Quick question re:O'Reilly

My neighbor asked me last night if I caught ORielly pontificating about the lawsuit on his show last night?

Did he actually do that?

Have not been up to watching him at all lately.

You get on his shit list and he will hack away at you every night. Also, anyone who DARES to not appear on the Factor is somehow slapping democracy in the face. He has the most vitriol for anyone who won't appear on his show--as if he is the ultimate arbiter of democratic accountability and all public officials must appear on his show that less than 1% of the American public watches every night.

Yep. I didn't watch but you can find it here.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94702,00.html

"The main point here is that trying to hurt a business or a person because you disagree with what they say is simply unacceptable in America. And that message has been sent by FOX. There's a principle in play. Vigorous debate is embraced by us, but smear campaigns will be confronted. It is simply a joke for The New York Times to editorialize that fabricated personal attacks are acceptable under the banner of satire."

What a fool. The man's suffering from terminal egotism. This lawsuit has the potential of actually bringing down O'Reilly who will be seen as the rampaging mean-spirited bully he is. Franken's a smart guy. This will play to his side beautifully and could end up being hilarious.

The Times editorial referred to here is positively wonderful. I can't provide a link at the moment, I've been having trouble accessing the Times lately. But you can try your luck at http://www.nytimes.com It was Wednesday's editorial. I don't see anything about it over on DU's editorials board but I may have missed it.

The Editorial is titled, "Windfall Publicity for Al Franken's Book"
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/13/opinion/13WED4.html

ha ha. For real. His little ego may still be bruised from when Franken (and Huffington?) called him on his lies (oops I mean mis-speakings) about a Peabody award.

I think this passage speaks volumes about O'Reilly's terminal egotism:

"In the Old West, and I would have loved to have been in the Old West, Al and I, we would have had a little shootout. We would have gone out on Willshire Avenue, six shooters. Now he's a much smaller target than I am, about 4'11, but he's wider and it would have been, you know..."

O'Reilly picked the wrong guy to mess with. Franken, while a pompus ass, is well-respected in media/comedy circles and his exploits are sure to be reverberated on late night talk shows.

Already Letterman has shown a disdain for both Dubya and Faux...is an long-time friend with Franken...and loves when a large corporation (especially one that competes with his own) looks stupid.

Leno's messages are more subtle and he attempts to play "all sides"...for example while he was getting all the buzz for Arnold's apperance there were two nasty shots at Dubya in the monolouge. Leno's no F.O.F. (Friend Of Franken), but he won't miss the chance to take a couple shots at Faux (not O'Reilly).

Kimmel has already made a couple of cracks about the suit and has aired the Franken/O'Reilly "debate" several times, taking some wicked shots at the "No-Spinster".

Of course, the person to watch the most on this is Conan...not only a close friend of Franken's, but his show has turned into the late-night clubhouse of Republican bashing. Too bad O'Reilly doesn't have an accent so Robert Smigel could take a crack at putting words in his mouth.

Also, the best of the bunch is Jon Stewart who is rapidly becoming the "Walter Cronkite" of the Gen X'ers...while mom and dad are watching O'Reilly, the kids are watching The Daily Show.

Remember, these people reach millions who either watch little news or that they use these shows to guage what's going on politically. O'Reilly deserves to be exposed for the pompous egotist whose phony "everyman" routine has been eroding for sometime.

Sure, O'Reilly's ratings are the top of the heap of Cable News (1% of all people watching TV) he assumes that this justifies his "crusades"...while not understanding there are many of us out there who will tune in just to see what stupid things come out of his piehole.

In his tirade O'Reilly said this:

"I wonder if The Times thought that Donald Sagretti (sic) was funny when he manufactured dirt to hurt Richard Nixon's political opponents. I guess The Times editorial board would be yucking it up if their pictures appeared on a book cover accompanied by the word "liar." Satire, my butt."

As a geezer who was there, nobody thought Donald Segretti was funny. That was because Segretti was not in the cheap entertainment biz like Faux News; he was working under the President of the United States in a campaign of political sabotage to secretly destroy any of Nixon's Democratic opponents in the 1972 re-election campaign. He served 4 1/2 months in prison for distributing illegal campaign literature, including a letter falsely claiming candidate Scoop Jackson had fathered an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old girl.

O'Really's claim is not quite in the same league. Besides, Franken has truth on his side.

btw...as one old geser to another:

I remember Segretti too and he was neither an entertainer nor funny..he was criminal..

wasn't Rove his protege'?

I never take anything this guy says seriously. In fact I never listen to ANYTHING he says. I never watch his show, I only catch him now and again in soundbites. He's an idiot, conservatives are idiots, and I don't care what they say. Now, if any of them would ever sit down for a "fair and balanced" discussion, I might have a shred of respect for them. Until then, I will continue to ignore them, and spend my time educating myself instead. Oh yeah, I'm sure Al will outsell O'Reilly anyday.

if o'really eneded up holding the bag if the lawsuit ends up costing Fox alot of money and whatever prestige they have remaining.