WileyCoyote
07-30-2006, 06:05 PM
O'Reilly's new mantra is that people acting in a manner with which BOR disagrees are "aiding the terrorists". For example, using too much gasoline aids the terrorists. More BOR inconsistency: Mr. Bill is mortified that the oil companies are making huge profits while the nation is at war. Huh? What does war have to do with it? Isn't Bill a Free Market person? Maybe the oil companies are being patriotic by discouraging overuse of fossil fuels. After all, Bill sees consumption of oil as an aid to "the terrorists".
What really aids the terrorists, Bill, is being terrorized. Especially being terrorized to the point that you're willing to give up your basic freedoms and demand that others give up their freedoms (such as not criticizing public policy while we are at war). So, Bill, YOU are aiding the terrorists. By definition, the job of terrorists is to keep us afraid, to keep us from progressing, to keep us spending our money, creativity, political capital, etc. on alleviating our fear. Fear that superstitious, self-righteous chicken hawks like BOR propagate. ("Chickenhawk" is a term used to describe people who escaped the Vietnam War, but do not hesitate to back the sending of others to war. This term includes Dubya, most of his cabinet, Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich. Bill apparently escaped by being a high school teacher until just after the draft ended)
I used to think BOR was just an idiot. Now I'm convinced that he is a cheerleader for the White House, a modern day Goebbles. He acts as if his alleged "no spin zone" is all we need to keep ourselves informed. He admonishes us to "stay off the far-left websites". How about the far-right sites? Apparently, "far left" to Bill means left of him, which encompasses a lot of people and groups. The ACLU is "far-left" (and the most dangerous organization in America, according to this nitwit) in spite of having defended Rush Limbaugh and the KKK.
He tells us who we're allowed to listen to, all the while congratulating himself by giving us permission to think for ourselves. He is a character assassin. His latest campaign is to have Kevin Barrett fired from the University of Wisconsin. Barrett has classroom discussions about his theory that the U.S. government orchestrated 9/11. Grades are not based on whether a student understands or agrees wi th this theory. One week of the course is devoted to this subject. But BOR wants to silence all dissent.
O'Reilly said, "This guy would have been gone at Boston University, my alma mater, in a heartbeat. The Chancellor there, John Silber, would have--would have--this guy'd be in the Charles River floating down, you know, toward the harbor." BOR said he was just joking. Of course he was. But he didn't hesitate to use Barrett's letter to Rupert Murdock to insinuate that Barrett was over-reacting to Bill's quote. A look at Barrett's letter ( http://www.911blogger.com/2006/07/bill-oreilly-death-threat-against.html ) shows that he too, was writing tongue-in-cheek. BOR only displayed part of Barrett's letter on his show, out of context, of course.
Barrett may be full of it, I don't know. I'm not convinced that 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. government But I do know that silencing dissent is dangerous and unpatriotic. And I know that some of the official "facts" surrounding 9/11 smell worse than Limburger cheese that's been stored in a hobo's socks. Whatever, O'Reilly is trying to control the thought processes of Americans and that sucks way beyond just being stupid.
He's constantly yelling about rich liberals like George Soros supporting Air America and other left wing projects. As if rich conservatives don't do the same: Adolph Coors and Saife Foundations, to name two. Soros and Coors have a right to support any political movement they want to. But BOR can make his show more "fair and balanced" by reporting on monetary influence from the Right as well as the Left. These people are spending their own money. Dubya spends OUR money to fund propaganda. The Bush regime hired actors to pose as journalists in video news releases sent to TV stations intending to convey support for new laws about health benefits. http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1170534,00.html No word about this from BOR, of course.
A suggestion for Rupert Murdock: Cut his mic.
What really aids the terrorists, Bill, is being terrorized. Especially being terrorized to the point that you're willing to give up your basic freedoms and demand that others give up their freedoms (such as not criticizing public policy while we are at war). So, Bill, YOU are aiding the terrorists. By definition, the job of terrorists is to keep us afraid, to keep us from progressing, to keep us spending our money, creativity, political capital, etc. on alleviating our fear. Fear that superstitious, self-righteous chicken hawks like BOR propagate. ("Chickenhawk" is a term used to describe people who escaped the Vietnam War, but do not hesitate to back the sending of others to war. This term includes Dubya, most of his cabinet, Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich. Bill apparently escaped by being a high school teacher until just after the draft ended)
I used to think BOR was just an idiot. Now I'm convinced that he is a cheerleader for the White House, a modern day Goebbles. He acts as if his alleged "no spin zone" is all we need to keep ourselves informed. He admonishes us to "stay off the far-left websites". How about the far-right sites? Apparently, "far left" to Bill means left of him, which encompasses a lot of people and groups. The ACLU is "far-left" (and the most dangerous organization in America, according to this nitwit) in spite of having defended Rush Limbaugh and the KKK.
He tells us who we're allowed to listen to, all the while congratulating himself by giving us permission to think for ourselves. He is a character assassin. His latest campaign is to have Kevin Barrett fired from the University of Wisconsin. Barrett has classroom discussions about his theory that the U.S. government orchestrated 9/11. Grades are not based on whether a student understands or agrees wi th this theory. One week of the course is devoted to this subject. But BOR wants to silence all dissent.
O'Reilly said, "This guy would have been gone at Boston University, my alma mater, in a heartbeat. The Chancellor there, John Silber, would have--would have--this guy'd be in the Charles River floating down, you know, toward the harbor." BOR said he was just joking. Of course he was. But he didn't hesitate to use Barrett's letter to Rupert Murdock to insinuate that Barrett was over-reacting to Bill's quote. A look at Barrett's letter ( http://www.911blogger.com/2006/07/bill-oreilly-death-threat-against.html ) shows that he too, was writing tongue-in-cheek. BOR only displayed part of Barrett's letter on his show, out of context, of course.
Barrett may be full of it, I don't know. I'm not convinced that 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. government But I do know that silencing dissent is dangerous and unpatriotic. And I know that some of the official "facts" surrounding 9/11 smell worse than Limburger cheese that's been stored in a hobo's socks. Whatever, O'Reilly is trying to control the thought processes of Americans and that sucks way beyond just being stupid.
He's constantly yelling about rich liberals like George Soros supporting Air America and other left wing projects. As if rich conservatives don't do the same: Adolph Coors and Saife Foundations, to name two. Soros and Coors have a right to support any political movement they want to. But BOR can make his show more "fair and balanced" by reporting on monetary influence from the Right as well as the Left. These people are spending their own money. Dubya spends OUR money to fund propaganda. The Bush regime hired actors to pose as journalists in video news releases sent to TV stations intending to convey support for new laws about health benefits. http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1170534,00.html No word about this from BOR, of course.
A suggestion for Rupert Murdock: Cut his mic.