Can someone explain Bill O'Reilly to me? :facepalm:

[Levant]

I just don't get it.  I'd rather watch Keith Olbermann.  At least Keith admitted he was a liberal.  O'Reilly pretends to be a mix of conservative and "fair and balanced".  He's neither.  He and a guest just did an episode of raking Senator Cruz over the coals and throwing in at least one dig on Rand Paul.

This guy is why I never watch Fox; I came in from work and my wife had it on his show.

How in the world is this joker's show the #1 talk show on the news networks?

[Perd Hapley]

He's smarter and more reasonable than you. That is why you are a conservative ideologue, and he is a wise and thoughtful moderate.

[AZRedhawk44]

He's a busybody bully, a shill for whatever authoritarian counter-cause is rallying to undo or seize the authoritarian status quo, and has never taken the individualist's side on any issue.  A disgusting man. 

If government is a quest for the One Ring, he is Gollum.

[Levant]

He's a busybody bully, a shill for whatever authoritarian counter-cause is rallying to undo or seize the authoritarian status quo, and has never taken the individualist's side on any issue.  A disgusting man. 

If government is a quest for the One Ring, he is Gollum.

Damn, I wish this forum had the thanks feature... You'd get one...

Oh wait.. It does have a thanks feature.... Thanks!

[Waitone]

He's led around by his paycheck.  Michael Savage predict he'd go squishy as soon as news broke that a Saudi owned 19% of FOX stock.  Took less than a week before O'Reilly flipped.

[Monkeyleg]

O'Reilley is like a lot of people. His views are based upon what's best for him. He wasn't a 2A supporter because he wasn't into guns. I think he became one when he saw it would help his career.

It's sad to see someone with no core convictions, whose only platform is what suits him best and to hell with the rest of the world.

[TommyGunn]

O'Reilley is like a lot of people. His views are based upon what's best for him. He wasn't a 2A supporter because he wasn't into guns. I think he became one when he saw it would help his career.

It's sad to see someone with no core convictions, whose only platform is what suits him best and to hell with the rest of the world.

He became a 2A supporter when he saw what happened in Nawlins after Katrina.
If you think he has no convictions then you don't know him that well.

I just don't get it.  I'd rather watch Keith Olbermann.  At least Keith admitted he was a liberal.  O'Reilly pretends to be a mix of conservative and "fair and balanced".  He's neither.  He and a guest just did an episode of raking Senator Cruz over the coals and throwing in at least one dig on Rand Paul.

This guy is why I never watch Fox; I came in from work and my wife had it on his show.

How in the world is this joker's show the #1 talk show on the news networks?

You don't get it either.  O'Reilly isn't a liberal.  He isn't a conservative.  He isn't registered as a democrat or republican but independent.
He self-identifies as a "traditionalist."
He looks to politicians and analizes them from the point of view of their problems-solving ability, not their ideology.  If you suffer under the delusion of him being either a conservative or a republican you will write posts like Levant's.

He's a busybody bully, a shill for whatever authoritarian counter-cause is rallying to undo or seize the authoritarian status quo, and has never taken the individualist's side on any issue.  A disgusting man. 

If government is a quest for the One Ring, he is Gollum.

Are you sure you're not watching "The Hitler Channel?"

He's smarter and more reasonable than you. That is why you are a conservative ideologue, and he is a wise and thoughtful moderate.

Well, he's not a "moderate" but Fistful has managed the best description here yet.

He's led around by his paycheck.  Michael Savage predict he'd go squishy as soon as news broke that a Saudi owned 19% of FOX stock.  Took less than a week before O'Reilly flipped.

"Squishy?"    Michael Savage is one of the most self-absorbed conservatives that has ever been on the radio.  Somewhere I heard he has a "Mensa" card?   Having a high IQ doesn't mean you're palatable or particularly world-wise I guess.  But you can think of ever-so-clever insults easily.

[rcnixon]

Bill O'Reilly is an entertainer, His views are beholden to whomever is selling the most soap; he is a squishy liberal.

Russ

[Jamisjockey]

He's a *expletive deleted*che.

http://youtu.be/Ob94_pw9E8Q

[charby]

Bill O'Reilly is an entertainer, His views are beholden to whomever is selling the most soap; he is a squishy liberal.

Russ

That is how I see it, he is a pundit that acts according to what will sell advertisement space during his show. If he lost his audience he would be done. No different then the rest of the "news" show pundits on any of the cable networks.

[Sergeant Bob]

He's a *expletive deleted*.

http://youtu.be/Ob94_pw9E8Q

Well, he certainly knows how to "adapt" to the latest government intrusions to suit his own narrative.

He's a tool.

[Perd Hapley]

He looks to politicians and analizes them from the point of view of their problems-solving ability, not their ideology....

Well, he's not a "moderate" but Fistful has managed the best description here yet.

Thank you. I see my sarcasm was not entirely lost on you, just mostly. "Ideological" is another way of saying "principled." O'Reilly, as you and I have both described him, sees the ends as more important than the means. Ideology (hewing to notions of right and wrong) must be sacrificed when it gets in the way, and the principled be derided as "too rigid," "old-fashioned," or currently, "ideologues." It does not help that O'Reilly seems to have a need to feel he is smarter than other people; in this case the ideologues.

[Balog]

If you think you have any idea about the actual inner motivations and beliefs of any pundit from watching their show you're in error. They're actors playing a part.

[TommyGunn]

Thank you. I see my sarcasm was not entirely lost on you, just mostly. "Ideological" is another way of saying "principled." O'Reilly, as you and I have both described him, sees the ends as more important than the means. Ideology (hewing to notions of right and wrong) must be sacrificed when it gets in the way, and the principled be derided as "too rigid," "old-fashioned," or currently, "ideologues." It does not help that O'Reilly seems to have a need to feel he is smarter than other people; in this case the ideologues.

We need a sarcasm smilie.
I never thought of O'Reilly as perfect -- often enough I've refered to him as "O'Really" in posts, usually on other forums.

If you think you have any idea about the actual inner motivations and beliefs of any pundit from watching their show you're in error. They're actors playing a part.

Wow.  You are HARSH.  In the case of O'Reilly I think you're 3% right and 97% wrong.

Bill O'Reilly is an entertainer, His views are beholden to whomever is selling the most soap; he is a squishy liberal.

Russ

I will concede he is an entertainer but the rest is antipathetic twaddle.

[Monkeyleg]

He became a 2A supporter when he saw what happened in Nawlins after Katrina.
If you think he has no convictions then you don't know him that well.

I haven't watched broadcast or cable TV in years, so I'm just going on my impressions of him from the past. If he had a come to Jesus moment on the 2A, that's good. At the time I was watching, it seemed that his convictions were based upon his situation. Maybe I was wrong, or maybe things have changed.

[TommyGunn]

He's a *expletive deleted*.

http://youtu.be/Ob94_pw9E8Q

"BILL O'REILLY SHOWS MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ON NSA SURVEILLANCE."

Wow.  You take a bunch of  really badly captioned twaddle from an anti-O'Reilly site and think THAT is to be taken seriously?
Taking a closer look at those excerpts is it not possible to believe O'Reilly actually does support properly conducted surveillance against terrorists while simultaneously  showing concern over the possibility of the intelligence agencies possibly using them improperly against innocent Americans?  I see no hypocrisy there; I also want to "spy" on the nation's enemies and not on innocent Americans?
The dweeb hosting in that video is clearly incapable of differentiating between the two extremes, instead he deliberatly conflates them so he can attack O'Reilly as a "hypocrite."
He has a small, small mind.

I haven't watched broadcast or cable TV in years, so I'm just going on my impressions of him from the past. If he had a come to Jesus moment on the 2A, that's good. At the time I was watching, it seemed that his convictions were based upon his situation. Maybe I was wrong, or maybe things have changed.

He believes that we do have the right to keep and bear arms for our own protection, and most recently even stated he believes the 2A was intended to help protect against a tyranny, should it arise.
What O'Reilly does NOT ..."get" about the gun rights debate is that registering guns would lead to confiscation (or atleast attempts to do so).  He gets annoyed at "hypothetical" arguments even when one can point to historical examples to support them.  
He isn't perfect.  I don't agree with him all the time (I STILL wish he'd tell us who the head guy behind the enormous conspiracy to wrangle gasoline prices is) but that's saying a lot more than how I feel about some other of TV's pundits.

[Balog]

/yawn

Fanbois are tiresome.

[TommyGunn]

/yawn

Fanbois are tiresome.

My apologies for boring you, Balog.  Perhaps you would be more interested in another thread? 

[roo_ster]

Not even Bill O can explain himself to you.  Besides, to insinuate that he has to explain himself is offensive to Bill O.

[slingshot]

O'Reilly does support 2A and self defensive use of handguns and rifles.  But I believe he sees little benefit to society with having EBR's legal for civilians.  Some may recall his "heavy armament" comment which really turned me off because it was so incorrect.  EBRs are small arms.

I don't know what his current thinking about EBRs is now.  But I suspect he still favors restrictions on ownship.  He flips around on this issue and is not a hard liner relative to 2A issues.  He does not blame the NRA as the big scapegoat for gun control.

He geneally does not see passing new laws as a means to get a better handle on violent crime.  He supports mandatory prison sentances nationally for gun crime.

He supports the fisk thing in NYC and suggests it for Chicago to help get a handle on gun crime.  He is also the only big media news guy that has repeatedly taken notice and commented that the majority of the violent crime is committed by minorities (namely black).

He is a moderate which means he generally drifts around in terms of his views and attitudes.

[zxcvbob]

I haven't watch Bill O in several years (so he might have changed) but he's not a conservative or a liberal, he's a Populist.  He's also a blowhard.  He gives the impression of being a conservative just because of his age and his suit and his haircut.

[Levant]

Well, I see why he's successful.  There are those who give him credit for being a thinker.  I don't.  I think he's all fluff.  He simply puts on airs of being better than either side by trying to understand and defend, or attack, both sides.  He's middle of the road.  Luke warm.  Fence sitter. 

[BReilley]

F*** IT!  WE'LL DO IT LIVE!

[Levant]

And don't forget the adultery and sexual harassment.

[seeker_two]

Someone recently told me that the political divide is no longer Republican vs. Democrat....or even conservative vs. liberal. It's authoritarian vs. libertarian. And it makes a lot of sense to me.

Guess which side O'Reilly is on.....