O'Reilly IS A Lying Whore: I Can't Prove the Whore Claim But I Can The Lying Part!

Prakosh

Senior Member
What's that point have to do with anything? The United States has a vested interest in helping nations draft consitutions allowing for and requiring the principles of Democracy.

Does that "vested interest" include killing hundreds of thousands of civilians???

And as far as BILLO lying. There are thousands, indeed, books full of examples of his lying.

Here's just a few:"

O'Reilly: Speaking to a guest about going to court: "You have to put your hand on the Bible. So hopefully, you'll never be arrested; but if you are , and you have to testify, you're going to have to put that hand on the Bible there, doctor, or you're going to be held in contempt of court" (3/15/02)

According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 603, a witness is required to declare that he or she "will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witnesses conscience and impress the witness's mind with the duty to do so." A note to the rule specifically explains that a Bible isn't necessary to allow "flexibility" in order to apply to atheists, conscientious objectors, and others.


O'Reilly: On January 9, 2003 a guest suggested that the U.S. Government supplied Iraq with chemical and biological weapons after Rumsfeld visit to Iraq in 1983. O'Reilly was incensed: "That's been denied by every single federal official in the government....This is another nutty, crazy things that goes out on the Internet and you guys pick up and think is true."

From Newsweek: "The meeting between Rumsfeld and Saddam was consequential: for the next five years, until Iran finally capitulated, the United States backed Saddam’s armies with military intelligence, economic aid, and covert supplies of munitions. Over the protests of some Pentagon skeptics the Reagan administration began allowing the Iraqis to buy a wide variety of ‘dual use’ equipment and materials from American suppliers….Most unsettling, numerous shipments of ‘bacteria/ fungi/protozoa’ [were made] to the IAEC [Iraq Atomic Energy Commission]. According to former officials the bacteria cultures could be used to make biological weapons including anthrax." (9/23/02)


O'Reilly: We have a 300 million population base here and Sweden has 3 million (5/8/01).

Since we just hit the 300 million population landmark last month it is highly unlikely that we had 300 million in 2001. Further Sweden has a population that is just under 9 million.


O’Reilly: "If you think that I’m a conservative go ahead. I mean, our audience is, according to the Pew Research Center, 47 percent Democrat on The Factor. (4/26/03)

That’s almost the opposite of what the study said. The audience for The O’Reilly Factor is skewed a bit more to the right: 56 percent of viewers were conservative, while 5 percent identified themselves as liberal. The study did not identify the viewers by party affiliation as O’Reilly claimed.


O’Reilly: "I’ve had two number-one best sellers…Not one NPR invitation." (3/6/02)

O’Reilly was profiled on the NPR show On The Media in January 2001

O’Reilly: "I’ve never heard a right-wing person on NPR anywhere…You never hear a pro-life person on NPR. You never hear an anti-global warming person on NPR. They don’t get on there" (1/7/02).

Again not true: Conservatives appear regularly on NPR, both in commentary (e.g. The Weekly Standard’s David Brooks and the Heritage Foundation’s Joe Loconte) and as sources in news stories. Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a global warming skeptic appears regularly and the network quoted Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee 11 times in 2001.

O’Reilly: If you want to understand why President Clinton is so popular here in Southern California, look no further than The Los Angeles Times. L.A.s only major newspaper has reported not one word of the Juanita Broaddrick story. Not one word." (2/24/99)

The Times had run a story just four days earlier on 2/20/99.


O’Reilly: "I’ve got a transcript on what they do and a rundown of their whole lineup. And look, twenty-five years Saddam has been committing atrocities. all right. Al Jazeera didn’t report on them. They didn’t report on the mow-downs after the ‘91 war. They didn’t report on the gassing of the Kurds in the eighties."

The Al Jazeera network was founded in 1996.

I think that is enough. O’Reilly lies like a Dawg!

Thanks to the great little book, The O’Really Factor (2003) for all the information. Reading books is a good thing.
 
You should spend some time reading the dictionary; familiarize yourself with the differences of a 'mistake in information' and a 'lie'.
 
You should spend some time reading the dictionary; familiarize yourself with the differences of a 'mistake in information' and a 'lie'.

Oh, so you're saying that O'Reilly is an ignorant fuck...He's that and a damn liar!!!
 
Again Prak, I disagree. I think if you tried hard enough you could prove that he was a lying whore.
 
You should spend some time reading the dictionary; familiarize yourself with the differences of a 'mistake in information' and a 'lie'.

What are the chances O'Reilly didn't know he was on the NPR show???

O’Reilly: "I’ve had two number-one best sellers…Not one NPR invitation." (3/6/02)

O’Reilly was profiled on the NPR show On The Media in January 2001.

You might claim he didn't know the population of America, or that he didn't know when Al Jazeera was created but then you would have to explain this statement: "I research up the wazoo" (5/4/2000). His research of the wazoo has netted these kinds of thrilling statements: "we have brand new research here from the Urban Institute, 70 percent [of the homeless in America] are addicted or mentally ill or whatever" (12/19/02). Isn’t that a great but obtuse and meaningless statement: 70 percent are something; and the research don’t forget the famous BILLO wazoo research.

And then there is the infamous BILLO Iraqi War Solution. Perhaps now that we are even more bogged down than we once were and Bush has said he will consider all solutions, BILLO’s rather simplistic approach to war and civilization will be given a look-see:

There is a school of thought that says we should have given the citizens of Baghdad forty-eight hours to ‘get out of Dodge’ by dropping leaflets and going on AM radios and all that. Forty-eight hours, you’ve got to get out of there, and flatten the place. Then the war would be over. We could have done that in two days….You flatten Baghdad, you flatten all the troops, we know where they go, there’s nowhere to hide in the desert. We know where everybody’s moving. And you know as well as I do, this war could have been over in two days….It’s just frustrating for everybody to know that we have been fighting this war with one hand tied behind out back. (3/26/03)

So there you have it the BILLO simple solution to the war in Iraq. The complete destruction of Baghdad a city of 4.5 million residents less 100,000 or more refugees and who knows how many hundreds of thousands of dead residents by this time. But I think we should still give mr. anti-abortion and anti-stem cell research because taking a life is wrong’s total destruction theory a reading. It is obvious he abhors the taking of human life.

Another contradiction appears over the beginning of the war with Iraq. He early on said this:

"I can't in good conscience, tell the American people that I know for sure that he has smallpox or anthrax or he's got nuclear or chemical and that he is ready to use that. I cannot say that as a journalist or an American" (12/6/02).

But two months later O'Reilly had changed course and accepted the WMD justification hook, line, and anthrax.

"According to the UN [actually that was according to Colin Powell, but how would O’Reilly have known the difference, what being restricted by his wazoo research] he’s got anthrax, VX gas, ricin, and on and on" (2/17/06).

"This guy we know has anthrax and VX and all this stuff" (2/26/03).

The question is then is he a stupid ignorant whore of the right or a lying whore of the right? We report; you decide!

Thanks once again to the Oh Really Factor.
 
I think most of OLielys viewers are over 60 from what I have seen.

Yes, the average age is somewhat over 70. It is one of the things that Olbermann laughs about regularly. Since Olbermann's viewers are much younger, he thinks eventually he will beat out O'Reilly through attrition if nothing else.
 
Yes, the average age is somewhat over 70. It is one of the things that Olbermann laughs about regularly. Since Olbermann's viewers are much younger, he thinks eventually he will beat out O'Reilly through attrition if nothing else.
Nah, as they get older they get their marching orders from the AARP and suddenly stop liking anything but O'Reilly.
 
I think it is something different from that. I have never seen anything from AARP promoting O'Liely.
I am a card totin member :) I carry it in my wallet right next to my concealed carry permit....
I know that it might be hard for some neocons to believe that a liberal type has a concealed carry permit, but that is the way it is.
 
I think it is something different from that. I have never seen anything from AARP promoting O'Liely.
I am a card totin member :) I carry it in my wallet right next to my concealed carry permit....
I know that it might be hard for some neocons to believe that a liberal type has a concealed carry permit, but that is the way it is.
I think it is psychic impression. They've cornered the market on that you know....
 
Nah, as they get older they get their marching orders from the AARP and suddenly stop liking anything but O'Reilly.

What Olbermann means by "attrition" here is that O'Reilly's viewers will eventually all die off while his viewers who are younger will still be watching him.
 
What Olbermann means by "attrition" here is that O'Reilly's viewers will eventually all die off while his viewers who are younger will still be watching him.
The problem is that they age and thus "convert" see?

It's okay. It was a terrible joke anyway.
 
Back
Top