Just an observation, but notice how much muck is dredged up by conservative thread starters in this forum. The vast majority of thread starters in this forum are conservatives. Much of the mud slinging comes from blog sites, not exactly the most impartial of information. Also notice that no liberals have started a thread about conservative guru Bill O'Reilly and his sexual harassment suit. I dare say that if Al Franken were accused of harassment, the conservatives would be climbing all over themselves trying to post "the truth." I realize that I am dredging up a little muck myself with this thread. Neverthless, I thought it was interesting. And I have nothing to say about the charges against O'Reilly. The only thing I find strange is why conservatives worship him in the first place. He's just a mud slinger himself. It's a bit ironic that now he finds himself on the messy end of that. Does anyone know the title of his newly released children's book? Is it, perhaps, Mr. Vibrator's Adventures in the Caribbean? Is it the Bible that talks about worshipping false Gods? Sorry, couldn't resist.
All self-rightous Neo-cons eventually self destruct. Robertson, Swaggart, Limbaugh, and now O'Reilly prove that the right is full of hot air when it comes to ethical and moral values. Whose next? I bet Hannity is next. He looks a bit scummy anyway. (lol).
O'Reilly is definitely not a neo-con. He's generally a traditional conservative, and that often does come through in his show. But he does try to be fair, most of the time. I often don't agree with him, but I do respect him. I have no idea if the allegations are true, but I think it is sad that people who preceive his as "the enemy" are jumping on this when they don't know, either.
I am waiting to see if there is any evidence behind the accusations before I jump in. Some only put in their thoughts, with their "sides" hat on. I wait to see the data / eivdence (I think my schooling has taught me that).
I really don't know if he is guilty or not, I haven't seen the evidence. However, Bill has proven that he is not very intelligent in the way he has handled this. Bill brought this out into the public eye by a preemptive lawsuit. The "victim" wanted to keep this under the radar. However, if the fact of the lawsuit are in fact true, Bill can be guilty of a federal offense by retaliating against someone who has filed a claim of sexual harassment. Like so many "shock jocks" (O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Stern, and the most sleezy Ann Coulter), these people don't really report the news and provide hard hitting interviews, they merely slam people down in a vain attempt to make themselves look good. You can only do this for so long without turnabout. All of these people should look at Chris Matthews and even to some extent Pat Buchanan. Both are excellent hard hitting interviewers who don't have to stoop to being rude or condesending to their interviewees. Bill sounds like an immature child, always trying to prove himself using a false agenda (and background). Sad - even sadder at Bill doesn't really have to resort to this type of sleaze. I suspect he cannot help himself.
Actually someone did start a thread on Bill O'Reilly: http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?threadid=16240 I don't know if the thread starter from the above link has liberal or conservative political views, but the thread is there nonetheless. As far as the charges against O'Reilly, I don't know if there's any truth to them but then neither does anyone right now except the two people involved in the suit. On the other hand, I do recall at least one time O'Reilly made what I considered to be an offensive remark of a sexual nature to a female while on air. She was clearly offended, and called him on it. It bothered me that instead of apologizing he simply rolled his eyes and repeated the remark. Troubling to be sure, but still not an indication that he's guilty of worse. From what I have seen those guilty of worse things in that regard seem more likely to play holier-than-thou in public. But who knows at this point. Kit Edited P.S. Oooops....you were right, I just checked the dates on the two threads, yours and the one started by Carl. You posted yours first, so you're right, no one started an O'Reilly thread before yours.
It warms my heart to see big mouth neo-cons self-destruct. Especially such crap mongers as O'Reilly. O'Reilly apparently isn't as smart as he thought he was and neither are his attorney's. By filing suit against this person after she filed a sexual harassment claim, he has broken federal law. Of course, neo-cons never think the law applies to them. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=8&u=/ap/20041020/ap_on_en_tv/o_reilly_lawsuit_7 Even funnier reading http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html My prediction: O'Reilly will fade off into the sunset by the end of this year. He will continue to whin and cry proclaiming his innocence. Of course, no one will care as this man hasn't cared about anyone else his entire career. (kind of reminds me of Hannity and Limbaugh). You see, assholes usually get it in the end no matter what their party affiliation.
It is funny how cons and neo-cons can't recognize who they are. You never see O'Reilly smoozing through the Demo camp. Of course the 'Pubs have their nose so far up his arsh trying to get yet another plug. Neo cons and cons just can't face the facts. The Faux News Network and everyone associated with it is a CON. Pure and simple. The libs on they have are usually wimpy and strictly for window dressing.
Seems to me that anyone ,regardless of political convictions ,might find themselves in difficulty with the opposite gender. Wasn't there a democrat named Ted who drove into a river with some gal? Wasn't there another democrat named Bill too , let's see, what was his last name now, who messed around in the white house?
Really. This one isn't party specific. My theory: take a guy who's been a dorky smart political nerd all his life and give him power. Watch his pants drop with the new found opposite sex attention.
As I said in the thread begun by Carl (the one Tom said didn't exist), sleeze is sleeze regardless of political identification. To try to show the Democrats are sleezier than the GOP, or vice versa, is futile. Each party has within its ranks members of the "sexual sleeze sub party." Remember Chandra Levy and Democratic Congressman Gary Conditt? Remember Lori Klausutis? She was found dead in the office of then GOP Congressman Joe Scarborough with whom it was rumored she had an affair.
Yes, I do. Do you remember that Condit had nothing to do with her death, yet his life was ruined by scum who keeping planting ridiculous innuendo? Yes, I also remember her. And Scarborough had nothing to do with it. But here's the kicker. Do a Google search. Lori is mentioned a total of 541 times. Chandra is mentioned over 21,700 times. Neither Congressman had anything do with either of these deaths. Yet people like you insist on using the tragic death of Chandra Levy to your political advantage. Yes, the same has been done on the other side, but you and your allies have done it over 40 times as much. I completely agree. And most of the threads you have posted recently fall into this category -- sleeze.
