Discussion: WATCH: Fox's John Stossel Tears Apart O'Reilly's 'War On Christianity'

Discussion for article #235309

“It’s not a matter of winning. It’s a matter of respect,” O’Reilly replied.

My god… the perpetual victim mentality shines through like a laser. It’s difficult to respect someone who demands they be respected, init?


Bagger on bagger trolling with bidirectional misrepresentation and hyperbole. This is what happens when there are no faux liberals around to draw everyone’s fire. These guys need to hit the showers and share the falafel in a manly, brokeback mountain way. Watching them tear each other apart like this is just going to confuse the loyal Fox viewership no end.


Nail you have just met head.WHAM!!


respect? Here’s some respect. Insert picture of burning turd here.


I’m reminded of something Cartman sometimes said on South Park:



Even if it is based on religious beliefs, bigotry doesn’t deserve respect.


““It’s not a matter of winning. It’s a matter of respect,” O’Reilly replied.” you earn respect, something that Bill definitely has not earned. And those Xtains that insist that 'their rights" supersede mine also have not earned respect but disdain.


"It’s not a matter of winning.It’s a matter of respect’’… If you must fight to win respect sir, maybe you should consider a compromise, why not respect others and stop making stuff up? Prick.


Bill O’Reilly is to Christianity as Rush Limbaugh is to marriage.


Stossel’s schtick of taking on the establishment and conventional wisdom needs some rehab work. It’s getting old even when it’s aimed at his new establishment.


You’ve got to admit that Stossel distilled the argument closer to its’ essence–
than I’ve ever witnessed O’Reilly admitting to previously.

Respect my Whiteness™ --is the gist-- no?



It’s also difficult to respect someone when by “respect” they mean “never offending me by acknowledging that the world has changed, in part because I don’t control it.” I’m pretty sure that definition of “respect” is not a thing that actually exists.


So, it’s a good thing then…

1 Like

Yup. To me respect is a deep admiration, not an abject fear.


So…religious conservatives are just cry babies? Not sure how gay marriage and abortion factor much into Christianity. The former is not decried per se in the Bible but homosexual acts are decried. So are shellfish, in exactly the same language. The issue is consistency. Why no uproar over the other things? And there is nothing about abortion in the Bible that I know about, granted not a scholar of it, but the one you can reach is the commandment against murder. But what does the not killing actually mean, does it mean not killing anything ever? Does it mean people? The bible is a pretty vague book to fight culture wars on.


“O’Reilly then claimed that Christians are ‘verbally being killed.’”

Verbally killing? Oh, you mean like the infamous “Tiller the Baby Killer” remarks that got a Christian doctor slaughtered in cold blood like a goddamned dog, right in his own church on Sunday morning?

This pig fornicating loofah brandishing barnyard romeo deserves to be drawn and quartered on pay-per-view TV for that incitement.

Because homosexuality is “icky” but shellfish are yummy, of course! If there’s one thing we know about Christo-fascists, their cult is one of convenience. The limits of their “faith” lie where they begin to run counter to their actual beliefs.


I’m satisfied that BillO is in fact the ‘real victim’ here.

If only Sesame Street had existed when he was a child. Then BillO could have benefited from a significantly greater sense of personal safety - maybe just from singing the Feelings Song so many afternoons until it sunk in!

Also Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood: Fred Rogers could have brought to widdew Biwwow a real sense of individual dignity, so, maybe BillO wouldn’t have felt obliged to declare so many stupid conceptual faux wars, and make so many enemies - some so mysteriously they aren’t even aware that BillO’s challenged them.

So many famous people treat BillO as a loud, tall Archie-Bunker-worshiping cheap carny clown … and WHY? Why won’t they take the time to try to understand HIS point of view - contradictory, inconsistent, self-delusional, factually wrong, loony, pointless and so often inextricable from one or more of BillO’s bizarre experiments in commercially motivated meta-reporting as it is.

Why did BillO spend his oh-so-brief career in presumably (somewhat) honestly-attempted serious international reporting erecting monuments to himself in every banana republic he visited, systematically avoiding ever engaging with or understanding the locals or locale, using it as a backdrop in his latest BillO The Great, Courageous and Insightful Reporter promo production?
I think we all know why: no access to after school TV with early child development expert- created and approved content, that’s why.

If the Children’s Television Workshop had existed during BillO’s formative years, maybe he would’t have suffered from that desperate need to inflict his shallow self-aggrandizing bullshit O’history (It’s too wrong and way too crazy, so much so that it risks mental harm just to refer to it as “history”. O’history, tho, seems to do the job, while, ironically, serving the legend … ZOMG, I’m just another pinhead tool in BillO’s grand doofussy plan!).

Still, I am moved to this solemn public commitment:

Recognizing that BillO claims to be a pious Catholic,
and despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary of every potential basis for accepting that as at all true,
I hereby grant BillO the benefit of the doubt, and,
taking up John Stossell’s suggestion
(a line I frankly have heretofore never thought I would type, let alone post, except in pursuit of comedy),
I solemnly commit, for the balance of my life, to avoid burning BillO at the stake as a heretic.

In additional, hereafter I will consider it as likely that
he’s not in fact a religiot but is, as suggested - in print! - by the junior U.S. Senator from Minnesota:
just a Big Fat Liar who makes up and spread Lies.


Most posters here could easily write out a lexicon of words and terms used by the propagandists of the right in ways that have come completely adrift from their agreed-upon meanings. “Respect” is one, “religious freedom” is another, “lawless” is yet another, “socialism” is a biggie and “tyranny” is probably number one. Like Squealer in Animal Farm, they started long ago with distorted interpretations of reality and eventually simply left it far behind.


When was the last time O’Reilly was spotted at a Sunday Mass?