O'Reilly Hires Bodyguards; Talks Retirement

[Adam's Apple]

What's Hate Got to Do with It?
By Verne Gay, Newsday
October 18, 2005

In a corner office high over 47th Street in Manhattan, Bill O'Reilly stretches out behind a medium-sized desk that seems like a medieval fortress. Those papers piled high in the corners? Battlements. The pens, pencils and letter openers? Pikes, longbows and spiked flails.

The computer where O'Reilly had just filed his newspaper column moments earlier? Let's call that a drawbridge beyond which an angry mob has assembled. Google the words "Bill O'Reilly" and 6.5 million hits instantly appear. The first two are the flame-throwing newsman's own Web sites, but those are followed by the seething mass of obsessive O'Reilly haters who would love nothing better than to reach through the screen and throttle the tall, wan, rich, famous/infamous fellow on the other side.

Gauging the animus against O'Reilly has always been a rough art, but by his own estimation "it's gotten worse. Now it's so bad that I spend an enormous amount of money protecting myself against evil."

One usual suspect behind this rising tide of hatred, he says, is the Liberal Media Establishment, infuriated because it "can't marginalize me." But whatever the reason, almost exactly a year since he settled a sexual harassment lawsuit with former Fox News producer Andrea Mackris - the anniversary is next Thursday - the embattled life of O'Reilly has become an increasingly strange and scary one.

http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/ny-etlede4473201oct18,0,1133689.story?coll=ny...

 

[nosarcasm]

Shut up doesn't cut it in the real world.

 

[Adam's Apple]

???????? O'Reilly has been the #1 rated talk show on cable news for about the last five years. He tops everyone when it comes to drawing viewers. I don't watch him all the time, but occasionally I catch his program. I don't see much difference between his style/personality and that of Chris Matthews, James Carville, Paul Begala, etc., except that he is conservative/independent and they are liberals. O'Reilly puts his energies and efforts into what he feels are very worthwhile causes. What's not to like about that?

 

[trobinett]

Adam`s Apple states:

O'Reilly puts his energies and efforts into what he feels are very worthwhile causes. What's not to like about that?

Not a thing.......... :clap1:

 

[ScreamingEagle]

???????? O'Reilly has been the #1 rated talk show on cable news for about the last five years. He tops everyone when it comes to drawing viewers. I don't watch him all the time, but occasionally I catch his program. I don't see much difference between his style/personality and that of Chris Matthews, James Carville, Paul Begala, etc., except that he is conservative/independent and they are liberals. O'Reilly puts his energies and efforts into what he feels are very worthwhile causes. What's not to like about that?

Probably lots. Especially by liberals when he leans on them to do the right thing - such as the Jessica's law thing he's pushing in every state. Never underestimate the hatred engendered in liberals when someone tells them what to do - especially when most others think it is the right thing to do and they are cornered like the weasel rats they are.

Adding here an O'Reilley memo about libs who are resisting Jessica's Law:

My thesis is that most of the media in America will not help pass tough mandatory prison terms for predators who rape and molest children. I told The Union Leader guy his paper was not doing enough. He told me to stuff it.

Well, today, we did more research on just how many media organizations have editorialized in favor of Jessica's Law — and here is the list. The Herald News (search) of Passaic, New Jersey. That's it. That's the list. Only one small newspaper has actively campaigned for Jessica's law.

Surprised? I am. But The Washington Post (search) quickly wised me up with this editorial quote today. "Society has a legitimate interest in protecting children and others from sexual abuse. Civil liberties cannot take a back seat. There is a need for sound legislation that distinguishes between offenders who can be rehabilitated and those who cannot."

Well, there you go. Rehabbing child rapists. And The Post isn't the only one going this route. The Houston Chronicle (search) opposes Jessica's Law, and as does The Minneapolis Star-Tribune (search), which says, quote: "This kind of get-tough approach to sexual predators is hard to be against — hard but necessary. Making sex offenders suffer, after all, isn't society's only goal."

Now, that newspaper is off the chart left, but the New Hampshire paper isn't, and The Washington Post is moderate left, so what's going on?

Let's start with the punishment must fit the crime, the philosophical basis of American law. If an adult rapes or molests a child, the child's altered forever. That crime never goes away. Some victims never recover. So a mandatory 25-year prison term, first offense, fits the crime. But many in the media are simply incapable of making that simple judgment. They live in a gray world, where nothing is black and white, right or wrong. There are always extenuating circumstances. They live in a "no judgment zone."

Call me crazy, but I'm not interested in rehabbing a child rapist. That person has forfeited his or her right to freedom. Period.

Second thing in play here is ego. The New Hampshire publisher wasn't going to let that punk O'Reilly tell him or his state what to do. No way. The telling line was when he told me sarcastically, well, you're quite a crusader, O'Reilly.

Well, I have to be because many establishment people like him aren't going to protect children until forced to do so. They're not going to secure the border either, or develop alternative energy, or even admit we're in a worldwide war on terror. Not that man. He's just coming up against us on Jessica's Law.

Crusading is just about the only way to get things done these days. And if we have to embarrass or call out people, we're going to do that. All Americans, especially the kids, need protection. When will the media figure this out? And that's “The Memo.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166977,00.html

And here's his map:
http://www.billoreilly.com/outragefunnels

 

[trobinett]

One of the things I hear, that is suppose to steer me away from supporting legislation, like the aforementioned law, is, it could happen to YOU.

Well bull pucky on that argument.

If your caught in that kind of behavior, you deserve EVERYTHING you get.

Where am I going wrong?

 

[Psychoblues]

Bill O'Really is just a jerk. He insults his guests, his audience and the average intelligence of Americans with his constant whining about EVERYTHING. His show is NOT widely viewed or appreciated. His antics are more for self-promotion than anything else. His words are contradictory to say the least and his vocally expressed truth is nonexistent.

But, he's a rich man for his willingness to exploit conflict for his own untruthful ambitions. WAKE UP!!!!!!

Psychoblues

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

His show is NOT widely viewed or appreciated.

He has the number one show in his time slot. How much more widely viewed does he have to be? Appreciated is all a matter of opinion, and no real way to measure it, but to say he is not widely viewed is totally inaccurate.

Bill O'Really is just a jerk.

Spelling aside, yeah, he can be a jerk. How does that make him any different than Al Franken, or any number of other hosts from politically based shows. And I include the comments about being "whining" and "insulting his guests" in that. Personally, I've never seen him openly insult a guest that didn't deserve it.

His antics are more for self-promotion than anything else.

Yeah, pushing Jessica's Law is all about him.

His words are contradictory to say the least and his vocally expressed truth is nonexistent.

But enough about you, get back to O'Reilly.

 

[Psychoblues]

OK, O'Really is still a jerk, a liar, self-promoting and untruthful while presenting himself as an objective journalist. He definitely impresses me as having objectives but responsible journalism is not one one of his objectives.

Do you have conflicting evidence?

Psychoblues

 

[Adam's Apple]

Psycho, do you have any authorative links to back up your ridiculous opinions about O'Reilly, or do you just like to see your own opinions in print? From hanging around here, you should know that liberal opinion scores no points among conservatives. Usually liberals just leave O'Reilly alone because they can't get the best of him. Instead of stating "His show is NOT widely viewed or appreciated", you should have said "His show is NOT widely viewed or appreciated among liberals." That would have been a true statement.

Not only is O'Reilly a top-rated talk show host, but he also writes #1 best sellers and turns out thought-provoking commentary on current political/social issues in his daily columns. These are the talents and abilities that have made him a rich man.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

OK, O'Really is still a jerk, a liar, self-promoting and untruthful while presenting himself as an objective journalist. He definitely impresses me as having objectives but responsible journalism is not one one of his objectives.

Do you have conflicting evidence?

Psychoblues

Evidense that conflicts what? Your opinion? You are saying nothing more than the generic insults and uninformed criticism that anyone who doesn't like O'Reilly casts out. He hosts a commentary show, not a newscast. Somehow, some people don't see the difference, at least when it's hosted by someone that doesn't pander to their own views.

Don't like him? Continue not to watch him.

 

[Hobbit]

OK, O'Really is still a jerk, a liar, self-promoting and untruthful while presenting himself as an objective journalist. He definitely impresses me as having objectives but responsible journalism is not one one of his objectives.

Do you have conflicting evidence?

Psychoblues

O'Reilly has never made his politics a secret. Unlike shows like Nightline, Frontline, and the CBS evening news, O'Reilly often informs his audience that he is a "traditionalist," meaning that he's a big believer in older, traditional values. Traditionalist is, by nature, conservative, and while a registered independant, O'Reilly often admits being right of center. He has never presented himself as "objective," and, on his radio show, anyway (CSI is on during his TV show, so I don't see it often), he says quite often that he is not a journalist, but a commentator, meaning he's not in the business of reporting the news, but rather telling people what he thinks.

He's also not a liar. I've heard him say untrue things in his broadcast, but never without a retraction, correction, and apology as soon as he finds out the mistake. If you wish to contest this claim, list for me any lies you think he has told.

Yeah, he's self-promoting, but since when is this a bad thing? I like to promote myself. You like to promote yourself. Everybody wants to promote themselves as this often makes people think highly of them, making it easier to get jobs, loans, and whatnot.

A jerk? Yeah, but I don't think I've ever seen him hammer anybody that didn't deserve it. Sometimes, you just need a jerk to point out the truth. Remember "stuck on stupid?"

 

[trobinett]

Jimmyeatworld posts:

He hosts a commentary show, not a newscast. Somehow, some people don't see the difference,

Therein lies the problem.

Both the liberal movement, and the elite media(which just happens to be liberal in its makeup)have pushed to turn hard news shows into opinion driven broadcasts.

Just one of the reasons I can`t stand to watch the news on TV, as to the other forms, print, and radio, thats another story.

Bill knows what kind show he`s putting on, he ISN`T confused, and the show isn`t trying to mislead.

I don`t think I can remember the last time a liberal "talking head" took on a subject head on, or was honest about their intentions.

How many "interviews" with a conservative supporter, that is championing a counter viewpoint, have we seen from the elite media, that hasn`t turned into a "gang rape"?

Bill gives everyone their turn, those that have the courage on come on the show that is. And, if they deserve it, he shows them respect. Sounds fair and balanced to me.

Where am I going wrong. :usa: