O'Reilly on co-host Lis Wiehl: "Every time I want" to "denigrate" someone, "I just go over to her and whack her around"
SUMMARY: Discussing his interview with author Norman Mailer, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly told a caller to his radio show that instead of denigrating Mailer, O'Reilly could "just go over to" co-host Lis Wiehl "and whack her around."
Discussing his interview with guest and author Norman Mailer, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly told a caller that instead of denigrating Mailer, O'Reilly could "just go over to" co-host Lis Wiehl "and whack her around." He added, "figuratively speaking, of course." O'Reilly made his remarks during the March 15 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show.
As Media Matters for America has documented, O'Reilly has previously called Wiehl a "good-looking blonde" and suggested that she learn to dance for a tip. On another occasion, O'Reilly called for "a full-body search" of Wiehl, and claimed that "she asked for it." O'Reilly has also referred to Wiehl as "eye candy" and asked her to protest outside CBS studios in a bikini. Wiehl is an author, a graduate of the Harvard Law School, and a legal analyst for Fox News.
From the March 15 edition of Westwood One's The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly:
CALLER: Well, I think you also let Mr. Mailer off the hook a little bit easy. I expected you to be a little tougher on him on some of those questions.
[...]
O'REILLY: Yeah, I mean, look, look, here, here's the deal. The guy comes on the radio, we have an interesting conversation, a good back-and-forth, you get a good view of his, uh, opinion of the world, you get a good view of mine. If I'm gonna -- if I'm gonna to be mean to him, mock him, or something like that, you know, why? It makes me look like an idiot to do that. I like him. I think his book is interesting to read. I don't agree with it. But I think he's honest. I think he's passionate. I think he loves his country. Why would -- why would I want to go in and denigrate him? That's what I have Lis here for.
WIEHL: That's right.
O'REILLY: Every time I want to do that, I just go over to her and whack her around. So -- figuratively speaking, of course. Ay-ya-ya --
WIEHL: You'll get in trouble for that one.
O'REILLY: Yeah. I'm in trouble constantly.
I like the way you look;I wanna grope you; I wanna see you dance; Now I wanna beat you up!
Conservative Radio with an Edge!
This guy should be locked up.
You would think that Bill "sexual harasser" O'Reilly would learn his lesson but faloofah boy just keeps on going and going and....
I don't understand why she never stands up for herself. Heck, if she is not embarassed or angry about Bill constantly debasing her, why should I be?
She obviously doesn't mind this kind of crude talk.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
O'Reilly named his penis "Lis Wiehl". Unless you realize this, you can't really get his little inside joke here:
"Every time I want" to "denigrate" myself, "I just go over to her and whack her around" --Bill O'Reilly
This is also the only explanation as to why Bill has a wife. Yuk!
Not that I'm Brad Pitt myself, but...
Mrs. Sean Hannity
Mrs. Rush Limbaugh (x3!)
Mrs. Bill O'Reilly
Mrs. Michael Savage
Mrs. Pat Buchanan
How is any of this possible?
Media Matters claims it is "dedicated to [sic] comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."
This item reveals Bill O'Reilly to be a sexist boor, although even that is a strech since bantering between on air personalities is hardly unusual. Where's the conservative misinformation in this case?
By the way I had never seen O'Reilly's show prior to encountering Media Matters' obsession with him here. I had to check him out. While he's a bit low brow for my taste he does very satisfactorily whack the stuffing out of the "progressive" left.
Congratulations, You're the 51,000,000,000th person to say that about MMFA's 'stated mission.'
Of course I am. The mission itself is pretty bogus but that Media Matters can't even adhere to such a slim justification for tax-exempt status is quite amusing.
If you really believe that Bill "whacks the stuffing" out of anything but himself on a Friday night... you should prob get out more.
It's definitely "bogus" to want to expose misinformation and spin from the Corporate Media. Granted, I agree with you on this one, not really a case of misinformation here, just BOR being a sexist POS as usual.
BOR doesn't "whack the stuffing" out of anything, BTW. What he DOES do is lie, lie, and lie some more. That's why MMFA pays attention to him, because he's one of the very worst of the propogandists.
Of course, since you apparently like his show (and doubtless FAUX) you wouldn't know or understand that.
Hey, guys, you've missed the point. That argument has been so refuted, noboby cares what you think about MMFA's mission, or whether or not you think they're fulfilling it correctly. Could you professional trolls at least coordinate with each other? I thought Rove was doing a better job.
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And you conservatives just can't stand the heat here.
and any newcoming trolling pointers.
You know, whether or not MMFA adheres 100% of the time to its mission statement is neither here nor there. The people who run this organization have every right to post whatever they see fit to post. It's not up to you or any other commenter to decide what MMFA decides to report on. If you don't like what MMFA is doing, for God's sake, go back to your right-wing website. As for Bill O'Reilly and his remarks, they are just that, remarks. If Lis wants to stay there and put up with it, power to her. However, those of you who are defending O'Reilly really should connect some dots. This man has some serious issues with sex and sexuality. Note his sexual harassment settlement with a former female co-worker, his CONSTANT and RELENTLESS stories about children who are sexually abused in support of the passing of Jessica's Law in EACH and EVERY state, no matter what the residents of that state want and his seemingly low opinion of women in general. Misogyny never had such a good friend.
Now it just goes into the mix. Who ever said that ONLY things which apply to the mission statement could be posted, especially since from the beginning this kind of lighter, conservative insensativity and basic stupidity was always highligted. MMFA does a very good job complying with its mission statement and adds a little more, so what. Its pathetic that you morons think there is any problem with this. Here is a clue, a mission statement is what the site is about not a statement limiting them to this ONLY. Gee, it really isnt that complicated.
Bill's just being funny again! It's funny to smack around women! He's just being playful. .. .. where's Bill's butt-boy Sorcerer/LeftWing?
"he does very satisfactorily whack the stuffing out of the "progressive" left."
I hope you don't drive immediately after writing something like that. It could get you arrested.
The only thing he whacks the stuffing out of is...oh, never mind, that might be a little low brow for you.
This thread is wholly appropriate. The misinformation here is the one the conservatives have bantered about since the nineties that conservatives and traditionalist as BO calls himself adhere to traditional wholesome family values. They have also appointed themselves as the warriors who serve as enforcers for adherence to such values. Every time BO goes into his lecherous old goat routine he dispels that myth and you know that BO is a big phony unless you and Bill believe sexually harassing women is a traditional American family value.
Holy christ you're boring, And you can't even spell properly.
Welcome to the site. I look forward to the exhilarating contributions to stimulating discussions that you will offer. I see you are quite attentive having noted my spelling errors. Yes it is true I am a poor speller, and if being a deficient speller keeps a person out of heaven I'm in big trouble. Please indulge me for a moment and allow me to share something with you that a professor I once had for a writing course shared with me. He had a PhD in English Literature and in education. He encouraged (demanded) that his students use the spell check feature in Word or whatever word processing software we had. He told us he himself was a very poor speller and he thought the automated spell check feature in word processors was one of the greatest inventions of the 20th century. He also added his observation that one's ability to spell accurately was the sign of good memory skills but that it wasn't reflective of a person's critical thinking abilities. He said the later would serve us better in life but reiterated that we had better proof read our work. I apologize for not running my post through spell check . I assumed that in this informal setting it wasn't that important. I'm sure you’re both a gifted speller and critical thinker, and I can’t wait to read one of your posts where you have something to offer other than a critique of someone’s spelling abilities.
Eye ran this post threw spell Czech, and it said it was awl write.
Billy cranks The Prodigy's "Smack My ***** Up" and 'goes to town' on Lis. It all makes sense now. LMFAO
I'm engaging in the same kinds of personal attacks that O'Reilly and his cohorts use. That's against T-man's MMFA rules. Shame on me.
Who is t-man?
MMFA, please stop taking the bait. Wiehl is obviously playing along and I doubt it is because she is unable to find gainful employment elsewhere. With all due respect you're going too far off-mission with this post.
When Bill says, "Why would -- why would I want to go in and denigrate him?" about one of his guests, it only goes to show how enormous of a hypocrit he is. "I don't do personal attacks." Ring a bell?
Here we have one of his callers getting on him for not engaging in his usual bullying, denigrating and attacking And he uses siezes the opportunity to again hypocritically places himself on some kind of journalistc ethical high ground, saying he doesn't engage in that kind of activity.
Pete, I am only one person. Setting aside your "pattern of behavior" obsession (whether mine or BO's) to me this is just a flippant comment to see who he can piss off among his detractors. You're making his job too easy at that. This has nothing with me (or other broken records) missing the point. It has everything to do with this post serving no purpose whatsoever except for possibly playing into BO's hands. I know today is St. Pat's day and all but why use that as an excuse to throw him a bone?
Skip and repeat. Skip and repeat. Skip and repeat.
Thanks, MMFA, for another great post.
He doesn't take on Norman Mailer is because he is a big...um...rhymes with wussy and pretty much means the same thing. So, yes, it is O'Reilly wimping out and giving a fake reason. That, in my opinion, is misinformation.
It doesn't matter if the bimbo is paid to take his mysogenistic crap. That actually makes it worse.
You cannot be serious posting silly little banter like this? Find something of substance, please!
You cannot be serious posting silly little banter like this? Find something of substance, please!
Tommy, since you like to play the non-partisan card--even though you've never fooled anyone with it--kindly name one left-wing media figure who (a) is on record as a sexual harasser, (b) has claimed that he doesn't do personal attacks, and then (c) engages in "banter like this"?
No real man would ever dream of abusing any woman, no real man would ever joke about such a thing, and no real man would accept that as humor from anyone else.
If you were capable of it, you should be utterly ashamed of yourself.
If you want to play the "sexual harraser" game which consists of the man admitting nothing and the woman accuses, then if your intellectually honest, you will admit Bill Clinton and Bill O'Reilly are on equal moral highground, does that answer your question about a media figure. Silly question deserves a silly answer.......
Who is talking about abusing women, let Liz Wiehl determine whether or not this offends her, who are you to sit their and act so high and mighty. How ridiculous.
Grow up.
If you want to play the "sexual harraser"
That's "harasser."
game which consists of the man admitting nothing and the woman accuses,
O'Reilly settled out of court. If he believed in his own innocence, he'd have fought it out in court. And since when does "sexual harassment" have such a narrow meaning? By the way, you switched tenses with "admitting" and "accuses."
then if your intellectually honest,
That's "you're." What kind of grades did you get, anway?
you will admit Bill Clinton and Bill O'Reilly are on equal moral highground,
My goodness, you're predictable. Drag in Clinton again. Why should we believe you're more intellectually honest, and hence more worth listening to, than any other troll? P.S. "High ground" is two words.
does that answer your question about a media figure.
Of course not. Clinton's a politician, O'Reilly's a media figure. You missed by a mile. Oh, and you should have finished with a question mark, not a period.
Silly question deserves a silly answer.......
But in this case, an intelligent question gets a moronic answer. Furthermore, you missed the indefinite article at the beginning, and an ellipsis gets four dots at most.
Who is talking about abusing women, let Liz Wiehl determine whether or not this offends her, who are you to sit their and act so high and mighty. How ridiculous.
The kind of language O'Reilly used is abusive on the face of it. If you're unable to recognize it as such, that's your problem. Would you say such things about your wife or your girlfriend? If you do, you don't deserve to have one. And finally, you have sloppily combined three sentences--two of which are questions--into one.
Grow up.
Now there's a mature comment. You apparently can't argue like a man. Must have been something wrong with the way you were raised.
But, by all means, keep writing in two-word sentences. It cuts down on the gross linguistic errors.
Bill Clinton had a consensual affair outside of his marriage. Monica Lewinsky testified to Congress that it was consensual. Morally repugnant, yes, but CONSENSUAL.
Bill O'Reilly allegedly sexually harassed a subordinate who spurned his advances. She allegedly told him repeated that she did not want an intimate relationship with him. Nonetheless, he allegedly masturbated while talking to her on the phone. She filed a harassment lawsuit, and he settled.
Please tell me you see a difference here.
Please.
Wow!
Never thought it was in Tommy, but he has clearly advocated the abuse of women! If "smack her around" is a joke, then Liz Weihl is a cartoon character.
Making jokes about the abuse of anyone is pathetic. You need to grow up Tommy.
O'REILLY: Every time I want to do that, I just go over to her and whack her around. So -- figuratively speaking, of course. Ay-ya-ya --
WIEHL: YOU'LL GET IN TROUBLE FOR FOR THAT ONE. O'REILLY: Yeah. I'm in trouble constantly. - I love how some people champion minority and women's rights, then pretend like Lis Wiehl can't stand up for herself because she scared of reprisals and and that Bill's will her career. She is where she is because she WANTS to be there. I know.
I seem to be the only female that has commented on this topic, I hope my fellow female posters come back I think female perspective would help in the debate of these type of topics; whether it's welcomed or not. That said you are right about Liz Weil obviosuly she doesn't have an issue with this. We women are all different and have differing views of what we find funny and tolerable. I don't think the point of this story is Liz Weil, the point of this story as I stated in my previous post is to further expose Bill for the phony that he is. He has appointed humself the overseer of traditional family values. Here he is a married man who frequently and blatantly hits on his young an beutiful co-host. If Liz doesn't have a problem with this neither do I, but it shows the BO is full of sh-it as usual.
...that this posting is germane to MM's mission because, as you so clearly articulated, it is disingenuous to assert that you're pro-family and and pro-life and then talk about whacking the site of life: women.
So, why aren't fundies offended? Is it because many of them are women-whackers? Of course, I can't answer this. No one can. But it is disturbing and puzzling that the right-wingers aren't protesting this.
Bill is just a bleeping loon. Lis Wiehl must get paid a lot of money to put up with this crap. I thought when he suggested she become a stripper was pretty much the low. By the way he is also talking about Lisa modeling his hat on his website. Bill is headed towards oblivion and more and more he is becoming irrelevant.
What the hell was Norman Mailer doing on O'Reilly's show???
I think he dialed the wrong number. Which would explain why he kept on trying to order a pizza throughout the call.
Does it strike some of you a little funny that O'Reilly is like a drug to many of you? Unless you get your nearly hourly fixes of O'Reilly stupidity, you become like fiendish addicts foaming at the mouth........."Give me something, ANYTHING, please!!"
This item rises to the level of swallowing a bottle of Scope because there is no other alcohol-based beverage in the house.
Wow, I should try that.
I couldn't have said it better myself. She's a Harvard lawyer, if she didn't want to be there, she could go somewhere else and make 500k a year. I love how people are trying to act offended FOR her. I think she would be in a better position to take offense than the mindless drones here.
"...mindless drones here."
Rethugs are just the BEST at projection, deep-thinkers that they are.
You are here too.
Tommy using the phrase "rising to the level" is meant as comedy.
Does O'Reilly abuse all women ?
Why does Fox and Westwood One put up with this talk?
Why is it most all of the rabid Billy O fans I know or work around are angry, middle aged, frustrated, divorced white guys? Seems to me Bill really knows or more likely reflects his core audience well and has an affinity for what they like to hear.
If she's that smart and accomplished, I doubt she's desperate for a job. So if O'reilly's antics were really that offensive to her, she'd have options.
If a Harvard grad wants to be treated like a stripper, that's her business.
There are far more eggregious things coming out of O'Reilly's mouth
You're disgusting. You and falafel guy should grab your loofahs and go elsewhere.
She puts up with this crap from him all the time and it really advances the stereotype that she is nothing but an empty-headed bimbo who enjoys being verbally abused and sexually harassed. Boor O'Lielly is a misogynistic pig, and as long as an educated woman like Wiehl is willing to put up with it, he will undoubtedly continue his crass and illegal behavior. I'm sure that sooner or later he will be the defendant in another lawsuit, and hopefully he won't get off as easy as he did the last time. He clearly has not learned his lesson.
You are right, Wiehl is there because she wants to be there. Wiehl is a media hound selling herself to the highest bidder and subsequently & deservedly fell right into O'Reilly's trap. IMO, everything about her screams "for hire".
Their banter is a lame attempt to drum up ratings for their radio show.
One thing that the right wing pontificators have in common is the denigration of women. When we defend their behavior, we encourage others to treat our sisters, mothers, wives and daughters this way. Once again, O'Reilly and his defenders should be ashamed.
Every time O'Reilly gets featured on MMfA we get treated to the debate over how stupid it is to get upset at him, and what a bunch of codependent idiots us lefties are vs. what an unconscionable jerk O'Reilly is and how he oughtta be in jail.
These stories should be headed with the "Only On Fox:" lead-in. The point of featuring Bill O'Reilly's absurdities is to reveal what an ass he is. Sure, Bill O'Reilly is a joke -- a tacky, stupid, sexist, arrogant ass of a joke. So WHY IS HE ON A NATIONAL "NEWS" PROGRAM??
Now do you get it, Tommy? That's the point. Why does this crackpot self-parody get a program on anything but public access tv? Fox "News" could boost its ratings by showing Hustler videos, but it doesn't, because pornography has no place on a news network. Well, Bill O'Reilly is intellectual pornography -- trash aimed at appealing to the basest prurience of its audience. He has no place on a news network.
The point of focusing on O'Reilly is to challenge his employer for airing his crap.
Tommy "gets it"; he's just paid by Rove to troll against it.