Ignoring Boehlert's specific claims, O'Reilly suggested Media Matters is "lying" about Fox News' ratings
SUMMARY: Referring to Eric Boehlert's recent Media Matters column, Bill O'Reilly claimed that "the smear factory has put out an article that says Fox News will have a rough year in 2008. Well, if the January ratings are any indication, Media Matters is once again lying its 'you know what' off." But Boehlert did not address Fox News' overall ratings; he compared Fox News' and CNN's ratings during major campaign events in January to support his argument that Fox News will have a "tough year." And O'Reilly did not address any of Boehlert's specific assertions about Fox News.
During the January 30 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly labeled Media Matters for America "pinheads" in his nightly "Pinheads and Patriots" segment. Responding to a recent column by Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert titled, "Fox News is in for a very rough 2008," O'Reilly stated: "Now the smear factory has put out an article that says Fox News will have a rough year in 2008. Well, if the January ratings are any indication, Media Matters is once again lying its 'you know what' off." O'Reilly asserted that Fox News has "eight of the top 10" highest rated cable news programs and that The O'Reilly Factor "hammered our competition at 8 p.m." ET during the month of January. But Boehlert did not address Fox News' overall ratings. Rather, he compared Fox News' and CNN's ratings during major campaign events in January -- the big primary and caucus events, as well as the high-profile debates -- to support his argument that Fox News will have a "tough year." Boehlert also pointed out that "of the 10 most-watched debates this election season, Fox has aired just two, compared to CNN's five." Further, Boehlert cited the altercation between O'Reilly and a staffer for Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) at a New Hampshire campaign event as one of many potential reasons for "discomfort inside [Roger] Ailes' Fox News empire." O'Reilly did not address any of Boehlert's specific assertions about Fox.
During the segment, O'Reilly also claimed that "Media Matters is perhaps the most dishonest enterprise in the county," and later stated: "Media Matters is run by liars and defamers. They are far worse than pinheads."
From Boehlert's January 29 column:
The most obvious signs of Fox News' downturn have been the cable ratings for the big primary and caucus votes this year, as well as the high-profile debates. With this election season generating unprecedented voter and viewer interest, Fox News' rating bumps to date have remained underwhelming, to say the least.
For instance, on the night of the big New Hampshire primary, CNN, which habitually trails behind Fox News in the prime-time race, attracted nearly 250,000 more viewers than its top competitor, marking a changing-of-the-guard of sorts.
The turnaround was striking when you consider that in 2004, even with no Republicans running against Bush, Fox News was still able to draw 200,000 more viewers than CNN on the night of the New Hampshire Democratic primary. Yet in 2008, with a very competitive GOP field, CNN was the ratings winner from New Hampshire.
And just look at the ratings for January 19, which featured returns from the Nevada caucus coming in during the late afternoon, and then fresh returns from the South Carolina Republican primary being posted during prime time that night. In the past, Fox News would have absolutely owned that night of coverage, as conservative news junkies flocked to their home team -- Fox News -- to see the results. But no more. CNN grabbed nearly just as many prime-time viewers for the Republican South Carolina returns as did Fox News.
[...]
The lack of Democratic debates for Fox News has meant a huge setback for the news organization from a ratings perspective. Just look at the grand slam CNN hit last week when, on January 21, it broadcast the much-talked-about Democratic debate from South Carolina. The CNN event not only creamed Fox News in the ratings, nearly tripling its audience that night, but the debate set a new cable news mark for the most viewers ever to watch a primary debate.
In fact, of the 10 most-watched debates this election season, Fox has aired just two, compared to CNN's five. Of the 10 most-watched debates, six have featured Democrats; four Republicans.
CNN is virtually guaranteed another monster ratings win this week with a pair of high-profile debates staged in California -- the Republicans on Wednesday night and Democrats on Thursday.
No wonder CNN's so giddy these days. Here's the spin CNN president Jonathan Klein put out following its New Hampshire ratings win: "There's a freshness and exuberance to our coverage that the others just aren't matching. ... Fox almost seems downright despondent in their coverage."
From the January 30 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: On the pinhead front, the far-left website Media Matters is perhaps the most dishonest enterprise in the country. Now the smear factory has put out an article that says Fox News will have a rough year in 2008.
Well, if the January ratings are any indication, Media Matters is once again lying its "you know what" off. FNC has the top six rated news programs on cable and eight of the top 10. The Factor once again dominates the field. On the nights I was here in the chair in January, we hammered our competition at 8 p.m., beating them all combined. In fact, with about 4 million viewers for both 8 and 11, we beat a number of entertainment programs on the networks.
Media Matters is run by liars and defamers. They are far worse than pinheads.
O'Cryly is scheduled for a rare public appearance, Feb. 15, the Keller Auditorium in Portland, OR. As part of a panel of fascist foment and disturbing the peace, for the information of anyone in the vicinity who might like a shot at him.
Fix LINK: Portland Keller Auditorium, Feb. 15
Right wing d-bag playbook - when push comes to shove... shove and lie even harder. Good work Bill. We love you.
I Hereby Award - - THOMP.STEVE...9098 With...
The Medal of DisHonor... And Worst Poster Today!...
For Steve's endurance, patience and persistence in his Posts to proudly defend Fox News Liars and O'Really, who proudly goes where no man has gone before with dishonesty. Job well done - THOMP.STEVE9098 .... But...
You're engaging your great efforts in a foolish, stubborn, idiotic, moronic, hateful and dishonest way, with no regard or respect for High Journalistic Values, such as Honesty and Integrity. This WebSite Is The Last Place on Earth where a sane, truthful, human being will come to do a MINI COMMERCIAL FOR FOX LIES!....and O'Really!...
Such as the ones you've been doing. Everyone knows what Fox News is! I'm delighted and find it amusing that you've come here to make a complete fool of yourself by promoting the well known FOX LIES CHANNEL.
Let's cut to the chase STEVE!
FOX NEWS HAS FAILED YOU ! ...
AND Fox News Should Be Fired! - - High Ratings Did Not and Do Not translate into respectable journalism or into keeping Republicans in Power. Fox News Outlet will go down in historic infamy as a major reason for Republican loss of power in our great country. You must know this Steve, but you're just uninformed or dishonest about it.
Fox News will probably "Stay The Course," a strategy found deep in heart of the Bush Playbook. They will hopefully adjust some of their Journalistic behavior and programming but, I ain't holdin my breath on that one. A good start would be to fire you're man O'Really and many others.
Get Real Steve!
I Hereby Award - - THOMP.STEVE...9098 With...
The Medal of DisHonor... And Worst Poster Today!...
Take it easy Sammy. I inquired whether BO's stat's were accurate. I post my opinions on here, sometimes sarcastic sometimes not. Where have I lied? It's a bit weird that you seem to boil with animosity over an anonymous poster on some website. I'd would have simply ignored your rant, but I actually got a kick out of how you charged me with disrespecting journalistic integrity.
ONE: I didn't say you LIED! Although now that you mention it, your dishonesty is equal to lies. Your denial of facts = lies! Your positions on most issues are = to lies! But NO...
WHAT I SAID, in a very cool, calm, humorous, collective and positive way is you come here to post without the facts, and defend Liars with your funny little mini commercials. AND....
THAT MY FREIND, (McCainism) is not "sarcastic" as you dishonestly say it is. It's More like hostile, harmful, hateful Humor!
TWO: Your inquiry was a cheap slam or swipe at Media Matters and a promotion of a non respectable excuse for Journalism delivered upon a huge audience of unknowing listeners by Fox News Channel and O'Really!
THREE And you're out Stevie! I don't "BOIL" You Do! What I do, is like I said before....I find it amusing and I'm delighted you're here to POST and make an utter fool of yourself. I wonder... If we know who you are... Do you still have the same stones to post here. I sure would, because I have the facts to back me up. You my friend, DON'T!
Furthermore, you don't get a pass from me for your hostile humor and your hateful name calling of me. I'm proud to say I'm not the one who starts that lowering of discourse. And Steve....
You must be here and I will defend your right to post here. I refuse to hold your YOUTH and INEXPERIENCE against you. (Reganism)
As I said to you before 'You Go For it Steve'... You have every right to be wrong! Good Luck in the upcoming elections, you're going to need it. So are the Dems.... I'm Non Partisan.
I'm off to a Hillary rally 5 miles away at San Diego State Univ.
There were 5 Ann Coulter's and 5 Darth Vaders waving home made signs with deplorable, vulgar attacks on Hillary. One read HELLARY. One was saying how UGLY Hillary is. Another one read, HUCK FILLARY! Others were worse that those. The young students waved those signs in front of the huge crowd waiting in line.
After about 10 minutes a huge throng of people broke ranks from the line to compete with the 10 students for Media Coverage. The Hillary Signs Won! The 10 students decided to leave.
Also 2 very respectable young men were walking around with one JOHN PAUL sign. I'll be at his rally tomorrow because a good friend invited me. Otherwise I would not bother to go, but he's my favorite at the Republican debates. He gets the biggest applause at those debates.
As I shook hands with Hillary I told her I was a Non Partisan Vietnam Veteran and AARP member. I then asked if she would let me be her Secretary of Peace and Humanitarian Services. A new Cabinet Department. Hillary's eyes widened and she gave me a big smile and said. "Hey That's a Great Idea!"
ANN COULTER JUST ENDORSED HILLARY !!??
If McCain gets the Republican Party Nomination. She just said this on Hannity & Colmes. Ann said if that happens she will campaign for Hillary. Bottom line...
It's got to be another one of her lies. Are Republicans in the process of a big time fracturing. Even my personal Republican friends say they WON'T EVEN VOTE, if it's McCain?
I think this might be the NeoCon Wing rebelling against McCain. Go Figure!?
Hey STEVE... Thank You Very Much For You Previous Post!
SHOULD HAVE READ... Ron Paul
"Well, if the January ratings are any indication, Media Matters is once again lying its "you know what" off. FNC has the top six rated news programs on cable and eight of the top 10. The Factor once again dominates the field. On the nights I was here in the chair in January, we hammered our competition at 8 p.m., beating them all combined. In fact, with about 4 million viewers for both 8 and 11, we beat a number of entertainment programs on the networks."
Are any of BO's facts wrong? If not, doesn't sound like 2008 is going all that rough so far.
Better chance of snow in Miami tonight than that EVER happening ;-)
We live in an age of phonies and frauds on cable news.
Join the real world.
That's it. But of course you have to somehow make this about Olbermann. Again.
Your schtick is tired and played out.
Your schtick is tired and played out
Actually your schtick is tired and played out. If you do not want to have an intelligent discussion than leave. If you want to live in a country like North Korea then feel free to go.
Media Matters does not claim to be impartial or unbiased. They clearly state they are a progressive organization. They clearly state they only go after conservative misinformation. MMFA is basically the liberal counterpart of right-wing websites like newsbusters. MMFA is not a news organization pretending to give a "balanced" view, so of course they go after conservative commentators rather than liberals.
Also, Fox is clearly having trouble. Their ratings are off compared to the last election cycle, which was uncontested on the Republican side. You'd think they would pick up more viewers with a close Republican race for the nomination in 2008, but they're not. They're losing to CNN's coverage on many nights. Their debates are low-rated. The Fox Business Channel has completely tanked and is losing money hand over foot.
Fox was backing Giuliani, with pundits like Hannity actually appearing on Giuliani fundraisers, yet Giuliani's campaign completely floundered. That's yet another example of their influence dropping. Ron Paul, who Fox routinely demonized and tried to exclude from debates, was getting more votes than the favorite Fox candidate (Giuliani) in state primaries.
O'Reilly does not address ANY of those issues, and instead chooses to launch personal attacks and bloviate.
It's interesting to see how little influence old right-wing stalwarts like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are having on the Republican nomination. The same could be said for right-wing blogs, although I never thought they had much influence. None of them wanted McCain, yet here we are with McCain leading. They saw immigration as a huge issue for the Republicans, but it doesn't look that was the case, especially here in Florida where Romney tried to become the rabid anti-immigration candidate, constantly attacked McCain on it, then saw his lead in the polls vanish and all the delegates go to McCain.
I think all this (as well as the voter turnout numbers and campaign contributions) mean a Democratic President. Bush has destroyed the Republican Party for at least the next 2 national elections, and he has brought all the pundits down with him.
It's a hopeful sign that Republican voters aren't as dumb as the Republican leadership thinks they are. For 6 years the GOP had pretty much complete control over our government. In that time they did very little but pander regarding social conservative issues, went crazy with the public credit card and came up with nothing on immigration but an amnesty bill with a pipe dream about a fence.
And now they claim that McCain isn't a real conservative but Romney is while the two have very similar records on compromising or outright voting against the supposed core Republican platform items.
Right. If you can't call everyone out, then don't call anyone out. Join the real world.
That's exactly how it should be, why is that so tough for you to wrap your mind around?
People who live in glass houses...
over O'Reilly like Sueeld does KO. At least he gets paid for it.
SUELD: "(Keith Olbermann) seems like a nice person."
I want to memorialize this moment for posterity... ;>)
Whenever there an article about O'Relly or Fox on this site
you will somehow bring up Olbermann, irrespective of what the article is about.
KO is just doing what he gets paid for doing.
Well now using that argument/excuse, so are O'Reilly, Hannity, Rush, Coulter, Matthews...should I go on?
MMFA time to close up shop. Everybody gets paid, therefore they are from this day forward immune from criticism.
;-)
Criticize whomever you feel like. I'm not defending Olbermann I'm just saying he's only doing what he gets paid for. Now if you want to try and compare him to that list of j*rkoffs, that's your your problem
I'm not defending Olbermann I'm just saying he's only doing what he gets paid for.
Actually you are defending him by saying he's doing what he gets paid for. I'm just pointing out that same argument, weak as it is, can be applied to anyone.
I was merely pointing out that Sueeld continually inserts Olbermann into the discussion where it's not warranted and suggested we stay on topic (O'Reilly's inability to address the issue of Boehlrt's article). You decided to jump in with your opinion and it had nothing to do with what I was saying.
"Yawn".
Ahhh yes, but how come MMfA never talks about Olbermann's yawns?
I would imagine most broadcasters are under contractual obligations not to call-out their fellow employees as media misinformers, "worst persons" and the like.
Has Bill O'Reilly ever seriously criticized in the same way he lambasts CNN, MSNBC, NBC, etc., anyone that's on Fox News??
OReilly was critical of his own network when they wanted to do the OJ Interview.
I asked if O'Reilly is critical in the same way that he repeatedly bashes MSNBC, CNN, CBS, the Times, etc.
Your example does not qualify as "the same way".
The answer is he doesn't bash Fox News or its personalities in the same way.
Very interesting that O'Reilly's let off the hook for that, but others are held to a different standard.
"OReilly... has been critical of the FOX network and he did go after Mark Levin for personal attacks , who appears on Hannity and Colmes from time to time."
FYI: Levin was a guest--not a regular Fox News host.O'Reilly never goes after his fellow Fox News hosts in the same way he goes after CNN, MSNBC, NBC, etc. Yet you demand and insist that Olbermann bash his fellow MSNBC hosts.
really? So pinheads and patriots doesn't fit that bill? How about his little tiff with Mark Cuban, or David Letterman, or MMfA...
And Olbermann's WPITW doesn't exclusively go after his competitors. He regularly has on newspapers, congressmen, people within the Bush adminstration, and all sorts of people who come out and baselessly lie for an agenda.
Awwww. Poor Fox News. Always being attacked. And they never hurt anyone.
Say: if Fox News can't withstand attacks from MSNBC, how are they going to be able to stand up to The Terrorists?
"I do not demand and insist anything. I simply discuss. Why would OReilly attack fellow FOX people? Just because Oreilly does not do it does not mean Olbermann should not."
First off, I don't think O'Reilly should or will attack Fox hosts. Neither do I think Olbermann should.
That's what's called a single standard.
You repeatedly insist and argue here that Olbermann name Scarborough, or Matthews, as "worst person". Yet you don't ask the same for anyone else.
That's what's called a double standard.
That's some of the most convoluted, illogical, incomprehensible rationale I've ever encountered.
I do not watch OReilly -Sue
That's because you're glued to Olbermann.
I don't think she "watches" Olbermann.
I think the correct term is that she stalks him.
That's right, you would be fired. Jeez
Do not preach about the behavior of other familes if your family has the same problems as other families.
.
MSNBC is a giant company with multiple divisions, shows, producers, etc.
It appears that your saying that no one is allowed to criticize any outside entity if someone within that company is something similar? Don't you think your oversimplifying this?
".... Keith Olbermann...."
Yes, it's Olbermannia, 24/7.
For the last week or so, you were making good arguments that were rational and to the point. You were polite.
But then you fell off the wagon.
Time to call your KO Anonymous sponsor.
Hey, I've just described a pretty sharp outfit for the well dressed hate horse rider.
I've got a bottle of Jameson and some Pogues CDs.
King, I'm all for the drinking but gotta tell you I draw the line at some of the thing on this list. ;-)
http://www.rootsweb.com/~irlcar2/An_Irish_Wake.htm
I missed you too, & thanks for asking about me (I was reading comments when I couldn't log in)
I like a wake, but easy on the keening.
And, everybody, I beg you- could you put your links in the "new window" option? Right now, going to a link and back is zeroing out the thread (or is that just me?)
Yeah, and if having 14 of the top 16 spots in cable news total viewers for January, according to insidecable.blogsome.com is rough, CNN and MSNBC should have it so rough.
Of course O'Reilly selectively left out the campaign specificities in Boehlert's column, but Eric also wanted to leave the impression that Fox is in some sort of ratings trouble, and apparently, they aren't.
Perhaps I am overlooking something but does any ratings such as O'Reilly is talking about count reruns of an earlier show. How can he factually present that his 11:00 p.m. recast gets four million viewers. Everything I have seen shows him getting around 2.1 milliion at 8:00 and no mention of the 11 recast. O'Reilly continues to lie about his ratings as he is an ego maniac. the reality is that the man on the street could give a damn about O'Reilly. It's just us political junkies who know about him. SSSHHHHH!!! Don't tell O'Reilly that...we may get a little visit from Fox Security. I will admit though, I pray for a day that I am able to confront this man and have him try to "gently remove" me.
For anyone interested, there is a site called O'ReillySucks.Com in which the site owner gives excellent detail about how O'Reilly lies constantly about his ratings.
Chris, Perhaps he is talking about the west coast viewers on his 11 pm show, which is 8 pm on the west coast. I presume many of them did not see his 5 pm Pacific time show, so his 8 pm rerun is the not a rerun to them.
But I could be wrong.
But I could be wrong - Tommy
That's a classic O'Reilly cop-out statement, meaning he just pulled something out of his a**.
Most of them aren't wrong, they're just irrelevant to Boehlert's point, which is that Fox News is seeing their political power diminish.
This "fact" is suspect though:
"Media Matters is once again lying"
Did Boehlert lie? What did he lie about?
Maybe you can say he stated his prediction as fact, but it's still a prediction.
Ratings numbers can be misleading. For example, FOX News, as the only cable network dedicated exclusively to right wing propaganda, is sui generes. Rather than comparing FOX News' ratings just to CNN or MSNBC individually perhaps a more accurate measure would be to compare FOX's numbers against all other news networks combined. Further, there is the matter of demographics. I will stand corrected if so, but my appreciation of O'Reilly's numbers is that they are dominated by a somewhat elderly crowd of viewers and that his numbers are simply remaining stable while Olbermann's numbers are increasing among younger viewers, which are considered the most important demographic group for advertisers. Regardless ratings numbers do not show how abysmal FOX News is in actually reporting the news thoroughly and factually.
I know Fox is the favorite whipping post here, but I wonder if you take a look at the real misinformation threads posted here, and I don't mean the ones about their commentators or pundits insulting Democrats or private citizens, I mean substantive real conservative misinformation from their anchors, or news reporters - just how does that stack up against all the other news networks, or any other media outlet?
In other words, if you don't count the O'Reillys, Hannitys, Gibsons shows, which are opinion and commentary, how much misinformation is there on Fox, comparatively speaking?
And during the Minnesota bridge collapse last year, I believe they were the most watched cable news outfit during that tragedy.
They are not as illegitimate as their detractors want to believe. They just hate their partisan pundits.
Not to mention that a much greater percentage of Fox viewers believe WMD's were found and Saddam's minions flew the planes into the WTC.
Re; your straw man argument:
MMfA never said that Fox' January ratings were down.
Boehlert cited facts. Stated his opinion. Neither O'Reilly nor you has disputed Boehlert's facts.
My problem is when we have discussions about ratings on MMFA, it becomes a mute issue, since Olbermann has horrible ratings and we have been told forever that Ratings do not matter.
Um...
A) CNN's resurgence as the go-to cable destination for election coverage.
B) The incredible shrinking candidacy of Fox News' favored son, Rudy Giuliani.
C) The still-standing candidacy of Fox News nemesis and well-funded, anti-war GOP candidate Rep. Ron Paul.
D) The Democratic candidates' blanket refusal to debate on Fox News during the primary season.
E) Host Bill O'Reilly being so desperate for an interview from a Democratic contender that he had to schlep all the way to New Hampshire, where he shoved an aide to Sen. Barack Obama and then had to be calmed down by Secret Service agents.
F) Former Fox News architect and Ailes confidante Dan Cooper posting chapters from his a wildly unflattering tell-all book about his old boss. ("The best thing that ever happened to Roger Ailes was 9/11.")
G) The fledgling Fox Business Network, whose anemic ratings are in danger of being surpassed by some large city public access channels.
H) Host John Gibson's recent heartless attacks on actor Heath Ledger, just hours after the young actor was found dead.
I) Fox News reporter Major Garrett botching his "exclusive" that Paul Begala and James Carville were going to join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign, and then refusing to correct the record.
"FNC has the top six rated news programs on cable and eight of the top 10. The Factor once again dominates the field. On the nights I was here in the chair in January, we hammered our competition at 8 p.m., beating them all combined. In fact, with about 4 million viewers for both 8 and 11, we beat a number of entertainment programs on the networks."
Yeah Gov, you really proved BO wrong.
And MM's equally disingenuous by suggesting Fox is in rating's trouble.
And how did MMFA do this?
"[MMfA] hates FOX."
A convenient, simple-minded rationale for dismissing everything.
MMfA presents facts. They don't "hate".
If I was as illogical as you are, I'd say that you hate Media Matters and Keith Olbermann.
MMfA presents facts. They don't "hate".
Sure they do not hate, they love
If I was as illogical as you are, I'd say that you hate Media Matters and Keith Olbermann.
Well I can admit I do hate , i hate FOX . I do not hate Olbermann, I am disapointed in him and MSNBC, I think they have a chance to change cable for the better but have blown it by becoming too partisan and childish with the petty FOX Feud. As for hating MMFA, never, I give proud donations to it, without it the cons would rule the world.
You have zero evidence that MM "hates" Fox, just as I have zero evidence you "hate" Media Matters. That's the point you can't or don't want to grasp.
Hi Tommy,
I took Eric's article to be a prediction based on the ratings of the debates. Did I miss something?
Fried,
Eric selectively chose what he wanted to highlight and then presumed that Fox is in ratings trouble for 2008 as a result. Not a fair prediction based on their January 2008 numbers alone. O'Reilly chose what he wanted too and slammed MMFA for it's deceptiveness. Not a fair slam considering Eric's facts were accurate.
It was the impression Eric's article wanted to leave out that is disingenuous. That doesn't excuse O'Reilly's disingenuousness either.
It's typical, when opponents who hate each other as much as MMFA and O'Reilly do, it's always about selective facts and figures and the truth is somewhere in between the two of them, in my opinion.
Did not say lie. I said they're being disingenuous, meaning they're definitely not giving the whole picture when supporting their claim that Fox will have a rough 2008.
All good points, Gov.
I see lots of facts there, with an educated, informed opinion from Boehlert.
O'Reilly simply doesn't like what he reads, and resorts in his usual way to name-calling ("pinheads"), while not really rebutting the extensive facts Boehlert presents to back up his opinion. Typical, angry O'Reilly response when confronted with facts he can't or chooses not to refute.
Ok Bill its put up or shut up time. You always call people cowards who won't come on your show, but why not have Boehlert or Brock on? If you have hard numbers and statistics that prove your point, put them on. Confront this "far-left" enterprise you keep referring to or cut your own mic.
If you feel like MMFA is defaming you, take them to court immediately! I know how hard a defamation suit is to prove when you are a public person, Bill, but you seem so sure of the "truth" you keep spewing that its time to file that suit.
If you choose neither of these two options, Bill, you are, in your own words, a "Coward."
"What say you, Mr. O'Reilly?"
O'REILLY: "...Media Matters is perhaps the most dishonest enterprise in the country."
Sorry, Bill, but the Bush Administration captured that award in a landslide. FOX News was honorably mentioned for its collaboration, however.
But keep up the good work, Bill...we're all pulling for you to stay on the air. What would we do without you?
Roger 'n B.O.
Ring.... Ring.... click.... O'Reilly here.
Yeah Bill, Roger.
Hi Roger; what's up?
Well Bill, these MMFA guys are ripping us a new one, and, uh... well Bill, they seem to find a lot of things you say..
Those lying, PINHEAD PRICKS! They're full of it and I can prove it Roger, so..
Now Bill, calm down, calm down. I know how you feel about these blogger pricks but, I gotta tell you, they're getting a lot of air time, especially with pricks like Olberma...
DON'T SAY SAY THAT NAME! DON'T SAY THAT NAME! DON'T SA..
Jesus Christ, Bill, take it easy! Look, have your staff pick a little flyschit out of the pepper, blow a little smoke - you known what I mean - and try and have 'em do it in a way that'll make it harder for those pricks to respond with facts.
Okay Roger, I'll get right on it - see ya.
I think O'Reilly's recent anti-homeless veterans screed was obscene.
I think the behavior of the executive branch of our government during the last 7 years and ten days is obscene.
I think the heartlessness of today's self professed compassionate conservatives is obscene.
Yet I find nothing in Drafted's post obscene.
But then I didn't think Janet Jackson's breast was obscene or the ass shown on ABC, five years ago was obscene.
The "C" word
If we all know what you mean, it's kind of the same thing.
Perhaps you find the term "PR*CKS" acceptable and not offensive, I find it equally as disguisting as the "C" word when directed toward women.
Doesn't really bother me. I have thick [ ]skin.
Too bad you were so offended by Scarborough's joke yesterday but vile, hideous guttersnipe slurs against women don't bother you, as you just said
Try again, Tommy. The "disgusting" term in question is "prick" or as you so delicately put it; "PR*CK".
Ok, differentiate now, you put them both in the same email above, the "P" word and the "C" word, I told you to get the moderators to lift the obscenity ban, and you said they don't bother you due to your thick skin.
Perhaps you should be more clear on what does and what does not offend you. I know it's strictly driven by your partisanship, but it sure is confusing.
Sue-
In the real world, people talk like that. Doesn't mean you have to or that I like it, but to become concerned about "filthy language" in a public forum is a little uptight, methinks.
And it's a "moot" issue or point, not "mute." That's a fairly common mistake. I guess I could get all annoyed and outraged at your poor use of the English language, but, naw. If it weren't for your stalker-like behavior about K.O., I could actually get to like you.
Let's play Whack-a-Troll....
Didya ever notice how some posters rarely address the point of an article and/or a reader's post in response?
It's the easiest way to spot a troll.
Oh, BTW, BO uses language like I did - in fact it's on tape and in court transcripts.
Drafted,
I think I have noticed it maybe once or twice. ;)
Thanks Billie I will try and answer
In the real world, people talk like that. Doesn't mean you have to or that I like it, but to become concerned about "filthy language" in a public forum is a little uptight, methinks.
I agree, I could care less about the language I think BO deserves worse than that, I just was wondering if it is more tolerated toward BO than others
And it's a "moot" issue or point, not "mute." That's a fairly common mistake. I guess I could get all annoyed and outraged at your poor use of the English language, but, naw. If it weren't for your stalker-like behavior about K.O., I could actually get to like you.
Thanks, i type fast and have many things going on, i figured this is not an English class and also after so many years of using microsoft products I have become lazy. But I see your point, we should start policing the english language on here more ? As for Stalker like behavior? Nah, if questioning MSNBC and its behavior and using its head anchorman as the symbol is stalking than it appears O"Reilly has many stalkers here also .
Thanks for your comments ;-)
So, Sue, you deny the rumor about the restraining order then...?
Come on, admit it, if Keith called you tonight you'd love nothing better than to spend a wild evening of monkey love with him. ;>0
I am married Irony to the love of my life ;-)
While Faux Noise gets hammered in presidential primary coverage, the zombies keep trying to change the subject to KO. My, my, my!! KO must be a VERY formidable competitor to have so many attack him whether it is the topic of the post or not.
One by one, Americans with IQ's over room temperature are waking up to the smear tactics of Faux & Bill-O's insane rants and leaving the propaganda channels in droves.
4 years ago only a few of my friends & family ever heard of KO, now the majority of them LOVE him & call him the best journalist ever.
Buh-bye Faux
Why doesn't someone, with nothing to lose, just pull a damn Timothy McVeigh on that building during prime time and get it over with?
Just be clear, I wouldn't ever do something that, I'm not stupid, nor am I smart enough to even know how. So, please faux noise, don't come after me. ;-P
"The IU researchers found that O'Reilly called a person or a group a derogatory name once every 6.8 seconds"
"Media Matters is perhaps the most dishonest enterprise in the country"
"smear factory"
"Media Matters is run by liars and defamers. They are far worse than pinheads."
Looks like you've made par again, Bill. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for the publicity to the million supporters you have William O'Lielly. Loser. Next time have the web address scrolling at the bottom of the screen to make it easier for your supporters to locate the site. Media Matters is not always right, but it is wrong far less than anything Pinnochio News broadcast.