Bill O'Reilly Wrongly Labeled Funeral-Protester Fred Phelps 'Far Right'

  • Bookmark and Share

Recently, Bill O'Reilly used Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) to illustrate that he condemns extremists on the right as well as those on the left, but the problem is that Phelps isn't one of the “far right nuts,” he's one of the “left wing loons.”

On the November 1 “O'Reilly Factor,” the Fox News talker criticized the Kansas-based WBC as a “far right group” that loudly protests military funerals because they disagree with the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy that allows closeted gays in the military.

But Phelps isn't “far right.” According to Wikipedia and Kansas Voter View, he's a registered Democrat who ran in five Kansas Democratic primaries, including governor. He also reportedly campaigned for then-Sen. Al Gore in the 1988 presidential campaign (these photos seem to back this up), culminating in invitations to both Clinton-Gore inaugurations, although that support waned as Clinton-Gore promoted gay rights.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Unfortunately, O'Reilly seems to have fallen for the myth, labeling Phelps “far right” on both the November 1 and November 5 “O'Reilly Factor.” In the first show, O'Reilly called WBC a “far-right group” in the promotional teaser, as well as the introduction for the segment, stating, “A far-right group must pay the father of a dead Marine millions (bold mine throughout).”

In the actual segment, O'Reilly again linked Phelps and WBC to the right, implying the group is “far-right” by contrasting it with one that is far left:

And it's a shame there are this many crazy people in the world. You know, we've got the people attacking the churches--the far left loons and we got these people interrupting a military funeral.

During the November 5 viewer email follow-up, O'Reilly read responses to the previous piece about WBC and again branded Phelps “far right,” stating that he calls out both the left wing loons and “far right loons” equally.

This is not new. July 20, O'Reilly wielded the same technique to demonstrate that he is an equal-opportunity critic of political extremism by the “left wing loons” and “right wing nuts.” That's an even-handed policy, one that Old Media should note, but O'Reilly placed these particular loons on the wrong ideological side.

Between lefty blogs like Daily Kos and lefty websites like Think Progress, the left still tend to cast Phelps as a righty. Perhaps knowing Phelp's political background, the majority of Old Media very studiously avoid labeling Phelps, which contrasts with their habit of identifying people as righties whether the story calls for it or not. I doubt they would show that restraint if Phelps and WBC were "far right," especially if the preacher claimed to have photos of George W. Bush instead of Al Gore.

Hopefully, the next time that O'Reilly features Phelps and his church, he will get the political association correct, or better yet, starve them of the media they crave.

Photo via Orlin Wagner/AP and MSNBC.com

Lynn writes for NewsBusters and can be reached at tvisgoodforyou2 AT yahoo DOT com


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Has anyone sent BOR an

Has anyone sent BOR an email and corrected him?

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Actually, KP tried to

Actually, KP tried to make that point on his show this week and he corrected her, pointing out that Phelps is a registered Democrat.  He knows the deal now.

Forget 911, I dial 9MM.

It's about time someone

It's about time someone pointed out some of BOR's lunacy!

How BOR thinks a group of moonbats who disrespect fallen soliders and their families is "too conservative" ("far right", right?) is beyond me.

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Actually, it's

Actually, it's understandable (while not making excuses for BOR). Phelps' philosophy is indeed far-right, even while his political association is Democrat. No lefty would espouse or endorse Phelps' anti-gay rantings. Pro-gay is a lefty stance, rabid anti-gay is an extreme righty position.

Bottom line, BOR and his crew are guilty of the same lazy researching as the vast majority of the LSM, but trying to make the slightest bit of sense of Phelps' ravings (equating his political affiliation with his philosophical position) is simply not possible.

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

Lynn... BRAVO! Excellent

Lynn...

BRAVO!

Excellent catch here with BOR and his big mistake in regards to this plus thank you for the info on Phelps, some I knew but not as much as you put here.

Like Dan the Man said...I wonder if anybody has emailed BOR about this...did you by chance?

I hope to catch the show tonight and see if this is corrected.

Yes, I did email the

Yes, I did email the show--and the new ombudsman-type Dhue Point segment.

Thanks for correcting Bill.

Thanks for correcting Bill. It made me mad when he said this
idiot is a right wing nut. Hopefully Billy will apologize and
straighen this out. we'll see......I'll be watching, Bill!!!

Right wing MOM

and a child in the military. 

I think BOR has been punked

I think BOR has been punked by his teleprompter person.  An extreme right winger would not be protesting against the military on any issue.  An extreme right winger would be on the contrary demanding government action against perceived enemies of the State...like the NYT, Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria, etc. targeting their locations.  An extreme right winger would be taking matters into their own hands using violence.  This country knows nothing of right wing death squads like what occured in other countries.  A public lynching would be the closest example of what that would look like.  When was the last lynching?  The abortion clinic bombings would probably be another example (note the guy wasn't even a Christian, he was a-religious by his own admission).

As far as religious fundamentalists would be concerned, anyone calling themselves a Christian who would have the gall to walk with signs saying a soldier was going to Hell would be at minimum disfellowshipped, at max. excommunicated from the Church.  In fact they would not be considered as Christians and be treated like any other cult.  This guy Phelps is a cult leader and as such is on the road to Hell itself.  Repent you sinner!  Turn or Burn! 

Even when Christians take on homosexuals or any other group they consider as unsaved like abortionists, the response is not to tell them they are going to Hell, the response is to bring them the message of Salvation, even the lowest of human reprobate slugs is to be given respect as a fallen child of God in need of mercy.  While it may be true that the collective condoned actions of the US in allowing abortion, homosexuality and the rest of the filth as advocated by liberals/libertines warrants condemnation by God, those who are the instigators and leaders of that filth bear the total responsibilty for leading people astray, not the soldiers.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

Muslims "don't condemn

Muslims "don't condemn terror" enough - and that's bad - but you guys don't condemn WBC enough - and that's OK - is that what I've seen here over the last two years? 

Partner with Islam and the NB respect police:)

WBC

Lynn, you could send him your issue via "The Dhue Point".  He has been touting that a lot lately.

My guess is he won't acknowledge that WBC is actually left wing because it doesn't fit his template.

The WBC is anti-military and they protest at funerals to get their point across any way they can.  They are a family of lawyers.  They know exactly what they are doing.  My guess is they are hiding behind the shield of a church designation to do their dirty work.  They think it provides them some legal protection they wouldn't otherwise have.  Just my opinion of course.

"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."  Hillary Clinton, 6-28-04 San Francisco

Bill O'Reilly doesn't make

Bill O'Reilly doesn't make corrections because he doesn't make mistakes. If you disagree with his information, you must be a Kool-Aid drinker.

BOR Turns a Deaf Ear Again

Don't call BOR on this.  He'll just shout you down.

The media don't care that Phelps harassed the soldiers family

they only care that his group is speaking out about Gay people in the military. That is the issue that lets them lead people to believe this guy is on the right even though there are many on the left who are against Gay people being in the military and many on the right (like myself) who are fine with don't ask don't tell. It doesn't matter if he's on the right or left, either way it's despicable.

What is even worse is the media's and the left's selective outrage. They don't care about the protesters outside of Walter Reed or about Michael Moore using footage from a soldiers funeral without permission from the family in a way that offended them, or groups that I've seen in Chicago putting on live torture plays at their protests that paint our soldiers as the bad guys.

If this guy was on the right, it would be meaningless anyway because there is no large support or condoning of his actions like there is on the left with the protesters at Walter Reed or Michael Moore.

Three Cheers Lynn, Nice

Three Cheers Lynn,

Nice spinning!  Very admirable attempt. 

1)  Did you purposely not bring up Phelp's vehement opposition to the Clinton/Gore in 1992?  How could you have missed it?  It was clear as day in your Wikipedia link, right below the 1988 campaign support of Gore. 

2)  You do you know why he supported Gore in 1988 right?  Not b/c he was a Dem, but simply b/c Gore opposed a bill that was in effect, a gay bill of rights

Phelps far left?  Haha.  Sorry there, but nice try. 

You're argument is basically, he's registered as a Dem and he supported al gore in '88 (conveniently ignoring his Gore hate in '92)so he's far left. 

Yeah, that sure makes a lot of sense.

Leave it to you Leon. You

Leave it to you Leon.

You never quit do you little one...

Carry on as usual.

BT, Still gung-ho on

BT,

Still gung-ho on Thompson or are you showing your fair weather fan colors yet?

Your main man who you've been touting as the next president doesn't have a chance. 

Looking forward to when you try to claim that you never supported him.  haha.

Why would I claim I never

Why would I claim I never supported him little one?

Btw...I really really would love John Bolton to run as I have said numerous times, now there is a man who would do as he ran on one way or the other!

Thompson/Hunter '08 or Cheney/Bolton '08 you can reverse either of these scenario's too.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I will also support Giuliani if it comes down to it little one over any democrat...especailly Shrillary.

I really really would love

I really really would love John Bolton to run as I have said numerous times...

...after finally accepting that Thompson was a major dud.

ha.

I am fully behind Thompson

I am fully behind Thompson so far little one...don't go putting words in my mouth.

You are a regular afternoon comedy show every time you post Leon.

Troll on..... 

I can't help it

"... to both Clinton-Gore inaugurations, although that support waned as Clinton-Gore promoted gay rights."

It appears that Lynn covered that....

And where did she say, or imply, Phelps should have been labeled "far left"?  It's not there.

Once again, Leon, your ignorance is exacerbated by your myopia.

Waned?  That is a

Waned? 

That is a purposeful minimization of his true hatred of the Clinton's.

Once again a Newsbusters contributor engages in the same disingenuous behavior they claim they set out to fight.

Too funny.

So what????  You used this

So what????  You used this as an argument against Lynn's point, yet it's clear by the article that she covered that.

Minimize, schminimize...that's just more typical, Leonic obfuscation.

It's incredible....

Mattm, She didn't cover

Mattm,

She didn't cover it.

Waning support means that there is STILL some support, albeit a diminished amount.

The fact of the matter is that there was NO support.  In fact, Phelps went after Gore/Clinton with his infamous hatred. 

That's not waning support at all.

You're stretching things a

You're stretching things a bit there pally... Nothing new for you.

Mattm, No I'm

Mattm,

No I'm not. 

I'm reading words using their definitions like you're supposed to.

It's not my fault you don't know what waning means.

Mattm, you should have

Mattm,

you should have just ignored this conversation.

And where did she say, or imply, Phelps should have been labeled "far left"?  It's not there.

The first sentence guy.  Wow.  I figure you'd at least read the first sentence

Recently, Bill O'Reilly used Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) to illustrate that he condemns extremists on the right as well as those on the left, but the problem is that Phelps isn't one of the “far right nuts,” he's one of the “left wing loons.”

Not a very nice try there,

Not a very nice try there, Leon. Notice the quotation marks???  This was obviously (well, obviously to anyone with a brain) a literary device referring to O'Reilly's use of those phrases to promote his anti-extremist image. 

Good grief, do I have to explain every little thing to you???

Talk about "wow!" 

Mattm, Dense my man. 

Mattm,

Dense my man.  Dense

She used quotes b/c she used the exact term employed by Bill O'Reilly.

The rest of the words are all hers.  Especially where she says the problem is that he's not a far right nut, he's a left wing loon.

Mattm, you are an utter joke with minimal lexical understanding.

I'll take that as a

I'll take that as a compliment, coming from you.

The point it obvious.  You attach meanings to things people said which they did not mean.  It is obvious that the use of those quoted phrases means the words were not hers...they were O'Reilly's...

If you want to assign them to her to make your ridiculous point, that's your problem...but the fact is, she did not say that O'Reilly should have referred to Phelps as a Left Wing Loon, but merely that calling him a member of the Right was incorrect...

But I know you already knew that, and that you're just flame throwing ...

Have a nice day.

Mattm, What do you not

Mattm,

What do you not understand?

The words in the quotes are O'Reilly's.

The rest of the words are Lynn's.

It's clear as day.

Was O'Reilly making the argument on his show that Phelps wasn't far right, but actually far left?

I don't think so b/c if he was, why did Lynn write the post in the first place?

What do YOU not understand???

My point was they are not Lynn's words, yet they are the ones YOU used to make the claim that I was wrong to say she was not suggesting that BOR should have called him a left wing loon.

And even if she had called Phelps that, and was wrong about it, it's a moot point anyway because her point was simply that Phelps can not accurately be called "Far Right"!

Unreal

Mattm.Did Lynn not write

Mattm.

Did Lynn not write this post?  Weird. 

You're right she wasn't suggesting anything.  She was TELLING us that BOR should have called him a left-wing loon.

See below.  I've done you the favor of putting in BOLD the words that Lynn herself wrote:

Recently, Bill O'Reilly used Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) to illustrate that he condemns extremists on the right as well as those on the left, but the problem is that Phelps isn't one of the “far right nuts,” he's one of the “left wing loons.”

Now do you get it?   Your misunderstanding is truly baffling to me.

You are SO WRONG its

You are SO WRONG its amazing!!!!!

She was definitely NOT "telling us that BOR should have called him a left-wing loon."

She was simply telling us that it was wrong for him to call Phelps a member of the "Far Right"...

This is a classic example of how you deliberately misinterpret what someone says in order to make some stupid point.

Good grief what a dolt!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Mattm, are you

Mattm,

are you intentionally ignoring the end of the sentence.

he's one of the “left wing loons.”

Not only is she saying he's not far right, she closes by saying he's a left wing loon.

I write bigger so you could read it, but unfortunately, NB doesn't have that function.

You are intentionally

You are intentionally ignoring the overall point and meaning of the entire article.

You pick out one sentence to criticize me over, yet you deliberately miss the point in order to score a hit, or something.

You do this all the time.

If you want to say that her article is suggesting BOR should have labeled Phelps "far left" or that she was labelling him that way fine...but it's clear that the article is about what BOR said, not what he should have said.

Blech. This whole 'story'

Blech. This whole 'story' just goes to show how grotesquely relentless we are in our attempts to compartmentalize ideology. You'd think the left and right would be able to find some common ground over how repugnant Phelps is, but no, it's a contest over who can disown him first.

And since I find him repulsive, and I'm not conservative, he must be conservative, right? It makes such perfect sense.

Phelps is an idiot. Let's not try to pawn him off on each other.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

so you disown him

so you disown him then?

GoHunter08

I sense a trap....I don't

I sense a trap....I don't think Phelps was ever a liability of the left in the first place, so I don't have anything to disown. He's a Christian zealot and hates gays, so it's easy to think of him as being (stereotypically) right-wing. But he protests the military so it's easy to think of him as (again, stereotypically) left-wing.

Can't he just be an anomaly of fanaticism? Why does each diametric ideology have to displace him onto one another? How unproductive can you get, getting into an argument about who hates his politics more?

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Jace

no need for a trap; your self-contradictory posts speak for themselves

GoHunter08

Care to elaborate? I

Care to elaborate?

I figured the trap was that if I jumped to say "yeah, I disown him" I'd be admitting that he's the left's liability in the first place.

So...where have I contradicted myself? I'm not being cagey here, I'd really like to know where you see contradiction, because I'm flummoxed.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

but no, it's a contest over

but no, it's a contest over who can disown him first.

And since I find him repulsive,

you are doing the very thing you complain against, but i must agree with you that this person would best be not seen and not heard.

GoHunter08

And since I find him


And since I find him repulsive, and I'm not conservative, he must be conservative, right? It makes such perfect sense.

Wow, seriously? That's where I contradicted myself? Dude, I was being sarcastic. That's me taking a tone of mockery about the liberal perspective on this issue. Sorry I didn't write "sarc on", I thought the tone of my writing was crystal clear. Turns out we're in perfect agreement here.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

no no no Dr J

it was in your clear statement that you find it distasteful that both sides attempt to disown him and then do your best to disown him. That is the contradiction. 

 I think all people should disown him

GoHunter08

No, I didn't use the word

No, I didn't use the word distasteful, and I didn't say that I personally disown him. The point of my original post was that one would think both sides could find common ground on Phelps rather than trying to attribute his ultra-fringe beliefs to the other side of the spectrum.

That post was meant to be uniting and non-partisan, and still the semantically-impaired jump on it like flies on $h!t, trying to expose some non-existent hypocrisy or contradiction. My post was crystal-clear, it's not my fault you either don't get it or wilfully look for flaws to chip away at.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

JasonC, Great post.  I

JasonC,

Great post.  I agree that everyone should find common ground around Phelp's unmitigated hatred.

But what irks me is that anytime there's a far left wack job, the right uses that person to paint the entire left as extremist, anti-Americans, i.e. Code Pink

However, as soon as there's an extremist on their side, they get defensive and claim he's not representative of the majority on the right.

It doesn't work that way.

Actually Jason, it has been

Actually Jason, it has been pointed that Phelps and his so called congregation are a pack of lawyers.  They are using the Church as a shield for their leftist behavior as a means of trying to discredit religious people, its called being an agent provocateur.  As I have pointed out before, no Christian behaves the way they do and certainly is no zealot of Christianity, they are therefore either a cult or using religion as a shield for their disgusting behavior.   Trying to claim these creeps are Christian is like trying to claim Jim Jones was one as well.  The only anomaly here is you not recognizing the falseness of their so called proclaimed faith.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

I know D, that's why I

I know D, that's why I qualified the statement with "stereotypical". I'm not speaking from either side of the aisle here.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Good luck

Sadly a lot of times you're either on the "team" or not. Independents aren't tolerated very well. And in this case ideology shoudn't be an issue. Phelps is just plain old crazy.

Thank you, exactly. "He

Thank you, exactly.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

The fact is this story is

The fact is this story is about O'Reilly, not Phelps.

Those who try to say that Lynn was making the flat statement that BOR should have called Phelps a "far left loon" are, I think deliberately, ignoring the context of the post, as I tried to explain.

I believe the context was clear: i.e. that BOR, in an overzealous effort to portray himself as an anti-extremist, misapplied the label, and that IF (big IF) BOR is going to use that kind of label,  yes, "far left" would have been more accurate, since the guy is a Democrat.  I don't think she was flatly saying that Phelps should be labled that way.  O'Reilly and his use of the label, and his motivation for it, was the issue.  To me, that was clear. 

Admittedly, that's my interpretation, but I think that, in context, it's correct, and could only be missed by someone who is deliberately nitpicking, or reading something into it that isn't there, in an effort to seem to be making a brilliant point.

Bottom line: The "far right" label was misapplied by BOR.  "Far out" would be more like it...

It would be nice if we could get common ground on Phelps...and I think we have...most of us, that is.  The guy is a whack...pure and simple... But, as I say, this article was not about him, it was about O'Reilly.

READ

She "flatly" said:

"he will get the political association correct"

You said:

"in an effort to seem to be making a brilliant point."

Just stop. Please.

Reading comprehension isn't considered "brilliant". I have to say you are making a brilliant effort in making yourself look stupid.

MV, Perfectly

MV,

Perfectly stated. 

That whole exchange was futile since matt clearly can't read or understand the English language.  I wish I had realized earlier.

At first I thought he was arguing just b/c he was stubborn, but it's now clear he's comprehension disabled.  It was unfair of me to try to exploit his clear weakness.

I'll be careful in the future to not take advantage of those that are at a natural disadvantage, i.e. not able to read or write on a blog requiring reading & writing.

"In context"

http://hetstence.com/blog/media/inigomontoya.jpg

"I do not believe it means what you think it means"

You are friggin hilarious!!!

Nothing personal but I think

Nothing personal but I think you are completely misreading the post. It's obvious that she is saying Phelps is far left.

Here's the headline:

Bill O'Reilly Wrongly Labeled Funeral-Protester Fred Phelps 'Far Right'

The only place in the entire article where she uses "far left" to describe Phelps is in the opening paragraph...and that was merely using O'Reilly's terminology, as she later illustrates.

She then goes on to refer to Phelps, thusly: "But Phelps isn't "far right." According to Wikipedia and Kansas Voter View, he's a registered Democrat who ran in five Kansas Democratic primaries, including governor. He also reportedly campaigned for then-Sen. Al Gore in the 1988 presidential campaign (these photos seem to back this up), culminating in invitations to both Clinton-Gore inaugurations, although that support waned as Clinton-Gore promoted gay rights." 

Nowhere does she say, or even imply, that O'Reilly should have lebelled Phelps "far left" - she may believe that, but her article dosn't say it.

This article is about O'Reilly incorrectly putting the "far right" tag on Phelps, not about how he should have labeled him "far left."

Amazing.

If he's not far right what is he?

The only thing amazing is your cognitive dissonance.

Her summation clearly states:

"Hopefully, the next time that O'Reilly features Phelps and his church, he will get the political association correct, or better yet, starve them of the media they crave."

Far Out ...see above. The

Far Out ...see above.

The article is about O'Reilly, not Phelps.  The context is clear.  BOR, in an overzealous attempt to portray himself as an equal opportunity anti-extremist, mis-applied the "far right" label.

She was not making a flat declarative statement that the guy should be labeled "far left", but mererly that if O'Reilly is going to use these kinds of labels, he should get the political affiliations right...

LOL

Which would be "far left".

You are a trolling genius.

Doesn't this explain all

Doesn't this explain all this?

"but the problem is that Phelps isn't one of the 'far right nuts,' he's one of the 'left wing loons.'"

Doesn't that say what Lynn thinks? 

Fred Phelps and his ilk are

Fred Phelps and his ilk are the rarity that put to lie the concept of Left/Right politics in this country.  They are more like outer orbit rather than left right...

Yeah I agree BD, except

Yeah I agree BD,

except that they support many of the fundamental tenets of the Republican/Right/Conservative platform.

And they share a universal

And they share a universal hatred of the military which they share with the liberals as well...

Ah BD, Nice.  Love the

Ah BD,

Nice.  Love the generalization.

Now since this hatred from the left of the military is universal, does that mean leftie soldiers hate themselves?

 

Never mind, read it

Never mind, read it wrong.

Texas has a population of nearly 21 million people, all of whom are ashamed to be from the same state as the Dixie Chicks. (IMAO.us)

Ha Sun! No problem.  I

Ha Sun!

No problem. 

I was really trying to think of a witty comeback, but I wasn't sure what you were going for. 

 

Please, by all means, FIND

Please, by all means, FIND a liberal soldier and ASK THEM.

Like trying to find an honest man in congress....

"except that they support

"except that they support many of the fundamental tenets of the Republican/Right/Conservative platform."

Like registering and running for office as Democrats?

"You're argument is

"You're argument is basically, he's registered as a Dem and he supported
al gore in '88 (conveniently ignoring his Gore hate in '92)so he's far
left. Yeah, that sure makes a lot of sense."

Makes more sense than believing a man that has been a registered democrat for 20 years, who has run for office 5 times as a democrat, who is a fan of Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein, whose group protested against the US from Baghdad in 2003, and who attacks military families isn't far left.

Besides, that is not what

Besides, that is not what the "basic argument" is....

I believe people are deliberately taking this article out of context.  It's about O'Reilly, not Phelps.

No Spin Zone here...just a solid Democratic background

@ Leon 

1) I did address Phelps's displeasure by stating:

 [they were very supportive] culminating in invitations to both Clinton-Gore inaugurations, although that support waned as Clinton-Gore promoted gay rights.

As Clinton-Gore supported more LGBT issues, Phelps supported the pair less and less.

2) It isn't that he *just* supported Gore in '88; there is a laundry list of affiliations with the Democratic Party, including a voter registration in Kansas as a Democrat, as well as a 1999 "Mother Jones" profile where Phelps affirmed his status as a Democrat:

Phelps remained prominent in state and local politics, working for years as a major organizer for the state's Democratic Party. (He still calls himself a Democrat, refusing to change just because his party has.) In 1988, Phelps housed campaign workers for Al Gore's first presidential run; in 1989, his eldest son, Fred Jr., a fundraiser for Gore's Senate campaign at his home.

I noticed your enthusiasm in protesting Phelps's status as a Democrat further down the thread. I think it is pretty clear that Phelps's background is that of a Dem, and as of that '99 still thought of himself as one. Whether he does today is a unknown, but the point is, his background is not Republican or "far right."

It is Democratic, and since I don't think he is mainstream, his background can also be defined as "far left," especially when one factors in his extremisim, which he exhibited while still calling himself a Democrat.

I don't know how anyone could get "far right" out of that background.

Lynn the

Lynn the Disingenuous,

and yet again, you ignore Phelp's behavior during the 1992 election and the entirety of the Clinton's presidency.

It wasn't displeasure he felt in'92.  It was  utter hatred.  IN 1998 he screamed at Gore that his father was in hell.  That's not displeasure lynn. You're purposefully downplaying his hatred toward the Dems of the 1990's and 2000s.

A laundry list generally has more than two items Lynn.  He's a registered Dem and he affirmed his registered Dem status.  That's your laundry list?  Interesting choice of words.

You're weak argument is this:  He's a registered Dem, so he's a Dem.

Unfortunately, action speaks louder than words and his actions are faaaaar right.

I never protested his Dem status, I protested your lame attempts to call him far left.  You have no argument.  All you have is a voter registration, which means nothing, especially in the a state as thoroughly RED as Kansas. 

Sorry folks, Fred Phelps is

Sorry folks, Fred Phelps is as conservative as they get.  We can't pass him off on the left.  He's bananas, but his values are as conservative Christian as they could possibly be.  Mainstream Republicans were right beside him protesting against gay rights, and now he's gone way too far and we're trying to disown him.  We're going to have to face the fact that there are some righties that go too far.

Registered Democrat??? He

Registered Democrat??? He has just gone off teh deep end like Murtha.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Yeah, riiiggghhttt.   

Yeah, riiiggghhttt.    Ran for DEMOCRAT office five times,  as recently as a 1998 bid for governor of Kansas, and financially and physically supports democrat candidates.   I'm sorry, but someone who is an "extreme conservative" is not going to support democrats nor seek democrat office.

Also, there is absolutely NOTHING conservative Christian about hatred or demonstrating at funerals or being anti-semitic.

Lastly, who are these "mainstream republicans" who joined right in with Mr. Phelps?    

 

When asked if he went to war with Iraq  to derail the impeachment vote:  “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Jer, Did you ever

Jer,

Did you ever consider Mayor Michael Bloomberg a Republican?

Or did you realize he ran as a Dem to avoid a crowded field?

Come on Leon..

From Wiki:  Bloomberg, a lifelong member of the Democratic Party decided to run for mayor as a member of the Republican Party ticket.

So... I never considered Michael Bloomberg a Republican, mainly because he wasn't a Republican.

If you can show me where Phelps was a lifelong member of the Republican party instead of a lifelong member of the Democrat Party, and that the Kansas gubernatorial race was too crowded on the (R) ticket,  then your point will have merit.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq  to derail the impeachment vote:  “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Valid point Jer, I

Valid point Jer,

I suppose my only point is that your party registration is not always indicative of your beliefs.

It looks to me like Phelps will support anyone that hates gays.

Hating the SIN of being gay is definitely a right position.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't gay marriage a HUGE issue in 2000? 

"It looks to me like Phelps

"It looks to me like Phelps will support anyone that hates gays."

Agreed.

 

"Hating the SIN of being gay is definitely a right position."

Hating SIN of any kind is a Godly position.

 

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't gay marriage a HUGE issue in 2000?"

Actually it was "Sanctity of Marriage" .

 

I think we both agree that Mr. Phelps is the epitome of "lunatic fringe".

Thanks for keeping things civil Leon, it is appreciated.

 

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

I suppose my only point is ...


Valid point Jer,

Give it a rest. You've been totally PWN3D, Leon:

Here is a Phelps time line from The
Southern Poverty Law Center.
Note:

1988
Phelps provides rooms for Democrat Al Gore's
presidential campaign workers
. Though the Phelps-Gore connection will
grow increasingly distant, Phelps' oldest son, Fred Jr., is invited to
the first Clinton-Gore inauguration in 1993
.

Did you know that Phelps ran for the governor of Kansas - as a
Democrat
?

1990
Phelps, undertaking a run for governor of
Kansas
, begins disseminating flyers attacking his gubernatorial
competitors and other state politicians in unusually personal terms. He
loses the Democratic primary
, but garners 11,634 votes, 6.7% of
the total
.

And Log Cabin
Republicans
, who bill themselves as "the nation's largest gay and lesbian
Republican organization", report that Gore is no friend to Gays.

Gore, who was quoted by the Nashville Tennessean in 1984 saying
homosexuality is not "an acceptable alternative that society should
affirm"
and said in his 1984 U.S. Senate race that he would not
accept money from gay rights organizations
and that he opposed a "gay
bill of rights," reportedly sought the support of the Phelps family in
his 1988 presidential campaign, and invited the Phelps' to the Clinton-Gore
inaugurations of January 1993 and January 1997.

..................................................

Neverdock even has a few nice family photographs of Democratic Vice
President and former failed Democratic Presidential contender,
Al Gore, posing with Fred Phelps:

Fred Phelps (left) and Al Gore
(center)Fundraiser at Phelps HomeTopeka, Kansas

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30473968@N00/22991073/

And here is one with the whole family!

Left to right: Fred Phelps, Tipper
Gore, Betty Phelps, Al Gore

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30473968@N00/22991074/

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

Your buddies Gore and Edwards are clearly homophobes.

As for Obama Usama, I can't realy tell.

And as for Hillary, I won't even take a lick at it.

I agree with you

I agree with you here. My man (and my namesake) Bill O'Reilly is mainly right here. Phelps' anti-gay rights beliefs are part of the traditionally conservative movement, but his anti-Catholic (I am going to be baptized soon), and anti-military stances make him a Democrat. I am a big fan of O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Greg Gutfeld, and John Gibson, though I often disagree with them from time to time.

"Kame-Hame-HAAAA!!!!!" - Son Goku, destroying Usama Bin Laden.

Being anti-military is not

Being anti-military is not a Democratic position.

This cheap, tired line needs to go the way of the dodo.

Somebody's been getting his

Somebody's been getting his talking points from Media Matters.

Forget 911, I dial 9MM.

Uh Fossten, It's not a

Uh Fossten,

It's not a talking point.  It's reality.

*in my douchiest voice

"Somebooooody's been getting their talking points from LGF."

Uh...Troll Link

Uh...Troll

Link please?

Forget 911, I dial 9MM.

Oh and Fossten, I would

Oh and Fossten,

I would imagine most people that live and die by talking points, use some that are a little more current than 2005.

sweet link though.

Being anti-military is not

Being anti-military is not a Democratic position.

Really?  They sure had us fooled with the mixed signals.  Let's see, John Kerry's comment on ending up in the military in Iraq if you don't get a good education, John Kerry equating the military in Vietnam to Ghangis Khan, both Clinton And Carter gutting the military budgets for domestic programs, Moron.org (aka, far left Dems) publicly defaming General Petraeus with a full page ad, etc.  Hmmm, I wonder where we ever got that idea from?????

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.

just plain looney

Reading his wiki entry the guy protests anything and anyone.

"Phelps' stated political views and activities are primarily driven by his view that the United States is, "a sodomite nation of flag-worshiping idolators."[26]

I have to say that homophobic liberal is an oxymoron. And party affiliation means nothing. There are liberal republicans and conservative democrats.

I think he's so far to the right that he's pretty much out there all by himself. Probably thinks Reagan was too liberal.

 

 

What in the world are you

What in the world are you talking about? I know plenty of liberals that talk more about homosexuals (in a bad way) than my close friends (who are very conservative) do.

Also, living in Ohio, I know plenty of people in Southeast Ohio that are racist and homophobes and guess how they vote? That's right, they vote Democrat across the board. My fiancee's grandparents are bigots and aren't comfortable around African-Americans and guess how they vote? Straight Democrat again.

On the other hand, my mom, grandparents, aunt & uncle, cousin and I are all very conservative Christians and guess what? None of us have any problem with the fact that my step-father is black.

I don't know how the Democrat party has everyone so fooled about them being the ones that care about minorities because from my personal experience and observation it is the exact opposite.

Bill made note of this guy

Bill made note of this guy being a registered Democrat last week if I'm not mistaken.

I leave for awhile, come

I leave for awhile, come back, expecting to read the usually astute comments, and instead, see Leon wallpaper from almost top to bottom. Sigh...

Chris... He is just doing

Chris...

He is just doing what he gets paid for...sure wished Soros would fire him so he could spin more records....maybe full time and let us alone.

O'Reilly

Phelps may not be fully far-right, but his ludicrous statements are an extreme right view point, extreme emphasis on extreme.(Not conservative, far-right) I really don't think this is a big deal. Phelps is a lunatic.

voter registration

Being registered as a Democrat does not make you a Liberal. When I registered to vote many many moons ago, I checked the Democrat box because I was from a poor family (10 kids, Dad worked 2 jobs most of my life to support us) and thought they represented the poor people more....  I grew up and became more aware of reality, and realized that giving free stuff to poor people does not help them, but hinders any chance of motivating them towards personal success.   

Political party is unimportant to me, so I have never bothered to change the registration, and I still show as a Democrat.

My point, just because Phelps is registered as a Democrat, that  doesn't make him a LeftWingLoon.  There are RightWingNuts also.  Whether people choose to acknowledge it or not, they can be as crazy as the Left Loons.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.