The journey from there to here
Published on February 27, 2006 By Gideon MacLeish In Current Events

A blogger on this site linked to a petition to get rid of O'Reilly. I thought I'd take a look at this petititon blow by blow:

Dear Your Honor Roger Ailes,

We, the undersigned, are becoming increasingly concerned about the mental health of the host of your 8:00 PM EST show on Fox News Channel.

Mental health is a prequisite to having a show online? How do you, then, justify the continued airings of reruns of shows featuring the likes of Bob Saget, Dave Coulier, Scott Baio and Tony Danza?

This host has claimed:

1) San Francisco should be attacked by al-Qaeda terrorists ("homicide bombers").

Now, this is a blatant lie. O'Reilly's statement was in response to San Francisco's banning of military recruiters in the city's schools and was not an encouragement for terrorists to bomb the towers, but a statement of fact that the SF intitiative was effectively an open invitation for just such an attack. In fact, SF's recent attempts to diminish the military presence in their city seem to reinforce that fact.

2) There's a conspiracy to cancel the extremely popular Christmas holiday, even though the culture of Christmas is prevalent in America for nearly three months of every year.

O'Reilly's "War on Christmas", while occasionally hyperbolic (the "Silent Night" example is just one such illustration of this) was not entirely off the mark. O'Reilly provided repeated, documented evidence of all of his assertions, and, in fact, lawsuits by individuals such as Michale Newdow reinforce O'Reilly's point.

3) That opponents of his show favor personal attacks and smearing, while he routinely employs the pejorative "pinheads" to describe anyone who disagrees with him.

OK, so we're accusing the pot of calling the kettle black, while we, the kettle, are calling the pot black. Good show!


4) That he never used the phrase "shut up" even though he's on-record saying that phrase dozens of times.

 

Not aware of this assertion, so I'll give this point to you, but question how it could possibly be a sound basis for removal of O'Reilly (in fact, it causes me to question the sanity of the petititon's author).



5) He has yet to publicly address his sexual penchant for soapy falafel sandwiches and female underlings.

O'Reilly's private life is not my concern, or anyone else's.



6) He routinely misrepresents factual information (often called "lying"), then claims he told the truth, but will occasionally recant and admit to flagrantly misleading his viewers.

O'Reilly is a commentator, NOT a reporter. It is interesting that he should be held to a higher journalistic standard than reporters, who must run corrections on articles they've printed on a regular basis.


(For more citations of your 8:00 PM EST host's growing level of dysfunction, please visit: http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/billoreilly where there are approximately 400 references to your host's mental instability.)

And extremely unbiased analyses, I'm sure (said with a voice dripping with sarcasm).

As a result, we recommend that you uphold your "fair and balanced" reputation and replace your 8:00 PM EST host with popular talk show host Phil Donahue.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Phil Donahue POPULAR? Sure, in 1979. Fair and Balanced? Umm, NEVER!

In a recent petition to MSNBC, your host praised Mr. Donahue's ability to draw a large audience and referred to Mr. Donahue's "honor and dignity" -- a perfect fit for Fox News Channel as your current host obviously endorses Donahue's ability to perform in prime time. So he's a perfect replacement for your 8:00 PM EST host who clearly could use some time off and professional psychological assistance.

Honor and Dignity don't translate to sanity, sorry.

We look forward to the premiere of The Donahue Factor, weeknights at 8:00 PM on Fox NewsChannel.

And I look forward to the premiere of nude jello wrestling on the Family Channel. Want I should buy you a beer while we're waiting?


Comments
on Feb 27, 2006
The person in question is on an irrational whine binge. It's funny how people who'd never be caught dead watching that show know ALL about it... usually because of inaccurate quotes they pick-up second hand on LIberal messageboards.
on Feb 27, 2006
As though programming of this nature actually responds to public petition.
Incendiary as it is, it's still info-tainment.
on Feb 27, 2006
The person in question is on an irrational whine binge. It's funny how people who'd never be caught dead watching that show know ALL about it... usually because of inaccurate quotes they pick-up second hand on LIberal messageboards.


I actually watch and listen to O'Reilly occasionally just to know what crap he's spewing, so I can hold an informed conversation about it with friends/family that think he speaks the gospel.

Media Matters is definitely a biased site. They state pretty clearly that their mission is to monitor conservative news/pundits for inaccuracy and misinformation. However, they provide transcripts and clips of everything they go after. They don't take stuff out of context. They also provide facts that counter the misinformation. They don't just say "That's a lie!", without backing it up.
on Feb 27, 2006
Don't these people have the ability to turn the channel if they don't agree with or like the show and it's host. I'm not a huge O'Reilly fan. I will watch occassionally. There are many other shows that I think are an even bigger waste of time, so I don't watch. (rolls eyes) people?!
on Feb 28, 2006

They don't take stuff out of context.

I like your humor!  I am glad you are not serious as that is clearly incorrect.