect, Mr. O'R has no intellectual honesty. He blindly serves the conservative party to make money and be popular.

Mr. O'R uses cheap tactic and bullying technigues with his guests, and I do think any decent thinker should appear on his show.

Wed Apr 12 2006 4:15 PM


PHIL:

bILL I am so tired of the news media making such a deal about the Marines before before the investigation has been completed. I am a veteran with over 20 years service, I did 2 tours in Nam Grenada,Panama & Niquaraguia. I am an X Ranger, X special forces, and if some of these news guys would have any idea of what our troops are doing they would not be so quick to act. What ever happened to patriot? With immegration the way it is, let us all say NUTS and have a Beer.

Sat Jun 3 2006 9:51 PM


Rich:

I'm a fan of Bill and Sean. But you have to understand they are not journalists and if you asked them they would confirm that. These are talk shows. The equivilent of an embelished newspaper editorial page. They are on because people watch or listen. I don't know why but so far the liberal side has not been able to find any personalities that can generate viewers and listeners. When they do find some I will watch them also. Although I probably will throw objects at my TV.

Thu Sep 7 2006 12:34 AM


Justin:

I'm gonna agree with Jon Stewart in that these shows are hurting America. I for one have stopped watching all "political debate" shows--they just aren't debate. The ideal debate ends with some kind of compromise or agreement or at least SOMETHING beneficial. These shows just stir up controversy and partisanship for the sake of polarization and ratings. Tragically, the good Ol' U.S. of A. has become an irreversibly polarized nation. Compromise seems impossible and not a moderate is in sight.

Sat Dec 30 2006 3:34 PM


Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam

Email:







Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Last.fm Weekly Artists Chart

<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>