Time for Bill O'Reilly's weekly Pitting

The BBQ Pit
1

This isn’t about something that O’Reilly has said recently,but rather about what he hasn’t said.

Which is that he was wrong.

Dead wrong.

Not even in the same planetary orbit degree of wrong.

Way back when Hillary Clinton’s book deal was announced, I remember O’Reilly bleating and screeching about how her $8,000,000 was obscene and an abomination and how Simon & Schuster would never make back their money and you would have thought Satan himself was roaming the land, dealing out his own unique form of justice with his pitchfork and Lackeys of Ironic Punishment.

Every so often over the next 3 years O’Reilly would dredge the subject up again, and he would always mention how Simon & Schuster would never get their money back and that Hillary’s book wouldn’t sell more than 100,000 copies.

O’Reilly even guaranteed that one.

And then, when Hillary’s book was released this past June, O’Reilly again was screeching and bleating about it, this time saying that it “was a travesty because she wasn’t telling the American people what they wanted to know.”, which according to O’Reilly was the truth about Whitewater and he stock dealings.

It was funny because O’Reilly sure as fuck was speaking for any Americans that I knew of, in fact most people were sick of all of the old attacks being dredged up and thrown at the Clintons yet again to see if **this ** time they could stick.

And then about a month or so ago, O’Reilly had the Medusa of the Right Wing, Anne Colter on, ostensibly to flog her new book, but really to take more potshots and attack the Clintons yet again.

During the course of the interview O’Reilly again brought up his by now standard, “she won’t sell nearly enough books for Simon & Schuster to make back their advance.”

Hillary needed to sell about 1,000,000 copies for the publishers to recoup their advance and for her to start collecting royalties.

Well guess what?

Hillary is well over 1,000,000 copies sold and Simon & Schuster have indeed made their advance back. In fact, Hillary’s book is shaping up to be among the best-selling books for the entire year.

But has O’Reilly stepped up to the plate and admitted that not only was he wrong, he was pitifully wrong?

Fuck no.

He just pretends that he never said it and since no one will call him on it, unless Al Franken does, he gets off scot free.

Gila Monster felcher.

2

Well, bowtieweenie Tucker Carlson said he’d eat his tie (and shoes) if Hilary’s book sold a million. He got off by eating a cake shaped like a tie that Hil came on Crossfire to serve. :confused:

BTW, did I miss the O’lie-ly pitting when he said he’d never again trust the Bush Administration if the WMD claim was bogus.

3

Who admits they’re wrong? It’s never been a good survival trait to advertise one’s weaknesses.

Seriously, is this a joke?

4

Nobody admits they’re wrong, but it’s kinda fun to see it pointed out by others. No, it’s not a joke, but it is pretty funny. I’d love to see O’Reilly choke on his own words (if he’d eat 'em). I’d bust a gut laughing. :wink:

5

Well, after he was caught lying about his affair (yeah, yeah, WAY after), President Clinton admited that he was wrong. Not that this necessarily makes him more moral than O’Reilly.

Heck, even Jesse Helms admited publicly that he was wrong about the AIDS crisis, and apologized for holding up money for research and treatment.

6

All you “fans” may want to check out this book. There are excerpts available here.

7

Well, I would think if one is a “journalist”, it is likely an ethical requirement to correct oneself. Especially if you claim your shtick as being “spin”-free.

Or let me guess, O’Reilly is really (at least in this case) an “entertainer” and not bound by any silly ethics code?

8

http://www.thismodernworld.com/

Tom Tomorrow (may the Good Lord bless him and keep him…) has excerpts from a recent book specifying a number of O’Reilly whoppers, fibs, and minor mendacities.

Enjoy.

9

If a self-appointed pundit like O’Reilly is going to make a very public “guarantee” about something it is only decent for that person to admit it if they’re wrong (as Tucker Carlson did). It’s not illegal for O’Reilly to ignore his own past statements when it’s convenient (and he does that a lot) but it definitely shows a lack of class and credibility.

10

I’ve always liked Tucker Carlson even though he’s a conservative. He’s never come off as insane or hateful or mindlessly ideological as so many other pundits do (left and right). He also showed that he can take a joke and be self-deprecating. He’s got a ton more class than people like O’Reilly or Coulter.

11

Wow! I had no idea there were people who saw through this moron’s veneer. I feel kind like the non-pods in “Invasions of the Bodysnatchers” (the original).

O’Reilly is to ethics what professional wrestling is to Shakespearean thespians - wholy unrelated.

B

(p.s. Be gentle. First post, you know…)

12

O’Reilly is constantly bleating and screeching about how the tabloid Tv show Inside Edition won two Peabody Awards while he was the anchor.

As Al Franken has pointed out, the show didn’t win a Peabody but rather another award and it won the award after O’Reilly had left the show.

And O’Reilly has never admitted or even tried to correct his error, even going so far as to blatently lie on the O’Reilly Factor and say 'Never said it. Dig up a tape of me saying it. You won’t find any evidence. Never said it.'

Then when confronted with evidence of his lie O’Reilly starts screaming and bleating at Franken to shut up.

Those are hardly what I would call meeting even the very minimal journalistic standards.

13

I can tell you’re new here. Bill O-lie-ly is one of the most frequently pitted public figures on this board. :wink:

Welcome to SDMB.

14

Of course, the only reason he says that is because he hates America so much.

15

Isn’t Tucker Carlson gay? The only reason I’m asking is because it puzzles me that if he is, why would he ally himself with people so hostile to his sexuality?

If I’m wrong, well, NEVER MIND. :wink:

16

I was quite surprised to read what Carlson had to say about O’Reilly in the Sept. 13 issue of Salon (free day-pass available by watching a quick ad). Commenting about O’Reilly and his show on FOX, Carlson says:

**You go, bowtie boy!

17

I think you might be confusing Tucker Carlson with David Brock.

David Brock wrote a book called ** The Real Anita Hill: The Untold Story** which savagely attacked her and which Brock later admitted was a bunch of lies.

Brock also wrote for the American Spectator which is a magazine about on a par with The Weekly World News in terms of actual factual/truthful writing taking place between the front and back covers. The Spectator was one of the main sources of the right wing attacks on Clinton, and Brock had a large part in some of the most vicious lies and smears thrown at the Clintons.

But, he had an epiphany and wrote a memoir called Blinded By The Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative in which he came clean and admitted what he had done.

The right wing then started bleating and screeching that everything in the book was a lie but they never came up with any evidence to do so.

Brock is gay.

18

according to this very brief author bio, Carlson has a wife and children so I doubt he’s gay. Maybe it’s the bowtie that gives that impression. :wink:

19

H’uh. I thought I read somewhere he was gay. That’s really weird.

Oh well.

20

Carlson is a great guy. Smart, principled, and totally willing to state his biases as a commentator outright and show why he’s right anyway. And, as he rightly notes, he has a REAL self-deprecating(sp?) sense of humor and the ability to admit when he’s wrong.

There was a funny article on Slate a while back that chronicled O’Reily’s manner of speaking in which “shut up” is pretty much his replacement for “uh” or “um.” He says it in virtually all occasions, sometimes laughingly, sometimes in a frothing rage, but almost obsessively.