O'Reilly criticizes NBC News for having "never, ever said a negative word about Tiller's activities"

If refusing to come down explicitly on the side of public opinion is as hideous a crime as Bill says it is, will he condemn his own network for their support of bloody, unpopular wars and their relentless attacks on a popular, duly elected president?
(Hint: No.)

Since they never condemned him, I guess that means NBC doesn't have blood on their hands like mr. o'reilly does.

p.s. I see now why the republicans implemented the southern strategy...

OK Bill nice try to play the old switcheroo. Let me tell you why NBC didn't condemn.....because Dr Tiller was within the law of the land not the law of O'Reilly. You see NBC reports news while Fox distorts news. That's a significant difference even to crazy people. I know, I know...there is no reason to bring up your nightly audience who is now having slumber parties across this nation for the death YOU caused. Pro-Life? After watching your show just once I am Pro-Deaf.

O'Reilly criticizes NBC News for having "never, ever said a negative word about Tiller's activities"

Why should they. Do news networks usually publish negative words about a private citizen doing his job legally?

O'Reilly must think his idiocy is contagious, and he castigates anyone immune to the infection.

Could it be that maybe news organizations aren't THERE to condemn people, just to report on them? I understand this is probably an entirely new concept to Bill.

Since his segment is called talking points commentary, here's some talking points for Bill O'.

Dr. Drew Westen.


The reality is that when Democrats clearly state their values on this issue, Americans prefer their message over a strong, well-crafted "pro-life" position by double digits. Consider the following statement, which the pollster Stan Greenberg and I tested in October with a representative national sample of 1000 likely voters:

Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. That's why I'm both pro-choice and pro-personal responsibility. Politicians shouldn't intrude on a woman or couple's most personal and painful decisions, and no one has the right to use government to impose their religious beliefs on somebody else. But that doesn't mean people should engage in unprotected sex and use abortion as a form of birth control. The best way to reduce abortions is to reduce unwanted and teen pregnancies. That means making sure every adult has access to medically accurate information and birth control, and providing honest, age appropriate sex education to our kids.

This message beat an evocative, well-branded conservative message by 19 points with the general electorate and by 20 points with swing voters. This was the only message we tested that used the term "pro-choice" that strongly appealed to voters, but it was one of the most effective ways of speaking to voters, particularly in the political center, for several reasons. It paired choice with responsibility, rather than suggesting, as the right often does, that choice implies a casual attitude toward sex, contraception, and abortion. It did not disenfranchise men from this issue the way the language of "a woman's right to choose" normally does, referring instead to "a woman or couple's most personal and painful decisions," which in most cases is actually more accurate (because although the final decision lies with the woman, most women deciding whether to have an abortion talk to the man who impregnated them). It inoculated against the right's "slippery slope" argument that Democrats really believe in "abortion on demand." And it emphasized sex education, which strong majorities of even evangelical Christians want their children to get.

Why would a news organization condemn a doctor for conducting a legal medical practice?

That's Fox's job.

I think he forgets that a real news source is to provide news not give negative or positive opinions.

A news organization has a duty to inform the public, not to pass judgement.

O'Reilly criticizes NBC News for having "never, ever said a negative word about Tiller's activities"

Perhaps that's because NBC (for the most part) has realized that Dr. Tiller did nothing illegal or of any substance deemed worthy of negative neanderthal ideology like that which comes from fanatical zealots like yourself and (your possible tag-team partner in murder??) Mr. Roeder and all the other ideological right-wing fruitcakes among us!

Great show by the way Billy... NOT!

It is not a news organization's job to object to legal medical procedures that violate your morality, Bill.

Why don't you understand this?

If I didn't know any better, I'd think that O'Rielly was trying to- oh I don't know- justify something maybe?

I am against abortion.I am also against the government telling women what to do with their bodies.Commentaters and officials should just stay out of this personal decision.Only when people are truly free are they free enough to make the wrong decision.Stop making people live to your personal views of righteousness.

O'Racist is even more desperate than usual attempt to bring NBC into this. Seriously, why are you reich-wingers such lowlife freaks? NBC? Really? That's friggin hilarious. Nothing is going to change that fact that O'Racist supports terrorists and is an enabler of terrorism. He can desperately attempt to distract his myopic viewers with tangents, but the fact remains that O'Racist and his teabagging audience are anti-American.

NBC reports news. They don't control it, justify it or try to make it into a socialist platform. If Tiller had not been validated legally in the states that he was practicing in they would have, I think. Yep, NBC reports. They probably interview but they don't threaten the opinions out of guest they discuss and address perspective and ideolgy. Say something bad for what! What happened to unbias and objective. You can get your point across with saying anything at all. Bill was doing such a nice job, they "left" it up to you. Why is this issue still haunting Bill, It's old news!

You are on candid cameras!