O'Reilly: Media Matters is an "awful, despicable ... outfit," "fascists" who espouse "anti-Americanism"
During the March 25 edition of his Fox News program, Bill O'Reilly called Media Matters for America an "awful, despicable ... outfit," and said: "[T]alk about anti-Americanism. I mean, these Media Matters ... these are fascists. They're dishonest people." O'Reilly made the comments in the context of discussing a March 25 article in the American Prospect by Media Matters senior fellow Paul Waldman concerning the controversy over statements by Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Sen. Barack Obama's recently retired pastor.
O'Reilly frequently attacks Media Matters; he recently stated: "Any of the presidential candidates who can deport those swine -- I'm voting for them."
From the March 25 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Oh, absolutely. It'll be interesting to see if Obama or his supporters do anything on this. And if they do, it'll be on the far-left blogs, which are really vile -- just vile. And on that subject, you broke a story -- or you're following a story -- about the awful, despicable Media Matters outfit. What are they doing now?
LAURA INGRAHAM (Fox News contributor and conservative radio host): Well, this guy named Paul Waldman, who works for Media Matters, and I don't -- I don't -- I'm not familiar with his work -- but he wrote a piece essentially saying that because conservatives and others are talking about Reverend Wright, they are, quote, "putting down a marker" to bring this -- bring the campaign into one of the more ugly aspects of racial prejudice.
In other words, Bill, a guy who wants to be president of the United States, have the ability and the authority to launch nuclear weapons, start a war, veto spending bills, should not be vetted. We should not be able to look at his closest relationships that have followed a course of 23 years, especially when it comes to someone like Reverend Wright. If we do that, we are going to be branded racist. That's how scared they are about this Reverend Wright issue. They know it's explosive.
O'REILLY: Well, they're going to brand people racist anyway. That's what Media --
INGRAHAM: Absolutely.
O'REILLY: -- Matters does. That's what they do. But here's the interesting part about this: That outfit has been very, very pro-Hillary Clinton up and to this point; very silent about any attacks on Barack Obama. This is the first time as far as I know -- I don't read them all the time; they're just disgusting -- but they've been basically in the tank for Hillary Clinton, because the Clintons and John Podesta, their close confidante, were in -- and we don't know the extent of it -- but did have something to do with the creation of Media Matters. There's very close ties there. But I think you're right. This is basically throwing out the first salvo that if Barack Obama is the nominee, any criticism --
INGRAHAM: Tread carefully.
O'REILLY: Right.
INGRAHAM: Yeah, tread carefully.
O'REILLY: -- any criticism you make about him will -- that's a racist criticism. Anything.
INGRAHAM: They're inoculating Barack Obama or attempting to do so. And Bill, I think this really shows the weakness of the Obama campaign right now. The fact that Media Matters and other groups like it have to be out there saying, "Hey, don't you do that. You're making this a race thing. And you're showing the country what you really think about black people," when, in fact, Bill, you know this as well as I do, this story about Reverend Wright isn't about race. It's about anti-Americanism.
O'REILLY: Oh, absolutely, absolutely.
INGRAHAM: It's about the vile anti-Americanism spewing forth from that pulpit week after week and a man like Barack Obama, who knows better, sitting there week after week because he thought he would get street credibility by being associated with that Trinity Church. Now he doesn't need them anymore, so it'll be interesting to see how he reacts in the days and weeks to come.
O'REILLY: But Barack Obama -- and I don't believe this to be true, I could be wrong -- he doesn't have anything to do with what Media Matters or the Daily Kos or any of these people do. And I want everybody to be clear about this. None of the candidates can control the kind of filth and -- talk about anti-Americanism. I mean, these Media Matters --
INGRAHAM: Yeah, it's unbelievable. It's unbelievable.
O'REILLY: -- Huffington Post, Daily Kos -- I mean, these are fascists. They're dishonest people.
INGRAHAM: But, Bill, here's the deal.
O'REILLY: But the candidates --
INGRAHAM: Yeah. OK.
O'REILLY: -- don't have anything to do with them other than currying, pandering to them.
Which brings to mind Walter Lippmann's remark that "where all men think alike, no one really thinks much at all."
In other words, conservatives are not entitled to any monopoly on the transmission and dissemiation of news and information (including prolefeed).
Oh man, you stole my line...I was gonna say something like "The only time MMfA espouses anti-Americanism is when Bill O'Reilly says it does."
O'Reilly is anti-American. there, I said it.
I'm thinking the same thing you all are.
O'Reilly thinks MM is facist > MM repeats HIS words verbatim > therefore O'Reilly and his words must be facist.
Seriously though, does O'Reilly even understand what words like facist and Nazi really mean? No, he doesn't. He just misuses these horrible labels because his ego and insecurities require him to attack those who dare to hold him and what he says up for scrutiny.
In fact, his total abuse of words like facist and nazis is an incredible insult to those who have had their lives affected so negatively by real life facists and Nazis (think holocaust). O'Reilly owes them an apology for so lightly throwing around words that have such a heavy and horrible historical meaning. O'Reilly is a disgrace.
O'Reilly also confuses MMFA with Kos and others, too. In his screeds against "hate" web sites (!) he doesn't realize that MMFA often defends the Clintons.
He's a numbskull. Not worth getting upset about.
Walter Lippmann
You're right. O'Reilly has no clue what fascism means. He referred to MMFA as both "fascist" and "anti-American" in the same breath, even though any educated person knows that extreme nationalism is a central component of fascist regimes, and thus "fascism" and "anti-Americanism" are in fact mutually exclusive. "Fascist" doesn't really mean anything to O'Reilly. It's just name-calling, like "jerk" or "a-hole," only the term "fascist" carries a stronger political connotation.
I have to admit, O'Reilly is on the mark when he claims that MMFA is pro-Hillary. For once, Bill is spot on, as MMFA typically devotes 25-50% of their coverage to Hillary stories. For a self-proclaimed "progressive research and information center," MMFA certainly spends an inordinate amount of time defending a moderate like Hillary Clinton. Most of the time MMFA just highlights opinions, not conservative bias, that challenges Senator Clinton. Real progressives that come to MMFA for an unbiased look at the conservative agenda in the media instead are fed a pro-Hillary agenda by MMFA, which is immensely disappointing. If a media figure notes, foe example, that Hillary may have a "bitch image" to overcome (as some have), that is not bias, but indeed pretty astute commentary.
EXCELLENT POINT, gentlemen and ladies.
WHATEVER O'Reilly cares to say about a site which ONLY spotlights HIS OWN WORDS, with text and video when available ... IN context, and WITHOUT COMMENT other than to ALSO site documented contradictions ... whatever O'Reilly says about such a site, he is really characterizing HIMSELF.
MMFA is a MIRROR (except for the "comments" section, which is not MMFA's own originated product, and thus cannot be held responsible for). If a MEDIA figure is vile, MMFA will show us how, with the proof. If a MEDIA figure has fascist tendencies, that will be reflected in THEIR OWN WORDS which MMFA reproduces with great care. It is the MIRROR that O'Reilly cannot stand, and wishes to destroy, and who can blame him?
These MEDIA figures wish to remain unaccountable, to say whatever they want and then claim "freedom of speech" as if this defends their offensive thoughts and words. They loathe exposure, they hate being examined. They wish to spout their propaganda free of criticism and analysis, because their presentations CAN NOT SURVIVE any scrutiny.
They LIE, they present a constant flow of MISINFORMATION, they reveal their darkest prejudices and bigotries, they show their lack of humanity, compassion, or empathy, they show their mean spirit ... and MMFA is there to document it all. And they HAAAAAATE THAT!!!!!
So, O'Reilly's got a mad on for MMFA (I.E. HIMSELF). That's great. If only he would actually take a look at his own words, instead of constantly trying to shift blame to the MIRROR, he might become a better commentator.
But, alas, these "brave" talking heads cannot admit to a SINGLE error, lest their house of cards come tumbling down. Virtually NONE of their "opinions" is based on sound reasoning, fairness, or factual analysis. It is propaganda, and propaganda cannot survive exposure.
[As an ultimate irony, the MEDIA is currently engaged in minute examination of individual words and phrases of Democratic candidates and their staff/supporters/friends, making HUGE daily "news" by endless speculations about what each word MEANS, what it says about the candidate's CHARACTER, and why these examples should disqualify the candidates from the presidency (of course, McCain is getting his customary PASS for the words he foolishly utters).
SUCH SCRUTINY IS THEIR STOCK-IN-TRADE, their bread and butter, and yet they claim such analysis is UNFAIR and HORRIBLE if applied to themselves. Such vile hypocrites they are!]
Billy and Laura are my hero(s)! .....
Only these two twits can be so right when it comes to those of us here that do that historically un-American activity of speaking out against lies, deceit, and calling out those that would aid in America's destruction!!
If that is how these people define fascism..... works for me..... but we all know that Billy and Laura are projecting.... so all is well.....
I saw this clip last night. Fall-down hilarious.
Bill-O's personal definition of fascism: "Anyone who calls me on my crap."
There would be no issue if Geraldine Ferraro haden't portrayed BO as the affirmative action candidate, if BO had distanced himself from Rev Wright, and had BO used his "race speech" to address the issue with Rev Wright and not delivered a "State of Race Relations" speech, and had not identified his granny as a "typical white person".
Instead of slamming the Dems for handing ammunition to their enemies Waldman is whining about the Repubs using it. Politics is about winning. Don't blame your enemies for using the ammunition you have handed them.
OK MIL - let me clarify. Had BO distanced himself from Wright YEARS AGO... Just like Waldman you are refusing to see the real issue. When a Con says something racist it is trumpeted and held over their heads until they resign or are beaten back into oblivion (Trent Lott). When the Dems do it you just want to forget about it and "move forward".
The real issue is that there is obvious raiosm in the Dems (i.e. "Typical white person")- it is no longer something that can just be directed at Repubs. However instead of taking the Dems head on Waldman is trying to stuff Dem racism back in the closet and paint the media as recist Repubs for exposing it. Shame on you MIL for falling for it.
"When a Con says something racist it is trumpeted and held over their heads until they resign or are beaten back into oblivion (Trent Lott). When the Dems do it you just want to forget about it and "move forward"."
So Obama said something racist? Your analogy doesn't fly.
Trying to pin racism on a person for a single inocuous three word phrase is lame beyond belief.
Typical conservative lameness.
A poor attempt at deflection. I suppose those "three words" just appeared in his dialog out of nowhere.
Typical liberal cluelesness and/or denia.l
And you're showing the country what you really think about black people," when, in fact, Bill, you know this as well as I do, this story about Reverend Wright isn't about race. It's about anti-Americanism.
and I thought it was about chickens and roosting....
HILLARY CLINTON:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/clinton.wright/
"I think given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor," Clinton said in a news conference in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.
The comments came hours after the New York senator made similar comments to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in an editorial board interview.
"You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend," she told the paper.
Clinton repeated those remarks in the news conference.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillary Clinton seems to have perfected this kind of campaigning herself!
GO OBAMA!!
The quote was "For the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country."
Unfortunately, even here, at this site dedicated to correcting conservative misinformation, this quote is regularly cropped and mangled by posters. When done... ON A REGULAR BASIS... by the corporate media, the removing of the word 'really' is not simply an inadvertent act, but one intended to subtly change and distort the meaning of the remaining words.
On another thread, MMFA had exposed ANOTHER attempt to promote the 'Al Gore claimed to have invented the internet' meme. After EIGHT F*CKING YEARS this propagandistic lie is still up and about and walking among us. It is still being used to ridicule Gore as a liar and a 'serial exaggerator'. This is why we must push back every time the right tries to stuff another of their dishonest memes down our throats.
You're right. It was a dumb thing for her to say. Arrogant, too.
The full, accurate quote actually makes it sound worse.
Are you really this dense? The CONTEXT of the remark was just spoon fed to you. You don't understand how CROPPING and ALTERING a quote distorts its meaning? This is something that you wish to proudly admit to?
Okay, then. Have it your way. And when MMFA inevitably presents us with an article demonstrating how Tweety, or O'Lielly, or the Savage Weiner has misquoted HILLARY, we can expect to see you there making the same sad argument... that there's nothing inherently wrong with altering the ACTUAL WORDS of a political figure.
Its been a rather ugly experience lately to witness so many rabid Hillarians so zestfully embracing the very same right wing tactics that they had previously denounced in this forum. The recent arrival of Hotnuke and his sputtering, vicious attacks on those who dare to oppose the object of his veneration is a prime example of this. Not all Hillarians do this, mind you... not even most... just enough to make me realize how precarious the balance of power really is in this nation, and with what ease some will slide over to the lies, the distortions, the willful contrariansm, and anti-intellectualism of the right. There are some people in the little community of MMFA posters of ours who are more than willing to accept lies and distortions as acceptable political practices... just as long as those lies and distortions advance THEIR OWN narrow agenda.
Actually, I agree with M. Obama. But the quote was a dumb one-- she clearly meant that for the first time in her adult life she was proud of her country. The first time.
It doesn't matter what she was proud of-- it matters that she said it was the first time in her adult life. The context doesn't matter-- and the quote wasn't cropped.
If Hillary had said the same thing-- used the same words, expressed the same sentiment-- I would have thought it was a dumb, arrogant thing to say, too.
It doesn't matter what she was talking about. It could be the greatest thing in the world. But it shouldn't have been her first adult time.
It was the "really" that was being cropped and hense leading to the distorted meaning. There is a difference between saying "I was proud..." and "I was REALLY proud". The first one says that one was never proud before. The second one says that she has always been proud, but now her pride is increased.
Your welcome.
you mean all those things some people on here have called discredited nonsense for years, but suddenly they have joined the right wing chorus? we know everything about hillary. there is nothing more to come out. the banning handgun issue is one of the biggest things that sunk dukakis in 1988. and obama is trying to say he did not support that. a group submitted a questionaire in 1996 for his first state senate race, and it was returned with that answer. now they are trying to say that some staffer filled it out in error, but the group involved said they personally interviewed him. read the link. you may not want to discuss it now, but it will come up.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-12-22-2414012588_x.htm
"we know everything about hillary. there is nothing more to come out. "
Then why does more and more come out every day?
Face it, the media, and Hillary, have pushed this campaign too far. Obama is going to be the nominee, whether you like it or not. Unless she wins every state here on out by 70% or more (and she's trailing by 20% in NC right now,) she will not be the nominee.
What's sad though, is that more Clinton supporters said they will not vote for Obama than Obama supporters said they will not vote for Clinton. That's troubling for this election, and could very well give McCain the nomination.
Why have the corporate media... and you... repeatedly cropped Michelle Obama's quote? Why have the corporate media... and you... insisted on removing the word "very" from her statement? Why have the corporate media... and you... continually lopped off the second part of the quote in which she explains its meaning, its intent, and its context? Why are the corporate media... and you... resorting to these sort of dishonest wingnut tactics?
Well?
No one's cropping anything. She said it was the first time.
And she's not even correct, factually. Bill Clinton wasn't an insider, nor was Jimmy Carter, and neither were known at all before they started campaigning
So she's not even accurate!!!
"No one's cropping anything. She said it was her first time." - Carlileb
Amazing!
You deny that anyone's cropped Michelle Obama's quote AS YOU'RE AGAIN CROPPING HER QUOTE!!!
I mean, do you even pay attention to what you're posting?
This ranks right up there with Mefirst arguing that the CONTEXT and MEANING of her statement are irrelevant.
It makes me wonder... when someone oozes far enough over to the right that they've actually joined Wingnut Nation, are they required to take a formal oath? Or is it sufficient affirmation to merely scowl and mutter incoherent complaints about welfare and affirmative action?
" No one's cropping anything. She said it was the first time." carlileb
My bad. I inadvertently erred when quoting Carlileb. I am now correcting that error, in order to be fair and accurate.
Unlike a couple of other posters on this thread, I think that's important.
What 'quote' did I make up? You do know what the word 'quote' means don't you? In the future, you might find it helpful to any discussion that you get involved in to know basic word definitions.
Just trying to be helpful.
i understand the reason she gave. but she said it was the "first time" she was proud
...in regards to the political process. She was talking about the political process and that led into her making the proud comment.
had she said i'm really proud to be an american
You're putting words in her mouth. I'll try to parahase what she said:
America has for ages chosen to go with the candidate who had best name recognition, the most money and who is a Washington insider. For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country for bucking that trend.
You DID put words in her mouth, and you are continuing to crop her quote and distort her words in order to smear her and Barack Obama.
To paraphrase Hillary Clinton... SHAME ON YOU!
America has for ages chosen to go with the candidate who had best name recognition, the most money and who is a Washington insider. For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country for bucking that trend."
Again, why is it the first time?
That's the problem.
BTW, what she said isn't even true-- remember Jimmy Carter? or Bill Clinton? neither one fits her claim.
The uncropped version
---Speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback."
---Then in Madison, she said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change."
See for the Hillary lovers like MEFIRST and the pretend Hillary lovers that are operating chaos for Rush like CARLIL the truth isn't important.
If asked they would spew off a litany of all the times they had to stop in their day to day tracks, stunned and taken aback by how proud they were of this country. Me, personally, I can't remember the last time I was awed at how proud I was of it all. I'd be willing to be most people are the same. Its just not something that naturally occurs to you.
This doesn't mean you don't love your country. For the last eight years I have NOT BEEN PROUD of what George W Bush has done to my country and I HAVE NOT BEEN PROUD of what my fellow citizens have allowed to happen. I still love that statue of liberty though, the bill of rights still makes me proud, its just those things didn't happen in my adult lifetime.
And Slick Willy was a good President, I've never said otherwise, but getting a blow in the office wasn't a proud moment, nor was gutting welfare and starting NAFTA. And George H W Bush was not a PROUD moment either. Thats a lot of years of poor to middling leadership and the progress brought along by it. Doesn't mean I'm not proud of the Revolution, that I don't respect the Constitution...again, it didn't ahppen in my adult lifetime.
The uncropped qoutes that I have linked and provided audio proof too show why she is proud now and I agree. The country does seem hopeful and after years of racism a black man may finally be President. We may even get out of Iraq.
Maybe even in my adult lifetime
"I still love that statue of liberty though, the bill of rights still makes me proud, its just those things didn't happen in my adult lifetime."
-Eden
"i mean really, there is nothing you can think of to be proud of?"
-MeFirst
Do you see the disconnect? You're straying far from reality, my friend.
You didn't quote him at all... you simply paraphrased him.
Damn... you really DON'T know the definitions of these words.
ME Are you for real right now ?
---Speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback."
---Then in Madison, she said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/michelle-obam-1.html
Just in case my word isn't good enough. Now we expect this kind of nonsense from Carlil but Me, really ?
You said, i've heard that described as "out of context", but it seems straighforward to me.
After reading the uncropped qoute, watching the clip, would you like to take back that line of reasoning ?
Thanks for the link, Eden. It demonstrates just how badly the corporate media have distorted what Michelle Obama said. Even the quote that I provided turned out to be cropped. I googled it and found mostly news organizations and partisan web sites that either badly cropped it or simply paraphrased it, making it mean whatever they WISHED to make it mean. I thought that I had found the whole quote, but obviousely I should have dug a little deeper... as you did. My apologies.
LOL MESCAL
THAT WAS FOR MEFIRST
OI ME Have you read and listened to the whole quote yet ?
Are you ready to admit the media cropped her and blew this out of proportion now ?
Or do you like CARLIL as company, ick
I haven't smeared anyone, and I am telling you that you are ignoring the context in which she said it.
Context is everything. Because, in her mind, America, for the first time, is doing something different in its political process, she's proud of that. Since it's the first time it's happened, then she's proud of that for the first time.
It's not that she's never been proud of America before. It's that on this one issue, since this is the first time she's seen it happening, then she's proud of it.
Until O'Reilly gets up the courage to confront the "fascists" at MMFA in person, all this unsubstantiated mud-slinging he does on camera with people who agree with him does nothing more than soothe his fractured ego.
Until O'Reilly has a televised discussion with someone from MM (I've read Brock has offered to come on The Factor but O'Reilly won't accept), he cannot declare anyone else a coward for not coming on HIS show (as he has done many times in the past).
And I'd prefer it to be live so no one does any editing. Come on, O'Reilly, cowboy up, tough guy! Or are you afraid of MM?
One thing with O'Reilly never changes:
The man is a grade-A, first class, COWARD. When he's challenged, he lashes out, BECAUSE HE IS A COWARD. Most cowards are bullies as well.
This is the one over-riding trait that shines through with this man.
He hates America with a deep and passionate hatred. He hates everything America stands for, with a deep and potent hatred.
Bill O'Reilly
The O'Reilly Factor
FOX News Channel
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
In May of this year, I asked that you allow me to come on The O'Reilly Factor to discuss your attacks on philanthropist George Soros. Your producer denied my request, saying you were no longer discussing the topic. Yet in subsequent weeks, you continued to discuss Mr. Soros on your radio and television programs. Despite my offer to discuss Soros, you still did not invite me on -- even complaining during your June 1 Radio Factor, "I mean, we really can't get anybody in here [to defend Soros] that's not a raving, raving Far-Left person, and why we would want to do that, I don't know."
In recent months, you have repeatedly attacked me and my organization, Media Matters for America:
As you can see, Mr. O'Reilly, you have repeatedly and personally attacked me, Media Matters for America, and my fine staff, calling us "vile," "despicable," and "weasels," and comparing us to the Ku Klux Klan, Castro, Mao, and the Nazis. And you have refused my repeated requests to appear on your broadcast.
You once offered your viewers your definition of the word "coward." On the January 5, 2004, O'Reilly Factor, you declared: "If you attack someone publicly, as these men did to me, you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward."
Well, Mr. O'Reilly, you have attacked me publicly on numerous occasions, and you refuse to face me. You, sir, are a coward -- by your own definition of the term. You are "hiding under your desk" (to paraphrase your August 26, 2003, claim about a "coward" who declined to appear on your show) rather than allowing me on your program to discuss your insults. You are "gutless," to borrow the phrase you used on January 10, 2003, and February 8, 2001, to describe people who would not appear on your program. I attach additional examples of your pejorative descriptions of those who decline invitations to appear on your broadcast.
Your frequent complaint that your words are taken out of context appears to have spurred your recent assault on my organization. While reasonable people can disagree about conclusions we, or you, have drawn about your comments, you are simply wrong to say that we took you out of context. I remain willing and eager to appear on either your television or radio program to discuss your contention that my organization has taken your comments out of context.
Should you continue to refuse this offer, it is only reasonable that the American people will conclude that you are not only -- as you would put it -- a "coward," but a hypocrite as well.
Sincerely,
David Brock
President and CEO
Media Matters for America
That's well done Pearl...
Exactly what I've been saying for months, only said a lot better.
O'Reilly is a gigantic, thundering, COWARD.
"he told a caller that communism and fascism were the same thing (because they both have dictators)....."
And while he was correct about Fascism, Communism is, by definition, NOT a dictator led political system. As a matter of fact, it's perfectly possible to have a Democratic Communist system or a Communist Republic.
I'm a fascist,
You're a fascist,
We're all fascists,
If you're on Media Matters you're a fascist too!
Be a fascist, read Media Matters,
Be a fascist, read Media Matters...
Whenever Nurse Nancy Nympho and Tweedledum open their yaps I just play "what's the caption?".
Bill: Hey Laura! I've got a falafel that's this big!
Laura: Oh, my! Does that meal come with a drink?
That darn outside voice again, always getting me into trouble!
That darn outside voice again, always getting me into trouble!
Let me say again, I LOVE THAT OUTSIDE VOICE!
It's actually funny...my aunt watched O'Reilly until we started having a discussion about Media Matters. She parroted the "oh, Media Matters is fascist and they slander people," so I showed her the actual web-site (which she had never been to) and showed her around and, needless to say, she doesn't watch Bill O'Reilly anymore.
I still can't get her off of her Dr. Phil kick though
I still can't get her off of her Dr. Phil kick though
Maybe this will help.
When I lived in Colroado, I was seeing a therapist who was originally was from Texas and knew Dr. Phil personally as well as professionally. He had nothing good to say about him.
Ha, I wish that would help...she LOVES the man, can't get enough of him.
It's all Oprah's fault.
Of course, she's also voting for Obama, because Oprah said so. That should tell you something...
Right, never an example, just the slander:
"...really vile...
...awful...
...despicable...
...disgusting...
...filth...
...anti-Americanism...
...fascists...
...dishonest people."
8 insults, 0 examples.
O'Dork doesn't do personal attacks...
You know that.
O'REILLY: -- any criticism you make about [Obama] will -- that's a racist criticism.
Hey, Bill: "Where's my mother f____g iced tea?!"
Atta boy Dave,
This kind of crap from O'Reilly really shows just how afraid he is of Media Matters. And well he should be.
Media Matters has reduced the man to an absolute pile of stinking wreckage. And all they had to do was report what he said (in context). The name O'Reilly has become an absolute joke to most Americans.
No Bill, it's only racist when YOU do it. Why? Well... you're a... (you know.) I can criticize Obama (or since I don't, as I'm voting for him, let's say Jackson and Sharpton, whom I DO) without be called a racist beacuse... well I'm not. And that's self-evident to anyone who knows where I stand on things. Juts as your racism is self-evident to anyone who listens to your rants.
And you keep saying "facsist." You're really wearing that word out. You're sucking all the meaning out of it. Look it up. It has a definition. And in the words of Indigo Montoya:
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you you think it means!"
"I mean, these are fascists. They're dishonest people."
I do not hink that word means what you think it does...
Funny, I thought debate and freedom of speech were pretty American. Apparently, Mr. O'Reilly doesn't seem to think so. Ah well Bill, maybe you and Savage can get together, run for President and VP, and then if and when you win, you can lock up all the liberals like Mikey old boy wants to do.
Ingraham: "Trinity Church. Now [Obama] doesn't need them anymore".
I guess I missed when Obama said he didn't need his church anymore...
Then again, Ingraham also remarked that Al Sharpton might steal things while visiting the White House, so I'll consider the source...
I can't imagine a more fair and balanced panel:
Billy O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham.
Two unplugged blowholes.
Actually this is what Laura said and I quote from MMFA:
"Oh, did anyone see President Bush at the White House? This was interesting: He was celebrating African-American History Month, and he made that comment, saying, you know, "People shouldn't play around or -- with nooses," and that was clearly a reference to, you know, all the problem that, you know, appearance of nooses has caused in this country. And he talked about that. And then, he welcomed Al Sharpton to the White House. I hope they nailed down all the valuables."
She obviously never said he "might steal things" as you claim. That's a LIE.
Gee, I'm really sorry for being such a liar. And an all-caps liar to boot.
I really should have said Ingraham was only concerned that valuable White House objects might "accidentally", ahem ahem, "slip or slide", nudge-nudge, doncha know, into the unknowing Al Sharpton's pockets.
this coming from a guy who routinely has mary kathering ham from townhall.com on his show? apparently, he doesn't read that website, becasue there is all kinds of "vile" "filth" on there. their columns are often filled with some really nasty stuff directed particularly at Obama. at least MMFA deals with facts.
BTW, did anyone catch Chris Wallace ADMITTING that "fair and balanced" means "giving a conservative point of view?" check it out on huffingtonpost.
Well, once again O'Reilly shows his exposed nerve when MMFA calls him on his crapola.
So much for ProudCon's assertion that MMFA matters "very little," huh? If it mattered so little, Billbo and Rushbo and all the rest of the right-wing noise machine wouldn't bring it up ...
I was just getting my brown shirt pressed.
Can someone tell me what I missed?
Hey, Old Ben. You didn't miss much,we were just polishing our jackboots, while trying to reconcile and harmonically converge our communism and fascism.
The shirt looks great! Earth tones are the new black.
What?
Why didn't I get that memo BEFORE I shelled out big bucks for the retro Gestapo black leather coat?
And it just looked so cool.
Next meeting, I'm bringing up the issue of a WARDROBE REFUND!
Time for more Joe!
You start wearing blue and brown
working for the clampdown.
OB, I saw one of my favorite living contradictions a few days ago, a guy I occasionally see driving down PCH as I'm going to work.On the back of his pickup are the following stickers; "Crime pays-hire an illegal", "Liberals suck", the newest addition "NOBAMA!", and, I kid you not, A Clash sticker.
I guess he just likes dancing to Rock the Casbah.
RFLMAO!
You ever see Rude Boy? When the rude boy asks Joe "Why you got to be poltical all the time?"
I've seen similar things. Those are the people that helped drive Kurt Cobain over the edge. He hated seeing the same type of thugs that beat him up in high school at his shows pushing other fans around and singing his songs. I remember seeing a video from outside a Rage Against The Machine concert that was to raise money/awareness about Mumia. The fans on the way in were saying things like "I don't f'n care about politics man, they should just fry that n___er cop killer."
Sad.
DETOUR! Off topic warning- go around.
sad,funny,sad, O.B.. I saw Rude Boy, years ago. Always interesting to see the frustration in peoples ideas being misunderstood completely by their followers.I just recently read Rotten:No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs. It was on my low-brow, pop-culture reading pile,but I was surprised by what a great read it was.Horrible, depressing, and hilarious- a good Irish story.
O'Reilly is so old news. His antics will always intrigue the National Enquirer audience.
Which sadly is a lot of America. Seriously, who is keeping that publication in business? I wonder the same thing about O'Reilly . . . Who the hell is watching and listening to this guy?!?
see the violence inherit in the system!
hey, when obama beats hillary for the dem nom.... do you think she'll take it like a man?
Who died and left The System, and why is the violence inheritin' it?
As for your knee-slapper, i'd say Hillary, like most women, probably seems pretty manly when you're comparing her to yourself.
"hey, when obama beats hillary for the dem nom... do you think she'll take it like a man?" Knuckledragging paleocon
Will you?
Gee. And all this time I thought we were 'fascists who espoused anti-Americanism'....
Y'all sure as shootin' are educatin' us.
This place is in the pocket of the Dems. FinanceBuzz
So what?
How is being in the pocket of the Dems (actually not literally true. Media Matters attacks conservative misinformation. Eventually that effort, if successful, will improve the stature of the Republicans. If the Republican Party gets its act together, and disavows this nonsense, then they'll rightfully regain a lot of their partisans) equivalent to
O'Reilly: Media Matters is an "awful, despicable ... outfit," "fascists" who espouse "anti-Americanism"
But these two. O'Reilly and Ingraham what a true to life reminder that the authoritarian wing of the Republican Party will forego no pretext to stop the liberal cause.
The cons own the institutions that influence our culture and they will use their every advantage to sully the progress of liberalism.
INGRAHAM: It's about the vile anti-Americanism spewing forth from that pulpit week after week [a couple 30 second snippets proves WEEK AFTER WEEK?] and a man like Barack Obama, who knows better, [who knows better than whom?] sitting there week after week because he thought he would get street credibility [you are referring to white street credibility right?] by being associated with that Trinity Church. Now he doesn't need them [which them do you refer, Laura? The people Obama said he specifically would NOT disown] anymore, so it'll be interesting to see how he reacts in the days and weeks to come.
But it's not about race.
Ever notice that these far right wing loons can't tolerate anyone disaggreeing with them. In their eyes if you differ from their view of things then you are an unpaitriotic ,unamerican ,pro terrorist ,pinko ,commie traitor. And they accuse the left of intollerance.
You libs never fail to amuse me. You think Bill is the grand poobah of the right wing movement. Let me reassure you, Bill is not a particularly loved figure in right wing circles. Almost all of my friends think he is a shill for Democrats.
He fawns all of the B Hussein and the Dragon Lady, yet he has constantly criticised Mitt Romney - the one and only candidate on either side who is qualified to be President.
Trust me on this, Rush and Annie C are considerably more popular amongst right-wingers. Bill is looked upon with great suspicion.