Bill O’Reilly : STFU!
by Jason at 6:06 am on April 15th, 2004 in General, STFU!
By now, some of you have heard about the fledgling Air America radio network�an attempt to provide a liberal alternative to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity and the rest of the established right-wing broadcasters. It has received a decent amount amount of press coverage, probably because of the novelty factor and the network’s David-versus-Goliath longshot status. But even a little fleeting coverage is apparently too much for Fox blowhard Bill “No Spin Zone” O’Reilly.
“Never in the history of the American press has one tiny enterprise gotten so much free publicity. The reason, of course, is that the elites want liberal bomb throwers to embarrass and defame people with whom they disagree. It’s like hiring hit men and women.”
Wow, the irony is layers deep on this one. First of all, O’Reilly’s television program is on Fox News, which is about as balanced as Dubya on a Segway scooter. Secondly, O’Reilly’s radio show is syndicated to 405 stations nationwide, while Air America is heard on a whopping six stations. Thirdly, about 90% of political talk radio is about embarrassing and defaming those who disagree…and Bill, does the term “pot calling the kettle black” mean anything to you?
It’s hard to know if O’Reilly is actually serious about this quote, or if it is just another manifestation of his obsessive Al Franken hatred bubbling to the surface. Either way, O’Reilly earns the coveted “World’s Smallest Violin” award for this week. Of course, he’ll probably whine that Franken got one in a nicer color.
Need more? This pretty much says it all.
Ellogoods wrote:
While I think that there is a lot to NOT like on AirAmerica, there are things on their to love so I was a listener. Last night I came to find that the station I listened to is once again a Spanish radio station (wtf???)- that really bummed me out. I guess in this growing period they lost a station, so now I have to resort to streaming the station off of their website.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 7:08 am ¶
jen wrote:
regarding maddox’s review… all of this stuff would be much more effective without calling him a “blubbering vagina” and the like… it’s equally as effective as calling him a “fat homo”. nice to see that calling someone any reference to womens’ genitalia or “feminine products” is still an acceptable way to say that someone is a terrible human being, because we all know that vaginas are smelly and evil.
i expect more from you guys.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 7:27 am ¶
tom wrote:
so does calling someone a “cocksucker” degrade all those women who loyally give their husbands blowjobs?
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 8:48 am ¶
jen wrote:
how often do men call women cocksuckers, smarts? rarely. it’s an insult men call other men, implying homosexuality, which (as i referenced above) is on par with the “blubbering vagina” insult, and ridiculously ineffective. i mean, we all know being a gay man is just as bad as being a woman, or any other minority, really.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 10:28 am ¶
rob wrote:
see whaty vitriol o’liely brings out in all of us? come on everyone, group hug.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 11:53 am ¶
tom wrote:
um, ive participated in calling people of every race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, and gender “cocksuckers”. the point is that its literal meaning is most definitely separated from its meaning as a rip. this goes for almost anything you can call someone.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 11:57 am ¶
jen wrote:
give me a break. women don’t go around calling each other (or men, or anyone) clitsuckers, because lesbianism is fashionable, and acceptable.
i could go on, but bottom line, there are more offensive words derived from derogatorily calling a man a woman, or homosexual. period. and just because you use it on anyone (or everyone) does not make it acceptable.
do you freely call white people the n-word? i didn’t think so.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 12:44 pm ¶
Jason (1115) wrote:
Ok, this is getting ridiculous. If anyone has a problem with Maddox’s language, I suggest that you complain to him about it. After all, he wrote it. And considering the verbal smackdown that he gives O’reilly in the piece, I have no reservations whatsoever about linking to it.
Yes, when you call someone a “pussy” (which is pretty much what Maddox did, in a more descriptive form) it implies that the person is weak and a crybaby. But if you use the exact gender opposite and call someone a “dick”, it implies that the person a sanctimonious blowhard who delights in taking advantage of other people. Neither is good from a PC perspective, but I challenge anyone to come forward and say that they have never used either of these terms.
One last thought: the beauty of internet blogs/journals is that you can get a wide range of opinions without them being filtered through someone else’s ideas of acceptability. And even if certain authors make you angry because if their insensitivity or choice of words, it’s what makes this whole thing work. I dread the day that we present only the news/links that are homogenized and pretty, because that will be the day that we are no better than the soulless media drones we make fun of.
Posted 15 Apr 2004 at 1:41 pm ¶
tom wrote:
amen, jason.
Posted 16 Apr 2004 at 8:29 am ¶
Coolfer wrote:
I noticed you didn’t include O’Reilly in the list of established right wing broadcasters. He leans right on most issues, but he is way, way more neutral that Franken, who is completely precictable in what comes out of his mouth. His slant can be seen a mile away. At least O’Reilly has recently become very critical of Bush and his cabinet. That’s hardly a partisan thing to do. Can you imagine someone like Franken saying anything nice about Bush, even if only to compliment his golf swing? No.
Sean Hannity is the guy at Fox who is biased, and he probably wouldn’t deny it. Every time I turn on that show he’s saying to a Democratic guest, “Just answer me yes or no: Is Iraq better off without Saddam Hussain?” Yeah, Sean, if things were just that simple.
Posted 23 Apr 2004 at 3:38 pm ¶
matt wrote:
Fair point about Franken, but we don’t carry any water for him either. In fact, I’ve called for a duel between O’Reilly and Franken, hoping neither one missed.
They are both buffoons. The only reason that O’Reilly is saying negative things about the administration is because he was so sure that they were right before the Iraq war, that he went overboard flaking for them. He laid (what there is of) his credibility on the line and got burned. Badly.
Hannity is a clown.
Posted 23 Apr 2004 at 5:06 pm ¶