Bill oreilly is most hated/liked

vbimport

#1

GUY’S
According to a new survey Brother BILL OREILLY
of FOXNEWS is the most hated and liked.
ZAP:bigsmile::bigsmile:http://www.asylum.com/2008/11/14/bill-oreilly-is-most-loved-and-most-loathed/?icid=200100397x1214132923x1200892752


#2

I love bill…he just tells it like it is!!!


#3

He’s a fool. An entertaining fool maybe, but a fool none the less.


#4

The most informative interview Obama did this year was the one with O’Reilly. He actually asked Obama some meaningful and tough questions unlike the liberal a$$ kissers from CBS/NBC/CNN/ABC/MSNBC/NYT/WP/LAT/Time etc. They were too busy trying to find his zipper to ask him a question on anything of substance.


#5

Bill Oreilly should have been fired when they found out what he did to a woman who worked for him but not at fox.

ill O’Reilly: O’Reilly is not only a phony conservative, he’s just an outright phony. O’Reilly isn’t exceptional. He is in fact, a perfect example of the ruling class, secure in his faith that the rules the slaves live by do not apply to him. Just because Bill O’Reilly wants to do sexual threesomes with women who work for him, while arousing them with phone sex is no big deal! Never mind the details of the sexual harassment lawsuit that Andrea Mackris, 33, a producer on his show, filed against ole’ “family values” Bill. It hit the news just when he was beginning to promote his new children’s book… a book, mind you, aimed at inspiring moral virtue and “American” values in our nation’s youngsters. Then there’s the time he lied about having won a Peabody. Fox has never corrected this pile of BS. Bill O’Reilly earned no such honor, and worse still, the award he fraudulently claimed was a Polk (in terms of awards, the Polk is to a Peabody what, in terms of Fords, a Pinto is to a Mustang). My favorite exemplar of O’Reilly’s incompetence are his interviews with “Lt. Colonel” Joseph Cafasso. Yes, In these days of war it’s a damn shame “Lt. Colonel” Joseph Cafasso is nowhere to be found. For about four months in 2002 Cafasso was one of Fox News’s many hired “military analysts.” As it turns out, “Colonel” Cafasso was a complete fraud, not having been a Colonel at all, not even having ever been an officer. Yes indeed, Cafasso was in the military, but he only spent 44 days in the Army, and as a Private at that. Naturally, records of this fake “military analyst’s” presence on FNC have been purged from Fox’s web sites. Yet he was real. And so was the cheap rug he pulled over O’Reilly’s eyes. Because he spouted the neo-con line, O’Reilly and Fox were willing to give him a run. Apparently phonies attract one another.

It always funny how people attack the other news as being liberal when they listen to Hyprocites like Oreilly and Mr drugs himself Rush Limbaugh.


#6

[QUOTE=samlar;2166703]Bill Oreilly should have been fired when they found out what he did to a woman who worked for him but not at fox.[/QUOTE]

Do you think Bill Clinton should have been removed from office for what he did to an intern?


#7

[QUOTE=UTR;2166878]Do you think Bill Clinton should have been removed from office for what he did to an intern?[/QUOTE] No. She consented to everything they did together. Clinton showed poor judgment and low morals, then was caught lying about his indiscretions.

O’Reilly was accused of sexual harassment, not of getting head and lying about it.

But I digress, as the topic really is irrelevant IMO.


#8

She did not censent to anything but that the way with one party attack the person who is wronged and a member of the other party. This post was not about bill clinton if so then yes he was a jerk but at least he did not go on TV acting like he was upholding the Christain believes. At least in Little Bush case I will say he did what he believed in. In people like Oreilly he is a Hyprocite who live one life and says he is for another. There is to many good Christain Republicans out there so why listen or hold up as an example someone like Oreilly?


#9

[QUOTE=UTR;2166878]Do you think Bill Clinton should have been removed from office for what he did to an intern?[/QUOTE]

.



#10

No he did not do anything that was at the level to be fired per the constitution but I do think he was a jerk and should have resigned.

Unlike some who believe as I do I for one do not look at Bill Clinton as a great president. He always gets credit for how great the economy, when really it was Old Bush tax increase (the same tax increase Obama wants to put back in place) and Y2K and the internet that made the economy. Along with the fact he did not get us into a war. What is really bad is we would not have been in Iraq at all had not Old Bush sent April Glaspie to Saddam Hussein to tell him (the US has no mutual defense pact with Kuwait). she did not only tell him this once more than once. Dick Cheney was right in the middle of this and even then if people did not tell him what he wanted to here he just changed it to fit the way he wanted it.
I for one do not like Saddam Hussien but when I look at all the people who have died and all our money spent for a war that would not have happen had Old Bush just said the words (If you go into Kuwait we will go to war with you to Saddam.)
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a073190kellynotreaty

Another one of these was the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that got us into the Vietnam war big time when it was based on things that were not true.


#11

I see. You all can crucify O’Reilly but give Clinton a pass for sexually taking advantage of a girl half his age entrusted to him? In most any corporation in the USA what Clinton did would be considered sexual harassment and he would have been fired. If Monica Lewinsky was your daughter then your opinions might be different. It is time people stopped making excuses for the conduct of a serial sexual predator.

You all don’t know what exactly was behind the O’Reilly settlement but it seems some of you are willing to jump to conclusions anyway. Maybe O’Reilly would rather settle than be drug through the mud by ambulance chasing attorneys, lying ex employees and an extremely liberally biased media. But then I guess this type of frivolous, untrue accusations only happens to Democrats and liberals? Anyone care to discuss former Gov. Spitzer? He seems to be the latest Democrat to escape prosecution for lack of control over his zipper. Ironic too in that he sent people to jail for the same violations of the law he admits to performing. I guess he really is above the law.


#12

[QUOTE=UTR;2167224]I see. You all can crucify O’Reilly but give Clinton a pass for taking advantage of a girl half his age entrusted to him? [/QUOTE]They’re both amoral sleazebags…Clinton did get impeached, unlike Nixon… [QUOTE=UTR;2167224] It is time people stopped making excuses for the conduct of a serial sexual predator.[/QUOTE]Haven’t you figured it out yet that justice is an illusion?

[QUOTE=UTR;2167224] Anyone care to discuss former Gov. Spitzer? He seems to be the latest Democrat to escape prosecution for lack of control over his zipper. Ironic too in that he sent people to jail for the same violations of the law he admits to performing. I guess he really is above the law.[/QUOTE]
Anybody in a position of power, via having money or an elected official, is above the law…Unfortunate but a fact of life…


#13

[QUOTE=UTR;2167224]I see. You all can crucify O’Reilly but give Clinton a pass for sexually taking advantage of a girl half his age entrusted to him? In most any corporation in the USA what Clinton did would be considered sexual harassment and he would have been fired. If Monica Lewinsky was your daughter then your opinions might be different. It is time people stopped making excuses for the conduct of a serial sexual predator.

You all don’t know what exactly was behind the O’Reilly settlement but it seems some of you are willing to jump to conclusions anyway. Maybe O’Reilly would rather settle than be drug through the mud by ambulance chasing attorneys, lying ex employees and an extremely liberally biased media. But then I guess this type of frivolous, untrue accusations only happens to Democrats and liberals? Anyone care to discuss former Gov. Spitzer? He seems to be the latest Democrat to escape prosecution for lack of control over his zipper. Ironic too in that he sent people to jail for the same violations of the law he admits to performing. I guess he really is above the law.[/QUOTE] He did do the right thing and step down Oreilly did not he put it out that it was all her.

No if she was my daughter ant the age this lady was then I would say it was her fault as much as his. As I stated he was a jerk and what he did was wrong and he should have stepped down, but it was not a impeachable thing. Gov. Spitzer did break the law and should have had to stand trial for what he did.


#14

GUY’S
The reason it was settled with the woman so
fast,was because this was the woman.[AND HE INTERVIEWED HER TOO!]
Now let’s stay on the subject and move on![hmm! where have I heard
that before?]
ZAP.:bigsmile::bigsmile:


#15

On subject it been off that since the fourth post.


#16

pipemanid, you’re right about politicians being above the law. They have come to see themselves as an elite political class that deserve preferential treatment. Why we let them get away with it is beyond me.

[QUOTE=samlar;2167239]He did do the right thing and step down Oreilly did not he put it out that it was all her.[/QUOTE]

If you are referring to Spitzer he was forced out and used his resignation to get out of prosecution. Their was no “right thing” in what he did. It was a self serving act and had nothing to do with being the right decision.

[QUOTE=samlar;2167239]No if she was my daughter ant the age this lady was then I would say it was her fault as much as his. As I stated he was a jerk and what he did was wrong and he should have stepped down, but it was not a impeachable thing. Gov. Spitzer did break the law and should have had to stand trial for what he did.[/QUOTE]

Lewinsky was an unpaid intern sent to the White House to learn about government while performing meaningful work. What do you think many girls would do if the President wanted them to perform sexual acts on them? Can you imagine the influence a president has over a lowly intern? Who is supposed to be the responsible person in this situation? Clinton is a sexual predator and has used his political power to get sex in any way he could. He did this for decades and some even accuse him of outright rape. His behavior goes far beyond the “jerk” level and into the criminal. I won’t even get into the trampling of the Constitution he committed even though he took an oath to defend it. Even while he was elected Governor of Arkansas he had to dodge sexual accusations and it continued through his final term as president. How can so many women be liars especially when many have substantial corroborating evident and circumstances to back up their claims? Why didn’t Truman, Eisenhower, Reagan, Carter, Bush I & II have these kind of accusations? Heck, even womanizers like Kennedy and Johnson didn’t have as much trouble. What was so special about Bill Clinton to get such accusations and in such quantity? Maybe there was more truth to them than we would want to believe.

[QUOTE=samlar;2167243]On subject it been off that since the fourth post.[/QUOTE]

It has been on topic through this post, IMO. I’m just showing the political bias that many have against O’Reilly by letting you defend Bill Clinton for his known behavior in sexually harassing his employees and then wanting O’Reilly crucified for behavior that wasn’t proven and only alleged. When person political bias replaces consistently applied logic then justification for a statement of condemnation loses its potency and validity.


#17

She was 23 and she worked at the White House as an unpaid summer intern starting in July 1995, moving to a paid position there in December 1995
The thing wit Bill happen between November and December of 1995 so she was paid most of that time. At 23 she was not some young girl but a woman. As for as it being Criminal it could have been if she worked for him but that was never brought up. What really bothered me was that ne did not trample on the constitution but as Republicans stated he trampled on the office of the president of the United States. I agree with that and that is why I say he was a jerk which might not be strong enough and also why I say he should have quit and left the offce.


#18

UTR: I think you’re letting personal beliefs and political bias enter into your thoughts regarding the Clinton and Lewinsky affair a bit too much.

Of course Clinton abused his power and is a jerk, but to think that Lewinsky was some innocent child is simply asinine. You’re making assumptions that it was Clinton who did all of the manipulating, while it’s quite possible that she was trying to set herself up for a better job – all the while being able to say she had a fling with the president.

But I digress, as you’ve already hijacked the thread enough…


#19

[QUOTE=Randomus;2167257]UTR: I think you’re letting personal beliefs and political bias enter into your thoughts regarding the Clinton and Lewinsky affair a bit too much.[/QUOTE]

There is much to the Lewinsky situation that has been proven true. There is no doubt about what transpired. His DNA was on the blue dress. He took sexual advantage of a subordinate and this was far from the first time he did such a thing.

[QUOTE=Randomus;2167257]Of course Clinton abused his power and is a jerk, but to think that Lewinsky was some innocent child is simply asinine. You’re making assumptions that it was Clinton who did all of the manipulating, while it’s quite possible that she was trying to set herself up for a better job – all the while being able to say she had a fling with the president.[/QUOTE]

Clinton has preyed on subordinate women for decades and he was duped by a girl in her early twenties? This girl thought they were going to be man and wife one day. Where did she get that idea? Do you really think blaming Lewinsky for any of this is a defense of Clinton? If Clinton can be manipulated by an intern like you say then what the hell could a 20 year old drop dead gorgeous Russian spy get him to do? Is this the kind of person you would want with his finger on the nuclear button or making decisions affecting the planet?

[QUOTE=Randomus;2167257]But I digress, as you’ve already hijacked the thread enough…[/QUOTE]

Clinton’s personal behavior is on topic because when someone defends his actions but believe O’Reilly should be nailed to the cross for the sexual accusations made against him shows an inconsistent application of their logic against O’Reilly. The trouble is that the Clinton defenders are losing sight of this connection and crying “off topic” as a defense, or diversion, of their inconsistent application of logic toward the two incidents. I am using the old tactic of “giving a person enough rope so they will hang themselves” in that taking the bait and defending Clinton’s sexual misconduct only serves to undermine the argument they are using against O’Reilly. You can’t condone that O’Reilly needs to lose his job (over unproven accusation no less) and say Clinton keeping his was acceptable and keep the moral, or logical, high ground.


#20

I do not know who you mean as defending Clinton I sure am not as stated but this post was about Oreilly not Clinton