The left dominates the mainstream media, including the big three television networks and most of the nation's newspapers. They have hundreds of thousands of Web sites and blogs spewing their propaganda daily.
They have their own radio network, Air America, although hardly anyone listens to it. They've infiltrated every sector of the education system and our courts. They control the Democratic Party.
But they still can't stand it when somebody wants to offer an opposing view. Conservative authors are routinely blackballed from television programs when they try to promote books. Liberals routinely disrupt speeches by conservatives on college campuses.
I was reminded of how intolerant the far left is when I read a letter to the editor by a "progressive" member of the Berks County Chamber of Commerce who apparently doesn't like the choice of guest speaker for the chamber's annual dinner in Reading, Pa.
The keynote speaker for the May 12 chamber event is none other than Bill O'Reilly.
While the letter-writer has the option of staying home when O'Reilly visits Reading, he instead decided to launch unsubstantiated attacks on O'Reilly, the host of "The O'Reilly Factor" on the FOX News network and "The Radio Factor" on hundreds of radio stations and author of several best-selling books.
Here's the text of the April 2 letter published in the Reading Eagle newspaper:
O'Reilly should not speak at dinner
As a member of the Greater Reading Chamber of Commerce, I was shocked to learn that the chamber has invited Fox News Channel pundit Bill O'Reilly to speak at its annual dinner on May 12.
O'Reilly was sued for sexual harassment by an employee and was forced to settle out of court after sexually explicit telephone transcripts were released.
Furthermore, it has been documented by various watchdog groups that O'Reilly has made overtly racist comments on his shows.
Last October O'Reilly claimed that American GIs massacred Nazi prisoners of war in cold blood at Malmedy during World War II. In fact, it was the Nazis who shot and killed American prisoners from the 82nd Airborne Division.
Even if one were to overlook half of the accusations against O'Reilly, he would still be a terrible example for local business leaders and an inappropriate guest for the annual chamber dinner.
The chamber should cancel O'Reilly's appearance.
Bob Cesca,
Spring Township
My favorite part of Cesca's dispatch is the line "it has been documented by various watchdog groups..." Watchdog groups? Did Mr. Cesca list a single "watchdog" group that can offer proof that O'Reilly made racist comments on his show? Of course not. There are no "watchdog" groups. Liberal like to make things up.
What Mr. Cesca meant to say is that "it has been documented by left-wing smear sites and bloggers" that O'Reilly ...
O'Reilly is a favorite target of the left because of his popularity. And because he's not afraid to challenge these radicals.
The problem with liberals is that they get information from far left Internet sites that never let facts get in the way. These sites are propaganda merchants in the truest form. The bigger the lie, the better for these purveyors of deceit.
O'Reilly hosts the most popular news program on cable television (the highest rated cable television show for more than 200 consecutive weeks). He has written a series of No. 1 best-selling books. His syndicated column is carried by hundreds of newspapers. He is a big draw.
The Berks County Chamber of Commerce wants to fill every seat for its forum and wants people to be entertained and informed. That's why they booked O'Reilly.
Mr. Cesca can stay home on May 12 and surf the Internet for more hysterical nonsense from the far left. Or he can tape Rosie O'Donnell on "The View" and catch up on her latest rants.
I'm looking forward to having Bill O'Reilly come to Reading. No one should be afraid to listen to new ideas. Especially ones they disagree with.
5 comments:
Tony:
I am going to assume a few things:
1). You actually do read these comments;
2). You actually like to see opposing viewpoints;
3). You are not totally closed-minded on the subject of Mr. O'Reilly.
Having said that, I do not feel Bill O'Reilly needs defending. He has, as you point out, a very highly--rated tee vee show in prime time. That gives him a bigger soapbox than almost anyone. He can surely defend himself, as he seems to be doing more and more and more on his show lately. Odd that. Would it be that the criticism is hitting home?
Furthermore, I do not feel Bill O'Reilly deserves defending. Having watched him this week, once again, order a guest's microphone to be turned off because she wouldn't say what he wanted her to say, I feel he should be apologizing to America.
Why would you want to defend someone who invites people onto his show only so he can tell them they are kooks or so that he can shout over them when they disagree with him? At the end of your article you say, "No one should be afraid to listen to new ideas. Especially ones they disagree with." Please tell that to Mr. O'Reilly.
Mr. O'Reilly browbeats his interview subjects. His questions, all of which have incredible spin in his No Spin Zone, are always YES/NO, BLACK/WHITE, ON/OFF, ZERO/ONE questions. He will allow no answer that doesn't conform to the answer he wants and he certainly sees no grey in this world.
In pont of fact, it would be a misnomer to call these segments on his show interviews. They are simply interrogations.
I would suggest that it's possible you do not watch a lot of The O'Reilly Factor otherwise you would know he displys dreadful manners and that his critics are, in the main, correct even if the rhetoric is terribly overblown.
The character Mr. O'Reilly plays on his program (which may only be the tee vee O'Reilly, a character, totally divorced from what he is like off-camera) displays behaviour for which I would have punished my children.
I also saw him suggest (it wasn't a clear-cut declaritive statement, which is why I use the word "suggest") that a teenage kidnap and rape victim probably liked not having to go to school. (Again, I don't have the exact quote, date, but I can tell you it happened on The O'Reilly Factor.) I was stunned when he said it.
But, the real fun was watching him backpedal and deny he ever said it over the next week or so. And, you can see that he really believed himself. It was sad, ironic, and just a little bit frightening all at the same time.
You may, as you did in your article, say that I accused Mr. O'Reilly of this, that, or the other and didn't provide proof. The letter writer you quoted (who I don't know) described an incident I personally witnessed, but you dismissed that because she couldn't provide a source. Don't dismiss an opposing view just because they cannot provide all citations (but I could if pressed).
If you really need sources, for what I've said, what the letter writer said, or any other claims against Mr. O'Reilly, I suggest you go to YouTube. YouTube is the single, biggest repository of Bill's Bad Behaviour in the world.
Even if you were say that what's on YouTube is a miniscule proportion of all the interviews he's ever done, I think what's there --- and the sheer volume of it --- is enough to say that it must define his true character, or lack thereof.
No, Mr. O'Reilly neither needs my defense nor deserves it. I will save my defense for those who allow a difference of opinion without resorting to ad homenim attacks.
Let me know when Mr. O'Reilly learns this important lesson in Democracy.
With all my love,
Aunty Em
http://auntyemsplace.blogspot.com/
S'me again...
I just thought you should see Mr. O'Reilly's latest meltdown: http://www.newshounds.us/2007/04/05/bill_oreilly_and_geraldo_rivera_duke_it_out_over_drunk_driving.php
Please answer me this: How can you seriously defend this man?
Might I also suggest that you take a look around Newshounds. It may be one of those leftest blogs that you distain, but when they say something they have the video to back it up. When Mr. O'Reilly denies something, there's usually video to prove him wrong.
With all my love,
Aunty Em
http://auntyemsplace.blogspot.com/
Tony -- Fascinating response to my letter-to-the-editor. While the Reading Eagle only allows 200 words in which to make a series of points, you have an entire blog to respond yet you made no attempt to disprove the accusations against O'Reilly including the Malmedy gaffe, his sexual harassment suit, or ANY of the long list of O'Reilly's lies, misrepresentations, and lies (lies is listed twice because he lies quite a bit). You really wanted me to list sources and references in 200 words, eh? Is there some way to bend the laws of physics I don't know about?
One of my sources, since you demanded it, is the website Factcheck.org. You know, the one the VPOTUS mentioned in his 2004 debate with John Edwards. Hardly a "left wing smear site". Speaking of that, since when are watchdog sites considered "smear sites"? Oh, that's right. That's what O'Reilly calls them. So it must be true. True like O'Reilly saying that American soldiers killed Nazi prisoners at Malmedy, when the exact opposite was the case. True like O'Reilly saying over-and-over that he won a Peabody Award. True like O'Reilly implying that he's been in combat.
My beef has little to do with political ideology. Hell, the chamber has invited Newt Gingrich in the past. No problems there. But I wonder how you'd feel if the chamber invited Michael Moore to speak to the top business leaders in the area. Or maybe George Soros.
Bottom line, I listed a series of specific issues and incidents involving O'Reilly. Rather than attacking my motives, I challenge you to disprove the points I made and the hundreds of others I didn't have the space to list, and we can call it even.
-Bob Cesca
Just a few words for Emily and Bob, who posted replies to my "Defending Bill O'Reilly" post.
They're probably surprised that I posted their replies. My policy has always been to allow anyone to offer an alternative viewpoint or raise any questions to my columns. As long as there's no name-calling or other personal attacks, I don't have a problem with anyone criticizing me, even Democrats.
Obviously, both writers have spent much more time researching Bill O'Reilly than I have or care to. I do catch his show a few times a week for a segment here or there, but I can't say that I've ever watched his show for the entire 60 minutes. I've never read any of his books, but when I've watched his Talking Points Memo or read one of his columns, I usually find myself agreeing with 90 percent of what O'Reilly says.
I agree with Bill O'Reilly that this country needs to protect its borders from illegal immigrants. I agree with O'Reilly that the far left is anti-American. The times I've watched, I've never seen O'Reilly order anyones mic turned off. I admire the fact that he invites a variety of guests on the program, even the far lefties. You don't see that on other cable talk shows, especially on the far left MSNBC or the equally far left CNN.
I don't understand why people who disagree with O'Reilly spend so much time watching his show. He has an audience (a really big audience) and he gives his viewers what they want. Liberals have a lot of alternatives of their own on the other cable outlets.
As for Mr. Cesca's concern about O'Reilly speaking at the Chamber forum, I think the people who pick speakers did so because Bill O'Reilly is a draw, unlike Michael Moore or George Soros. The idea is to sell tickets to the event, not scare off the majority of Chamber members.
May I suggest that Mr. Cesca get on the committee that picks future speakers so he can raise his objections before someone is booked at next year's Chamber dinner.
With Tony on this one
The people that are criticizing Mr. O’Reilly should get a life and the life is that there upset up because he talks the talk meaning he tells it like it is. I’m not saying I agree with all he says but I like how he stands up for what he believes. About turning off the mic well what most liberals say on his show is more embracing then anything he every said. These people love to watch his show just to look for far left propaganda he’s not perfect but again he not a far left person either. If you don’t like his Ideas watch the big three ABC.NBC a CBS there really far left then O’Reilly ever would be. If Mr. Cesca is a fan of Michael Moore we are in trouble Moore has nothing on O’Reilly Mr. Moore ideas are so far left you really can’t see it anymore!! I do believe the bottom line here is the hatred for our President the(DEM)don’t care about the country just the get me Bush stumping. It’s time we all thought about the country’s direction not the Bush pounding. This only can be accomplished by the parties to be working together this might be a bigger problem then we can imagine.
Wayne
Post a Comment