"In June of 2003, O’Reilly attacked the only form of media he was powerless in: the Internet. In his “Talking Points Memo” segment, he whined that “nearly everyday, there’s something written on the Internet about me that’s flat out untrue,” continuing with his theory that “the reason these net people get away with all kinds of stuff is that they work for no one. They put stuff up with no restraints. This, of course, is dangerous…” Yeah, real dangerous Bill. Next thing you know, people will get the crazy idea that they have the right to express their opinions as they see fit. Who knows? Maybe this idea will catch on and they’ll add it to the Constitution of the United States, giving it a catchy title like “freedom of speech.” What do you think of that you sock-sniffing bog trotter?
I highly recommend the film Outfoxed which really puts O’Reilly in his place.
Lastly, I was driving my car when I heard Terri Gross interviewing him.
I had to pull over I was laughing so hard at what a self-made dipstick he is. npr.org/templates/story/stor … Id=1459090
Maddox, the author of that site, does not justify or explain his use of the term bog trotter. However, he does clarify his use of “sock-sniffer”.
"This guy is the epitome of narcissism… If I had to describe Bill O’Reilly in a phrase, it would be “sock-sniffer.” You know the kind of guy who comes home from a long day of work, his feet have been sweating all day, his socks are ripe with the pungent aroma of stale milk and wet leather, and after he finally sits down and takes his socks off, but just before he throws them in the hamper, he takes a quick sniff to sample his odors.
A quick internet search finds that “bog trotter” is derogatory slang for an Irishman.
Bill O’Reilley may or not be a pompous, ignorant, hypocrite but I wouldn’t know because this is the first time I have heard of the guy. What I do know is the other guy - the one who wrote the article - is a condescending, foul mouthed moron. If you want to persuade intelligent people to oppose someone you should try convincing them with an intelligent critique. You’ll have more success that way. Articles like the one posted here just give the left a bad name. Heck I wouldn’t be suprised if O’ Reilley wrote it himself.
I just found this Maddox guy tonite, but according to his FAQ…
“-I’m under the impression that everyone hates your site despite your overwhelming traffic. Do you ever get any fan mail?
-Yes. Of the 800-900 emails I get each day, 90-95% of it is fan mail”
So you can send him your opinion.
Interesting that nobody here has heard of O’Reilly. The NPR interview or the movie Outfoxed provide a more intelligent critique. Actually I think Maddox’s comments are funny as hell, particulary the O’Reilly bingo game, and the photo of the box of Baby shampoo and Tampax Maddox sent him.
I think it’s funny too but I also think that the left indulges in too much of that kind of thing and loses credibility in the process. The only time it makes sense to me to use that sort of tactic is when you are attacking someone who, in the minds of some, is almost above criticism. In situations like that it helps to bring the person down to earth so to speak. But I have never heard of Bill O Reilly and “bogtrotter” sounds mindless and offensive to me as does "big blubbering vagina’ so I don’t think the article had the intended effect.
Have you ever heard of Rush Limbaugh or listened to him?
The right has no interest in rationality or intellectual discourse.
That’s why Maddox’s approach is such a breath of fresh air.
Is this what reverse culture shock feels like? If I have heard a dozen words out of Rush Limbaugh I honestly don’t remember. If the quotes are accurate though I’ll admit that is one scary stupid son of a gun.
Maddox is the man. He’s not trying to engage people in rational debate, he’s just ranting about things he thinks suck. He’s a comedian, not a pundit. I mean come on, anyone who writes an article entitled “Love your kids? Prove it by beating them” and “The Matrix: Revolutions is boring and shitty” is hardly aiming for a highbrow audience.
Oh, and yes, Bill O’Reilly is a tool, but at least he’s not Sean Hannity.
[quote=“Shenme Niao”]Have you ever heard of Rush Limbaugh or listened to him?
The right has no interest in rationality or intellectual discourse…[/quote]
Not true. You’re putting the Right all in one bucket.
The Right is undeniably interested in rationality or they couldn’t execute plans well enough to win elections (although they often deny or fail to recognize subjective experience, an asset the Left rather possesses to excess). And they’ve won a lot of recent elections.
The Right may no longer consider ‘intellectual discourse’ to lie solely in the province of the titled/landed/wealthy, though. Maybe.
That said, neither major American (sorry, hexuan and sandman) party relies on intellectual discourse to win elections. You can hardly blame the Republicans alone for that. Instead, they rely on the consumer to find his or her own way, although they make every effort to pave his/her path prettily enough that it ends in a place of the party’s definition. On the right, it explains why Rush Limbaugh is tolerated. His job is that of a funnel: he takes the great mass of those with unformed minds, makes very effective appeals to their emotions, and deposits their mark reliably in the R column of your local ballot. The Left has an equivalent actor in Michael Moore.
The Right lays far better paths than the Left these days, but they’re hardly uninterested in rationality or intellectual discourse.
Bill O’reilly is a friend of democracy and a well respected journalist. I find it sad that pro-China liberals would slam an old man like Bill. :raspberry:
[quote=“flike”]
The Right lays far better paths than the Left these days, but they’re hardly uninterested in rationality or intellectual discourse.[/quote]
Flike, I have to agree with much of what you’ve said. However, Bush saying e.g. that the basis for his actions is that God told him to in prayer, is to me not rational or intellectual. Except in the sense that its a great lie to pander to the red state fascists with. However, intellectual discourse is about an objective quest for truth… while clearly calculated lies may win elections… well, Maddox’s ridicule is a refreshing response.
We don’t get Fox here in Taiwan (maybe there is a God) but Hannity is another whore for the right, here is a review of his screed lewrockwell.com/vance/vance16.html
"The book jacket describes him as “the hottest talk-radio personality in the country,” the host of “the number one debate program on cable television today,” the host of an afternoon radio show “which is heard on four hundred stations and by more than twelve million listeners,” and the author of a “New York Times bestseller.” Perhaps it was just an oversight, but the publishers forgot to add “militant warmonger,” “Republican apologist,” and “Bush idolater.”
I voted Bill Who because I’ve never seen him. That’s another nice thing about living in Taiwan. I have heard of him, though and probably wouldn’t watch him anyway.
I can’t tell who Bill O’Reilly is, he lies too much for me to know. He’s perhaps a guy who won a Peabody or a Polk award, or maybe it was just some of his former colleagues. He’s perhaps a registered “independent” or perhaps really a registered “Republican”… He’s from a lower-class background, or else from the middle class, whatever it is he’s not saying.
Everything about this guy is obsessive. He speaks with an obnoxious cadence and rhythm, careful to chant the same handful of phrases over and over again. His entire repertoire of insults range from the versatile “ideologue” (oh no, don’t call me an advocate of a particular ideology, anything but that! Dumbass), to “demonizer,” and “ridiculous.” In fact, he repeats these phrases on his show, “The O’Reilly Factor,” so many times, you could play a game of Bingo while tuned in. Simply print out the following sheet and mark a square each time he does or says anything listed. You win when you get 5 in a row (horizontal, vertical or diagonal):
Whatever he claims his background to be, its clear he now sells his ass to the right wing elite.
It is semi-hilarious seeing people commenting on O’Reilly while admitting they have no idea who he is, what he stands for or what he does. :s
My personal opinion is that O’Reilly s nothing more than an opportunist. He is a shill and changes according to which way the wind blows. I have watched and listened to him for 5 + years and finally decided last year that I do not like him.
And that is based on more than what some internet web site says about him.
If the quotes are accurate though I’ll admit that is one scary stupid son of a gun.
:s