
People who are sick and tired of the smear campaigns against conservatives emanating from the left take heart, for it appears that last night's "O'Reilly Factor" was a foreshadowing of things to come.
Just hours after Bill O'Reilly came out strongly against media representatives parroting factually inaccurate statements promulgated by leftwing websites and organizations, the host of the "Radio Factor" issued a strong warning Thursday to press outlets participating in such smear campaigns.
Fasten your seatbelts, because this is really delicious (audio available here courtesy Johnny Dollar):
There is a huge problem in this country, and I'm gonna attack that problem. I'm gonna attack it. These people aren't going to get away this. I'm gonna go right where they live. Every corrupt media person is on notice right now - I'm coming after you. And I don't care if it's Bill O'Reilly, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, anybody smeared by any media from now on I'm holding them accountable. I'm gonna hunt you down, and I mean it. Smear stops here. You're all on notice out there. I'm coming for you.
[...]
I've had enough. It's gonna stop. And I am gonna be the cop that stops it.
Go get 'em, Bill!!!




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I'm gonna just
September 27, 2007 - 13:31 ET by Cape Conservativesit back and watch (and listen)! You go, Bill!!!
Beware those of you who think you can best this man.
"...And I don't care if
September 27, 2007 - 13:44 ET by Chris Norman"...And I don't care if it's Bill O'Reilly, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, anybody smeared by any media from now on.."
Huh? It's O'Reilly, ever positioning himself as independent. When, pray tell, has Clinton or Obama ever been smeared in a major media outlet? Where? Cheered is more like it...
While I don't agree with
September 27, 2007 - 14:39 ET by BeowulfWhile I don't agree with many of O'Reilly's positions and often find him somewhat arrogant, I would REALLY love to see some documented accounts of partisanship from him. I keep hearing that he's a "smear merchant" or a "conservative lap-dog". Show some examples where he made derogatory comments about someone without a factual basis. He is as politically independent as any talking head out there, and far fairer than the VAST majority of them. He slams the right as fast as he slams the left. If you do or say something stupid and you're in the public eye, O'Reilly is going to call you on it. If you're a hypocrite, from either side of the ideological divide, expect to hear your name on the Factor. Yes, he's opinionated, but he's not reporting the news either. He's a commentator, not a newscaster. Commentators comment. What they are and what they do kind of go hand-in-hand. And I said it earlier, and I'll say it again - the lefties really stepped in it when they took a shot across O'Reilly's bow. He's gonna hammer them. And it's going to be so fun to watch.
The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers
Agree to everything. I'm
September 27, 2007 - 14:51 ET by Chris NormanAgree to everything. I'm not O'Reilly's biggest fan, either. One reason being, in his attempt to appear unconnected to the GOP, he tries to apportion blame between them and the Democrats, even if it's a huge overreach to do so on some issues. I'm happy to see him go off on this crusade - even though he comes off sounding a little grandiose - per usual.
A terrific, ironic joke on the MSM
September 27, 2007 - 13:46 ET by RJI'm not an O'Reilly fan, but I'll support him in this.
If he plays it right, he could bump up his ratings even more....a terrific, ironic joke on the MSM.
Isn't smear Bill's main tactic as well?
September 27, 2007 - 13:47 ET by nyisgoldwatercountryIn the mass media war, it's always good to remember that there are no heroes. Everyone's looking out for number one.
Billo is the biggest 'smear
September 27, 2007 - 14:05 ET by katleeBillo is the biggest 'smear merchant' of all, what a joke
Billo is the biggest 'smear
September 27, 2007 - 15:09 ET by SMGalbraithBillo is the biggest 'smear merchant' of all, what a joke
Okay, the floor is yours.
Let's have some evidence.
And you would agree that falsely accusing someone of being a "smear merchant" is itself a smear?
SMG
evidence...?!?!? run
September 27, 2007 - 15:53 ET by TruthMongerevidence...?!?!?
run away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Making big statements like
September 27, 2007 - 15:59 ET by Chris NormanMaking big statements like that means never having to back them up.
LOL
September 27, 2007 - 16:00 ET by american-americanrun away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just had a visual of Monty Python's "Holy Grail" with the men clicking coconuts together and running away... :-)
that's where i got
September 27, 2007 - 16:04 ET by TruthMongerthat's where i got it:)
great minds think alike
Aye, this gave me a good
September 27, 2007 - 20:28 ET by CortillaenAye, this gave me a good laugh. Incidentally, I ended up envisioning these "smear merchants" (I wonder how that phrase will hold...) as the witch-hunting crowd, especially the one
Moron: She turned me into a newt!
Knight: A newt?
Moron: ... I got be'er...
Thanks for the kicks.
http://www.rhjunior.... Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Cort
September 27, 2007 - 20:35 ET byyou mean like this?
Yes, you are even more annoying than Blonde. the EYE
Aye, that'd be the one.
September 27, 2007 - 21:31 ET by CortillaenAye, that'd be the one. Too bad we can't just say, "Ni!" at them until they run away...
http://www.rhjunior.... Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
LoS
September 27, 2007 - 21:07 ET by UnsaneLink or slink.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
NOT EXACTLY...
September 27, 2007 - 21:14 ET by danybhoyIf you know anything about O'Reilly when it comes to this sort of the thing, it's not exactly about right & left, it's about power. He has always said the rich & powerfull protect each other. It's in their mutual interest to do so.
As for smear, he puts himself out there, he gets hit, & he also hits back.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
Interesting.....
September 27, 2007 - 13:56 ET by Missouri ConservativeHowever, what exactly is Bill going to do that he hasn't already done?
"women and minorities hardest hit"
O'Reilly to MSM: Bwahahaha!
September 27, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Mica the MagnificentLets see if Olberman and Matthews make eye contact with O'Reilly over this. Couric, should she develop a pair of cashews and take him on, will only wind up with a different kind of colonoscopy.
Dan 'Nurse! Where's my afternoon medication? (formerly known as Courage') Rather breathes a different gas and lives under a different color sky than the rest of us and is too stupid to get it.
Wolfe and the rest of the CNN propagandists will ask for advice from George Soros, MoveOn.org and the Clintons before proceeding with any further smear reporting.
George Steponmyeyeglasses and Andrew 'my daddy was a big shot and that's why I'm here' Cuomo will be arrogant, but cautious pending script approval from the people and the organization as mentioned above.
Go for the jugular, Bill, and don't let go!
Bill's coming after "them"..and
September 27, 2007 - 14:46 ET by JayTeeBill is coming after the smear merchants, and he has the TV audience ratings to make it stick.
Plus, unlike George Stephanopolis....Bill's E-mail doesn't get hit when Hillary/Bill Clinton needs MSM help......O'reilly's email comes from Americans, not the Chinese.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Glad Bill got the point when it came to him
September 27, 2007 - 14:57 ET by Lame CherryI alerted bloggers here weeks ago after Larry Craig was outed that there has been a pattern of destroying Conservatives to remove them from government. It has been from George Allen to now in media, Bill O'Reilly the most ludicrous tactics destroying people.
The question in this is why is George Bush sitting around along with Lott, Specter and Lugar allowing this all to happen? The uniformed chant about Iraq not understanding the policy there (which included Rumsfeld allowing terrorists in to kill them), but no one is addressing the real debate of these coups against Conservatives leaving only these patricians on both sides in Democrat communist Clinton and the Bill Buckley big brother type GOP as George Bush practices stomping this CanAmMex nation super state down our throats.
Bill O'Reilly doesn't need, but is required to start bringing out all of this as this is organized and is not just coming out of the blue.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
If Hillary believes..then Bill O'Reilly can believe the opposite
September 27, 2007 - 16:23 ET by JayTeeIf Hillary believes there is a vast right wing Conspiracy out to get her, then that lends precedence to Bill's belief ...... Tic for Tac.
They're gonna really hate O'reilly before he's done with them.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
And who better to lead the
September 27, 2007 - 16:21 ET by JerAnd who better to lead the anti-smear campaign than a professional smear merchant. I've been watching this charlatan nearly every night for the past nine years, and he has built his little empire on top of a mountain of mud.
Jer
telling the truth is "a
September 27, 2007 - 16:26 ET by TruthMongertelling the truth is "a smear" :) - got it...
Huh?
September 27, 2007 - 16:30 ET by MightyMouth"I've been watching this charlatan nearly every night for the past nine years"
If he is such a "charlatan" how come you have helped him build his little mud empire by watching?
I can't stand two minutes of the real charlatans.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
I've been banging my head
September 27, 2007 - 16:42 ET by Chris NormanI've been banging my head against a tree nearly every night for nine years and I'm qualified to tell you that it hurts.
Tree abuser tree
September 27, 2007 - 16:51 ET by MightyMouthTree abuser tree abuser!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Guilty. I have a very hard
September 27, 2007 - 16:59 ET by Chris NormanGuilty. I have a very hard head... :)
You tree-hatemonger!
September 27, 2007 - 18:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou tree-hatemonger!
Hey, the tree started it!
September 27, 2007 - 18:06 ET by Chris NormanHey, the tree started it! :)
Jer
September 27, 2007 - 17:00 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
I'm with the peanut gallery on this one. Why would you spend five hours a week watching a guy you think is a charlatan? Forgive me, but that seems rather foolish. Do you consider yourself to be a masochist?
You know, I think Al Gore's a charlatan, and I couldn't last more than five minutes into "An Inconvenient Truth" before I changed the channel. The one time the folks at the MRC asked me to watch and tape "The View" for them because it was being pre-empted on the East Coast due to a Bush press conference, I suffered emotionally for weeks, and will NEVER accept that gig again.
As for Olbermann, if I don't quickly change the channel after "Hardball" before his abomination begins, I break out in hives, and am irritable and appetiteless for days.
As such, could you please explain how you watch someone you hold in such low esteem five nights a week? ns
As for Olbermann, if I
September 27, 2007 - 18:00 ET by drillanwrAs for Olbermann, if I don't quickly change the channel after "Hardball" before his abomination begins, I break out in hives, and am irritable and appetiteless for days.
Hmmmm ... Olberman? Or dangerous diet drugs and/or stomach surgery????
That's a tough one, Noel ...
Hmmm...Maybe, that's the
September 27, 2007 - 18:24 ET by JerHmmm...Maybe, that's the reason my wife says I don't seem quite as congenial as I used to be.
Come to think of it, I have noticed a heightened sense of irritability about thirty seconds into his nightly Talking Points memo. And, if I am unable to view O'Reilly on a given night, I feel the sudden urge to slap myself around 8:00 p.m. ET. Thanks, Noel, I think you're on to something.
Still, I'm inexorably drawn to someone who can garner huge ratings based on a fraudulent premise: That O'Reilly is ideologically neutral. Utter nonsense.
Jer
P.S. It's only 4 hours a week. He generally takes Friday off. And I confess to not watching every minute of every show.
Hazard pay?
September 27, 2007 - 21:15 ET by UnsaneNoel - Does the MRC at least give you hazard pay of some sort for "jumping on the grenade" like that? No one could pay me enough to watch "The View".
Besides, Bill O'Reilly is a populist who leans to the right. I'm of a mixed view when it comes to him.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I am sure BoR thanks you
September 27, 2007 - 18:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberI am sure BoR thanks you for the ratings.
Did you eat alot of paint chips growing up?
Roger, you mean all those
September 27, 2007 - 18:35 ET by JerRoger, you mean all those blue Fritos I ate were actually...ohmygosh!
Jer
A new definition for the
September 27, 2007 - 18:57 ET by MikeBA new definition for the Democrat Newspeak English Dictionary:
smear (v): a conservative telling the truth about a liberal, esp. when the conservative has documentary proof and/or quotes the liberal in context.
smear (n): the truth when applied to a liberal, esp. when non-forged or non-fraudulent documents or direct, in context quotes of the liberal are used as proof of the true statement.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
You have no proof of him
September 28, 2007 - 14:29 ET by ConservativeRexYou have no proof of him smearing anyone after nine years? Truth, the truth is hard for you to comprehend. Well you libs are fixing to have all the truth thrown at you you can stand.
CoservativeRex: The problem
September 28, 2007 - 17:24 ET by JerCoservativeRex: The problem is that what I may consider unfair character attacks on individuals or the smearing of persons, groups, organizations, etc. will instead be regarded by many here as mere statements of "truth".
For example, when I'm not even able to elicit from fitzfong-- for whom I have great respect for his intelligence, knowledge and insight--an acknowledgement that Limbaugh's characterization of Air Force veteran Tom Daschle as 'Hanoi Tom' and a 'digrace to patriotism' [not even mentioning the comparisons to Satan, or the charge he had aligned himself with the axis of evil] was offensive, then I doubt a recitation of what I believe were below-the-belt claims by O'Reilly will provoke a chorus of "Amens" from a conservative website like NB.
But a few random recollections which I found objectionable comments and characterizations by O'Reilly:
--on different occasions calling Howard Dean, Michael Kinsley, Bill Moyers "dishonorable"; referring to Sen. Barbara Boxer as a "nutcase"
--referring to the dissenting justices on the Supreme Court as far out leftists whom we must keep an eye on
--calling candidate Al Gore "throroughly corrupt" and a known liar; Janet Reno was "corrupt" and covered up the crimes of the Clintons; Bill Clinton was responsible for the deaths of the 3000 9/11 victims; Hillary Clinton was an arrogant and reckless political opportunist...and didn't care about the 9/11 families; Daschle wasn't interested in national security and bad for the country
--constantly hammmers liberal and activist judges and Democratic politicians claiming they are unconcerned about the safety and welfare of our children
--of course there is also the infamous "joke" about encouraging Al Quaeda to bomb parts of San Francisco
--has labeled Soros and the ACLU [neither of whose positions I entirely agree with] the "most dangerous man" and the "most dangerous organization" in America respectively
--has referred to Fox "liberal" Neal Gabler as a "mad dog"
So that's an "off the top of my head" sampling.
Jer
Oh man....
September 27, 2007 - 16:25 ET by WiggyOh man, this is gonna be good. Time to get some popcorn and a good seat.
NS
September 27, 2007 - 17:50 ET by krismcsherryAs for Olbermann, if I don't quickly change the channel after "Hardball" before his abomination begins, I break out in hives, and am irritable and appetiteless for days.
I'm so glad I'm not the only one who reacts this way. He's gotta be the smallest man on the face of the earth next to Hillary Clinton.
As for Bill. Good luck to him. I like the guy and don't always agree with him. I've always been ticked he doesn't seem to see or care about the ramifications of hysterical AGW legislation. And he interrupts people too much. Annoying. I don't care for shouting matches.
Badges? He dun need no
September 27, 2007 - 17:57 ET by drillanwrBadges?
He dun need no stinkin' badges!!!
So, O'Reilly is going to
September 27, 2007 - 18:06 ET by Roger the ShrubberSo, O'Reilly is going to start doing what Newsbusters has been doing for years?
Yeah, but you know
September 27, 2007 - 18:16 ET by Chris NormanYeah, but you know O'Reilly. He doesn't acknowledge that anyone but Himself has an effect on public matters. For example, to listen to him, he has personally passed Jessica's Law in the last ten states that have done so. He really is full of himself...
They are going to take away
September 27, 2007 - 18:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberThey are going to take away your "No Spin Zone" floor mat if you keep talking that way..... :p
Eeeek. You're right! Mr.
September 27, 2007 - 18:41 ET by Chris NormanEeeek. You're right! Mr. O'Reilly, Please forgive me. I know you're "lookin' out for the folks". I know it....
"P.S. It's only 4 hours a
September 27, 2007 - 19:56 ET by ckc1227"P.S. It's only 4 hours a week. He generally takes Friday off. And I confess to not watching every minute of every show."
Well, actually he doesn't, not generally. He does take Friday's off for about 6 weeks straight during the summer, but he is there most every other night, m-f. Soooo, I'm guessing that maybe you don't watch quite as often as you say.
Gosh, ckc, do I need to
September 27, 2007 - 21:11 ET by JerGosh, ckc, do I need to submit an affadavit from my wife verifying how often I watch O'Reilly. Just for you, here are some details about my television viewing habits.
1. At 8:00 p.m. ET Mon-Thurs, I generally watch O'Reilly. Or, I'll catch the 11:00 repeat if I miss the earlier telecast. Or I may record it if I'm gone. On occasion, I do none of the foregoing. I will often do a little channel surfing during his show, especially if it's a segment which doesn't appeal to me [or to check out the Braves,etc.]
2. I generally do not watch on Fridays, unless I am aware of a particularly interesting topic or guest.
3. I'm not sure of the exact number of Fridays O'Reilly has a guest host (almost always a conservative), but I am confident it is considerably more than six. If it turns out to be only six, then I guess I'm just a bald-faced liar.
4. I have never seen a single episode of Olberman. I have seen a few short clips.
5. I would characterize myself as a regular viewer of the Factor. If you or others disagree, that's fine.
Jer