Posts Tagged ‘Bill O’Reilly’

Before the Super Bowl, which was a solid game, President Obama sat down with Bill O’Reilly. He spoke about Egypt, saying they will certainly change but we can’t dictate what they do. When asked about the judge’s ruling on health care reform, Obama said he disagrees with the judge and doesn’t want to continue fighting the battles of the last two years while championing some of the better parts of the bill. I do like at about the 7:00 mark how Obama makes the argument that the mandate is about responsibility. Obama also talked about his idea of winning the future in various ways. There is also an interesting point at 9:45 when Obama talks about the things that reach his desk. It’s definitely worth a listen.

Enjoy contemplating how long it will be before the next NFL game.

Adam Feser

Here’s a video of Sarah Palin on O’Reilly’s show:

I have no problem with National Prayer Day because it is voluntary. I do have a problem with some of Palin’s other statements.

I want to start by summarizing the Ten Commandments (though the order varies).

1. I am God and you can have no other gods.
2. Don’t take the Lord’s name in vain.
3. Keep the Sabbath holy.
4. Honor they father and mother.
5. Don’t murder.
6. Don’t commit adultery.
7. Don’t steal.
8. Don’t lie.
9. Don’t covet your neighbor’s house.
10. Don’t covet your neighbor’s wife or possessions.

How are we supposed to use these to create law? Making the first three Commandments (you could also argue the Fourth and Sixth) law would make us a theocracy. The Fourth Commandment can hardly be made a law. The Fifth is a law. The Sixth Commandment cannot be legislated. The Seventh is a law. The Eighth is only a law in rare circumstances (when under oath). And if we outlawed coveting it would ruin our economy. The American dream is built on coveting stuff other people have.

So 5 and 7 (and 8, at times) of the Ten Commandments are already laws and would be laws regardless of the Ten Commandments. If we legislated 1,2, and 3 we’d be a theocracy. Legislating 4, 6, 8 (most of the time), 9, and 10 makes no sense.

Knowing this, exactly why would we want out laws to be based on the Ten Commandments? The Ten Commandments are an important part of may religions, but that does not mean a huge modern country can base laws on them. Which commandment is salient regarding environmental policy? Where should we set speed limits? What about the death penalty?

To be fair, Palin also mentioned the Bible. Which parts of the Bible do we legislate? Do we use the Old Testament? Do we outlaw tattoos and shellfish? Do we stone women for premarital sex?

Or do we move in a New Testament direction and work on forgiveness and turning the other cheek? Should we use that as our guiding foreign policy?

This gets at one of the main problems with trying to legislate based on these texts – everyone has different interpretations of the texts. Many Christians believe the Old Testament does not apply. Others believe only parts of it apply. Palin is fond of the word “Judeo-Christian,” so should we include Orthodox Jewish law? Do we keep single women separate from men at night? Do we keep kosher?

I recognize and have no problem with anyone using whatever religion they follow for their own purposes. If it provides comfort and purpose, then it is a good thing. But when you attempt to force your religion on others, you are acting against the Constitution, which is the guiding law for creating legislation in this country.

I also think it cheapens religion to have it involved in something as contentious and oftentimes corrupt as politics. The First Amendment protects the right of citizens to choose their own religion, and it also protects religion from misuse and abuse.

I have to believe that Sarah Palin knows it would be impossible and often unconstitutional to legislate according to the Ten Commandments and the Bible. I can only imagine she says things like this because she knows it will appeal to certain parts of the Republican Party. Either that or we better hope she never gets in a real position of power.

Just to reiterate: I am not trying to belittle anyone’s religion. I am simply stating that no one religion is or should be the basis of the law in this country. It should for each individual, not something you force on others.

Enjoy angry comments.

Adam Feser

Tom Coburn, as noted in an earlier post that’s generated a lot of heat for some reason, said fear mongering like saying you’ll go to jail if you don’t have insurance makes for great TV on Fox, but it’s not the point of reform. This seems like an incredibly logical thing to say and it makes a great point. Bill O’Reilly recently took Coburn to task for this statement. O’Reilly’s team apparently researched it, and no one had ever said that on Fox News. I think we all know where this is going.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the people that do the research for the shows on Fox News are really bad at their job.

Enjoy Dennis Miller making a weird reference and passing it off as an original joke (that’s for regular guys, not famous comedians).

Adam Feser

Jon Stewart recently went did an interview with Bill O’Reilly. There was the usual Bill making fun of Jon’s stoned viewers and such, but there were some good points.

Jon is good at giving reasonable answers to questions and also pointing out just how silly a question like “How is Obama doing?” can be. To Bill’s credit, he’s okay taking on a light tone with Jon. But when Jon starts talking about the problem (which Jon calls genius) with Fox, Bill uses two examples of people that won’t go on his show as total vindication.

It looks like they couldn’t fit the entire interview into the show, but it’s still worth watching.

The part where O’Reilly compares Fox to a newspaper, which also has opinion, cracks me up. Is the opinion on the front page of a newspaper and does it take up nearly the entire newspaper? MSNBC is also guilty of this. It makes you wonder whether or not they should just be called 24-hour opinion channels.

Enjoy doppelganger week (mine has been John Belushi).

Adam Feser

I figured I should post this one as well.

Enjoy a cherry-flavored beverage.

Adam Feser

This video is perfect. It shows the obvious hypocrisy inherent in O’Reilly’s show. There is nothing new here. What is really great about this video is that it shows how truly ignorant of this hypocrisy Bill is. He has absolutely no idea that he does the very thing he claims is unAmerican. It is almost shocking to see. Only someone with an ego as big as O’Reilly’s could be oblivious to the fact that he goes on rants against himself. Let’s just get to the video, which does a better job of describing it than I can.

Enjoy Ben Kweller’s new album, Changing Horses.

Adam Feser

I just found this while on a break in one of my classes. Say what you will about Bill O’Reilly, but one thing is certain: his ego is not small. This link includes a piece of Bill’s new book in which he describes how to convert an atheist. You simply describe Bill’s life and they will see the light. I’m not an expert on the Factor’s audience, but something tells me atheists are not his key demographic. I hardly think the fact that millions and millions of people listen to him every day would be viewed as divinely inspiring to atheists. It seems atheists (doesn’t he call them SPs for secular-progressives or liberal nutjobs or something?) would see his popularity in a negative light. Maybe I’m wrong. I think I will find an atheist and use the O’Reilly story to convert her or him. Wish me luck.

The definition of narcissistic personality disorder at the end is classic. I am having some difficulty figuring out how to properly include a link, so you’ll have to copy and paste it to your address bar. My apologies.

http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/367

Enjoy the Twins-like Tampa Bay Rays roughing up the White Sox.

Always skeptical, never cynical

Adam Feser