What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
262 Comments
- WakeUpToFreedom, on 10/10/2007, -11/+165Bill O is a nappy headed ho
- ScornedPatriot, on 10/10/2007, -12/+143You don't strangle people because it's morally wrong, not because it's against the law. I do believe that makes you insane.
- WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -11/+101God damn, he should have kept his mouth shut! What a raving lunatic he came off as...
- TheSavant, on 10/10/2007, -7/+95That's what happen when you ARE a raving lunatic.
- jj101, on 10/10/2007, -7/+79hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē| noun ( pl. -sies) the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
I wonder if he'll stick a camera up his own nose? - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -12/+80The man is pathetic. If we manage to recover our sense and our freedom, he will be the subject of derision in the future, as our children strive to understand how such a vain and hateful man, who spouted such ridiculous nonsense could have been taken seriously by anyone.
- beerput, on 10/10/2007, -6/+60Bill O' Reilly is character made up by FOX television for entertaining purposes only.
- rolf, on 10/10/2007, -9/+37Bill IS NOT a raving lunatic. He likes coming off that way for a reason.
I though when people had experience with the internet, they would understand the solution to Bill much better. He's a real-life version of a troll. These people spout all sorts of crap to get attention, and attention correlates directly with their paycheck at the end of the day.
Hell, so many people at the "conservative" news do it now (Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh) that I am surprised it hasn't become passe and people have caught onto the tactic by and large.
Look, if you really are offended, the best thing to do would be to pay the troll no attention, the worst thing to do would be to call attention or more attention to it. You feed into their hands.
There are also online trolls that make money with this tactic - John C. Dvorak for one. - bitcloud, on 10/10/2007, -5/+30Welcome to the Right....
"Law & What they can get away with..."
when you live based upon a moral barometer, you may not always align with every law, but the important ones are universal... - MaTT2011, on 10/10/2007, -6/+24Doesn't this just reveal the logic behind MOST peoples morals in America and religious individuals in general? I think its a great illustration that most people only think something is wrong when it has negative consequences......not because the action in and of itself is wrong.
This is the core logic behind most religious thought, Bill is a christian from what i can tell and this statement reveals that the logic ingrained into such a religions followers is not based on reasoning and value; rather it is dependent on consequence/reward systems that are set up by a magical man in the sky. At this point in the game the moral evolution that religions may have provided at some small period of human evolution has run its (limited) course and is now showing itself to be illogical, unintelligent, counter intuitive, harmful and just plain stupid method of thought that it really is. - zyklon, on 10/10/2007, -5/+19Anyone else says anything remotely like that, and they get fired.
- MonkeyOverlord, on 10/10/2007, -12/+25I can't stand Bill O'Reilly, but the fact is that MediaMatters is out to shut down opinions they don't like. Their argument that it is "racist" or some other form of prejudice or bigotry is irrelevant. Even bonafide racist speech is entitled to at least as much protection on free speech grounds as porn, video games and other forms of "expression" that would get people outraged if MediaMatters went after them. The fact is, MediaMatters is the left-wing equivalent of every right-wing group that tries to force its morality on the public and airwaves. They are the puritans of the left.
I hate groups like MediaMatters that exist to police what people say and drive them hard into oblivion. That is brownshirt behavior. Even if they aren't trying to get the government involved, they are trying to shut down someone for saying something they don't like, which puts the lie to any claim they have of respecting free speech. Free speech doesn't exist when you have unlimited legal rights, but a culture that is rampantly censorous. - Gerbil_Juice, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16I love how he always accuses Media Matters of misquoting or taking quotes out of context when they put up a full transcript of where the quotes come from.
- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12Godwin's Law already? That was quick.
- DocHoliday22, on 10/10/2007, -5/+14Coming from the UK I find it bewildering how this man is still allowed to be on TV. If this was said on British TV he would have been a gonner.
- diggduggjoe, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I agree with that statement.
If, you would really murder someone for their beliefs (voting not guilty) and only do not for you may get caught or go to hell, it is too late. You are going to hell (if, there is such a place). Most religions are pretty consistent that truly, in your heart, wanting to sin is the same as actually sinning.
That is were I feel that religious beliefs are wrong. Most religious people feel that they will go to heaven for they feel that they have done no wrong. To behave in a civilized manner, only because you will receive an eternal reward is insane. You must wish to act civilized because you believe in civilization.
I am an agnostic regarding higher beings, but 100% a non-believer of heaven and hell. Many would call me immoral for without heaven or hell, I am incapable of acting morally. WTF!
I act nice for I truly want to help others. Altruism is not moral, unless you fear damnation? Again, WTF! - thatzac, on 10/10/2007, -7/+16I cannot stand this man.... I've heard so many racist, sexist, whatever-ist comments come from him, and every time he gets called on it, this is his response. Play the victim, and attack the people that finally exposed his crap.
- Oomsoup, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Um, MM is publishing public speech and in fact, a good chunk of the entire transcript usually so things can't be taken out of context.
Those bastards? - ImperialSoren, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10"[I]f I could strangle these people and not go to hell and get executed ... I would -- but I can't." what a simple world he lives in, like a child.
- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Hey, some of his best friends are black!!!!
/sarcasm
Really, though, it's not that O'Reilly's intent was racist or perjorative, it is simply that O'Reilly's beliefs were racist and perjorative. This is the problem his supporters (who are for the most part as ignorant as he is) have trouble understanding. They think that giving some black people the smallest of compliments attributing to them aspects of common decency and self-restraint is in and of itself a positive, as if we as a people did not know we were decent and restrained.
To put it in perspective, walk up to your mother and say, "I'm surprised that you don't smell like *****!!!" No, seriously, just everyone in this thread do that next time you see her. In fact, make this astonished face like you honestly can't believe it. If you refuse, ask yourself why (and if it's language, replace "*****" with "dog crap"). TECHNICALLY, you have given her a compliment -- the fact that she doesn't smell like ***** is a good thing. But if you can't bring yourself to say this to her, then you are one step closer to understanding why black people are pissed. - Damian91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7"What I'm worried about is we live in a country now where you have a media that's flat-out dishonest, distorting things and lying to you every day." That's what I'm worried about."
I wonder if he is going to quit working for Fox now... - jgzman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I am not aware of MM trying to punish O'Reilly for his words. They are simply making his more foolish statements public. As far as I know, they are only making his PUBLIC statements public, in fact. If his own words are foolish enough that exposing them to the general public is considered 'punishment' then who is to blame?
- BrandonMills, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Except the government spending isn't going towards the people, it's going to money hungry government contractors that just pocket the money and run off. Nice "sky high" comparison with FDR there, but way off the mark. These government contractors are just taking the money and running, with no real benefit being seen from all the spending. If you want to see the benefit from FDRs spending, just look at most of the US's infrastructure. You know, back in the day, it was ok to spend money on the countries infrastructure, but today, everyone can go to h*ll as long as some rich bastard gets a tax cut.
- theone2Punch, on 10/10/2007, -5/+12In his defense -if you listen to the audio file- he says it very tongue and cheek. He was just being sensationalist on his radio show just like every other radio host. We all know he stinks but move on please...
- vertinox, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Quick question... If 40% of the US economy is now government spending, does that mean 40% of the US is now socialists? Granted this mostly happened after the Iraq war so henceforth we've got the most left wing government of all time since FDR.
- EarlOfLade, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7No, it just shows you have no clue when you ask such a question.
As a social democrat, these types of comments irks me. The ignorance you show in regards to what the various political ideologies incorporate is incredible. - enki25, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Claiming these comments are taken out of context is such a blanket excuse. What context makes the comments excusable? And no, democrats with influences in their community similar to Rush's don't say these things.
- RollFizzlebeef, on 10/10/2007, -6/+12Ridiculous argument.
Media Matters draws attention to the stupid things that comes out of right-wing mouths, and it's suddenly Media Matters fault when it does?
These guys like O'Reilly are making millions of dollars (and sometimes, encouraging government policy) on what they say; they should absolutely be called out when they make insane statements. - frazw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Their reasons are not relevant. There are certain people who will always follow and the result is the polarisation of your country. While a certain amount of difference of opinion is good it is only good when coupled with critical thinking, not blinkered thinking.
- MaTT2011, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Thats a completely false claim to make, most people here on digg don't want see bush dead. What individuals like you don't seem to understand is that just because someone disagrees with and deplores the actions and policies of a public official, like bush, doesn't mean we want to see them dead. Thats extreme and your using it in a way to paint people you disagree with as being some kind of radical , violent liberal wackos. This is what i, and any other self respecting educated individual, like to call a "strawman fallacy" and your attempting to use this failure in logic to create an enemy that doesn't exist (average diggers who want to see bush dead!) and then attack it as though you were attacking your intellectual competition. All this does though is reveal your intentionally illogical tactics to be what they are and as a result just makes you look like a complete douche.
- frieddonuts, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7You're as bad as O'Reilly is.
- lalalalamppost, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10ORLY?
- amigabill, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8From the article: "What I'm worried about is we live in a country now where you have a media that's flat-out dishonest, distorting things and lying to you every day. That's what I'm worried about."
Deos Bill Oreillly forget who he is or what TV network he's on? (knock knock... Oh, hi Bill. Aaaaiiiiyeeeee!) - JacksonBlack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Not to disagree with you in the general case, but there is certainly an economic case against unrestricted immigration. In particular, that case is social welfare. If you drastically increase the number of poor people in an area over a short period of time, that area degrades, because there is more use of its infrastructure without a proportional dollar increase in the tax base necessary to maintain it.
- preisler, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7It's not smearing to simply record and transcript what these insane people say.
- brasso, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Anyone basing their actions on whenever they think they will go to "hell" or not is definitely insane and beyond any chance of rescue.
- maiku00, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7wow, this guy is ***** UP
the only thing keeping him from killing someone is the threat of punishment (one of which is delusional)??? - preisler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Full transcripts are hard to refute so you go for a diversion eh?
- minorthreat, on 10/10/2007, -7/+11I honestly 100% believe Bill O'Reilly claims to be a conservative Christian for the simple reason of making himself feel better and to give off a better public image for the immoral thoughts of murdering people(if it were legal) and deceiving those who watch his show.
- zachshmack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I love how he's complaining about the media distorting the truth and lying. Oh, the irony.
- ruley, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8im no defender of Billo, but if you listen to the whole thing about sylvia's is not meant to be racist.
- Martlet, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9He's a personality. He gets paid to entertain. Like Al Franken, only successful. How hard is that to understand?
- Economist35, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5your title needs a conjunction
- frazw, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4He clearly doesn't consider himself part of the media. He seems to think his opinion does not smear.
He claims anyone who speaks out against him is far left. This is not true, the people who speak out against him are just ordinary folks who disagree with his opinion, which happens a lot because he is far right. That simply distorts his view of the moderate.
He seems to believe in open threats to control people, that suggests he is facist, if not terrori... no it still seems wrong to call him that.
He has revealed himself to be an evil person. He desires to murder people but the only thing stopping him is fear of god or rather fear of satan.
That makes me somewhat glad he is religious, he clearly needs it to be a "decent" person but even still he isn't doing too good a job.
It makes me sick to think people like him (the ones with a true capacity for evil) label atheists as evil on the basis of how they would act in the absence of religion, not how the atheist actually behaves, which lets face it is generally more respectable than the religious, but lets not be petty I don't want to claim religion causes evil here more that in some cases it prevents it.
I really don't think he was malicious in what he said about the restaurant. He does come from a different time and that doesn't excuse racism but it does sometimes explain the difference in attitude. He is closer in terms of generations to extreme racism whereas younger generations are further away and expect more acceptance (not even tolerance, I think we are in some places getting simple tolerance now). Had he said that when he was young it might have been called progressive.
/rant
I must apologise for ranting but Bill O'Reilly is such a bigotted fool he really annoys me. Anyone who is blind to their own faults or bias cannot be a public advocate of fairness and the moderate as he claims to be.
And breathe... - ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Christian Humanists, such as myself, would heartily disagree with pretty much everything O'Reilly just said.
- appleann1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Right now. 71%-no
29%-yes. - MaTT2011, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Religion is a means by which people attain their system of morality; this quote has EVERYTHING to do with that system of morality. It reveals Bill's system to be flawed and appalling.
Ones world perspective and personality is also very much determined by their belief system and ideologies; Bill's is that of the typical christian. This religion, like most if not all religions, encourages, hell it indoctrinates, a type of logic which leads to these kinds of clearly immoral and illogical statements as the one this thread highlights. - UrbanOne, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I gotta weigh in here. I believe the Constitution is our law. I believe in free speech, freedom of the press (true freedom of the press), etc. But, and the courts have upheld this: there is a difference between exercising free speech, and exercising hate speech. O'Reilly, Coulter, Limbaugh, and others, I'm sure,( in my opinion,) are guilty of hate speech.
In this article, O'Reilly, threatened people. I'm not a lawyer, but I would have to think that one more step and the law should get involved. Is it legal (never mind moral) to hreaten people? - scabbers, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Yeah right, the biggest problem in the media is people smearing Bill-O and not people like Bill-O cheerleading for the biggest ***** since Vietnam.
- MaTT2011, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4He only thinks actions are wrong when god says , or his religion says, it is wrong.
There is no logic, no reasoning, no intelligence and no effort to learn and improve in this kind of morality. Instead of trying to determine why something is wrong people like bill look to their religious figure heads to tell them what to do instead of attempting to think and know for themselves why something is right or wrong and having a reliable logical form of argumentation that validly deduces its conclusions. -
Show 51 - 100 of 264 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is