Looking Out for Bill O'Reilly
While Bill O'Reilly was busy lying to his radio listeners this morning about "Liberals" and "Progressives" (e.g. "Liberals believe Government can solve all of our problems, and they believe the bigger the Government, the better!"), Media Matter's David Brock was standing by, waiting to hear back from the "cowardly" Master of the Loofah, O'Reilly.
From Brock's no spin letter to O'Reilly:
Mr. O'Reilly, you have repeatedly and personally attacked me, Media Matters for America, and my fine staff, calling us "vile," "despicable," and "weasels," and comparing us to the Ku Klux Klan, Castro, Mao, and the Nazis. And you have refused my repeated requests to appear on your broadcast.
You once offered your viewers your definition of the word "coward." On the January 5, 2004, O'Reilly Factor, you declared: "If you attack someone publicly, as these men did to me, you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward."
Well, Mr. O'Reilly, you have attacked me publicly on numerous occasions, and you refuse to face me. You, sir, are a coward -- by your own definition of the term. You are "hiding under your desk" (to paraphrase your August 26, 2003, claim about a "coward" who declined to appear on your show) rather than allowing me on your program to discuss your insults. You are "gutless," to borrow the phrase you used on January 10, 2003, and February 8, 2001, to describe people who would not appear on your program. I attach additional examples of your pejorative descriptions of those who decline invitations to appear on your broadcast.
You once offered your viewers your definition of the word "coward." On the January 5, 2004, O'Reilly Factor, you declared: "If you attack someone publicly, as these men did to me, you have an obligation to face the person you are smearing. If you don't, you are a coward."
Well, Mr. O'Reilly, you have attacked me publicly on numerous occasions, and you refuse to face me. You, sir, are a coward -- by your own definition of the term. You are "hiding under your desk" (to paraphrase your August 26, 2003, claim about a "coward" who declined to appear on your show) rather than allowing me on your program to discuss your insults. You are "gutless," to borrow the phrase you used on January 10, 2003, and February 8, 2001, to describe people who would not appear on your program. I attach additional examples of your pejorative descriptions of those who decline invitations to appear on your broadcast.
By the way Mr. O'Reilly, David Brock is gay, so I'm certain a manly-man like yourself should be able to take him on without a problem...Right?
We're just looking out for you, Bill.
3 Comments:
MikeyCan said:
"He is today's "Morton Downey Jr." on TV, except that he's taken seriously by a few wingnuts because he happens to be on the extreme "right" of any topic."
I would take exception only to the above comment, MikeCan. Truth is, O'Reilly is taken *very* seriously by *millions* via both TV and Radio.
If he were in fact the well-known joke you describe him as, he wouldn't be nearly as dangerous as he *actually* is.
I don't disagree with either your comment or your suggested tacticts, Mikeycan.
Just wanted to point out that O'Reilly still has the number one show on all of Cable News, along with the extraordinary reach and influence that comes with it.
I believe those folks who right him off (and FOX as a whole) as having influence over right wingnuts only is desperately missing the bigger picture of the damage that such outrageously biased and unbalanced coverage is having on the left and the middle as well.
Propoganda works because the majority of folks don't realize it's propoganda. That's at play big time in the Fox/O'Reilly sitch, and why Fox (and Sean and O'Reilly and Hume, etc etc etc) are all so terribly damaging to our republic.
I wish they *did* only have influence over the wingnuts! Unfortunately, they are much more dangerous than that.
Brad said: "I wish they *did* only have influence over the wingnuts" ...
Unfortunately, they seem to have the power to turn otherwise reasonable people *into* wingnuts.
That is why they must be fought.
Post a Comment
<< Home