Bill O'Reilly Makes A Fool Of Himself Yet Again

[Formaldehyde]

By using propaganda tactics to try to rebut charges that he and other Fox News talking heads frequently engage in propaganda tactics, such as trying to equate Huffington Post to "left-wing Nazis".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/28/jon-stewart-hits-back-at-_n_815284.html

For the third time in about a week, Jon Stewart has dedicated a "Daily Show" segment to dealing with angry, Nazi-related rhetoric used in media and politics. But what seems to bother him more than nonsensical Hitler comparisons is Fox News pundits' inability to see their own Nazi references as inappropriate.

After Stewart called out Steve Cohen's use of a Goebbels reference to describe GOP behavior, Megyn Kelly of Fox News said there is no Nazi rhetoric used on Fox News. But Stewart proved with a slew of clips that Fox was being hypocritical.

In one of those clips, Bill O'Reilly made a mind-boggling comparison between HuffPost and Hitler. Seeing it on "The Daily Show" didn't sit well with the Fox News host, who said on his next show that the clip was edited in a way took it out of context. Stewart responded:

Why you used the Nazi reference doesn't really matter in this. The segment is for Megyn Kelly to take offense to, not you. It's not all about you, Bill!"

The point of the segment was to show that contrary to what Kelly said, Nazi references run amok on Fox News. But since O'Reilly seemed so eager to provide context with his baseless claim, Stewart obliged him. The content that O'Reilly found suitable to compare to the work of Nazis? It turned out to be a nasty comment someone wrote on a post about Nancy Reagan that had yet to be removed by our comment moderators.

"That was a horrible thing for someone to write," Stewart said. "...But being a heartless douche isn't exactly the same as being a Nazi propagandist."

Like he does best, Stewart pointed out that Fox News' website also has some offensive comments, and produced a particularly bad one regarding Michelle Obama's backside. But Stewart's point wasn't that commenters are mean, it was that Fox News does use Nazi rhetoric, and with this rebuttal O'Reilly was basically saying, "Yeah, but I had a good reason."

Watch the rest of the clip to hear Stewart's impeccable speeding analogy that should really put the entire Nazi name-calling debate to bed.

Daily Show clip.

I think this is yet another classic example that Bill O'Reilly is simply far too bigoted and deceitful to have any pubilc platform whatsoever to spew his own drivel. He deliberately tried to give the impression that HuffPost had written the comment, instead of some idiot on the internet, which he then he incorrectly tried to ascribe to "far-left Nazi" HuffPost propaganda.

It looks like the talking heads at Fox News aren't at all interested in scaling back the "vitriol", propaganda, and deliberate lies, despite being warned to do so recently by Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes. To them, the battle against the "vile Nazi propaganda machine" is apparently far too important.

What do you think?

 

[MobBoss]

I think that how someone thinks Foxnews is propaganda, but the Huffington Post is just fine is beyond me.

 

[Ajidica]

It isn't which is propoganda, but which propoganda outlet still has a shred of journalistic integrity left. Hint: It isn't Fox News.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I think that how someone thinks Foxnews is propaganda, but the Huffington Post is just fine is beyond me.

Because one actually has journalistic integrity while the other obviously doesn't?

Because one frequently deliberately lies while the other doesn't?

Because merely disagreeing with the opinions of someone doesn't mean they are engaging in propaganda and can be peremptorily dismissed?

 

[MobBoss]

It isn't which is propoganda, but which propoganda outlet still has a shred of journalistic integrity left. Hint: It isn't Fox News.

Because one actually has journalistic integrity while the other obviously doesn't?

Because one frequently deliberately lies while the other doesn't?

Rofl, I think the claim of 'journalistic integrity' argument is crapola, along with the 'lies' claim as well.

They are just all just simply different sides of the same coin. Always have been, just spun in different directions. You can either accept that....or not. /shrug.

Because merely disagreeing with the opinions of someone doesn't mean they are engaging in propaganda and can be peremptorily dismissed?

Can I quote this back to you every time you complain about foxnews?

 

[SuperJay]

I'm fairly progressive politically, but I don't read HuffPost anymore; it's just too sensationalized. (Apparently I'm one of those strange people that desires objective information, and doesn't want their news and information to conform to their political opinions.)

That said, BillO is hysterical yet again. I love this guy - why get offended by such an obvious clown? I don't think he's quite the dishonest shill that Beck is, and BillO is obviously pretty intelligent, but he seems to substitute volume for reason far too often.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Rofl, I think the claim of 'journalistic integrity' argument is crapola, along with the 'lies' claim as well.

I know that's your opinion, but I bet you cannot show the former is actually true with any corroborable evidence. OTOH Bill O'Reilly deliberately lying is a frequent occurrence, and actually just happened yet again as this recent event clearly shows.

Can I quote this back to you every time you complain about foxnews?

You mean by deliberately taking it out of context to completely distort its actual meaning yet again?

 

[Holycannoli]

Can I quote this back to you every time you complain about foxnews?

I think it is your duty You know what to do.

You mean by deliberately taking it out of context to completely distort its actual meaning yet again?

The irony is strong in this one. MobBoss, you know what to do.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

I think that how someone thinks Foxnews is propaganda, but the Huffington Post is just fine is beyond me.

Can you find some proof of propaganda on the Huffington Post?

Maybe something along the lines of the Insurance Memos we saw from old Pox News?

 

[warpus]

Huffington Post is not fine and I don't see why it has to be quoted all the time.. as opposed to going straight to the source on this story

 

[MobBoss]

I know that's your opinion, but I bet you cannot show the former is actually true with any corroborable evidence. OTOH Bill O'Reilly deliberately lying is a frequent occurrence, and actually just happened yet again as this recent event clearly shows.

I could, but I dont care to. I am not as obsessed with huffpost as some are with foxnews...but I dont have to be obsessed with it to simply recognize its obvious spin.

You mean by deliberately taking it out of context to completely distort its actual meaning yet again?

No, I mean actually using the quote in its precise context without distortion of its meaning right back at you.

Huffington Post is not fine and I don't see why it has to be quoted all the time.. as opposed to going straight to the source on this story

And thats more than fair enough.

 

[negZero]

@Mobboss the difference is that one was a forum post made be some nobody that isn't on the HuffPost payroll, which Bill O'Reilly tried to portray as coming from Huffington writers. One came from a sick nobody who should be in cell, another came from a yellow journalist. if you can't see the difference then well... actually I expect you not to care about the difference nor acknowledge it.

 

[woody60707]

??? I don't get why anyone cares?

 

[Earthling]

The irony is strong in this one.

Except that it's usually against the rules anyway to quote posts in another, old thread in some other discussion, so I don't think that should be encouraged. Quoting rather old news articles which still happens in a lot of threads is bad enough but the mods don't punish that.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The irony is strong in this one. MobBoss, you know what to do.

Then I'm sure you won't mind finding an actual example or two instead of merely insinuating it must be so, as usual.

Can you find some proof of propaganda on the Huffington Post?

The silence in that regard is deafening, as usual.

It's always the same story from those who try to defend Fox News, even though Mobboss claims he never even watches people like O'Reilly and Beck for this very reason despite having quite similiar opinions about a number of topics, including this one. They just don't seem to realize that there is a huge difference between merely disagreeing with someone and deliberately using propaganda tactics while stating obvious lies such as this. That Fox News is in no way a responsible news organization with any sort of integrity, and that this clearly sets them apart from any "liberal" mainstream ones, such as HuffPost.

Bias is obviously not the same as stating deliberate lies or making clearly deceitful statements over and over again.

 

[PredatorFett]

Say it ain't so, LOL. Even as a libertarian, O'Reilly sickens me.

 

[MobBoss]

Then I'm sure you won't mind finding an actual example or two instead of merely insinuating it must be so, as usual.

The silence in that regard is deafening, as usual.

Actually, its not so deafening when grasped in context.

I dont really give a crap about huffpost doing what they do, so I could care less about wasting my time to appease you in what should simply be a given.

My point is more about hypocrisy than about whatever huffpost does. If one uses propaganda and lies as the definition of what Foxnews does, then is simply wrong to acknowledge that the very same thing is often done by their polar opposites. Thats what I am pointing out, nothing more.

Now, if you want to stand on your barrel and claim how huffpost is this icon of journalistic integrity you go right ahead. I will simply laugh about it and continue to

It's always the same story from those who try to defend Fox News

Just like its always the same from those that try to defend huffpost and other lib/left sources. I mean, seriously, the scramble for some kind of moral highground where media is concerned is just laughable.

even though Mobboss claims he never even watches people like O'Reilly and Beck for this very reason despite having quite similiar opinions about a number of topics including this one.

I gurantee you watch them more than I do. I do read Foxnews Online which is absent Beck/O'Rielly et al, and just seems to run news stories and thats it.

That Fox News is in no way a responsible news organization with any sort of integrity, and that this clearly sets them apart from any "liberal" mainstream ones, such as HuffPost.

And like I said, I find that laughable. Its quite the 'king has no clothes' moment if you ask me.

 

[Patroklos]

If I had a dollar for every time Forma called republicans, Americans, libertarians, police, me, Moboss, amadeus or pretty much anyone he disagrees with of any flavor a fascist on this board alone, I could buy a plane ticket to Bali.

My irony meter is pegged.

 

[BasketCase]

What do you think?

Fox News doesn't use Nazi rhetoric. It uses anti-Nazi rhetoric. Which I'm fine with.

When O'Reilly compares HuffPost to Hitler? What's he doing? Slamming HuffPost, basically. Hitler is universally recognized as really, really bad. O'Reilly called HuffPost really, really bad.

"Duh" factor five, Captain!

 

[Holycannoli]

Then I'm sure you won't mind finding an actual example or two instead of merely insinuating it must be so, as usual.

Umm, right there in the OP?