The Bill O'Reilly Factor

[Perknose]

Illuminating:

It started innocuously enough. On Monday, June 21, a producer from Fox News's The O'Reilly Factor called to ask me to appear as a guest that evening to comment on a front-page story in the New York Times claiming that the Bush Administration had overstated the value of intelligence gained at Guantánamo and the dangers posed by the men detained there. I'm generally not a fan of shout-television, and I had declined several prior invitations to appear on O'Reilly's show, but this time I said yes. Little did I know it would not only be my first time, but also my last.

I sat in the Washington studio as the taping of the show began in New York with a rant from Bill O'Reilly. He claimed that "the Factor" had established the link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and then played a clip from Thomas Kean, head of the Senate's 9/11 Commission, in which Kean said, "There is no evidence that we can find whatsoever that Iraq or Saddam Hussein participated in any way in attacks on the United States, in other words, on 9/11. What we do say, however, is there were contacts between Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Iraq, Saddam--excuse me. Al Qaeda."

Iwas impressed. O'Reilly, who had announced his show as the "No Spin Zone," was actually playing a balanced soundbite, one that accurately reported the commission's findings both that there was no evidence linking Saddam and 9/11, and that there was some evidence of contacts (if no "collaborative relationship") between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Maybe all those nasty things Al Franken had said about O'Reilly weren't true after all.

But suddenly O'Reilly interrupted, plainly angry, and said, "We can't use that.... We need to redo the whole thing." Three minutes of silence later, the show began again, with O'Reilly re-recording the introduction verbatim. Except this time, when he got to the part about Kean, he played no tape, and simply paraphrased Kean as confirming that "definitely there was a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda." The part about no link to 9/11 was left on the cutting-room floor.

Now it was my turn. O'Reilly introduced the segment by complaining that we are at war and need to be united, but that newspapers like the New York Times are running biased stories, dividing the country and aiding the enemy. "The spin must stop--our lives depend on it," O'Reilly gravely intoned. He then characterized the Times story that day as claiming that the Guantánamo detainees were "innocent people" and "harmless." He said the paper's article "questions holding the detainees at Guantánamo."

I noted that the Times had said nothing of the sort. And I pointed out that the article relied on a CIA study finding that the detainees seemed to be low-level and had provided little valuable intelligence.

That didn't convince O'Reilly, however, who again criticized the Times for misleading its readers by terming the detainees innocent and not dangerous. I replied that he was misleading his own viewers, by exaggerating what the Times had said. "No, I'm not," he retorted. So far, the usual fare on newstalk television.

But then I decided to go one step further: "It seems to me like the pot calling the kettle black, Bill, because I just sat here five minutes ago as you re-recorded the introduction to this show to take out a statement from the head of the 9/11 commission stating that there was no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11."

Apparently O'Reilly does not like being called "the pot." He exploded, repeatedly called me an "S.O.B." and assured me that he would cut my accusation from the interview when the show aired. He also said I would "never ever" be on his show again. At this point, I wasn't sure whether to take that as a threat or a promise.

Sure enough, when The O'Reilly Factor aired later that night, both Thomas Kean's statement about 9/11 and my charge about O'Reilly deleting it were missing. All that was left was Bill O'Reilly, fuming at the liberal media's lack of objectivity and balance, and ruing the divisive effect "spin" has on our national unity.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

 

[Kipper]

What are you so surprised about? O'Reilly's media darling drivel is just as bad as Michael Moore's. I simply prefer the latter because it is more entertaining. The millions of Americans who tune into this incredibly tedious show day after day and use it as their primary source of news are just as intelligent as lemmings - no, perhaps as intelligent as cultists.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

That guy sounds like as ass...I wouldn't invite him back to my show either.

 

[Fingolfin269]

I can't believe that some of you just don't get it yet when it comes to people like O'Reilly, Hannity, Moore, Franken, etc. You find no problem creating these massive conspiracy theories about how Bush/Cheney actually went into Iraq to make money, but can't seem to grasp the simple concept that everyone in political news presents themselves in the way most likely to make them a quick buck. Just how much money do you think a completely straight down the middle show would make? Nothing because it would be freaking boring.

 

[MAW1082]

Why are you even concerned about this idiot? He has obviously proved that he is a tool of the Bush admin.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
Why are you even concerned about this idiot? He has obviously proved that he is a tool of the Bush admin.

Once again, he's actually a tool to his wallet. I'm sure he'd rather have Bush win but then again I'm sure his ratings will be better if Kerry wins.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: MAW1082
Why are you even concerned about this idiot? He has obviously proved that he is a tool

there fixed it

 

[Hugenstein]

Quit bringing Franken into these types of discussion. There is no way he should be included in with the likes of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, Moore, etc. You may not agree with him, but he backs his opinions with knowledge and facts, and he is perfectly willing to admit a mistake when he makes one.

 

[happyhelper]

Originally posted by: MadCowDisease
What are you so surprised about? O'Reilly's media darling drivel is just as bad as Michael Moore's. I simply prefer the latter because it is more entertaining. The millions of Americans who tune into this incredibly tedious show day after day and use it as their primary source of news are just as intelligent as lemmings - no, perhaps as intelligent as cultists.

Please don't make that inaccurate assumption!

Low intelligence is definitely not a prime factor in whether a person is or is not a cultist.

The Cult Information Centre, run by former cult member Ian Haworth, stresses that students are prime targets for cults. "The likely candidate for cult membership is someone of average to above-average intelligence, well-educated, idealistic and intellectually alert," he says. "University campuses are saturated with people like that - smart people, who care."

That description isn't radical at all among cult exit-counselors and in my experience is very accurate - and I think it probably fits the majority of the O'Reilly faithful.

Despite low intelligence not being a factor, I do agree with your use of the term cultist.

Also, I think a lot of people say really stupid things because they believe the stupid things, in a cult-like, spellbound type of way, but aren't actually stupid people. They just have some sort of inhibition of thinking critically about the stupid things they say/believe/think while on another topic they may have no inhibition to think critically and are therefore rather brilliant about it.

 

[anonmouseuser]

Text

Enjoy!

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: anonmouseuser
Text

Enjoy!

"This guy is the epitome of narcissism, and coming from a guy whose website is titled "The Best Page in the Universe," that's saying a lot. If I had to describe Bill O'Reilly in a phrase, it would be "sock-sniffer." You know the kind of guy who comes home from a long day of work, his feet have been sweating all day, his socks are ripe with the pungent aroma of stale milk and wet leather, and after he finally sits down and takes his socks off, but just before he throws them in the hamper, he takes a quick sniff to sample his odors."

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Heh, sock-sniffer. That's funny

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: MAW1082
Why are you even concerned about this idiot? He has obviously proved that he is a tool

there fixed it

THIS THREAD HAS BEEN FOULED BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT CONTENT TO EXPRESS HIS OWN OPINIONS, BUT FEELS THE NEED TO 'FIX' WHAT OTHERS HAVE WRITTEN. THIS PRACTICE IS DISHONEST AND SHOULD BE BANNED.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: MadCowDisease
What are you so surprised about? O'Reilly's media darling drivel is just as bad as Michael Moore's. I simply prefer the latter because it is more entertaining. The millions of Americans who tune into this incredibly tedious show day after day and use it as their primary source of news are just as intelligent as lemmings - no, perhaps as intelligent as cultists.

ya its fun if you watch it and ignore their commentary

 

[conjur]

http://www.booktv.org/feature/index.asp?schedid=196&segid=3630

Click the "Watch" link.

It's long...about 2:16:00...but it glaringly shows O'Reilly's hypocrisy and arrogance. The first few min. are of O'Reilly answering callers' questions. He berates two of them.

Then, later on, during his speech to the Independent Booksellers, he says his mission is to raise the level of discourse (yeah...right.)

Then, to prove his hypocrisy, he rails against Franken when Franken points out an obvious lie of O'Reilly's (one O'Reilly never saw fit to correct when confronted with it) and calls Franken "an idiot".

It's classic!!

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
I can't believe that some of you just don't get it yet when it comes to people like O'Reilly, Hannity, Moore, Franken, etc. You find no problem creating these massive conspiracy theories about how Bush/Cheney actually went into Iraq to make money, but can't seem to grasp the simple concept that everyone in political news presents themselves in the way most likely to make them a quick buck. Just how much money do you think a completely straight down the middle show would make? Nothing because it would be freaking boring.

Say what you want about Moore... I'm not his bioggest fan, but he's not out for money. The man believes in his agenda and it is a selfless one.

After all, he did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11 just to get the word out.

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: MAW1082
Why are you even concerned about this idiot? He has obviously proved that he is a tool

there fixed it

THIS THREAD HAS BEEN FOULED BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT CONTENT TO EXPRESS HIS OWN OPINIONS, BUT FEELS THE NEED TO 'FIX' WHAT OTHERS HAVE WRITTEN. THIS PRACTICE IS DISHONEST AND SHOULD BE BANNED.

oh the Irony....... I just did what the article above says O'reily did.

edited , cut, and pasted so the "Proper" thought got out.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: busmaster11

After all, he did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11 just to get the word out.

no he didn't. right wing nuts tried to use Moores responce to an old press confrence question about piracy to claim that, but he never did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11.

 

[DeeKnow]

you're paying too much attention to the obnoxious twerp.... ignore him

 

[chess9]

Hugenstein:

Right on the money about Franken. He is partisan, but he almost always gets the facts CORRECT.

O'Reilly lives in a "NO FACT ZONE".

-Robert

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

no he didn't. right wing nuts tried to use Moores responce to an old press confrence question about piracy to claim that, but he never did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11.

so you're admitting then that Moore is a hypocrite when it comes to his own work and his money....ok to pirate other guys stuff but not his??

with regards to Franken, how can anyone not compare him to Hannity and such...he is just as much of a nut if not more.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

no he didn't. right wing nuts tried to use Moores responce to an old press confrence question about piracy to claim that, but he never did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11.

so you're admitting then that Moore is a hypocrite when it comes to his own work and his money....ok to pirate other guys stuff but not his??

with regards to Franken, how can anyone not compare him to Hannity and such...he is just as much of a nut if not more.

While Franken's whack he doesn't even come close to being the raving lunatic Hannity is!

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

no he didn't. right wing nuts tried to use Moores responce to an old press confrence question about piracy to claim that, but he never did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11.

so you're admitting then that Moore is a hypocrite when it comes to his own work and his money....ok to pirate other guys stuff but not his??

with regards to Franken, how can anyone not compare him to Hannity and such...he is just as much of a nut if not more.

While Franken's whack he doesn't even come close to being the raving lunatic Hannity is!

You might change your opinion of him if he were on TV every day.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

no he didn't. right wing nuts tried to use Moores responce to an old press confrence question about piracy to claim that, but he never did encourage people to pirate Farenheit 9/11.

so you're admitting then that Moore is a hypocrite when it comes to his own work and his money....ok to pirate other guys stuff but not his??

with regards to Franken, how can anyone not compare him to Hannity and such...he is just as much of a nut if not more.

While Franken's whack he doesn't even come close to being the raving lunatic Hannity is!

You might change your opinion of him if he were on TV every day.

It would be a hard act to top