On Tuesday’s "Good Morning America," the ABC program promised to investigate the "final straw" that pushed Rosie O’Donnell to leave "The View." Yet, somehow, neither anchor Chris Cuomo, nor reporter John Berman managed to mention the comedienne’s obsessive promotion of bizarre 9/11 conspiracy theories.
The segment also sympathetically portrayed O’Donnell. Co-anchor Cuomo even blurted out that Rosie "has to come here," meaning GMA. But first, reporter Berman tenderly noted that a video blog on her website features a picture of Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the show’s token conservative and frequent brunt of O’Donnell’s aggression:
John Berman: "As for Rosie O’Donnell, it does seem like she has at least a touch of nostalgia. On her blog, a new music video montage, pictures of her time at ‘The View,’ including one of Elisabeth Hasselbeck."
Cuomo began the segment, which aired at 7:32am on May 29, by asking what "really happened behind the scenes?" Berman echoed the same theme and frequently featured O’Donnell for the answers:
John Berman: "For the last year, ‘The View’ has been one part soap opera and one part professional wrestling, but no more. Today is the first day without Rosie. But the question remains, what was the final show that pushed her over the edge and can the show survive without her? You will never see a ‘View’ quite like this again. So, when did Rosie O’Donnell know it was over?"
[Clip from Rosie’s video blog]
Rosie O’Donnell: "When I saw the split-screen, that’s when I knew it was over. Seriously."
Berman: "This is from O’Donnell’s own video blog, seen here with a friend. She’s talking about how she was depicted in the famous face-off with co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck, a moment she calls Nuclear Wednesday."
Again, the piece made no mention of the underlying issue: O’Donnell’s active promotion of convoluted 9/11 conspiracy theories. YouTube even featured a clip of the comedienne warming up the "View" audience by discussing "bombs" placed at the World Trade Center. NewsBusters has comprehensively covered Rosie’s insinuations about 9/11 and equating the U.S. with terrorism.
Berman ignored these multiple elephants in the room. (Although he did mention that the comedienne's writer had to be escorted from the building after defacing a picture of Hasselbeck.) Instead, he focused on other, unspecified "strains" that Ms. O’Donnell felt:
Berman: "O’Donnell says there were other strains on the show too."
O’Donnell: "I was really just like the foster kid for a year. I came and, you know, we considered adoption, but I really didn’t fit into the family and now it was time for the foster kid to go back home."
The ABC reporter closed his report by sympathetically noting O’Donnell’s nostalgia for the show she just quit:
Berman: "In a statement, Barbara Walters said, ‘Rosie contributed to one of our most exciting and successful years at ‘The View.’ I am most appreciative. Our close and affectionate relationship will not change.’ As for Rosie O’Donnell, it does seem like she has at least a touch of nostalgia. On her blog, a new music video montage, pictures of her time at ‘The View,’ including one of Elisabeth Hasselbeck. So, what’s next for Rosie? Rosie says if she comes back to television, she wants it to be in a more peaceful setting. More peaceful than ‘The View.’ Chris?"
Cuomo: "She has to come here. That’s– That’s the only answer, John."
Rosie O’Donnell on "Good Morning America?" Her extreme liberalism would certainly be a good fit with co-host Diane Sawyer and weatherman Sam Champion.
The MRC has a full report, with a whole bunch of video clips, of Rosie's many inflammatory remarks on The View and earlier: "The Full Rosie; Daytime Host’s Long Record of Mean-Spirited Left-Wing Ravings."
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.













Comments Policy
Someone tell me, PLEASE, why
May 29, 2007 - 11:58 ET by Prester JohnSomeone tell me, PLEASE, why anyone with any brains should care about this?
Because Rosie's yammering i
May 29, 2007 - 12:16 ET by sarcasmoBecause Rosie's yammering is apparently a lot more fun to think-about for the NB masthead than, say, an ugly reality like this. Happily, Drudge put the story dead-center on his page today. Kudos, Matt Drudge. Prediction: TV news "journalists" will follow the same pattern and cover BS like Rosie's leaving "The View" constantly and therefore to the exclusion of any nasty-ol' economics-stories which might require actual thought about changing the behavior of big government, and THAT'S the true -- widespread -- bias yours-truly has just busted at no charge (unless, that is, you count the grandkids' future!).
JMR
Another BS article
May 29, 2007 - 13:43 ET by SportPoliticsAnother BS article. They whine about payments 75 years out in terms of todays incomes and todays economies, just like the flakey reps who announce a plans cost ( and never mention its actually the cost over 10 years) and pretend it's all for this year.
So, just as 75 years ago 100 billion was an unheard of number to our federal government, 100 trillion in collected taxes will be the unheard of number 59 or 75 years from NOW.
I am so sick of encountering some idiot article that supposes the government is hiding and lying, then they do the very same thing in a different fashion.
We don't pay out those unfunded liabilities because they aren't due yet, and even those idiot(s) who wrote the article should know that very basic premise. Maybe they are 19 years old and won't be retiring for 46 years, so they just want their social security benefits put away now before they even pay them in.
What a bunch of BRAINDEAD MORONS.
Prester John, You make a fair
May 29, 2007 - 12:20 ET by Scott WhitlockPrester John,
You make a fair point. But while the screaming match between Elisabeth and Rosie certainly has been tabloid fodder, the fact that ABC and other media outlets are trying to whitewash O'Donnell's bizarre 9/11 conspiracy theories is important, I think. They want to maintain her viability as a "mainstream" host and, since she's a liberal, protect Rosie from her own comments.
I really don't think there ar
May 29, 2007 - 13:06 ET by balboaI really don't think there are that many people out there looking to protect Rosie from herself, at least that work at networks. Many have already turned on her, as witnessed by the many jokes about her on Leno, Letterman, etc.
Yeah, another bably brainfart
May 29, 2007 - 13:53 ET by SportPoliticsYeah, another bably view of a moronic nature.
I'll let you know as soon as I turn on the news channels and Letterman and Leno lead off with the bleed.
Gosh, you could have at least tried to claim Colbert and Stewart, but no, not even that is in your dumbwaiter.
Thank you for being as stupid as always, and letting us know how you guage " the newscasters and reporters views ", Jay and Dave will send you a Christmas card I'm sure.
I wuv you, twinkle toes.
May 29, 2007 - 13:58 ET by balboaI wuv you, twinkle toes.
Yes you should bably
May 29, 2007 - 14:22 ET by SportPoliticsYes you should bably, I should get paid for trying to drive the very basics of sane thinking into your cranium.
Prester John,I'll tell you wh
May 29, 2007 - 12:33 ET by jpatchPrester John,
I'll tell you why we care: This woman was getting paid millions to be an ignorant, hateful and anti-American blowhard for years, and she actually had an audience. How are we not supposed to be alarmed when someone as openly biased and crazy as Rosie is has influence over people? Kinda makes you wonder who the h*ll lives in this country.
Moreover, this is also important because it exemplifies the MSM's SOP's (standard operating procedures) when it comes to the truth these days. Avoid it at all costs.
We all know why Rosie left the View: She was called out on her lies and biases, and she, like the MSM, could not, or would not, answer the direct question posed to her, except to utter yet another ignorant "insult" when she told Elizabeth, "you can talk all your Republican crap for three weeks..." and then ran away like a child. ABC wants to bury the fact that they've been paying a treasoner millions to spread her ideology, just in the same way that they want to bury any and all news that would portray our administration in a positive light.
They are biased and troubled, just like Rosie, and will do anything to perpetuate their own pathetic, Bush-hating lives, even if it's at the expense of America.
At THAT is why anyone with a brain should care about this. But trust me, I wish Rosie O'Donnell would get captured by terrorists, not because I wish her harm or death, but because I honestly think it would shed light on the fact that terrorism is real, that terrorists are real, and that they don't discriminate between liberals and conservatives when they're looking for a head to detach.
Rosie the Insane
May 29, 2007 - 13:00 ET by merlin61I agree with jpatch completely. On FOX News today a former military man said the reason we are seeing more and more of our soldiers being killed in Iraq in the last few days is because of all the wrangling with our
legislators, the left wing, blabbing about withdrawal and
not funding the troops. The terrorists know everything
that's going on here, and Rosie and the Congress,
including Pelosi are not helping our cause.
We can never win and accomplish what we are trying
to do to stop terrorism with all the treason being
liberally spread by the MSM, Congress, and insane
people like Rosie, Charlie Sheen and Bill Maher.
Thanks Merlin...You know what
May 29, 2007 - 13:14 ET by jpatchThanks Merlin...
You know what else is deeply disturbing here? The fact that Rosie, Bill Maher, Al Franken, John Stewart (although Stewart isn't quite as bad as the first three, but still)...they're all comedians!! And that's not a joke!
I mean, let's be honest: I live and work in NYC. If I went outside and started polling people about who they liked to watch, or who they trusted, I'd get just as many people who'd tell me that Bill O'Reilly is a lying, stupid b*stard as would tell me that they like Bill Maher, or Rosie, or Al. How twisted and scary is it that people think that Bill O'Reilly (or Rush Limbaugh, for that matter) is this manipulator and "mouth piece of the Republican party", while they go home and turn on the View or "Real Time" to get their news?? OH, wait, I forgot someone!!!
Michael Moore!!
Lord knows there are plenty of people in this country that would listen to Michael Moore over Bill O'Reilly, and that is simply terrifying.
Yes, Rosie, the show consider
May 29, 2007 - 12:04 ET by Hero SquadYes, Rosie, the show considered adoption, before realizing that in this instance, abortion was the easier option... Just get rid of it and hope to forget what happened to get to this point.
*****
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello
Perfect analogy on the lives
May 29, 2007 - 13:37 ET by Senior ChiefPerfect analogy on the lives of leftoids...Just simply abort, instead of adoption! If Rosie is capable of making her own babies, maybe she'll comprehend the concept. Leftoids has a lesson to learn here, if their brains are still functioning.
rosedude will now be the Anna
May 29, 2007 - 12:12 ET by FastEdrosedude will now be the Anna Nicole Smith - for this week - the "news" media has no shame, actually a reflection on society as a whole, and will spin their cowardly tale of the rosedude as a victim of the VRWC. And, one can only hope she joins either Can't Buy Sincerity or Notheing But Crud "news" teams - the fast they quit, the better.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
I will make a prediction: The
May 29, 2007 - 12:34 ET by Airforce_5_OI will make a prediction: The MSM will take and make Rosie a victim.
I know it is hard for some of us to believe but it will happen. Rosie the poor unfortunate over weight depressed person of an alternative lifestyle was emotionally abused and stalked by the far right wing Christian straight Hasselbeck before and after the show. It was Hasselbeck that caused her to hang upside down at night. It Hasselbeck who drove her from the show like the Bulldog conservative she is.
Now we will see soft pieces on how emotionally distraught she is and how bad Hasselbeck is on shows like Entertainment Tonight. You know the ones with the sad music in the back ground and crap like that.
It is coming NBer's, I see the writing on the wall.
The things that come to those who wait will be the things left by those who
got there first.
Yes, exactly. They have to
May 29, 2007 - 12:51 ET by jpatchYes, exactly. They have to defend their own in-house traitor that they've bankrolled, and find a way to blame Bush, Christians, Republicans, "big oil", take your pick. Honestly, would you be surprised if they found a way to link her dismissal to all four of those? It would be just another day of high quality professional journalism in this country.
Rosie is already playing the victim
May 29, 2007 - 13:12 ET by RJRosie is already playing the victim. In her video, she says she probably won't speak to Hasselbeck again....suggesting that it's just too painful for someone as sensitive as poor Rosie......
Hey, Hasselbeck is a "Christian", and a "conservative"...and we all know how mean THEY are......
"Oh mean bad wicked Zoot
May 29, 2007 - 13:55 ET by Airforce_5_O"Oh mean bad wicked Zoot"
What I can't believe is that
May 29, 2007 - 12:54 ET by TeamcheeserWhat I can't believe is that the adults surrounding Rosie haven't sat her down and threatened her with a "Time Out".
"Rosie, sweetheart, we don't scream and yell. We don't fight. And we don't demand that our friends defend the stupid things we say. And when things don't go our way, we don't simply quit, take our ball, and go home. We face adversity and take responsibility for what we say and do. We have to be able to see -- to listen to -- all points of view and sometimes that means we will have to change our own point of view. Like steel being heated by fire, we must become malleable, even if it means our little perfect world comes crashing down around us..."
But, TC, what you don't rea
May 29, 2007 - 13:01 ET by lnthompBut, TC, what you don't realize is Rosie has surrounded herself with people who are no more mature than she is, to insulate herself from reality. There are no adults there to give her a "time out."
Lee T.
U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington
The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain
Brilliant. I love NB's; I k
May 29, 2007 - 13:05 ET by jpatchBrilliant. I love NB's; I knew there were some intelligent people in this country...unfortunately none of them are on TV!! Well, save Glen Beck, Bill O'Reilly (we all know he's a know-it-all, but the man loves America, defends civil liberties, and understands warfare...not to mention that he's a career and award-winning journalist, which is more than you could say for 99% of the "analysts" on TV today...
Honestly, NewsBusters needs to be turned into a TV show, it would be the best thing on TV.
Bull O'Really? - "award-
May 29, 2007 - 13:08 ET by j. frank wilsonBull O'Really? - "award-winning journalist?" Was that his famous Peabody Award? Oh - that's right - he didn't earn a Peabody...sorry. He certainly won't win an award for his soft-core porno novel. Of course he understands warfare - he's a combat veteran! Just ask him.
Funny how easy it is to lure the Trolls out....
May 29, 2007 - 13:15 ET by RJFunny how easy it is to lure the Trolls out....
RJ I had the same thought
May 29, 2007 - 13:28 ET by misterbillRJ I had the same thought--- J Frank hates anyone that is respected by NBers.
Er...My level of respect fo
May 29, 2007 - 13:40 ET by sarcasmoEr...My level of respect for O'Reilly isn't exactly what you'd call "high." I've been especially critical of his economics-impaired & overly self-important oil company bashing over the "issue" of "price gouging." Even O'Reilly's defenders here on NB haven't debated me on that one, possibly because they still know enough residual economics 101 to understand when their man's obviously-wrong & I'm right...
JMR
Have you ever been wrong about anything sarky?
May 29, 2007 - 13:49 ET by RJHave you ever been wrong about anything sarky? Or hesitant to boast about it? ;^>
See? This is the very best
May 29, 2007 - 14:11 ET by sarcasmoSee? This is the very best an O'Reilly defender can do. I rest my case.
JMR
Come, now, sarky
May 29, 2007 - 14:20 ET by RJCome, now, sarky. Is that YOUR best? Making unfounded assumptions? Please point out where I defend BOR. ;^>
See above.JMR
May 29, 2007 - 14:21 ET by sarcasmoSee above.
JMR
You're losing it, sarky
May 29, 2007 - 14:32 ET by RJYou've lost it, sarky.....again, please locate and quote my BOR "defense." ;^>
And now see below. Heh heh
May 29, 2007 - 18:04 ET by sarcasmoAnd now see below. Heh heh heh...Too-damn-easy, but still fun!
JMR
I guess it IS "easy" sarky, when you manufacture non-existant
May 30, 2007 - 10:13 ET by RJI guess it IS "easy", when you manufacture non-existant "proof", sarky. So far, all you've done is say "look up", "look there", "look here"....but please don't ask for specifics, eh?
Still waiting for a single quote where I've defended BOR, sarky..... ;^>
And all you do is attack hi
May 30, 2007 - 10:23 ET by sarcasmoAnd all you do is attack his every attacker....As we say in chess, the best defense is a good offense, so nice job, RJ!
JMR
Well that's a fine admission, sarky.
May 30, 2007 - 10:39 ET by RJWell that's a fine admission. I guess the awful realization has set in that you have no examples to present, sarky. ;^>
I've been laughing at you and j. faux, and no matter how you try to twist it, I haven't defended BOR. It's a shame that you initially jumped to a conclusion, but now you've been forced to dart about, trying to defend yourself....
Here, I'll toss you a bone. It's possible that I said something mildly positive about BOR sometime in the past, but it's equally likely that I said negative things, too. Sorry, sarky, I'm just not a fan (nor a foe) of the guy.
I think I'll take O'Reilly
May 29, 2007 - 14:32 ET by SportPoliticsI think I'll take O'Reilly. Let's see, correct on hundreds of things, and wrong on one. Sarc, balboa, and the hogzilla - incorrect on hundreds of things, and occassionally full of pride because the NB regulars didn't argue one point they agreed with the rest of us on.
Yep, I'll take O'Reilly.
Sarc,With all due respect, th
May 29, 2007 - 13:57 ET by Chris NormanSarc,
With all due respect, there are a lot of people here who are very critical of O'Reilly. I haven't been alone in maintaining that O'Reilly is a populist who looks to Big Government to "solve" a plethora of problems. You run the risk of sounding dangerously like O'Reilly when you claim the mantle of being the only one who has addressed a particular subject or maintained a certain opinion. :)
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Did I say I was the only on
May 29, 2007 - 14:13 ET by sarcasmoDid I say I was the only one?? Where??? Hell, IIRC, even the NB masthead, which occasionally get barbs from me, has addressed the issue of O'Reilly's clue-impaired status when it comes to oil economics.
JMR
Not to pick a fight with some
May 29, 2007 - 15:22 ET by Chris NormanNot to pick a fight with someone I agree with much of the time, it's just there are a lot of "I"s and "I'm"s in your comment - and that's dangerously close to O'Reilly's style. Just trying to keep you humble... :)
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
And here I thought that was
May 29, 2007 - 16:08 ET by sarcasmoAnd here I thought that was RJ's self-appointed job... ;^)
JMR
Damn. I broke union rules. Th
May 29, 2007 - 17:06 ET by Chris NormanDamn. I broke union rules. There's going to be a complaint against me now.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
sarc-- I am in agreement re:oil companies--
May 30, 2007 - 10:53 ET by misterbillsarc-- I am in agreement re:oil companies--but the sum of who we are and what we are is in the net value of our accomplishments. I believe that BOR , at times , is over the top. I watch him 3- 4 nights a week. I do not , at times, like his bullying manner. I do not at times, like his toadying to a couple of guests, (Al Tawana Sharpton and I am Jesus Rivera (That's Haysoos.)
Then I look at many things he has done, such as publicizing judges who have been soft on child molesters. Bringing in guests on both sides of an issue. I see a positive contribution that far outweighs any negatives even though he is a giant pain in the butt, at times. So, I have respect for him because of the plusses. I disagree with you on some items, but I respect you, because you bring reasonable and honest debate to NB (except for Ron Paul LOL).
Well, well, well - it's cut a
May 29, 2007 - 13:55 ET by j. frank wilsonWell, well, well - it's cut and run MasterB. Back for more? Only this time you didn't wait to spew your blather. It might make a difference if I had any respect for you whatsoever - but so I don't, it doesn't.
do not understand the cut and run---and--
May 29, 2007 - 14:39 ET by misterbilldo not understand the cut and run---and--do not REALLY care.
My day is complete when you say you have no respect for me. I daresay, you have no respect for anyone save yourself.
Mr. Bill...Me thinks he knows
May 29, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Clear thinkerMr. Bill...
Me thinks he knows not the meaning of the word 'respect'.
Help a wounded soldier here...
http://newsbusters.org/node/12877
Do you defend Bull O'Really's
May 29, 2007 - 14:31 ET by j. frank wilsonDo you defend Bull O'Really's? use of the American Flag on his "No Spin" trinkets sold on his website? Not only are these in extraordinarily poor taste, but as I read the law they are illegal. The American Flag is not be used for advertising (also see Hate Talk 560's billboards with The Silly Savage), it is not to be used for articles of clothing (No Spin granny bags?), and nothing is to be added to it - including "No Spin."
Yes
May 29, 2007 - 14:35 ET by SportPoliticsYes, seems to me it's a lot better than burning, which is of course your favored use.
Why don't you keep your ignor
May 29, 2007 - 14:59 ET by j. frank wilsonWhy don't you keep your ignorance to yourself? You know nothing about the topic - so leave it alone.
j. frank...Were you ever in t
May 29, 2007 - 15:04 ET by Clear thinkerj. frank...
Were you ever in the Air Force?
Help a wounded soldier here...
http://newsbusters.org/node/12877
Nope.
May 29, 2007 - 15:06 ET by j. frank wilsonNope.
Ever live near Goodfellow Air
May 29, 2007 - 15:10 ET by Clear thinkerEver live near Goodfellow Air Base?
Help a wounded soldier here...
http://newsbusters.org/node/12877
If you have a point - and tha
May 29, 2007 - 15:14 ET by j. frank wilsonIf you have a point - and that's probably a 50-50 proposition at best - please just make it. The cutesy questions don't cut it.
I fly my country's flag proudly - and I take offense at anyone who says otherwise. The morning of 9/11, after watching events unfold, I wondered what at that precise moment I could to. Unfortunately, there wasn't a whole heck of a lot that any one citizen could do - particularly on the West Coast. But I could fly our flag - and that's what I did.
Otherwise, sorry just had to
May 29, 2007 - 15:43 ET by Dan The Man 2Otherwise, sorry just had to knock teh chip off your shoulder. BTW the flag you fly, the Hammer and Scikle, is not the American flag.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
You also know nothing about t
May 29, 2007 - 15:55 ET by j. frank wilsonYou also know nothing about this topic. So please keep your ignorance to yourself. PS: Do you type holding a canoe paddle in your mouth?
I can't wait to stop by every
May 29, 2007 - 17:05 ET by mulerider24I can't wait to stop by every car dealership on the way home today to make a citizen's arrest. Their attempt to undermine the sanctity of Old Glory is disgusting.
Ignorance can be cured by lea
May 29, 2007 - 17:10 ET by Dan The Man 2Ignorance can be cured by learning but stupidity like yours is terminal.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
j. frank wilson... Do you wan
May 29, 2007 - 13:20 ET by jpatchj. frank wilson... Do you want me to post all of O'Reilly's career accomplishments as a journalist? I'm sure you're ignorant of them, and I'd rather not waste my time doing something for you that you could do for yourself, but you let me know, because in the interest of the truth and helping our nation, I'd be glad to enlighten you about this man's enormous contributions to the world of PROFESSIONAL journalism.
And, balboa, like I said, O'Reilly can be a stubborn know-it-all, but seriously, if you listened to him (which, like Olberman admitted about Limbaugh, you probably don't) than you'd see that he's is critical of things Republican, too. I mean, Olberman is calling Limbaugh the worst person in the world, and then he says that he never listens to him. How can you know so much about someone that you never listen to?
I can't imagine it would take
May 29, 2007 - 13:58 ET by j. frank wilsonI can't imagine it would take more a few moments to detail Bull O'Really's? accomplishments as a journalist. Let's start with his boycott of all things French - what was his source for proof of the boycott's success? The Paris Business Review? Oh - that's right - there isn't any such publication! More stuff he just made up...
Falafel.There, I said it. :
May 29, 2007 - 14:01 ET by balboaFalafel.
There, I said it. :-D
Just the fact that the French
May 29, 2007 - 14:41 ET by Dan The Man 2Just the fact that the French were boycotted was enough. When a business has a product and a segmnet of the public buys that product suddenly stops buying it. Boycotts dont have to hurt a business to work they just have to threaten a business. Perhaps the electing of a conservative might be proof enough. But you wouldnt be staisfied with a report showing conclusive proof.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
A swing - and a miss...After
May 29, 2007 - 15:03 ET by j. frank wilsonA swing - and a miss...
After Bull O'Really? announced the boycott of all goods French imports went up. He lied about the economic impact - and he made up his source to back his lie.
Some gulls and rubes fell for it, of course. They are probably still in the public library, searching for the back issues of The Paris Business Review.
Or do you prefer his remarks about hotheads calling for the nuking of Iran. Forgetting, of course, that he himself had called for nuking Iran. If he doesn't even listen to himself why should I?
He isn't a journalist - he's a commentator. And a rather common one, at that.
You really dont understand do
May 29, 2007 - 15:46 ET by Dan The Man 2You really dont understand do you, ohh I forgot you are a Troll.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Alright, fine, I guess I have
May 29, 2007 - 15:03 ET by jpatchAlright, fine, I guess I have to do it. Give me a little bit, but in the meantime...
You guys never really addressed my point that you probably never really listen to O'Reilly, just like Olberman admitted to never listening to Rush Limbaugh, and then proceeded to name Rush his 'Worst Person in the World'. Kinda seems like the way most lefty's operate - say the words Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh, and they'll close their eyes and cover their ears until it's over, and then tell you how stupid those people are. And they do it with anything that they disagree with, just like terrorism or the War. They think if they close their eyes and plug their ears for long enough, this stuff will just blow over. Unfortunately, we're not little kids anymore, and pretending like problems don't exist doesn't make them go away. So remember that when all of the Democrats are telling you that the Republicans are just trying to scare you into voting for them - they're just closing their eyes...but the problem is going to be when they finally open them up, America will be in ruins.
Oh - you mean like when Conse
May 29, 2007 - 15:05 ET by j. frank wilsonOh - you mean like when Conservatives say "George Soros?" Bull O'Really? claimed Mr. Soros was a primary financial backer of the website "Media Matters." He isn't, of course, but that didn't stop ole Bull.
Here's a short list of what B
May 29, 2007 - 16:07 ET by jpatchHere's a short list of what Bill O'Reilly has accomplished:
B.A. from Marist in history, then his M.A. in broadcast journalsim from Boston.
First TV spot was in Dallas for WFAA-TV, where he won a Dallas Press Club Award for excellence in investigative journalism. Then, at KMGH-TV in Denver, O'Reilly won an Emmy for his coverage of a skyjacking. After two years in Denver, he went to New York, and while working for WCBS-TV, he won his second Emmy in investigative journalism for his coverage exposing corrupt city marshals. He was then promoted to network news at CBS, where he covered wars in El Salvador and the Falklands.
He then started his career as an anchor in Boston, and then in Portland for KATU-TV, before leaving for ABC in 1986. During his time at ABC, he recieved the National Headliner Award for excellence in investigative reporting for his work on a piece about the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In 1989, he took over "Inside Edition", where he became the first national anchor to broadcast live from the L.A.riots. He was named reporter of the year by the New York Crimes Victims organization.
He went back to school at Harvard in 1995, enrolling in the Kennedy School of Govt., recieving his M.A. in public policy.
This is just a quick hitlist, but like it or not, this man has worked all over the world, has busted corrupt city officials, has helped bring criminals to justice, has seen the realities and atrocities of war, has seen poverty and disease first hand, and has been recognized by nearly every organization that he's been a part of as an excellent investigative journalist. So, tell me, why is it that people will listen to Michael Moore, Bill Maher, and Rosie O'Donnell, but they'll tell you that Bill O'Reilly is the devil? The answer: because Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Rosie, and the rest of the MSM say so.
Tell me - with a straight fac
May 29, 2007 - 16:39 ET by j. frank wilsonTell me - with a straight face - that you honestly believe these are "enormous" contributions to the world of "PROFESSIONAL" [sic] journalism?
First off, none of these are contributions to the world of journalism. Some of these may be considered accomplishments within that world - hardly earthshaking, of course, but ok. And one might ask what he's been doing for the past 20 years.
Are you his flak or just his biggest fan? You have waaaay too much time on your hands, that is obvious.
And Bull O'Really's? reign of error since becoming a common tater fall outweighs whatever limited accomplishments he achieved before that.
You can rattle off your list of rightwing boogymen (you missed Al Franken, by the way) - I don't need them to tell me about Bull O'Really? He does a fine job of that all by himself.
thanks j frank, you're a true
May 29, 2007 - 16:44 ET by jpatchthanks j frank, you're a true lib, through and through. Confronted with truth and reality, you revert to name calling and denial. Nice Work. Oh, and just to let you know...
Bill Maher got an English degree from Cornell, Rosie O'Donnell dropped out of college, and Michael Moore never went to college. Not that going to college is everything, but when it comes to figuring out who i want to get my information from, I'd like to know that this person is at least educated.
Um, and in case you were serious about asking what he's been doing for the last 20 years...he went to Harvard in 1995 to get his M.A. in public policy, then became the executive producer of the O'Reilly Factor, where he's been telling it like it is ever since.
You also forgot to mention hi
May 29, 2007 - 16:46 ET by LeonYou also forgot to mention his prowess as a phone sex operator / professional sexual harasser.
what a tiny little man
May 29, 2007 - 17:30 ET by RJWhat a tiny little creature that shows you to be, Leon.
PS: About his closet full o
May 29, 2007 - 16:46 ET by j. frank wilsonPS: About his closet full of Emmys - are those National? Or would those be Local? There is a difference -
There is a difference between
May 29, 2007 - 17:07 ET by jpatchThere is a difference between being an acclaimed career journalist that has 3 different degrees from 3 different universities, including Harvard; that has worked all over America and all over the world covering issues that would be important to you; there is a difference between that person and a person like Bill Maher or Michael Moore.
I mean, can't you just stop being so damn biased for two seconds and realize that this man is not evil like you've been programmed to think he is?? He's actually tried to do good for people that have had their rights violated. But instead, you'd rather listen to people who make a living writing skits or movies to serve an agenda. Michael Moore's first "position" in politics, if you will, was as the president of the study body at his high school. You know what his reason for running was, and I quote: "To get the principal fired." Hmmm, seems like little Mikey has been anti-establishment since day 1, and he didn't even need our liberal universities to indoctrinate him further.
Does that mean Bill is "
May 29, 2007 - 17:13 ET by Dan The Man 2Does that mean Bill is "Harvard Smart"?
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
Your post would make a wee bi
May 29, 2007 - 17:34 ET by j. frank wilsonYour post would make a wee bit more sense if you addressed the issues I raised, instead of simply providing a canned response - ready at the simultaneous push of the "ctrl" and "v" keys.
So far, you are the only one to mention Mr. Moore, or Mr. Maher, or the other folks. My objections to Bull O'Really? only relate to what he himself says. As I previously mentioned, that's more than enough to convince me.
Now I do object to his commercialization of the American flag. But my primary objections relate to his slandering of judges and other public officials, his inability to maintain a coherent stance of a series of public issues, and the overall fact he is a blowhard so full of himself he runs the risk of causing severe damage when he explodes.
Are you willing to state for the record that you are not in his employ or otherwise being compensated for your vigorous - if misguided - defense?
And you, j. faux wilson...
May 29, 2007 - 17:41 ET by RJAnd you, j. faux wilson, are you willing to state for the record that you are not in the employ of some liberal operation or otherwise being compensated for your vigorous - if misguided - whining about BOR?
This was already moderated
May 29, 2007 - 18:02 ET by sarcasmoThis was already moderated "funny," so you're really out-doing yourself today, RJ -- bravo! ;^)
JMR
Just taking on the herculean
May 29, 2007 - 18:11 ET by RJJust taking on the herculean task of keeping up with your hilarious sense of humor, sarky. ;^>
Absolutely. I am not in the
May 29, 2007 - 18:10 ET by j. frank wilsonAbsolutely. I am not in the employ, and do not receive compensation of any kind - direct or indirect, immediate or contingent, to post either readily available public facts or my personal opinions.
Now it's his turn...
You elect to call it "whining" about Bull O'Really? because you don't want to fact the facts. If I were you I wouldn't either...
Perhaps you do, j. faux wilson
May 29, 2007 - 18:13 ET by RJPerhaps you do, j. faux wilson, but your obsessive personality has turned it into whining.
(oops! tsk, tsk, j. faux! you changed your post from "it's what I believe" to "fact the facts"...whatever that means)
P.S. I'm not defending BOR. I don't care one way or the other about him...but I AM laughing at your obvious emotional investment in him.
"face" not "fa
May 29, 2007 - 19:48 ET by j. frank wilson"face" not "fact" - my bad. A typo.
My "emotional investment" in Bull O'Really? is a child's allowance compared to, say, jpatch. But he's not worth your time commenting on because you agree with him, right?
Still laughing at your infatuation with BOR, j. faux wilson
May 30, 2007 - 10:02 ET by RJAgree with him? That would be hard to do, j. faux wilson, since I never watch or listen to him. How about you? Is your infatuation with BOR driven by your watching/listening to him? Or is it driven by what you read about him on the moonbat blogsites?
Still laughing at your emotional obsession with Big Bill.... ;^>
OK - I'll take "Local&qu
May 29, 2007 - 18:06 ET by j. frank wilsonOK - I'll take "Local" as your response.
This is actually really sad,
May 29, 2007 - 16:54 ET by jpatchThis is actually really sad, j frank, that your hatred and ignorance of Bill O'Reilly runs so deep that you are unable to process new information about him and change your opinion. I knew it wouldn't matter, but at least it was a good example of how easy it is to brainwash simpletons like yourself. Just get a comedian to host their own show and start telling lies about everyone with whom they disagree, and the audience will not only eat it up and applaud, but they'll actually absorb it as factual information. But, don't feel bad, everyone that you agree with does the same exact thing.
Just another day of bustin'.
I hate him because he's a sex
May 29, 2007 - 16:56 ET by LeonI hate him because he's a sexual harasser / sexually deviant.
In my mind, this simple fact nullifies any other contributions he might have ever made.
Is that ok?
"hate?"
May 29, 2007 - 17:34 ET by RJ"hate?" Ah. Now we're getting to the real Leon....the little man behind the big posts. Tell us more, Leon.....
RJ...Yep.
May 29, 2007 - 17:38 ET by bigtimerRJ...
Yep.
I happen to think O'Reilly is
May 29, 2007 - 17:55 ET by mulerider24I happen to think O'Reilly is a narcissist, but let's be honest, the meat of his show still cuts straight to the point and he has no problem bringing the opposition on to debate the issue. O'Reilly is at his best during a fat news cycle when he doesn't have to drum up a quasi-story to fill a show.
But Leon, how many bunnies at the Playboy Mansion do you think Bill Maher has harassed (assaulted)? Somehow I doubt your precedent on sexual deviance would nullify his contributions in your eyes.
Hatred? I don't hate ole Bu
May 29, 2007 - 17:36 ET by j. frank wilsonHatred? I don't hate ole Bull. I think he's full of B.S. and does extraordinary damage, but I don't hate him. I'll save that for the enemies of our country.
Ignorance? Because I call them as I see them?
You can keep your insults to yourself - they make you sound even more like a shill.
Please name the people that B
May 29, 2007 - 17:40 ET by Clear thinkerPlease name the people that Bill damages.
Help a wounded soldier here...
http://newsbusters.org/node/12877
want to return a favor
May 30, 2007 - 10:39 ET by misterbillwant to return a favor---you once corrected a post of mine because of a typo--catch up time- the word is not flak, it is flack. Flak is anti-aircraft fire or the exact opposite of what you are accusing Jpatch of--that is, another definition of flak is criticism. You did not know what flak is, I suspect, because you never served your country. I could be wrong, but your posts indicate that. You are here merely to challenge and to argue. You add little, if nothing, to the day.
Where’s the coward that would not dare to fight for such a land? And the parent that wouldn't be honored by the sacrifice?
Sir Walter Scott & Noel Sheppard
@MasterB: "flak"
May 30, 2007 - 13:53 ET by j. frank wilson@MasterB: "flak" was a modest homage to Sen. McCain. It went over your head. Kind of like, well, flak...The only time I've corrected spelling or grammar on another's post was when (1.) The typo was funny; or (2.) The poster was busy blathering to the world about his or her intelligence, and the error proved otherwise...Again, over your head..No surprise.
As for jpatch, he appears to be an obvious shill. Sad that Bull O'Really? would have to pay someone to stick up for him. As a child his parents probably had to tie a porkchop around his neck so the family dog would play with him.
You are absolutely correct, J Frank
May 30, 2007 - 14:04 ET by misterbillYou are absolutely correct, J Frank. You cannot lose an argument. You are so smart that your skull is nigh to exploding. Your correction to me was based on the insertion of a comma where one was not needed. Once again, you were absolutely correct. Pay no mind to the fact that it was a typo. I do not know why I argue you with you. You are perfect in every way. You really do fancy yourelf to be a cut above everyone on this site. Well, you are. You are perfect.
You are a perfect ass!!!!!!
PS Although I do not agree with you, I did find the pork chop comment funny.
As for jpatch, I imagine that he is probably, (gasp) even more perfect than you, if that is possible. And yet, he is not an ass!
Forgive me the word to describe you just came to mind--prig--. If you drop the "r" -thence the pork chop.
Flak--it went through your head!!!!
You are forced to pick nits b
May 30, 2007 - 15:39 ET by j. frank wilson