About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

O'Reilly claims "Communist Al Fran- excuse me, comedian Al Franken" is "jealous" of him

February 26, 2009 10:16 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (February 26, 2009 10:35 pm ET)
         
      It's the other way, BillDo. You've been jealous of Franken for years.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (February 27, 2009 12:05 pm ET)
           
        What i easier to refute is people who have their facts all wrong and don't make very much sense. Why on earth would O'Reilly be jealous of Franken, after all O'Reilly shows have kicked Frankens butt. He is one of the prime reasons that Air America was such a failure. Can you point to any support to your claim. I wouild love to see O'Reilly sit down with Franken an debate but it will never happen. O'Reilly would destroy him and no one knows thar better than Franken. And by the way have you seen the latest Nielson ratings for cable TV in general and specifically the news channels. Hint, Fox kicks all their butts. Why?, because people get more than a partisan presentation of the issues on Fox.  But of course that is the kind of programming you detest.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (February 27, 2009 12:13 pm ET)
             

          Billo is jealous that Franken didn't have to use lies to get an audience.

          Billo is also jealous that Franken has lived a life of such quality that he was able to get elected senator.

          Billo is also jealous of Franken's sense of humor.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by foghornleghorn (February 27, 2009 12:13 pm ET)
             

          Billo is jealous that Franken didn't have to use lies to get an audience.

          Billo is also jealous that Franken has lived a life of such quality that he was able to get elected senator.

          Billo is also jealous of Franken's sense of humor.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 27, 2009 12:36 pm ET)
             
          Actually, they have debated.  Franken crushed O'Reilly.  I would encourage you to look it up.  It took place during their book tours several years ago.  Franken calmly dismantled his lies while O'Reilly simply yelled "Shut up!".  If you actually watch it, you will quickly see that O'Reilly is powerless without his ability to shout people down and turn off their mics.  He is a bully and like all bullies is all bark and no bite.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fairliberal (February 27, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
               
            Actually I would suggest you look it up. That was not a debate, it was a book tour where they were both to speak. After Franken spoke for twice as long as he was allotted and repeatedly insulted O'Reilly as soon as O'Reilly started to speak, Franken interrupted him. O'Reilly then told him to shut up . Franken had been very rude and should have allowed O'Reilly the same opportunity to speak that Franken had just had. Franken has consistently lied about O'Reilly over the years, like his representation of O'Reilly's interview with that Glick guy. Glick was all wrong also, most of what he was saying was pure fiction. But of course franken makes a fool of himself by supporting him. Franken should look up the facts too.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 27, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
                 

              I have to say it is particularly delicious to hear an O'Reilly supporter complain that someone was "rude" to their hero.  He was very rude and interrupted helpless little Bill and that was why O'Reilly came out looking like a liar?  Poor Bill. 

              Well, here is your big chance - what were the lies that Franken was perpetrating against that poor victim, O'Reilly?  Let's hear it.  Clearly, Bill had no idea since his only comeback was to accuse Franken of being a smear merchant or whatever strange term he uses to attempt to discount those who ridicule his false claims - such as the prestigious awards that he did NOT win yet continued to claim he did.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by fairliberal (February 27, 2009 4:35 pm ET)
                   
                Well for one Franken totally misrepresented the interview with Glick and stated that O'Reilly had told Glick to shut up for saying "true stuff". One such true stuff was that Bush the elder had recruited and  funded the moujadeen during the Carter years to combat the Soviets. He further stated that this occurred six months prior to the Soviet invasion. That is totally false, look up the facts, Bush was in the CIA under Ford and resigned when Carter took office, the Soviet invasion was apx 2 years later. Franken said it was true, it is not. I have seen others on this site defend that idiot Glick , when most of what he said was nonsense. Franken purposely attacked O'Reilly, and was deliberately baiting him ,his book was not selling . It was # 400 or so on the best seller list, after this exchange it went to #1. That was Franken's motive.  Money, nothing more. There was other falsehoods in the kids remarks that Franken supported and lied about but I am sure you can find them on your own. And I wonder if you ever actually saw "the debate" as you call it, I doubt it. I sure you saw the 30 second clip of O'Reilly telling him to shut up and that is all you care about. Another airtight mind in action! 
                Report Abuse
                • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 27, 2009 5:04 pm ET)
                     

                  I believe you are completely wrong about Franken and the bestseller list, but I do not care what number on the bestseller list these books were on.  We were talking about Franken lying in regards to O'Reilly.  So, your only real substantive claim is that Franken backed up Mr. Glick's remarks insofar as stating they were "true".  You claim that they were not true because George Bush, Sr. did not run the CIA under Carter - which you claim is what Glick said.  I would instruct you to read a transcript of the debate between Glick and O'Reilly.  Although, I suppose this would not be a "debate" since O'Reilly yelled at him to shut up and turned his mic off. 

                  O'REILLY: ... I don't think he'd be equating this country as a terrorist nation as you are.

                  GLICK: Well, I wasn't saying that it was necessarily like that.

                  O'REILLY: Yes, you are. You signed...

                  GLICK: What I'm saying is...

                  O'REILLY: ... this, and that absolutely said that.

                  GLICK: ... is that in -- six months before the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan, starting in the Carter administration and continuing and escalating while Bush's father was head of the CIA, we recruited a hundred thousand radical mujahadeens to combat a democratic government in Afghanistan, the Turaki government.

                  O'REILLY: All right. I don't want to...

                  GLICK: Maybe...

                  O'REILLY: I don't want to debate world politics with you.

                  GLICK: Well, why not? This is about world politics.

                  O'REILLY: Because, No. 1, I don't really care what you think.

                  GLICK: Well, OK.

                  I would hope that would suffice to prove that point wrong.  We do not really need to go into detail about what "continuing" and "escalating" mean do we?  Got anything else?? 

                  Report Abuse
                • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 27, 2009 5:19 pm ET)
                     

                  I am very curious as to any further instances you can find of Franken lying.  I would have absolutely NO problem coming up with many instances of O'Reilly lying if that would help you out in making your decision on which one of these two is more trustworthy.  Or which one would win a debate argued on the merits.  I have never been a big Franken supporter, but I have also never heard him invent awards that he has won. 

                  I would think anyone interested in an honest argument of facts would find it very relevant that a man who continuously states his "no-spin zone" were lying about awards which he never won to make himself look better.  And, when called on this lie instead of owning up to the mistake were to yell at the accuser to "shut up" and accuse them of being "vicious" simply because they were stating facts that were uncomfortable to the liar. 

                  All the money and all the bestseller lists and all the ratings in the world could never convince me that this was a man to admire.  But, hey, some people choose to live by the mantra that millions of people could not be wrong.  I am just not one of those people.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by fairliberal (February 27, 2009 9:12 pm ET)
                       
                    The segment of the Glick/O'Reilly argument does support what I say about the kid being wrong on everything, but you only show a small segment, there were other issues also. But I was asking you if you had seen the Franken / O'reilly debate that you refer to, you claimed that Franken destroyed him and I wonder how you came to that conclusion. Frankens many fabrications can be viewed at this site  www.frankenlies.com  he claims to have 14 researchers and always tells the truth but his books are filled with errors, some big , some small, but lies none the less.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 28, 2009 11:39 am ET)
                         

                      I came to that conclusion by watching the interaction between O'Reilly and Franken myself - the same way any sane person would.  In reality if, during an argument, one man is proved to be a liar and his only comeback is to huff and puff and scream "Shut up!" then it is pretty clear that man has been dressed down.

                      Although, after visiting your wonderful supporting evidence - the frankenlies website, I am beginning to get a clearer picture where you are coming from.  I read the top 3 "lies" and they are all pathetic.  #1 claims that Clinton should get no credit for any terrorist plans that were thwarted unless the FBI arrested the terrorists themselves inside the US.  And since Franken is giving Clinton credit for terrorists plots that were thwarted overseas he is a "liar".  Huh?

                      The second one claims that Franken is a liar because he accuses a posted flier that stated the incorrect date for the upcoming election of being racist in its intent.  Even your website seems to admit that these fliers were found posted at a school in a black neighborgood, but because no one saw a Republican posting them then Franken is a liar for suggesting so.  So, I am assuming your belief is that Democrats were trying to suppress the black vote?  That is truly amazing. 

                      The third "lie" was that Franken never called the Democrats racist for rolling Oreos at Michael Steele.  Any sane evaluation of the situation just by listening to Steele's own stories about this incident show it to false.  I would suggest maybe you set up a website to track all the lies on your frankenlies website.  Even if I were to grant you that your disagreements with Franken on these 3 were true, they would still not be lies.  You disagree with what Clinton should get credit for, you disagree that it is Republicans who would want to suppress the black vote, and you disagree that Franken should call Democrats racist because you believe Oreos were thrown at Michael Steele.  These are your lies??

                      Is this really the best that you can do?  This is it?  This rinky-dink website full of half-truths that even the Fox News crowd wouldn't cite as evidence of anything.  That's your "fair" proof that Franken is a liar and O'Reilly would crush him in a debate?  Come one - you gotta do better that that.  Your Glick reference has been proven false and this website is not proving anyone of anything.  Please, tell me you got something to support these beliefs other than you want them to be true so then they are.

                      Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (February 26, 2009 11:10 pm ET)
         
      Was that written into the teleprompter?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by njguy93 (February 27, 2009 3:06 am ET)
         

      Yes, let's see here.  Al Franken is jealous of a guy who has a show on a joke of a network that nobody takes seriously except the neanderthal base of the Republican Party, a guy who himself is taken seriously by nobody except the neanderthals and mental midgets who watch him and the network he's on, a guy who has been exposed as a liar and a massive fraud about a million times over, a guy who had a multi-million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him and had to pay off the woman millions of dollars to keep quiet and go away and not talk about the graphic details in the lawsuit where he talks about pleasuring himself with sex instruments and releasing bodily fluids, a guy who is becoming increasingly irrelevant, yes Al Franken is jealous of this guy right as he is about to become a United States Senator while this guy continues to release his lunatic drivel into the ethers and hopes that the neanderthals continue to latch on while he laughs at them all the way to the bank.

      THANK YOU.

      njguy93@yahoo.com

      Report Abuse
    • Author by megabot (February 27, 2009 7:45 am ET)
         
      Billo, didn't you say you were going to leave the country if Franken won? GET OUT OF THE COUNTRY NOW, LOSER. And take your Stalker Nazis with you!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by harley (February 27, 2009 8:58 am ET)
         

       

      Calling a Democratic Senator a "communist"..how so ever "fair and balanced" of O'Racist.  Where is 'fairlibrul' to defend her hero?

       

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Damian G. (February 27, 2009 5:30 pm ET)
         

      Context, people!  As you may have seen at the very beginning of the clip, O'Reilly had just finished covering Alan Keyes' latest tirade against Barack Obama, in which he called the President a Communist.

      O'Reilly roundly mocked Keyes, then transitioned to Franken with a reference to Keyes' comments.  This was not some random slur.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by FightTheFascism (March 01, 2009 12:23 pm ET)
         

      The reason O'Reilly claims Franken is jealous of him is because O'Reilly is a narcissist and believes the world revolves around him. O'Reilly cannot tolerate the idea that his political nemesis shows no interest in him.

      Report Abuse