Bill O'Reilly Rant.....grrrr!

[Enlighten Me]

He just fed right-wing rednecks exactly what they want to hear......the 10 Commandment issue is not about granite----it's about secularists who want no moral boundaries or a "God" to fear in order to refrain from immoral behavior. He expressed the vehement contempt and blame that the religious feel for the non-religious here in the U.S. All that is good, ethical, and righteous in our country is to be associated with religion, while that which is evil, and immoral is the result of "secularism". It's scary to hear him speak, and it's scarier to know how well-received his message is by the masses.... :banghead:

[HappyFunBall]

i saw it...good god what an idiot. he doesn't realize how insulting he is to people like us. what a hypocrite.

[RufusAtticus]

"Fair and balanced" my ass.

[Raydo97]

I was really looking forward to his show tonight, but I didn't get to see it because a lightning storm knocked out my cable.

It's a shame he took this approach. I know he tends to lean to the right, but I HAVE heard some Christians speak about how the government should stay out of religion all together because it's a personal issue. Knowing the kind of influence he has, I was hoping O'Reilly would hold this view.

I am SICK of morality being tied to religious beliefs. I fail to see how a person who believes in a book that teaches that murder and rape are OK as long as they're committed by "chosen people" and in accordance with "God's will" is morally superior to anyone.

A book that portrays "God" as a racist who instructs his followers to cut off the heads of his enemies and rape the women of conquered lands can hardly be considered as a useful moral guide by any reasonable person. Clearly, these kinds of teachings make the human condition MUCH WORSE. We would all be better off if that miserable book had never been written.

[Jet Grind]

Bill O'Riely has taken a turn for the worst. When he started out, he really did present a fair and balanced scope of things. Now I guess he just find telling conservative whack jobs what they want to hear is profitable. It's no doubt partly because conservative commentary has recently become a hot commodity in the media (which can no doubt be attributed to the events on 9/11). Not to worry, fads like this have come and gone.

[JERDOG]

He actulaty said that secularist don't believe in good or evil today on his pathetic radio show.

Neal Boortz is the only national radio guy that is taking our side here.

[HappyFunBall]

he's nothing more than a populist. i've pretty much stopped watching fox news, the whole station is so conservative. ugh.

[Raydo97]

What is Bortz saying?

[Jet Grind]

Originally posted by JERDOG
Neal Boortz is the only national radio guy that is taking our side here.

Boortz also took our side on Pledge of Allegiance issue and supported the Supreme Court when it was striking down to Texas sodomy law.

The amount of times I find myself agreeing with the man is frightening (and hey, he hates O'Riely too :D)

[JERDOG]

Boortz is saying what we are saying pretty much. Just give the guy a listen. He said today he makes it a point to piss off religious right zellots everyday..lol.. And he is the guy Bill pointed his finger at and called him a VICIOUS SON OF A BITCH. lol.

http://boortz.com/nuze/200308/08262003.html

Boortz is the perfect Christian IMO. He keeps his religion to himself.

[Fenton Mulley]

I don't know if anyone else saw O'Reilly yesterday but he actually said that theres no reason why the monument can't stay right where it is/was since the 10c`s don't belong to any specific religion.

I had to turn the channel shortly after that before I went out of my fucking mind.:eek:

[gsx1138]

Fenton, I was listening to his radio show about 6 months ago (because I didn't recognize his voice) and he actually asked a guest, "I think you're wrong. What religion are the 10 commandments promoting?" My Pepsi almost came out my nose. I couldn't believe the amount of stupidity in that question.


Question. Why is there a persistent belief that our laws are based off of the 10 commandments? I count only 3 out of 10 that resemble anything in our legal system.

[Shadowy Man]

Originally posted by gsx1138
"I think you're wrong. What religion are the 10 commandments promoting?"

Buddhism, right?

Oh, that was the eightfold path, sorry.

Same difference, we all worship the same god anyway, right?

:rolleyes:

[Excidius]

Originally posted by gsx1138
Question. Why is there a persistent belief that our laws are based off of the 10 commandments? I count only 3 out of 10 that resemble anything in our legal system. Exactly, yet I hear very few people in the media point that out. Thou shalt not kill, steal or lie are the only 3 commandments that are law, and even then, they have exceptions in American law that are not granted in Mosaic law (for instance, it is not criminal to kill in self-defense, nor is it criminal to lie while not under oath or binding agreement or any other situation in which no harm comes from the lie).

O'Reilly doesn't even have the balls to concede that the Commandments demanding you to worship God (and only that particular God) are in and of themselves violations of the First Amendment.

[Majestyk]

Originally posted by Enlightened Lady
it's about secularists who want no moral boundaries or a "God" to fear in order to refrain from immoral behavior. He expressed the vehement contempt and blame that the religious feel for the non-religious here in the U.S. All that is good, ethical, and righteous in our country is to be associated with religion, while that which is evil, and immoral is the result of "secularism". And this is the kind of diatribe and contempt for the first amendment that necessitates the existence of the second.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

I am wondering if any national organization is going to make any protest of Mr. O'Reilly's comments.

It amounts to a group slander no different than saying that all Muslems are terrorists, or all Jews greedy co-conspirators in a plot to rob the rest of us of our hard earned money.

It is the type of comment that could get a person fired.

If only the victims are willing to make the case.

[The Other Michael]

Hello Excidius,

This post (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1142732#post1142732) has a link to an SF Chronicle article that discusses the "which 10C?" question, which is certainly a big step in the right direction.

cheers,
Michael

[CoffeeFiend]

Well, I woke up this morning at 5 o'clock to see what the O'Reilly fuss is all about. Yes, I get Fox news here on calbe, and I would say it's fair and balanced... sometimes, but not very often ;)

Anyway, if I was a secular activist in the US I would actually take his comments as compliments. The fact that he basicly had set up scary strawmen (evil secularists will let criminals off easy and let potheads blow smoke in the faces of your children :rolleyes: ect.) instead of refuting any of the arguments presented by people(Christians and non-Christians alike) who support the removal of the monument shows that whoever he is trying to appeal to must be really afraid and upset. If I am not mistaken... he even said powerful secular forces :D

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by CoffeeFiend
Anyway, if I was a secular activist in the US I would actually take his comments as compliments.

Sorry, but I take this to be quite equivalent to saying that Hitler complimented the Jews by crediting them with the power to be responsible for all that was wrong in Germany prior to his rise to power.

[Postcard73]

Originally posted by HappyFunBall
i saw it...good god what an idiot. he doesn't realize how insulting he is to people like us. what a hypocrite.
I would say he fully realizes how insulting he is...

Really, I think the guy provides just as much substance in his reporting as Jerry Springer does. He brings in people to interview, asks them loaded questions, and then shouts them down the second they begin to make sense. On FoxNews, he's a "respected" journalist; in a true debate forum where he had to give the other person equal time to speak, he would be little more than a horse's ass...

[CoffeeFiend]

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe
Sorry, but I take this to be quite equivalent to saying that Hitler complimented the Jews by crediting them with the power to be responsible for all that was wrong in Germany prior to his rise to power.

Yes I see your point. But OTOH it's really sad that he resorts to such demagogy in order to gain popularity and further the agenda he supports. It shows that somebody is really ratteling their cages. Although I think(hope) that a considerable amount of people see through the fallacy of scapegoating a very varied group of people such as atheists.

[The Other Michael]

I think(fear) that an even greater amount of people fail to see through the fallacy of scapegoating a very varied group of people such as atheists.

Scapegoats are just so convenient.

cheers,
Michael

[CoffeeFiend]

One point more.

The fact that he has high ratings doesn't tell anything about how well recived he is by the viewers.

[Alonzo Fyfe]

Originally posted by CoffeeFiend
Yes I see your point. But OTOH it's really sad that he resorts to such demagogy in order to gain popularity and further the agenda he supports. It shows that somebody is really ratteling their cages. Although I think(hope) that a considerable amount of people see through the fallacy of scapegoating a very varied group of people such as atheists.

I view it as not only sad, but immoral. He has the gall to claim a moral superiority -- based on religion -- when his very defense of religion is filled with lies and bigotry that betray a very deep rooted immorality -- based on religion.

But this immorality, on a national news channel, to national applause, does not make me feel proud. It makes me very much afraid. When people can say these types of things on national television without being challenged or even questioned, history gives us clear lessons as to how far this type of hate mongering can go.

Add this to the death threats that the plaintiff in this case received -- over 70 in one day left on her answering machine at home. Her car and her home were both vandalized.

How far away is this from burning crosses in the yard, to being chained up behind a pickup truck and towed down a country road, to our children coming home bruised and bloodied?

I see a situation that history tells me has a very real potential to getting out of hand very quickly. National broadcasters getting on national news channels and saying, "Your group is responsible for all the ills that this country faces," without protest and to great applause, is not something to be proud of. It is something to worry about.

[CoffeeFiend]

Originally posted by The Other Michael
I think(fear) that an even greater amount of people fail to see through the fallacy of scapegoating a very varied group of people such as atheists.

Scapegoats are just so convenient.

cheers,
Michael

Hmm, do you think I have too high excpectations when it comes to the masses ?

[PopeInTheWoods]

Originally posted by CoffeeFiend
Hmm, do you think I have too high excpectations when it comes to the masses ?
Let's put it this way: No one has ever gone bankrupt by underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

Or another way: Almost half of the American public is of below average intelligence.

Andy

[CoffeeFiend]

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe
I view it as not only sad, but immoral. He has the gall to claim a moral superiority -- based on religion -- when his very defense of religion is filled with lies and bigotry that betray a very deep rooted immorality -- based on religion.

But this immorality, on a national news channel, to national applause, does not make me feel proud. It makes me very much afraid. When people can say these types of things on national television without being challenged or even questioned, history gives us clear lessons as to how far this type of hate mongering can go.

Add this to the death threats that the plaintiff in this case received -- over 70 in one day left on her answering machine at home. Her car and her home were both vandalized.

How far away is this from burning crosses in the yard, to being chained up behind a pickup truck and towed down a country road, to our children coming home bruised and bloodied?

I see a situation that history tells me has a very real potential to getting out of hand very quickly. National broadcasters getting on national news channels and saying, "Your group is responsible for all the ills that this country faces," without protest and to great applause, is not something to be proud of. It is something to worry about.

I didn't know things were getting so out of hand. The situation in the US viewed through various media outlets gives the impression that both the active secularists and the fundies are dead scared of eachother and the people in between tend to be more chilled. I also have gotten the impression that violence insired by religious fanatism was quite rare (for such a large country). Care to clearify it from your POV ?

[Daggah]

Originally posted by CoffeeFiend
Hmm, do you think I have too high excpectations when it comes to the masses ?

Look at how quickly they went along with Hitler in Germany.

[Majestyk]

Originally posted by CoffeeFiend
I didn't know things were getting so out of hand. The situation in the US viewed through various media outlets gives the impression that both the active secularists and the fundies are dead scared of eachother and the people in between tend to be more chilled. I also have gotten the impression that violence insired by religious fanatism was quite rare (for such a large country). Care to clearify it from your POV ? Just off the top of my head, there were the anti-abortion terrorists (and I use that term intentionally).

Then there are the recurring incidents of anti-homosexual violence.

And of course, the racial violence that was almost institutionalized in some segments of the country.

What all these have in common is the nature of humanity to tribalism or kin identification. The result of which is to have a section of the population identified as being outside the tribe and not classified as kin. Such persons are not recognized as fully human, in the sense that whatever mechanism prevents us from brutalizing our kin is not applied.

So, when someone begins to tell 90% of the people that all their problems are caused by the remaining 10%, who are not like them then, you have potential for a major conflict.

Hence, my earlier noting the Second Amendment. Kin or not it is also a human tendency to prey on the weak.

[Roller]

Originally posted by The Other Michael
Hello Excidius,

This post (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1142732#post1142732) has a link to an SF Chronicle article that discusses the "which 10C?" question, which is certainly a big step in the right direction.

cheers,
Michael

It seems to me that the author forgot to mention another set of commandments. The ones from Exodus 34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=NIV&passage=exodus+34).

[Excidius]

It seems to me that the author forgot to mention another set of commandments. The ones from Exodus 34.Ah yes, those commandments. How could we forget how important it is to avoid boiling baby goats in their mother's milk? Surely that's a much greater offense and moral injustice than rape, which is condemned by no commandment.

Ask yourself this: have you ever seen anyone boiling baby goats in their mother's milk, anywhere? If you honestly answered no, then you have no one but Moses to thank!

[xorbie]

Actually, I agree with Bill O'Reily rarely, but on occasion he will say something mildly intelligent. For instance, he is pro legalization of marijuana. What I find so upsetting are the amount of people that find him too liberal :eek: :eek:

[Thomas Ash]

Originally posted by Majestyk
And this is the kind of diatribe and contempt for the first amendment that necessitates the existence of the second.

:D

[Oresta]

Majestyk;
And of course, the racial violence that was almost institutionalized in some segments of the country.

Almost?:confused: What greater violence the institutionalized racism of those Jim Crow laws and community ethos of whites that segregated some citizens from adequate housing, education, health care, economic opportunity, and even cemetary space and drinking fountains? The crippling effect is still here.

[openeyes]

My 16 yo was reading Franken's "Liars" book and switched on Fox to see if was as bad as Franken was saying.

We happened to catch O'Reilly talking about the 10 commandments and bad, bad secularism. Funny how both his guests were basically on his side for starters, and then his questions were so loaded and leading anyway, that when they'd try to perhaps rephrase them, O'Reilly would interrupt and be off to something else before they could get their own thoughts across.

He did have to brag about how he had the #1 prime time talk show, although he seemed angry and irritated (it was the day after Franken was on Letterman.)

It's as bad as Franken says, if not worse. :(