O'Reilly: Alito will defend Christmas like the Founding Fathers; but did they?
Fox News host and nationally syndicated radio host Bill O'Reilly claimed that "traditionalist" Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr., like the country's Founding Fathers, does not "want all mention of Christmas stricken from the public arena." Alito's views aside, O'Reilly offered no support for his contention that the Founding Fathers would not want to strike all public mentions of Christmas. He offered no support for the suggestion that the Founding Fathers would have had an opinion on whether Macy's department stores should wish customers a "Merry Christmas," "Happy Holidays," or "Season's Greetings" or that the Founding Fathers would have opposed New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's unveiling of the "holiday tree." It is possible that, in fact, the Founding Fathers may have been swept up in the wave of anti-British sentiment following the American Revolution, in which "British" customs, such as celebrating Christmas, were widely shunned.
From the November 1 broadcast of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:
O'REILLY: By the way, if Alito is confirmed, that will be a good thing for conservatives. That's the bottom line. Because Alito will take a more traditional view than a [Supreme Court justices Stephen G.] Breyer or a [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. OK? He'll look at things, and he'll say, "You know, the Founding Fathers didn't want partial-birth abortion. The Founding Fathers didn't want all mention of Christmas stricken from the public arena." That's what Alito will do. He's a traditionalist. He's going to rule that way.
According to HistoryChannel.com, celebration of Christmas in America prior to the Revolution depended largely on where one lived. In Jamestown, Virginia, one could celebrate the holiday freely. In Boston, celebration of Christmas incurred a fine of five shillings. Following the Revolution, Christmas was eschewed as "English customs fell out of favor." HistoryChannel.com noted that "Congress was in session on December 25, 1789, the first Christmas under America's new Constitution." The holiday remained unpopular for years, and Christmas was not declared a federal holiday until June 26, 1870.
O'Reilly was one of many pundits and commentators in 2004 to decry the so-called "War on Christmas" and featured a regular segment on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor titled "Christmas Under Siege."
Anyone expect anything different from O'Reilly? I sure didn't.
O'Reilly's grasp of US history is from the same source as his knowledge of French imports. The "Paris Business Report." (Or whatever O'Reilly called it.)
In other words, it doesn't exist.
But, O'Reilly majored in history in college, and taught HS history for two years!! Perhaps he did public education in Florida a big favor when he switched to broadcast journalism?
Plato
"You know, the Founding Fathers didn't want partial-birth abortion. The Founding Fathers didn't want all mention of Christmas stricken from the public arena."
Notice how O'Reilly inserts his own opinions when he cites the Founders. How does O'Reilly know how the Founders felt about abortion? About Christmas? Yet, I'm sure, most of his listeners nod in agreement with him -- they don't pause and think about what he says.
The link to how O'Reilly knows what the founding fathers believed goes something like this - God tells Bush - Bush tells someone in the WH staff - information is put into a WH talking points memo - the memo is faxed directly to Fox News - the talking points are rushed to the desk of BOR - they are then transcribed into the Factor Talking Points for the day and communicated to all the sheep. So you see when O'Reilly claims to know what the founding fathers would do its really coming directly from God.
I watched the history of Christmas on the History channel. It wasn't widely celebrated back then in the way we celebrate it today, it was extremely low key with no public displays. BO is moron or he's pretending to be one because he thinks his listeners are.
Pardon me for an unsubstantiated comment...but I saw a history of Christmas a few years ago and one of the conclusions was that our "modern" version of Christmas was invented, virtually single-handedly, by Dickens when he wrote "A Christmas Carol"
There he goes again. Blanket statements that attack and lumps all Liberals and Democrats into one fat lie. The one who is going to get the blanket treatment are the Republicans as these “Wally George’s” continue to spew lies, hatred and crap.
Distracting people from the real issues such as CORRUPTION and MEDIA MANIPULATION. But, I doubt the media would use a mirror and do a story on its self.
Wally George's?
What are those?
Talk about a blast from the past. Wally George was a guy from OC, CA that was the predecessor to the talking heads we have now. I saw him live a couple of times. It was pretty fun. He is also Rebecca de Morney's father. If you ask me who Rebecca is, you are too young and making me feel old. ;-)
But, I doubt the media would use a mirror and do a story on its self.
Um... what web site do you think you're on? =)
Not only is Christams a retail holiday, but abortion was legal, until the quickening, in America at the time of the Founding Fathers. Laws against abortion did not begin in earnest until after the civil war. They certainly had knowlege of the practice, so they would have outlawed it if they were so inclined. That is if we are to interpret their intent.
Even O'Reilly's basic premise is ridiculous.
How is Christmas "under attack"???? Because some retail stores now say, "Happy holidays," instead of, "Merry Christmas?"
That just means they are trying to include other holidays.
We all know the green and red decorations everywhere are for Christmas. We all know the trees we see decorated are not for Kwanza or Chanuka, but for Christmas. We all know Christmas, which even contains the word "Christ", is a Christian holiday.
This notion that Christmas or Christianity in general are "under attack" is beyond absurd. Go to any town in America in December, and you will see Christmas decorations and Christian churches everywhere.
Brian,
I tend to agree with you here.....O'Reilly is once again making a mountain out of a molehill. I suspect for a couple reasons - he loves to generate publicity for his programs and issues like these get people all riled up, scaring them to think that the government is going to walk in their house and yank out their Christmas tree. And he also has a book coming out next year about the culture war in America - nothing like stirring up emotions and issues which will feed into his book sales.
He is a brilliant marketeer, very skilled indeed.
I actually listened to some of O'Reilly's show today on my lunch break and heard him argue with an Oklahoma City teacher who taught Bible studies about this issue. The teacher, who was obviously a devout Christian, was being very calm and rational about why calling "winter break" in schools was a preferable term to calling it "christmas break" as it is religiously neutral and all-inclusive to people of different faiths. O'Reilly kept getting worked up and using his usual tactic of channelling "the founding fathers" and how this country is based on christianity. I really wish I had been in on the call so I could have brought up Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin and how they made it very clear that government and theology should remain seperate. O'Reilly seems to subscribe to the Goebbel's technique of repeating propoganda so long that people begin to believe it. Maybe next week he will begin with a segment incovering how 2+2=5 and how USA has always been at war with Iraq.
This notion that Christmas or Christianity in general are "under attack" is beyond absurd. Go to any town in America in December, and you will see Christmas decorations and Christian churches everywhere.
You are right.I think O'Reilly has absolutly no idea what he is talking about.I do not see an attack on Christianity or Christmas.What I see is the modern Church infiltrating other things into religion ie: Santa worhipping Jesus, placing real with fake so the children grow up confused.Once they find out Santa is a fake,then they will conclude that Jesus must be fake too.This is the "Church" doing this in their own buildings, not the secular world.They also sing "the drummer boy" as if that is real.This is the fault of the Church who infiltrated this garbage into christianity and now they want to blame someone else for it? I don't think so.I was a Sunday School Teacher for several years and they would try to give me material for the children to color that had nothing to do with Jesus.Santas and so forth.Making Christmas stockings to leave out for Santa.IN THE CHURCH!See, noone wants to talk about that stuff.Everything we see now today is a result of the Church not teaching the bible in Sunday School and allowing children to have Easter Egg hunts, make stockings to leave for Santa,and not teach them anything about the bible.Children grow up not knowing the truth and so you have the results you see today.A lot of confusion.So, if you want to do something about it, START WITH THE CHURCH.O'Reilly doesn't even know whats Christian and what is not.Besides, the Bible does not tell us that Jesus was born December 25th,it is a man made holiday in the first place.
By the way, I'm a democrat
This bogus assault on Christmas is now an annual staple on FOX. John Gibson is even hawking a book on the subject. Simple Equation:
Number of people arrested for celebrating Christmas in the U.S.=0
Credibilty of O'Reilly and Gibson on this issue= Also 0
god what a gibbering idiot. what makes him think liberals/dems don't celebrate christmas? sheesh. I have a tree up every year, say merry christmas to people, etc.
What is with his obsessive paranoia about Christmas being "taken over" or "taken away"? I just don't get it. Christmas is everywhere, every single year. Nowadays the season practically starts the day after Halloween and doesn't end under well after New Years.
It's an annual event with Fox. They did this last year as well starting around the end of October. Maybe they were successful at getting viewership up with their tacky exploitation of Christmas.
It's like the Defense of Marriage business. If someone somewhere isn't participating in a tradition the way you personally prefer to, that's persecution.
How big of a moron is O'Reilly? This big:
What I want to know is how does someone obtain a history degree without actually having read any books?:
Of course, many of the country's founders were deists, a philosophy which has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity. But we wouldn't expect O'Reilly (MA-Jack Daniels) to know that would we?
Christians have been attacking Halloween for years, making all sorts of claims abouts it origins and the long-term consequences for children that participate in all of it's pagan glory. Well, setting aside the history of christmas for the moment, who else here would be willing to join me in the effort to save Halloween ? Halloween is understand constant attack from various elements of society and needs our help! For surely the day we lose the right to dress up as goblins and monsters is the day we lose freedom itself!
*sigh*
lol
OK I'm in. It's just all too silly.
Thanks Lynn.. next Halloween we'll engage in the horrors of halloween.. wild orgies, worshipping satan, sadistic pleasures and smoking fine herbs.. and whatever else is said the heathens do on Halloween. We can save halloween only if we do it together :-)
What I want is a civil, responsible adult tag-team Texas cage match bewteen the teams of Christmas and Easter vs Halloween and St Patricks Day. President's Day can be the referee. Let the chips fall where they may
NO! NO! NO! It's about the CANDY!
yes, candy from SATAN !
Perhaps the stores should put up big signs saying
Welcome CHRISTMAS Shoppers!
Jews, Muslims and Atheists Please Stay Away Until December 26!
That should increase sales.
The founding fathers also held slaves, denied women basic rights, and were a mixture of deitists,christian,or neither as was B. Franklin. O'reilly needs a history refresher course.
Two Points:
1) Who cares what the founding fathers would or would not have wanted? They were politicians, office holders, property owners and just plain ordinary citizens. I respect their accomplishments and impact on the country/world today but they are dead and gone. George Washington put his pants on one leg at at time, just like me. He just happened to be born at a time when the American Revolution took place and was lucky enough(not to mention courageous enough) to be in a position to make a difference.
2) The mythical attack on Christmas serves a very good purpose for the Republicans. Does anyone remember the 2004 election, when the evangelical christian-right went to the polls in droves to save marriage from the "evil" homosexuals? If Fox can convince enough of them that Xmas is under attack, they might go out in droves again and vote for Rick Santorum. Get it?
For many years, Benjamin Franklin lived openly, in England, with a woman who was not his wife. Thomas Jefferson had children by his slave mistress, Sally Hemmings. The Anglicans of Virginia were quite secular and probably wouldn't have had a problem with Bishop Robinson. They weren't saints and never claimed to be. I suspect that they would, however, have had little tolerance for a self righteous hypcrite like O'Reilly!
Perhaps O'Reilly is referring to the Founding Fathers of the neo-conservative movement.
I know I have said a lot here, but let me add one more thing.Christianity was not born on the May Flower,The Nina,The Pinta or the Santa Maria either.The so called Founding Fathers had a predistorted European version of Christianity when they came here.May I present Exibit A ?(Salem Witch Trials)I would be very careful about these people who call themselves "Traditionalists" "Reformists" and "Constuctionist" That's what I have to say about that.
This is the largest Strawman argument I've ever seen.
Last year, as I sat next to my christmas tree, and holiday decorations, I was told that I (liberal) wanted to destroy christmas.
I feel bad for the idiots that actually watch this drivel, and get the idea in their head that liberals want to destroy christmas.
I'm an atheist, liberal democrat. I celebrate christmas every year because it is a GREAT excuse to share time with my family.
Destroy Christmas? Nah. Lets destroy Fox News instead!
The Founding Fathers also didn't have department stores, and mass merchandising. They didn't have marketing companies, and Christmas wasn't seen as a secular excuse for outdoing each other by how much money you spend on junk to give to each other.
Christmas was never "under attack". So by setting up this false premise and then arguing for/against it, creates a right wing talking point: Christmas is under attack.
After the talking point/false argument is established, the right wing searches for enemies (anyone who doesn't celebrate Christmas, and when lacking that, anyone who doesn't celebrate Christmas the "right" way, whichever way that is for the argument at the time). As soon as "enemies" can be pointed to, it encourages the right wing base, brings on the Two Minute Hate, and according to the recent Scanlon notes that were exposed, it "bring(s) out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them."
If this "attack on Christmas" didn't do any good last Christmas to rile up the base, I guess they can keep using it again and again so that it can be brought out, along with the decorations, eventually for some use. Apparently Alito this time.