This blog is old. You don't want to read an old blog, do you?

If you are not redirected to the fancy new blog in about 6 seconds visit
and update your bookmarks.

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Fun with Bill

Bill O'Reilly is a blowhard. He knows he's in the entertainment business, and, like every other entertainer out there he gets by on his act and personality. He is not a journalist, and this has never been more evident than in the following clip where he gets into an on-air tiffle with one of Fox's own and tries to convince her, and everyone in the audience, that the First Amendment is irrelevant. What journalist would take this ridiculous position? He also fails miserably and his interlocutor cannot help but make a fool of him, just by virtue of explaining the way the law, and Constitution, work.

Nice job.

from Boing Boing


Glennia said...

If Bill O'Reilly got ahold of a stolen email from Obama saying "I am a Muslim" he would change his tune really quickly.

Always Home and Uncool said...

O'Reilly is also against sexual harassment ... unless he's the one committing it, of course.

Redneck Mommy said...

Thanks for getting my blood pressure up.

O'Reilly annoys me on so many levels.


Might as well go get dressed now. Thanks for that at the very least.

Anonymous said...

I love seeing O'Reilly get the smack down. Megyn Kelly's face is priceless toward the end of the clip.

Thanks for posting that!

ms. changes pants while driving said...

that's awesome. bill is a menace.

Jenni said...

Oh, god, he is so stupid. In fact, I think my I.Q. just went down by listening to him talk for five minutes.

Swirl Girl said...

what a crock of crud -

Goldfish said...

Silly Megyn, facts aren't relevant to his argument. Nor is logic. We specifically got a dish network package that does not include Fox News, just because of this ridiculous man. Now I have to be done, because I've broken my vow to even acknowledge him.

The Microblogologist said...

He has a point though, if someone hacked into my account and gave my personal information to someone else who published it I would be extremely upset and want them to be required to take it down at the very least. If they knew the information was obtained illegally then I think they should be charged not just the hacker.

While it might not be against the law it should be, that is basically what he was saying. He wasn't speaking out against free speech, he was speaking out against the fact that people can print stolen private correspondences and get away with it. Neither was able to make their point well because they both kept interrupting each other trying to make their points. THAT is what annoys me most about that and other political talk shows, they are just contests in who can interrupt the best and not really discussions.

Either way there is a line between free speech and the right to privacy and I don't care if it is the republican VP candidate or the democrat presidential candidate, wrong is wrong. If it is OK to do it to her then there is nothing stopping someone from doing it to him. I can't wait for 11/5 and all this insanity will be somewhat behind us, election season sucks!

BabyShrink said...

I love it how the Fox guys are always able to divert us from the REAL issues -- the fact that a governor of a State is doing State business over her PERSONAL email, in order to avoid having a public record of State business.

Yeah, guys, let's just privatize everything! (It sure has worked with the banking and financial industries, hasn't it?)

Don't get me started, BPD! (I think I need to drink heavily until this election is over....)

Backpacking Dad said...

glennia: damn straight.

always home and uncool: I'm going to need to hear some evidence of that. Like a recording or something.

redneck mommy: You're welcome. Put some clothes on you nudist.

blissfullycaffeinated: I know; she clearly can't believe what's going on.

ms changes pants while driving: word.

jenni: mine too.

swirl girl: :}

the microbiologist: well, of course you'd be upset. But so would the CEO whose e-mail reveals a scam to bilk investors. But if that gets leaked to the press even though whoever committed the theft is criminally responsible we protect the press who informs the public because without a protected press we are victims of corrupt government. Like a governor who uses private e-mail for government business so she doesn't leave a public trail. This is exactly the point of having a free press. It is a supremely good example of what the Founding Fathers had in mind. As such, for O'Reilly to call for criminal charges is for him to demonstrate a reprehensible disrespect for basic Constitutional interpretation. The only controversial issue here is whether or not these websites constitute "the press", and the courts so far have said that they do.

babyshrink: Damn. Straight.