O'Reilly says NY Times and MSNBC execs, Soros, ACLU's Romero are "America-haters" for depicting America as a "torture nation"
April 27, 2009 8:59 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.
"MSNBC execs?"
Can't he just call Keith-O by name?
O'Racist is a coward....and an anti-American teabagger
O'Lielly should be prosecuted for torturing logic and the facts. He is beyond dishonest and is simply a sociopathic liar. His own seething hatred for America and our liberties is palpable.
What a freakin' putz.
Conservative Boogy Man George Soros has nothing to do with Media Matters, he is a founding member, board member of the Center for American Progress. CAP has never wavered, and has unabashedly stated their agenda of progressive policies.
George Soros has as much or more money than many of the most prolific idealogues in the media, like say Rich Ailles! The guy that without any reasonable proof called the 2000 Election for his shills Bush / Cheney.
No need to look for a boogy man on their side, the list long enough!
Media Matters for America has never received funding directly from George Soros,” Aman stated, no longer denying any relationship with organizations affiliated with Soros.
Soros had no control over where the money ended up, this is a relationship?
Scaife, Murdoch and a few of thier peers amount to a couple powers of ten more in monies paid out in support of conservative media. They also prefer a hands on approach.
"O'Reilly purported to chart an intricate web leading to "vile propaganda outfit" Media Matters"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704240003
They even try to solicit donations from Soros in that article.
"As previously indicated, Soros has never given money to Media Matters, either directly or through another organization. If he wanted to fund Media Matters, he or Open Society Institute (OSI), a grant-making foundation he established in 1993 to conduct his philanthropy, could simply write a check directly to Media Matters, as he and OSI do to numerous entities."
Just because that one spokeswoman says "We don't receive money DIRECTLY from Soros", it does not mean she was refuting anything Media Matters said in the past and she was "admitting" to receiving Soros money.
O'Reilly and the right offer no evidence to back up these claims. Care to back up your claims that there are organizations laundering money to ACORN? Name them, and then show me hard evidence to where the money is going.
I noticed you didn't provide a link - therefore by your logic none of what you wrote exists.
But, mostly - SO WHAT? Even though your article (or whatever it is) actually seems to refute your point that Soros funds Media Matters.
So what? And Ailes runs Fox News. The difference is that Media Matters admits they are out to show how biased conservative media is and uses facts to support their beliefs. Fox News pretends to be fair and balanced and bases most of their "stories" and shows on propaganda.
And who cares what Soros does fund? Why does he not have the right to do the same things that Murdoch or Ailes or anybody else does? Typical right-wing smear merchant - two sets of rules.
Right, it's your strawman argument. I get it.
So, care to explain how torture can be OK, yet those that talk about us torturing "hate" America? Please take all the time you need.
YEAH!! THAT'S RIGHT!! YOU GUY, BILL-O!!
American TORTURES!! We will waterboard you, your mamma and your uncle, so don't mess with the U.S.!!
Woo-Hoo!! The REAL AMERICA loves guns, hates gays, waterboards them arabs and LUVS Bill O'Reilly!
...LUVS Bill O'Reilly!
I doubt if they love him, but you might be right. My guess is they despise him the way his boss does but prefer him as the face of the conservatives,...well for various political reasons.
I don't get it. Is he saying it's BAD to call America a "torture nation"... but torture itself is GOOD?
What does he actually believe (I was gonna say "think", but I doubt he thinks).
I don't get it. Is he saying it's BAD to call America a "torture nation"... but torture itself is GOOD?
What does he actually believe (I was gonna say "think", but I doubt he thinks).
Bill's point that the cartoon will wreck America's image all over the world is silly. First of all, images like it will only convince the world that the US is getting closer to giving in to reason. Second of all, it won't convince the 'world' of anything; O'Reilly grossly overestimates how many people care about his opinion. The same can be said about his estimation of the world's population that pay attention to American news media. Believing anything he has to say about 'popular' opinion at any level of population is wrong.
Fairliberal, you seem to agree with O'Reilly that what is popular is true. The analogy has been made before; by that logic, McDonalds' food is the healthiest thing for you and Playboy has more intellectual merit than the average academic journal.
The base of the statue says "bring me your huddled masses."
Not, "bring me your captured enemy combatants to torture"