NationStates Jolt Archive

http://hosted.ap.org/photos/N/NYET14201091825-big.jpg

That's right -- on Thursday, Jan. 18th, Bill O'Reilly will be making a special guest appearance (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070109/ap_en_tv/tv_o_reilly_vs_colbert) on the Colbert Report. Pretty amusing considering that "Papa Bear" is the show's muse...

Anyway, since Colbert will be appearing on the O'Reilly Factor as well, how do you think the whole thing will turn out? Should Colbert maintain his "persona" throughout? Will O'Reilly successfully pwn his doppelganger? Who will win?

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE.

Wait, never mind, I had no idea that O'Reilly was 6'4". Well, Stephen's still about 5'8", so he's not that big anyway.

Anyhow, I won't be watching... I don't have cable. *cries*

Noone pwns Colbert. And when they do, they really don't (in Colberts mind).

O'Rielly will end up looking stupid during both shows and Colbert will steal O'Riellys fans for himself.

Oh. My. God.

TV show host Higlander. It has to be done.

Holy shit, Stephen Colbert is SMALL.

No, the truth is that O'Rielly is 10 feet tall. His reality distortion field prevents the blood from pooling in his ankles, so he's still alive.

How peripheral.

hmm, this thread needs too be re-titled:

East Coast Liberal in the persona of a cliche' blow hard conservative Vs. Blow hard conservative


(I have too see this)

hmm, this thread needs too be re-titled:

East Coast Liberal in the persona of a cliche' blow hard conservative Vs. Blow hard conservative

Is there really a difference between liberals on the east coast and liberals on the west coast? They're all pretty much of a muchness.

Is there really a difference between liberals on the east coast and liberals on the west coast? They're all pretty much of a muchness.

Besides a stupid age old generalization and a darker tan? Not really.

(My point, Colbert is a Liberal, who uses complex irony and his idiotic opposite Jon Stewart-esque persona too further himself.)

Noone pwns Colbert. And when they do, they really don't (in Colberts mind).

O'Rielly will end up looking stupid during both shows and Colbert will steal O'Riellys fans for himself.

Actually, I think it might be the same with O'Reilly. I mean, no one pwns O'Reilly in his mind. Of course Stephen Colbert is going to pwn him.

Oh. My. God.

TV show host Higlander. It has to be done.

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE...

Actually, I think it might be the same with O'Reilly. I mean, no one pwns O'Reilly in his mind. Of course Stephen Colbert is going to pwn him.

I cant argue with that

Truthiness > no spin

Colbert still has his mind.

O'Reilly will be take on a whole new crusade that was inspired by Colbert's fake veiws. Then Fox news will fire him for being to Conservitive.

How peripheral.

You need some new material. ;)

*Sets TiVo*

At the very least this is going to be entertaining.

GO Bill!

GO COLBERT!

Corrected. :p

Corrected. :p

Nope... :)

Bill pwnzors!

Noone pwns Colbert. And when they do, they really don't (in Colberts mind).

O'Rielly will end up looking stupid during both shows and Colbert will steal O'Riellys fans for himself.


You must be joking?

You must be joking?

Dont mind him. The people here on NS dont exactly fall into Bills Demographic, they prefer thier news from the Daily show and colbert report.

Dont mind him. The people here on NS dont exactly fall into Bills Demographic, they prefer thier news from the Daily show and colbert report.

Well, it's more like Colbert is funny, whereas Bill O'reilly only *looks* funny.

Well, it's more like Colbert is funny, whereas Bill O'reilly only *looks* funny.

Ah but what makes him funny my friend? Surely its not riding mainstream anit-Bush liberalism. ;)

Plus Bill O'Reily doesnt look funny....he looks pissed.

Ah but what makes him funny my friend? Surely its not riding mainstream anit-Bush liberalism. ;)

I think he's funny cuz he's a comedian.

I think he's funny cuz he's a comedian.

I am a comedian. Therefore I am funny.

(He uses typical center left political humor, which is very mainstream, and fairly old by now)

I am a comedian. Therefore I am funny.


I think I'll wait til you make a name for yourself on comedy central AND make me laugh before agreeing with you.


(He uses typical center left political humor, which is very mainstream, and fairly old by now)

I think you are allowing your political beliefs to get in the way of teh funny. It's not like he's Ann Coulter making a "joke" that's only funny if you happen to be, well, Ann Coulter.

hmm, this thread needs too be re-titled:

East Coast Liberal in the persona of a cliche' blow hard conservative Vs. Blow hard conservative


(I have too see this)

Actually, Bill O'Reilly is Independent. Everybody knows this. Just some choose to call him conservative or republican. He is equally critical of Republicans as he is in regards to the Democrats.

Actually, Bill O'Reilly is Independent. Everybody knows this. Just some choose to call him conservative or republican. He is equally critical of Republicans as he is in regards to the Democrats.

Actually he was a registered Republican, but has since switched to Independant. And if you think he is as critical of Republicans/conservatives as he is of Democrats/liberals then you must not have ever watched it. Pretty much every episode he bashed liberals and proclaims the virtues of "the folks" and conservative American values.

Actually, Bill O'Reilly is Independent. Everybody knows this.
Many of us also know that he was a registered Republican until December of 2000, even though he claims he has "always been an independent." He claims it was a clerical error...but then, this is also the guy who:

-lied about his pet War On Christmas (http://mediamatters.org/items/200601040009, http://mediamatters.org/items/200512140009)

-lied about supposed connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/oreillys-big-lie-on-let_b_32711.html)

-lied about the percentage of single mothers who are on welfare (O’Reilly Factor, 2/5/02)

-lied about Inside Edition supposedly winning two Peabody Awards when it was actually a single Polk award (after he left the show)

And so on and so forth.

If O'Reilly wants to call himself a "traditionalist" instead of a "conservative" or "Republican," he's welcome to do so. But I fail to see why anybody who is interested in reality should take him at his word about anything.

<snip>

Don't forget the Paris Business Review.

Don't forget the Paris Business Review.
Hey, I'd be delighted to turn this into a thread listing all of O'Reilly's lies! Go ahead and add your personal favorites to the list! :D

Hey, I'd be delighted to turn this into a thread listing all of O'Reilly's lies! Go ahead and add your personal favorites to the list! :D

The one thing that managed to beat all of his lies was that time when he started screaming at Al Franken on live TV on C-Span.

"Shut up. JUST SHUT UP! JUST SHUT UP!"

Many of us also know that he was a registered Republican until December of 2000, even though he claims he has "always been an independent." He claims it was a clerical error...but then, this is also the guy who:

-lied about his pet War On Christmas (http://mediamatters.org/items/200601040009, http://mediamatters.org/items/200512140009)

-lied about supposed connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/oreillys-big-lie-on-let_b_32711.html)

-lied about the percentage of single mothers who are on welfare (O’Reilly Factor, 2/5/02)

-lied about Inside Edition supposedly winning two Peabody Awards when it was actually a single Polk award (after he left the show)

And so on and so forth.

If O'Reilly wants to call himself a "traditionalist" instead of a "conservative" or "Republican," he's welcome to do so. But I fail to see why anybody who is interested in reality should take him at his word about anything.

Oh goody! I find myself cross examining sources yet again. Heres another snip from this guys source.

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/civil_and_human_rights

Getting a liberal vibe much?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/government_and_elections

now?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/national_security_foreign_policy

Im catching Mcain, and Bush catching alot of heat in these, with Sean Hannity in thier too...

I just kinda felt a little bias in this one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

<snip>

Whether the source is liberal or not, you cannot refute the truth of what they say. If you believe Bill is a good, impartial commentator then I don't know what to say.

Im catching Mcain, and Bush catching alot of heat in these, with Sean Hannity in thier too...

And the problem with that is...?

Oh goody! I find myself cross examining sources yet again. Heres another snip from this guys source.

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/civil_and_human_rights

Getting a liberal vibe much?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/government_and_elections

now?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/national_security_foreign_policy

Im catching Mcain, and Bush catching alot of heat in these, with Sean Hannity in thier too...

I just kinda felt a little bias in this one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
If you can refute the actual facts that are provided by the sources, do so. Simply saying "It's LIBRUL!!!" doesn't change anything. If a liberal source says 2 + 2 = 4, are you going to try to argue that they lack credibility because of their liberal bias?

Every source has bias, because every human person alive has bias. That's why you look at the FACTS instead of blindly accepting everything you hear from somebody.

I love Bottle.
Are you perchance a lesbian? I'm not usually, but I'd give it a try for you.

And the problem with that is...?
Well gosh, if McCain and Bush and Hannity are "catching heat" from somebody, it can't possibly be because McCain, Bush, and Hannity did anything wrong! It must be because the source is LIBRUL and wants the terrorists to win!

I love Bottle.

What a coincidence...I do too!

;)


Are you perchance a lesbian? I'm not usually, but I'd give it a try for you.
Bottle does not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, or sexual orientation. :D

Well gosh, if McCain and Bush and Hannity are "catching heat" from somebody, it can't possibly be because McCain, Bush, and Hannity did anything wrong! It must be because the source is LIBRUL and wants the terrorists to win!

If Hannity was caught publicly fucking a goat, his supporters would find some way of bullshitting him out of it.

If Hannity was caught publicly fucking a goat, his supporters would find some way of bullshitting him out of it.

It only happened because the gay agenda caused poor Hannity to have a minute of weakness, if it wasn't for that gay cowboy movie, and those gay penguins this never would of happened.

That goat took advantage of a drunken Sean and he's going to get treatment for his alcoholism.

This is a left-wing conspiracy, those pictures are photoshopped. There was no goat.

If you can refute the actual facts that are provided by the sources, do so. Simply saying "It's LIBRUL!!!" doesn't change anything. If a liberal source says 2 + 2 = 4, are you going to try to argue that they lack credibility because of their liberal bias?

Every source has bias, because every human person alive has bias. That's why you look at the FACTS instead of blindly accepting everything you hear from somebody.


Ah but you leave conspicuously absent a little thing I call "A degree scale of Bias". I prefer my sources being as non-biased as possible. The news paper and other source on focused on Conservatives. yes I could scream ITS LIBURUL! But its fairly riddiculous how you can refute a blatant bias, and pass it off as unfiltered truth.

Ah but you leave conspicuously absent a little thing I call "A degree scale of Bias". I prefer my sources being as non-biased as possible. The news paper and other source on focused on Conservatives. yes I could scream ITS LIBURUL! But its fairly riddiculous how you can refute a blatant bias, and pass it off as unfiltered truth.

She's not passing it off as unfiltered truth. She's saying that yes, it's biased, but just because something is biased doesn't mean it's not true. Bill O'Reilly is a hardcore American conservative biased quite extremely against the American left. Whether you want to accept that or not is your business.

Ah but you leave conspicuously absent a little thing I call "A degree scale of Bias". I prefer my sources being as non-biased as possible. The news paper and other source on focused on Conservatives. yes I could scream ITS LIBURUL! But its fairly riddiculous how you can refute a blatant bias, and pass it off as unfiltered truth.
Again, all this blather about the "bias" of the sources is irrelevant when it comes to the facts they report. It doesn't matter how "biased" somebody is, you can still fact-check their work, and if they reported accurate facts then that's that.

If you can challenge the facts, do so. If you can't, then admit that these are the facts and move on with your life.

She's not passing it off as unfiltered truth. She's saying that yes, it's biased, but just because something is biased doesn't mean it's not true. Bill O'Reilly is a hardcore American conservative biased quite extremely against the American left. Whether you want to accept that or not is your business.
Bill O'Reilly is a hardcore American conservative biased quite extremely against the American left, and this will be true NO MATTER WHO IS REPORTING IT.

Bill O'Reilly's political stances will not magically change depending on who is talking about him. Some people may say things about Bill O'Reilly which are factually untrue, but this means that those people are WRONG, not that Bill O'Reilly's political stances have changed.

Now, I provided some facts about lies that Bill O'Reilly has told in the past. The fact that he said these things is not going to change depending on who is reporting; he did say them. Somebody could LIE and claim he didn't, but that wouldn't change the fact that he did, in fact, say them. Likewise, the fact that these statements are lies will not change, because whether or not something is lie or truth depends on the facts. Somebody could lie and claim that what Bill O'Reilly said was true, but that would simply make that person wrong. It wouldn't turn the lie into a truth.

It doesn't matter if the person reporting on O'Reilly's lies is liberal, conservative, radical, or moderate. If Jesus himself came back to report on Bill O'Reilly's lies, it wouldn't change the facts any more than if Zombie Hitler did so. The facts would be the same. Maybe one source or the other would LIE about the facts, but then you can fact-check them and know the truth of the situation.

I've never said this to anyone before, but, sigged. :fluffle:
Bottle strongly endorses the fact-checking of both Jesus and Zombie Hitler.

And thanks. :D

Bill O'Reilly is a hardcore American conservative biased quite extremely against the American left, and this will be true NO MATTER WHO IS REPORTING IT.

Bill O'Reilly's political stances will not magically change depending on who is talking about him. Some people may say things about Bill O'Reilly which are factually untrue, but this means that those people are WRONG, not that Bill O'Reilly's political stances have changed.

Now, I provided some facts about lies that Bill O'Reilly has told in the past. The fact that he said these things is not going to change depending on who is reporting; he did say them. Somebody could LIE and claim he didn't, but that wouldn't change the fact that he did, in fact, say them. Likewise, the fact that these statements are lies will not change, because whether or not something is lie or truth depends on the facts. Somebody could lie and claim that what Bill O'Reilly said was true, but that would simply make that person wrong. It wouldn't turn the lie into a truth.

It doesn't matter if the person reporting on O'Reilly's lies is liberal, conservative, radical, or moderate. If Jesus himself came back to report on Bill O'Reilly's lies, it wouldn't change the facts any more than if Zombie Hitler did so. The facts would be the same. Maybe one source or the other would LIE about the facts, but then you can fact-check them and know the truth of the situation.
Exactly. Bill O'Reilly is, to put it simply, nuts. He's like a culturally accepted Jack Chick!

Bottle strongly endorses the fact-checking of both Jesus and Zombie Hitler.

And thanks. :D

It wouldn't fit, and this makes me sad. :(

David Letterman choked off O'Reilly on his show. Colbert will eat him alive, and I'll bet you he'll play the uber-toady Bushevik role to the hilt to where he won't give Bill the slightest chance to cut him off.

Just before the super move.

David Letterman choked off O'Reilly on his show. Colbert will eat him alive, and I'll bet you he'll play the uber-toady Bushevik role to the hilt to where he won't give Bill the slightest chance to cut him off.

Just before the super move.

Colbert will eat him with satire, so he'll simultaneously EAT and PRAISE him!

Colbert pwns!

Colbert will eat him with satire, so he'll simultaneously EAT and PRAISE him!

Colbert pwns!

"I have come to eat Caesar, not praise him."

*bumpage*

Five minutes 'till the O'Reilly Factor showdown... :cool:

Wait ... which is on first?

What the fuck? My flux capacitor is discarging wildly today.

O'Reilly? In my Colbert Report?

ive never watched oreilly. is it going to be painful?

*bumpage*

Five minutes 'till the O'Reilly Factor showdown... :cool:

Wait ... which is on first?

Colbert will be on the O'Reilly Factor, well... now.

O'Reilly will be on the Colbert Report at 11:30PM Eastern time.

What the fuck? My flux capacitor is discarging wildly today.
I think the collision of these two personalities is churning up crazy metaphysical energies...

Colbert will be on the O'Reilly Factor, well... now.

O'Reilly will be on the Colbert Report at 11:30PM Eastern time.

I hope someone will youtube them. My roommate is using the tv to watch his show right now, while he plays WoW on his computer.

I think the collision of these two personalities is churning up crazy metaphysical energies...

"Doc, you don't just walk into a store and buy plutonium. Did you rip that off?"

"Shhhhhh. Of course. From a group of Libyan nationalists. They wanted me to build them a bomb, so I took their plutonium and in turn, gave them a shoddy bomb-casing full of used pinball machine parts! Come on! Let's get you a radiation suit. We must prepare to reload."

When/if this ends up on Youtube, will someone link it?

She's not passing it off as unfiltered truth. She's saying that yes, it's biased, but just because something is biased doesn't mean it's not true. Bill O'Reilly is a hardcore American conservative biased quite extremely against the American left. Whether you want to accept that or not is your business.

He not so much conservative as he is Tradtionalist, which happens too be more friendly too the Right then the Left (politically)

When we look at the facts, it becomes more likely that they have been twisted or manipulated, judging by the bias. Sure, it could be completely true, or not.

Again, all this blather about the "bias" of the sources is irrelevant when it comes to the facts they report. It doesn't matter how "biased" somebody is, you can still fact-check their work, and if they reported accurate facts then that's that.

If you can challenge the facts, do so. If you can't, then admit that these are the facts and move on with your life.

You say this, yet i'm fairly confident your one of those "Faux News is a white house puppet!!" :D

He's not on O'Reilly right now...did I miss it or is it still coming up?

Oh...and Colbert Report comes on at 8:30pm EST too as well as 11:30pm EST

Ah good...pre-commercial previews just confirmed that I didn't miss it :)

He's not on O'Reilly right now...did I miss it or is it still coming up?
The show's an hour long, so they're probably saving the interview for the end.

Oh...and Colbert Report comes on at 8:30pm EST too as well as 11:30pm EST
Yeah, but the earlier slot is a rerun of last night's show. The new episode is at 11:30 EST.

Lol...O'Reilly just told viewers, in a "coming up" pre-commercial for Colbert, to "Hide the Children" and also used it as a header for a clip of Colbert hahaha.

It's the showdown we've all been waiting for.

The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny.

Are you French?! Col-bear or Col-bert, which is it?! WHO ARE YOU?!

Bill needs to learn how to use his indoor voice.

Colbert pwned him.

"I spend so much time in the world that is spinning, when I actually come in to the no-spin zone it gives me vertigo." :p

Bill's attempts to be funny were just embarrassing.

I loved the audience guy laughing about Colbert's report on bears, and I love that O'Reilly actually looked into Colbert's past.

Honestly though it was a good showing on both parts. Colbert kinda beat him, if they were competing, but I honestly liked it. It was far better than that other guy on Crossfire when Stewart slayed him.

Anybody catch the part where O'Reilly cited a "study" which found that most of the Daily Show's audience are "stoned slackers"? Yeah, that's a load of crap (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6117542/).

NEW YORK - The folks at Comedy Central were annoyed when Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly kept referring to “The Daily Show” audience as “stoned slackers.”

So they did a little research. And guess whose audience is more educated?

Viewers of Jon Stewart’s show are more likely to have completed four years of college than people who watch “The O’Reilly Factor,” according to Nielsen Media Research.

O’Reilly’s teasing came when Stewart appeared on his show earlier this month.

“You know what’s really frightening?” O’Reilly said. “You actually have an influence on this presidential election. That is scary, but it’s true. You’ve got stoned slackers watching your dopey show every night and they can vote.”

“If the head of General Motors was watching O’Reilly’s show, that could be very important to us,” said Doug Herzog, Comedy Central president.

“If you listen to O’Reilly, you get the sense that it was crazy longhairs behind the show,” he said. “And it’s not. It’s great, smart television that attracts a well-compensated audience, most of whom are voting age.”

Relax, said Fox News Channel spokesman Rob Zimmerman.

“Comedy Central must have lost their sense of humor,” Zimmerman said. “Without Jon Stewart, Comedy Central would turn into the Great American Country Channel.”

Comedy Central also touted a recent study by the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey, which said young viewers of “The Daily Show” were more likely to answer questions about politics correctly than those who don’t.

Comedy Central had no statistics on how many people watch “The Daily Show” stoned.

Although seemingly taken aback by repeated “stoned slackers” references while talking with O’Reilly, Stewart was ready with a joke.

“This election is going to rely on the undecided,” he said. “And who is more undecided than stoned slackers? Ice cream or pretzels? Ice cream or pretzels? What’s it going to be?”

Whether it’s the slacker or no-slacker zone, O’Reilly is entering it Oct. 7, when he’s scheduled to appear on “The Daily Show.”

So if Stewart’s audience is comprised of stoned slackers, how would Herzog describe O’Reilly’s audience?

“I’m not getting into that game,” he said.

Typical. I'd at least understand if he tried to explain the original reference away as a joke, but at this point he's referred to a fictitious "study" multiple times with no explanation just to slander the show. What an ass...

I searched youtube and it seems no one's posted any of it yet. God, how slow can you get? This is the internet! :(

Don't forget the Paris Business Review.

My favorite Bill O'reilly lie is "I don't shout people down and call them names to belittle them and minimilize their points."

Listen, if the mighty right wants to idolize this guy let them. He's a liar, hypocrite, and worse. Or did we forget he settled for 7 million to avoid having to make his sexual harrassment and naughty phone calls become more public than the leaks already out there? Bill O'reilly is a bully and pther people who think they're tought love him. Really the both of them would cower like bitches when they weren't allowed to shout and intimidate people. Like my pappy used to say, ..."until you meet someone meaner adn tougher than you."

Bill Spins the Revenue from the Bush tax cuts, on September 19 2005 O'Reilly said this:

O'REILLY: Under President Clinton, the tax rate climbed higher than at any time in history except in World War II. President Bush then came in and cut taxes for everyone. And guess what? Federal tax revenues will be more this year than at any time during the Clinton administration.

But Clinton signed into law one federal income tax increase -- OBRA in 1993. OBRA instituted two new, upper-income tax brackets: a rate of 36 percent applied to couples making between $140,000 and $250,000 annually, and a rate of 39.6 percent applied to couples with an annual income of more than $250,000. So 39.6 percent is not even close to the highest rate since World War II. In 1955 it was 59 percent, in 1965 it was 53 percent, in 1975 it was 60 percent, and in 1985 it was 50 percent.

Bush cut taxes in 2001 and revenue is down every year except for a slight jump in 2004 from 2003. Clinton raised taxes and revenue increased every year from 1997 to 2000. And 80% of the Bush tax cuts went to the top 20%, so when O'Reilly says Bush cut taxes for everyone he is spinning his ass off. Dont believe me on revenue, just read the chart below from the US treasury department.






O'Reilly & Newt Gingrich Spin the Rove CIA Leak Story: O'Reilly & Newt Spin The Rove CIA Leak


O'Reilly Spins The Apology About Not Finding WMD's: The Apology (Sort of, Almost)


O'Reilly Lies About Canada Being Bankrupt: The Real truth About Canada


O'Reilly Spins Deans Position on Parental Notification: O'Reilly Spins Dean


O'Reilly Spins The Jessica Lynch Story: The Real Lynch Story


The Bill O'Reilly 21 Spin Tips: Top 21 Spin Tips


O'Reilly Spins California Immigrant Driver's License Bill: 9-17-03-- The Real Truth


O'Reilly Spins The Gray Davis Recall: O'Reilly Spins With Two Conservative Guests


O'Reilly Spins The Danish Rape Laws: Danish Embassy: Bill Lies About Danish Law


O'Reilly Spins The Celebrity Anti-War Backlash: O'Reilly Was Wrong As Usual


O'Reilly Spins About Calling For The Pepsi Boycott: Bill Spins (Lies) About The Pepsi Boycott


O'Reilly Spins Bill Moyers Work: Bill Moyers (PBS) Exposes More O'Reilly Spin


O'Reilly Spins Global Crossing/Terry McAuliffe Story: Bill Spins Global Crossing/Terry McAuliffe


O'Reilly Spins Facts And Statistics: Bill Spins Facts & Stats


O'Reilly Spins He's Not a Conservative: Click Here For Proof he is a Conservative


O'Reilly Spins for Nuclear Power: Bill Spins The Nuclear Power Issue


O'Reilly Spins The Peabody Award(s): Bill Spins The Peabody Awards


O'Reilly Spins His Working Class Background: Bill Spins His Working Class Background


--------------------

Quote From O'Reilly:



It is true that if you are poor, and can't afford a good lawyer, your odds of going to prison skyrocket. But you know what? Tough. Don't do the crime! Poverty is a terrible thing. But millions fight their way out of it, legally! If you are a poor criminal, you know what awaits you. So too bad. Society does not have a responsibility to provide top notch legal representation at taxpayer expense.



Hey Billy Boy, You said people dont deserve a good attorney because they committed a crime. That assumes everyone charged with a crime is guilty. Read these stories below then think about how dumb your above statement is, about the need for a good attorney. Not to mention if you are wealthy, you can do the crime without doing the time. It seems you only think justice should be for the poor.



O'Reilly Spins Police Never Lie: 13 Cops Arrested In Planted Gun Cases


O'Reilly Spins Everyone Charged Is Guilty: Crooked Crime Lab Chemist


O'Reilly Spins Only Guilty Get Convicted: Innocent People Are Going To Jail

Top Ten Most Outrageous Comments of 2004 here.

1) O'Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn't oppose 9-11 Commission. O'Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards '04 TV ad highlighting Bush's opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)

2) O'Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O'Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: "They did have ricin up there in the north -- so why are you discounting that so much?" In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)

3) O'Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O'Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O'Reilly's claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq's supposed involvement in terrorism -- claims O'Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)

4) O'Reilly fabricated "Paris Business Review" as source for success of French boycott. O'Reilly falsely claimed "they've lost billions of dollars in France according to 'The Paris Business Review'" due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named "The Paris Business Review." (4/27/04)

5) O'Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O'Reilly tried to "blow off" the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)

6) O'Reilly confused on elementary economics. O'Reilly told a caller on his radio show, "We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we're not wild about snails" -- indicating that he doesn't know the definition of "trade deficit" and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)

7) O'Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O'Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)

8) O'Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention ... as Kennedy spoke behind him. O'Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O'Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: "When we come back, we'll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up." In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O'Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)

9) O'Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O'Reilly claimed that Democrats "lost votes from four years ago"; that "18- to 24[-year-old]s didn't go" to the polls; and that "[c]ommitted Republicans didn't carry the day for the president; independents did." All three claims are false. (11/4/04)

10) O'Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn't create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: "Socialistic" French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are "government-controlled," but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)

3-28-06 -- Once again O'Reilly calls for the death penalty, even though he claims to oppose it, so how can you call for death for someone if you oppose it. There is no in-between, you are either for it, or you are not. I do not know anyone who is really opposed to the death penalty who say well this guy is really bad so put him to death. Nobody who is really opposed to the death penalty would say that, nobody. But here you have Bill O'Reilly calling for death to Zacarias Moussaoui, and he claims to oppose the death penalty, sorry Bill, if you call for death to one person then you support the death penalty.

Here is what the lying hypocrite said on the 3-27-06 factor:

O'REILLY: "Factor follow-up" segment tonight, al Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui admitted he knew 9/11 was going to happen, and wanted it to happen. He did this today at the penalty phase of the trial in Virginia, where he could receive the death penalty.

Joining us now from D.C. is Emily Hunt, a terrorism analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

All right, look, I'm tired of this Moussaoui guy. I don't care what happens to him. I'm against the death penalty, but if they want to kill him, it's fine with me. I don't care. Can we believe at this point anything the man says?

9-5-2003 -- O'Reilly had a woman attorney on tonight to discuss this case.
------------
LOUISIANA - The sentencing to death of a Louisiana man for raping an 8-year-old girl has reopened a debate about whether crimes that do not involve killings may ever be punished by death. There has not been an execution for rape in the United States since 1964, and no one has been executed for any crime that did not involve a killing since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

The Louisiana law under which the man, Patrick O. Kennedy, was convicted allows the death penalty for the rape of a child under 12. It was enacted in 1995. Graham da Ponte, one of Mr. Kennedy's lawyers, said the punishment was disproportionate to the crime.
------------

First you must know how O'Reilly feels about the death penalty. For 7 years he has been saying he opposes the death penalty. He says the person should get life in prison, breaking rocks in Alaska, with bread and water to eat.

O'Reilly said he opposes capital punishment under any and all circumstances. He insists that America has a "moral question" about "taking a life" through use of the death penalty.

Listen to O'Reilly in an interview with American Enterprise: I'm against the death penalty, and I also believe in big government intervention to protect the environment.

----

You either oppose the death penalty, or you support it, there is no in-between. Tonight O'Reilly said this guy should get the death penalty, he also called for the death penalty in the westerfield/van dam case. After Westerfield was convicted the jury had to decide if he should get death or not. Every night for a week O'Reilly covered the case, each night he asked what was taking the jury so long to give him death. O'Reilly got madder and madder each night when the jury did not decide to give him death, he would actually yell at the guest and ask why they had not given him death yet. He was furious that it was taking so long for them to decide on death, does that sound like a guy who opposes the death penalty, not in my world. It sounds like a guy who only says he opposes the death penalty, when in reality he supports it, and supports it all the time.

That makes at least 3 cases that I can remember where O'Reilly has called for the death penalty.

This is conclusive proof that O'Reilly was lying about opposing the death penalty.

O'Reilly said Kennedy should get the death penalty, and the woman attorney for Patrick Kennedey said he should get life in prison, O'Reilly asked her why, she said because he did not kill anyone. Then O'Reilly said life in prison is not enough, he told her the guy should be put to death. That was a quote, he said life in prison is not enough. The he spent the whole 3 or 4 minute segment arguing for the death penalty.

When was the last time you heard someone who claims to oppose the death penalty say life in prison is not enough.

I am guessing never, I always had a good idea O'Reilly was lying about opposing the death penalty. Now I know for sure, he does not actually oppose the death penalty, he just says he opposes it.

People who oppose the death penalty, oppose it all the time. This is just another example of the spin and lies put out by Bill O'Reilly. And more proof he is a republican pretending to be an independent.

Update: O'Reilly recently said that he hopes that alleged sniper suspect John Muhammad "is taken care of in three days and gets the death penalty".

He then added, "Even though I am opposed to the death penalty, he deserves it".

You dont say you hope someone gets the death penalty when you oppose the death penalty, Unless you are a liar, which is exactly what O'Reilly is.

A liar.

This is the 3rd time he has called for the death penalty, that proves he only "claimed" to oppose the death penalty. This also proves he only claimed to oppose the death penalty so he could use it to claim he is not a conservative.

Yet more evidence that O'Reilly is lying about opposing the death penalty.

Bill you have just been busted again, you are the king of lies and spin.

Oh goody! I find myself cross examining sources yet again. Heres another snip from this guys source.

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/civil_and_human_rights

Getting a liberal vibe much?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/government_and_elections

now?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/national_security_foreign_policy

Im catching Mcain, and Bush catching alot of heat in these, with Sean Hannity in thier too...

I just kinda felt a little bias in this one:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

you haven't proved that what was said was a lie...You did classic "LIBERAL, LIBERAL!!!!!!!!!!!" that doesn't make what he said dissapear, it just means he got it from a liberal leaning source. I bet if anything comes from Newsmax.com it is "so true, so true." Read it and be objective. This asshat gets caught almost daily talking bullshit. The only difference is that he has mindless drones that follow.

I searched youtube and it seems no one's posted any of it yet. God, how slow can you get? This is the internet! :(

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/

Go to the video section on the right-hand side of the page.

*Earth-shattering snip*

Did you really have to cut-and-paste all that? Why not just use links? Sheesh...

You say this, yet i'm fairly confident your one of those "Faux News is a white house puppet!!" :D

Good, keep dodging the point that was made. Duck and weave, bob and spin. If you can refute Bill made those claims or did not use those quotes than do so. Otherwise, just crying about the source makes you look like a spoiled bitch. :sniper: Can you refute it with "facts" of your own?

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/

Go to the video section on the right-hand side of the page.



Did you really have to cut-and-paste all that? Why not just use links? Sheesh...

Oh, thanks.

Good, keep dodging the point that was made. Duck and weave, bob and spin. If you can refute Bill made those claims or did not use those quotes than do so. Otherwise, just crying about the source makes you look like a spoiled bitch. :sniper: Can you refute it with "facts" of your own?

And the sniper smiley makes you look like a 10 year old...

And the sniper smiley makes you look like a 10 year old...

change the facts yet? :cool: I hope you like that one better. So refute away as we'll all be waiting. Attack the facts, not me. Or are you the other poster's puppet?

Oh, thanks.

I do like how he quotes a "report" they 'they' did that said TDS viewers were stoned slackers when an actual review of demographics find them to be younger, more educated, and more informed that BO's audience. Why the hell would BO want to stick to the facts when there's so much lying to do?

change the facts yet? :cool: I hope you like that one better. So refute away as we'll all be waiting. Attack the facts, not me. Or are you the other poster's puppet?

It might just be an aversion to the gun smileys and nothing to do with the argument. Because the gun smileys are pretty juvenile. I'm not commenting on the argument itself, since I don't know what it's about. Just hatin' on that smiley.

It might just be an aversion to the gun smileys and nothing to do with the argument. Because the gun smileys are pretty juvenile. I'm not commenting on the argument itself, since I don't know what it's about. Just hatin' on that smiley.

Agreed...I didn't even read the argument. The smiley is just unnecessary and reminds me of children when they're of the age that begins to think guns are cool and power rangers are the best show on TV.

Oh...and Steel Butterfly would be one hell of a puppet, I'd say lol...

all right nitpicky ones. Time for bed.

As for those who continue to bicker...

Power rangers is over, Liuzzo...and put down that gun...it's not a toy...

It might just be an aversion to the gun smileys and nothing to do with the argument. Because the gun smileys are pretty juvenile. I'm not commenting on the argument itself, since I don't know what it's about. Just hatin' on that smiley.

Indeed. Would it help if I'd actually trained as a sniper and that's why I like it? I'd choose fragging but I'm more apt to the skill of high powered weapons. Bill O'reilly gets caught talking a lot of ish and lying. So please cotinue with that as the central focus and I'll refrain from gun smilies.

Agreed...I didn't even read the argument. The smiley is just unnecessary and reminds me of children when they're of the age that begins to think guns are cool and power rangers are the best show on TV.

Oh...and Steel Butterfly would be one hell of a puppet, I'd say lol...

all right nitpicky ones. Time for bed.

Indeed. Would it help if I'd actually trained as a sniper and that's why I like it? I'd choose fragging but I'm more apt to the skill of high powered weapons. Bill O'reilly gets caught talking a lot of ish and lying. So please cotinue with that as the central focus and I'll refrain from gun smilies.

No, it wouldn't really. You don't see me putting movie cameras in my posts, do you?

Just make your points and leave the graphics to the noobs.

you haven't proved that what was said was a lie...You did classic "LIBERAL, LIBERAL!!!!!!!!!!!" that doesn't make what he said dissapear, it just means he got it from a liberal leaning source. I bet if anything comes from Newsmax.com it is "so true, so true." Read it and be objective. This asshat gets caught almost daily talking bullshit. The only difference is that he has mindless drones that follow.

Are you retarded? Your trying too nullify the effect of an obvious bias. I've already stated it may be true, but I am lead too believe its not.

Yes Bill O'Reily rambles on, as too a convicted violent man was let off scott free, after he had molested a child. Those mindless drones, with thier defense of common value and the right of a child not too be sodomized...Idiots.

Thank you, Rhaomi, for linking the Colbert on the O'Reilly factor video, though I must cringe in disgust upon even glancing at the FoxNews website...

As for the Colbert Report tonight, if anyone spoils it in the next two hours, I will stab them. I am taking the time to record it on my family's DVR tonight, which I rarely do, since I want to see this as soon as possible, and while I know the first broadcast is on about right now, I can't watch it because other stuff is recording. Sometimes a family of six is such an annoyance...

Good, keep dodging the point that was made. Duck and weave, bob and spin. If you can refute Bill made those claims or did not use those quotes than do so. Otherwise, just crying about the source makes you look like a spoiled bitch. :sniper: Can you refute it with "facts" of your own?

I never dodged the point! I admitted the facts may be true, but I'm lead too believe differently based on an obvious bias. But I'm so sure you're too full of Liberal shit, you think it's all a reputable source.

Look at this guy! Crying about the source? Isn't checking sources the basis of defeating a quote from another person? According too you, I can't point out faulty sources...In that case I am defeated.

Keep your explicits for when you get back too middle school mate, it makes you look, well more so idiotic. =/

Anybody catch the part where O'Reilly cited a "study" which found that most of the Daily Show's audience are "stoned slackers"? Yeah, that's a load of crap (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6117542/).



Typical. I'd at least understand if he tried to explain the original reference away as a joke, but at this point he's referred to a fictitious "study" multiple times with no explanation just to slander the show. What an ass...

Huh thats awful. I don't like the show and it can be stupid, but his demographic isn;t really stoners, more so those who dont want thier center left news from MSNBC, more so from....erm....comedy central.

If Bill O'Reilly is just an act, what does that make Stephen Cobert?

A spoof, same as if he was 'for real.'

If Bill O'Reilly is just an act, what does that make Stephen Cobert?

..Damn it! Why can't I ever be the subject of these time warps?! I keep trying, and trying, but I never manage to be warped!

Well, you need dilithium crystals, to begin with, and legal permission to exceed the Warp Speed Limit.

..Damn it! Why can't I ever be the subject of these time warps?! I keep trying, and trying, but I never manage to be warped!
Was there an explanation for how it happens provided somewhere?

Well that was awesome.

..Damn it! Why can't I ever be the subject of these time warps?! I keep trying, and trying, but I never manage to be warped!

good show for Stephen Colbert - what happened on the O'Rielly factor?

Well, you need dilithium crystals, to begin with, and legal permission to exceed the Warp Speed Limit.

...okay, that was too convenient. I complain about it and all of a sudden I'm warped?

Nuh-uh. I don't buy it. That was not a coincidence. Someone is playing us all for fools. I want to know who's doing it! Show yourself, post controllers!

Kyronea's post asking why he's never the subject of a time warp got time warped. Let's do the time warp again.

*warps*

Was his post warped after mine, or mine warped before his? Or were we both warped? It's all relative.

EDIT: Speaking of which...

Kyronea's post asking why he's never the subject of a time warp got time warped. Let's do the time warp again.

...okay, that was too convenient. I complain about it and all of a sudden I'm warped?

Nuh-uh. I don't buy it. That was not a coincidence. Someone is playing us all for fools. I want to know who's doing it! Show yourself, post controllers!

*controls posts*

<.<

Kyronea's post asking why he's never the subject of a time warp got time warped. Let's do the time warp again.


Everybody's doin' the brand new dance now, come on baby, do the time warp.

Hmm. Doesn't sound very good when sung out loud. Not that I can sing.

Everybody's doin' the brand new dance now, come on baby, do the time warp.

Hmm. Doesn't sound very good when sung out loud. Not that I can sing.
Mmm, Locomotion...

Here ya go (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdu7xoHU9DA).

You know, I've never actually seen that video before...

lolwtfbbq.

Btw, do you have a link the colbert report video? I can't find it on the Comedy Central website.

Everybody's doin' the brand new dance now, come on baby, do the time warp.

Hmm. Doesn't sound very good when sung out loud. Not that I can sing.

Here ya go (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdu7xoHU9DA).

You know, I've never actually seen that video before...

It sucked rather much, eh?

I think the highlight was when Colbert put up the picture of O'Reilly as a gay biker or something like that.

Not too humorous at all. :(

lolwtfbbq.

Btw, do you have a link the colbert report video? I can't find it on the Comedy Central website.

Nah, they're usually slow about posting new videos. It should be up on the CC page by tomorrow, and I'm not sure how fast YouTube is.

Wow. Colbert played O'Rly so hard. That was great.

LOL... Colbert stole the Microwave oven from Oreilly/FOX..
:D

Hey I missed out on both of them, and the Fox video link isnt working, must be too much bandwith... Anybody have a Youtube link? Or anything too that effect?

Hey I missed out on both of them, and the Fox video link isnt working, must be too much bandwith... Anybody have a Youtube link? Or anything too that effect?let me put it this way.. too many are trying to get this clip.

they probably crashing both the Fox and CC servers :D

It sucked rather much, eh?

I think the highlight was when Colbert put up the picture of O'Reilly as a gay biker or something like that.

Not too humorous at all. :(
I think we overhyped ourselves. Wouldn't be the first time I did it, anyway.

Though you have to admit this line was absolutely hilarious when taken properly:
So if you're an act, what does that make me?

If Bill O'Reilly is just an act, what does that make Stephen Cobert?

A spoof, same as if he was 'for real.'

Well, I guess you can tell I hadn't seen it yet...

LOL... Colbert stole the Microwave oven from Oreilly/FOX..
:D
"Honest to God."

:D

PS: I found out a few days ago that Colbert himself actually frequents one of the main CR forum off-shoots (Tek Jansen (http://www.tekjansen.com/)!). He's contractually bound not to explicitly state that it's him, but has done everything up to that. Check out the site's About page (http://www.tekjansen.com/nav/about.php), for example:

Stephen Colbert has earned awards for his work ranging from Emmy to Peabody during a modestly long and immodestly successful career. Of course, due to legal reasons, I can't actually say that I am Stephen Colbert, so let me tell you these truths instead. I've worked in pseudo slash humor journalism for years, been consumed by verifiably millions, I love scifi, I have three kids, dark hair, glasses and I used to do a lot of improv... If I'm not me then I'm hard pressed to know who the hell I am, but that's a different story, and one I'm sure the attorneys will get in to soon enough (even though it's now been many months and it hasn't come to it, somehow).

If you want to view his profile and see the comments he's made (231!), click here (http://www.tekjansen.com/phpbb2/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2).

Nice to know that even a big TV star can still be involved in the fan community. :)

Eh, both the No Spin Zone and Colbert report was bit of a let down.