I don't see how you can realy argue with Bill, with that tape and all, he's kinda got a point.
It's not the validness of the point, it's the hypocricy that is the most entertaining and astonishing aspect about that O'Reilly clip.
Now, extremism is A-1 supar stupidness on all the sides, in any case. But the point that Fox News themselves quite always show just one side of things themselves (the Right Way as opposed to Lef... oops, the Wrong Way) and thus defending the freedom of speech is quite moot from their side. Especially as they identify violent, extremists as "liberal democratics".
There are bound to be just as dumbass conservatives. In fact, Right Wing's dumbassness is not limited to violence against other people, but against other nations as well (as is historically demonstrated).
The point is not being liberal democrat or conservative republican despite O'REilly's claims; it's about being a violent imbesil (which is a bad thing) or not being one (better thing, regardless of your opinions which may or may not suck).
When conservative media identifies violent behaviour as part of liberal, democratic "far left" agenda, it is not only blatantly untrue but could also be interpreted as hate speech against "liberal democratic" or "far left" people, of whom definitely not all are violent. After all, it's just a matter of interpretation who is considered "far left" and who just "left".
Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, moral or political views, etc. The term covers written as well as oral communication. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.
OK, no spin: Columbia University is a disgrace. It is not interested in
free speech or learning, it is a place of indoctrination. Let us call it
the "University of Havana, North."
1. He's mocking the university of Columbia by ground of what some people do on a video clip. Was the whole university people included? I don't think so. That's the first stupidity in this piece of what he said.
2. He's assuming that University of Havana is similar in regards that it is a violent, far-left environment to be. I've never been to Havana University, but I think it's a safe bet that neither has O'Reilly...
All over the country these kind of fascist tactics are being used by
fanatical secular progressives who seek to impose their views on others,
and silence and/or harm people who oppose them.
Okay, this is a very interesting piece of work. We learn interesting things from it:
3. Things depicted on the video are
fascist tactics (in Internet argument this one is already a kiss of death to any topic, but whatever).
4. These fascist tactics are used by fanatical
secular progressives. Interesting, because "secular" is quite much the opposite of "religious" and "progressive" is quite much the opposite of "regressive". Both of which are... not good on my books.
I don't know how fanatical secular people can be, but whatever. Perhaps O'Reilly approves fanatical religious regressives as opposed to fanatical secular progressives. But of non-fanatics, I would definitely choose secular progressive instead of religious regressive...
5. O'Reilly thinks that imposing your views on others and silencing and/or harming those who oppose is a bad thing. I whole-heartedly agree, but the trouble is that O'Reilly (along with Fox News) is not really acting along their claimed agenda for free speech, as any time anyone they interview tries to say something against the current US adminstration, they don't give them a chance to actually finish what they wanted to say.
And of course, Fox News (including O'Reilly) does not seem to care about the fact that the far right conservatives
are imposing their views all the time on others not only on all American people (via regressive legislations), but also people in Iraq and Afghanistan (via occupation troops) - and the Fox News definitely silences those who would like to say something against US adminstration - they simply start speaking over them (O'REilly included) and don't let them finish what they wanted to say.
This is becoming increasingly dangerous. People like Bill Kristol, Pat
Buchanan, Ann Coulter, have been physically assaulted during speaking
engagements. Attorney General Gonzales was disrespected at Georgetown
University. Even Hillary Clinton has been shouted down by far-left
loons. This kind of anti-American behavior must be condemned by all
Americans.
Okay, far-left loons are now not only far-left loons but also anti-American. Based on what?
Well, I can also call far-right conservatives anti-American since Bush and his adminstration are pissing over the constitution of USA... And that's actually more valid because it has even some argument behind it. O'Reilly just says so, and that's it...
Naturally, all far right conservatives are not anti-American, nor they perhaps think themselves to be, but calling someone something should always have some argument(s) behind the claim, otherwise it means nothing.
And places that allow these hooligans free reign, like Columbia
University must be held to account. Alumni should stop all donations to
Columbia.
...Right.
I can also think of few other organizations and institutions allowing violent behaviour. Including (but not excluded) to US Government, the Congress, White House and CIA.
How about tax payers stopped IMMEDIATELY giving any money to these hooligans?
I know, the analogy sucks, but nevertheless my point given earlier stands - was the whole university of Columbia involved in the events on the video clip? I don't think so.
Besides. Why should the University of Columbia do anything to this? It can't take responsibility of its students, who are (if I'm not much mistaken) grown-ups. If someone was a victim of violence, let them file a law suit.
Of course, it might be difficult to find out who were guilty of assault in that situation, but it isn't the University's fault, it's individual people's fault.
It's interesting how double standards are used. If it was a school shooting, the Fox News wouldn't say that guns needed to be banned, but when university's individual students commit acts of violence, they say that the university's funding should be pulled. What's the deal with that? If guns don't kill, people do -mantra holds true, then university is not to be held accountable, but individual students are.
Finally, the reason all of this is happening is the S.P.s are losing, so
they are angry and frustrated. Most Americans are not buying the radical
agenda. Air America is tottering on bankruptcy and other far-left people
are only accepted by a lunatic fringe. Nevertheless, the far-left smear
Web sites continued to fan hatred and it has now even spilled over into
the mainstream media.
Har har...
Is there some point into this piece of text that eludes my eyes? Because I only see unsupported claims chained together.
Nevertheless, I have no doubts that the leftest of the left will not get much support from Americans right now, which is a good thing, because as I said, extremism always suck... But I don't think the current right wing will get as much support as previously either. But we will see in next US elections... we will see.
There is no place for that kind of garbage in a country that prides
itself on free-speech and responsible dissent.
It is time to confront these merchants of venom and let their masters
know you will not buy their stuff, or donate to their causes, because if
this kind of thing continues, it is only a matter of time before someone
gets hurt.
Wow. Bill O'Reilly just condemned the Fox News. Pity the context doesn't quite suit...
Perhaps he's an undercover democrat who has infiltrated Fox News and is now trying to subtly point out the irrational things the Government does by spewing out exaggerated propaganda...
You try interpreting everything he says by this, and everything gets quite... interesting colour.
