What is Digg?205 Comments
- luskin, on 10/10/2007, -14/+107No, he's just an *****.
- dawg109, on 10/10/2007, -16/+85He is not mentally ill. He is just a typical Bush associate / parrot.
- treelovinhippie, on 10/10/2007, -9/+75Bill O'Reilly isn't mentally ill, just the millions who continue to watch him.
- DiggerRich, on 10/10/2007, -14/+78Olbermann's the man. He's the only guy in the media who has the balls to say this (or anything, for that matter).
- Lyanto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+57Ah, I didn't think it was possible to jam so much irony into a statement.
- northwatuppa, on 10/10/2007, -2/+42That, of course, begs the question "Are they all nuts?"
- rnwen2750, on 10/10/2007, -2/+34Mmm, ironic jam.
- dmbchris, on 10/10/2007, -6/+37O'Reilly isn't mentally ill- he's actually very smart-- smart enough to know what pleases his viewers, who are the ones who should really be classified as ill because they eat up the ***** that he feeds them. If you remember his stuff from the 90's, it was mostly sane but he was not very popular. Sometime between then and now he discovered how much more money he could make being a neo-conservative mouthpiece for Fox.
Every time you digg a Bill O'Reilly story you are actually making him more popular, by keeping him in the news. Remember- any publicity is good publicity. Also, it makes him more popular with his viewers when it looks like he is "under attack" by the "liberal media," which actually buys him sympathy. Best thing is to ignore him and report the truth, maybe having a laugh on the side. - corevette, on 10/10/2007, -8/+36mentally ill > bill o' reilly
at least the mentally ill sort of make sense - mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24You just contradicted yourself.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22and the greatest decade of prosperity and fiscal responsibility America has ever known, but of course many will only see his dick. (namely the republicans)
- shabumike, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22An ***** is quite a useful part of the human anatomy, maybe a .....puss filled hemorrhoid would be more appropriate.
- opiniastrous, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19Recently I've been reading a book by Norman Dixon called 'On the Psychology of Military Incompetence'. It's fantastic, although it is a little anachronistic and irrelevant given it largely deals with the British Army's experiences in periods some time before now. Still, it has some brilliant points. Today I was reading the chapter 'Authoritarianism' but rather than thinking about the military, I couldn't stop shaking the thought of America's Christian Right from my mind (and only American Christians, because in my experience Christians in other countries are not all all like those Diggers tend to hate). In it the author describes research on authoritarian personalities, which have been found to be disposed towards:
1. Conventionalism, i.e., rigid adherence to conventional middle-class values.
2. Authoritarian submission i.e. a submissive, uncritical attitude to words the idealized moral authorities of the group which he identifies himself.
3. Authoritarian aggression, i.e., a tendency to be on the lookout for lookout for and to condemn, reject and punish people who violate conventional values.
4. Anti-intraception, i.e., an opposition to the subjective, imaginative and tender minded.
5. Superstition and stereotypy, i.e., a belief in magical determinants of the individual's fate, and the disposition to think in rigid categories.
6. Power and toughness, i.e., a preoccupation with the dominant submission, strong-weak, leader-follower dimension, identification with power figures, overemphasis upon the conventionalised attributes of the ego, exaggerated assertion of strength and toughness.
7. Destructiveness and cynicism, i.e., generalized hostility, vilification of the human.
8. Projectivity, i.e., a believed that wild and dangerous things go on in the world, the projection outwards unconscious emotional impulses.
9. 'Puritanical prurience', i.e., an exaggerated concerned with sexual " going ons".
It struck me that many diggers who claim to be so vehemently atheist might only be so because being American (largely), they are so often exposed to the disgusting personalities of America's Conservative (and Christian) Right, like our friend Bill. What's more, it seems these personalities are developed from a young age, so they will just continue to develop. Roger Brown (an eminent social psychologist) said that the data (collected from 2000 Americans around WWII) were hair-raising and suggested "...we could find in this country [USA] willing recruits for a Gestapo." It's pretty interesting stuff...
If you want a look, a kind of dodgy copy is here - http://www.geocities.com/militaryincompetence/ - be careful though, because it really is dodgy; I think it must have been read out to the computer. I suggest buying a copy of the book. - Identity4, on 10/10/2007, -6/+22I like one of Kitman's points: DONT FEED THE TROLLS! Bill-O is a troll, media must stop feeding him.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Good source of iron? A nutritious jelly to apply to your sanity.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+18Yeah, fiscally responsible to you means cut taxes and let the future deal with the resulting debt. Clinton gave us budget surpluses.. something that sounds like a daydream now.
- robdazomba, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17I keep hearing this defense of O'Reilly but never an explanation, and now you're doing it too. I'm game. Explain how this is being mischaracterized.
Also, when you're done, explain why O'Reilly has a long history of making these kinds of questionable, racist-sounding comments. (Seriously, do a Google search and read up. This isn't the first time.) - ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17People don't want a real answer to this, but I'll take a shot with those psych classes I took.
First, O'Reilly cannot let others speak without providing his input, even when someone supports his position.
Second, O'Reilly rarely lets opposing views contest his own without support from a third party.
Third, O'Reilly is prone to irrational rants involving accusatory statements of personal persecution.
Fourth, while O'Reilly is persecuted by some, the mainstream media has quite often praised him inappropriately instead.
Fifth, O'Reilly wrote one book two years ago and believes he is crusading against an ethereal menace that has not manifested.
Sixth, O'Reilly HAS to be right. Even when he discovers that he is wrong, he alters history to believe that he is right (see, the Iraq War).
Due to these examples, I have come to the lay diagnosis that O'Reilly is a paranoid narcissist suffering from a delusional persecution complex. The scary thing is that I am almost certain that I am right. - Triachus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Liberal as compared to what exactly? The term liberal has been completely bastardized in the United States and people seem to think that unless you're a complete christian neo-conservative that you are a liberal. Most of the democratic party isn't even liberal.
- gottadiggit, on 10/10/2007, -4/+17Yes
- NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16I agree that the news media can't be trusted... but not in the way Bill meant that statement... LOL
- Namakemono, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14FreakyD = Buried.
- jimmick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Dugg for making people read before providing a video *applause*
"Having a conversation with O'Reilly is like trying to take a drink of water from an open fire hydrant."
LOL - Protoss, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11That there are plenty of idiots to watch O'Reilly?
- deadowl, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15Ohhh... that explains everything!!! (must be a very severe mental illness)
- SeethisPass, on 10/10/2007, -9/+20Bill O'Reilly never rose above the level of Bill Clinton's dick . That's where he is and has been and it is fitting that that's where he should stay. ( grin )
- grakker, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Well, Oberman is known for holding just about every side to the fire. He did the same with Clinton, when warranted. This is a big ***** difference.
- northwatuppa, on 10/10/2007, -7/+17That's quite true. In a 60 Minutes interview he expresses pretty darned liberal views. But why let yourself be paid for pandering too the loony right? The disparity between his private views and the views he expresses on FoxNews is so extreme that you have to question his personal integrity, if not his sanity.
- robdazomba, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9You didn't answer my question. Explain how his comments are taken out of context. You didn't do that. I keep hearing this defense, and nobody lays it all out. I've heard the comments he made in their entirety and it sounds pretty bad to me. So put it in context for me. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I'd love to hear how this is not in the proper context and everyone who says that fails to prove it.
Incidentally, you can't write off his history of making racist comments. I noticed you blew that off too, but read this article below and tell me you don't think O'Reilly might have just the silghtest issue with prejudice. And you can scoff at it because it's "on the Internet" but I've listened to O'Reilly, and I've heard him say things like this with my own ears. I'm not just using the Internet as the be-all end-all. Seems pretty clear to me that the guy has some kind of messed up thinking when it comes to racial minorities.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1147
Can you refute any of this mounting evidence against him or not? - jbhannah, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10You insult the mentally ill by mentioning Bill O'Rly in the same sentence as them.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9head in sand, buried.
- Tanishh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9 Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just because he says something true once in a while doesn't mean anyone will suddenly start to praise him for it. I really doubt that if his co host had asked if he was referring to himself when he said that he would say yes. In any case, he only said that because the media is revealing him as the racist douche he is, and not for the reasons that Diggers have for distrust of the media. The ends do *not* justify the means in this case.
Additionally, his comments about how he would strangle everyone who called him a racist if not for the fact that it was illegal and against his religion ( http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270017 ) reveal that he was either way too pissed to be doing his show or he's gone off the deep end. What the hell ever happened to free speech? This guy wants to kill people because they criticize stuff he says that is, at best, questionable. I don't care if tomorrow he announced that he was cancelling his show and throwing his support behind Obama or Ron Paul, he'd still be a total douche. - yomamaisfat, on 10/10/2007, -10/+19Doctors are too liberal for Bill O'Reilly to deal with so he does not go, but if he really does believe his own *****, he probably is ill.
- Triachus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Plenty of mentally ill people maintain some measure of decency and morality. Bill O is worse than that. He is widely considered to be a clear-headed individual and his sort of mentality passes as sane in many circles.
- haydesigner, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9It is not a contradiction. It is an oxymoron.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7it's just ironic for him to say the news media can't be trusted. it's because of people like him and his network the news media can't be trusted. this applies to all corporate news.
- DukeMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Then why bother even commenting about them. Are you really that in need of attention?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Answer : Yes Including the moron above.
- dartmanx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Check your facts. Oprah pulled in $260 MILLION over the last year.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ent/5174235.ht ... - Tanishh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6 You might not agree with me, but "to me" you really need to get an idea of what is and is not a decent way to get informed on the world. Now, granted, none of the mainstream media is really that great, but O'Reilly is probably rock bottom.
- kindrobot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Two words...
FULL HOUSE
It's ok, let it sink in. You'll get it eventually. - ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Anyway, I used to watch O'Reilly until last year. I watched him because I was curious about what Red Staters thought, and his stupidity was always worth talking about.
Then I discovered MediaMatters.org and they started watching O'Reilly for me. Saved me a lot of time, so I watch Olbermann instead (by the way, Olbermann has four different shows, one or two on radio, two or three on television). - CkMaverick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6That douche makes $50 million a year...?
- DukeMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I'm totally lost on whatever point you're trying to make here.
- 1337Einstein, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5He asked a very simple question, but you ignored it and focused exclusively on the lead in. Call it defense, don't call it defense, nobody cares, what he asked of you was to explain what was being misrepresented and how.
- PhilMoskowitz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Do you know who watches O'Reilly? The lionshare of his audience are geriatric red staters. He's lost a lot of his younger market due to his craziness. The people who haven't abandoned him are those not conscious enough to know they should.
- Tanishh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5 So being more inclined towards the left and critical of Bush makes you a pawn now, hmm? That then would make almost every registered Democrat a pawn of their party, and given the reverse views, every Republican a pawn of their party as well. Which not only sort of cancels things out but doesn't really make any damn sense.
- vjeko, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Aaaa stole the word out of my....keyboard! :)
- Reziarfg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I'm sorry, but when one does the things Mr.O'Reilly does (ie: siding with the rapist on the grounds of "the kid having more fun" with him) I don't care about his ratings, I just want the man thrown off the air. Also, would it hurt to actually have one decent debate where he's not yelling, cutting mics off, and generally being an *****? The only audience he's catering to are the equally hot-headed conservatives.
- spacecoyote1966, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6There would be no fight. O'Reilly would run. He talks tough, but deep down inside he's nothing but a coward.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 196 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is