Not really a surprise really. Bill O’Reilly is strongly anti-gun, as Instapundit finds here, even more so than Barack Obama. O’Reilly has said radically anti-gun things before, so this certainly isn’t the first time.Â It’s one of the reasons I don’t watch Bill O’Reilly. The other reason is that Bill O’Reilly is a class A bozo. Bill O’Reilly makes me want to shoot my television if I see him on it. No other cable news talking head makes me feel that way, save maybe Olbermann. Glenn Beck I can take or leave (mostly leave, I tend to find he’s a bit of a drama queen). But in the sphere of pure loathing, O’Reilly takes the cake. I still remember him calling Dave Kopel a secular progressive.
13 thoughts on “Bill O’Reilly More Anti-Gun Than Obama?”
What a total jackass, and this guy tries to portray himself “to the folks” as someone with common sense.
O’Reilly looked foolish attacking the individual who stated the purpose of his organization was to defend and support the Constitution. The military has been used in the past (1. To imprison the Japanese; against the Bonus marchers during the depression; against the Cherokeee among many other instances) in manners that were unconstitutional. This organization seeks to insure its members would not take part in such activities.
O’Reilly looked like an ass because he supported unconstitutional activities during an “emergency.” As if Obamao wouldn’t proclaim an emergency at the driop of a hat. He is pushing a federal gun registration bill in congress now authored by a black panther congressman.
“Bill Oâ€™Reilly makes me want to shoot my television if I see him on it. ”
I haven’t had Cable since 1997 (OK I did have cable for the few years I had Comcast Internet, but I didn’t watch it) Now with Hulu and Netflix on Demand , why would you need to poison yourself with that shit?
Come to the dark side!!!!
@Weer’d: Mad Men, Mythbusters, Caprica…nuff said ;-)
I was just watching Mythbusters on Netflix On Demand the other day. The wife has been watching the latest seasons of Lost on Hulu (and she didn’t discover the series until last November when she watched it on Netflix On demand)
The cost of Laptop connector cables, and/or a DVD/Video player with internet capability quickly vanishes when one looks at the cost of a monthly cable bill.
I’m another person who can’t stand O’Reilly. Beck used to be good, but he saw where the ratings were and swung into right-wing moonbat land so he could get more money.
Thomas Jackson, “debates” with oathkeeper-detractors usually follow a set script:
“They have all these paranoid right-wing fantasies about concentration camps!”
“We had concentration camps in the US in WWII. It’s hardly a fantasy. And right now we have a disturbingly high proportion of Americans who’re at least passively okay with the idea of segregating Muslims.”
“Yeah, but you _know_ these guys aren’t worried about protecting Asians and Muslims.”
Or, to boil it down:
“The thing they’re guarding against has happened right here within the lifetime of many living Americans.”
“Yeah, well they’re racists!”
It ain’t about the facts; it’s about stereotypes.
O’reilly, like our current president, refuses to accept he is ever wrong. In the situation with Kopel he’d made statements and come to conclusions without understanding the context, so when Kopel tried to explain it to him he went ballistic and shut Kopel down. It was painful to watch.
O’reilly is all over the board with his opinions. I don’t watch him much, but a few nights ago I heard him badgering someone because they believed the constitution overruled a law passed by congress.
I have heard him say that “gun ownership is a right” more or less saying that is beyond dispute, so he’s not all bad on guns.
I can’t stand Bill O’Reilly but I’ve never heard him on guns one way or the other.
What I find amusing is that quite often Olberman and O’Reily will vehemently attack each other! How’s that for irony, or poetic justice, or whatever?
Also amusing, both of their names begin with a big fat zero (no offense to any others whose names begin with “O”).
O’Reilly also believes in crop circles, global warming, all corporations are evil, and there is as many crazes in Tea parties as there are in code pink.
Yup, Iâ€™m done with Oâ€™Reilly too. Heâ€™s just too willing to â€œcompromiseâ€ the law if he â€œthinksâ€ itâ€™s wrong. He disagreed with the Weihl lawyer lady the night before about the ruling re. the 17yr old girl performing â€œartâ€ even though she was reading from â€œthe LAWâ€ too. Either someone believes in the rule of law or not. Donâ€™t like it, work to change the law. But donâ€™t criticize a judge that actually rules IAW the law vs being an activist and making law from the bench. In the Oathkeepers segment, Oâ€™Reilly mentioned that the Constitution allows the President to suspend Habeaus Corpus seemingly as justification for suspension of fundamental rights during emergencies. WRONG! First, the authorization for suspension of the Writ of Habeaus Corpus is found in Article I, Sec. 9. Art. I deals with Legislative powers. Second, it specifically states â€œâ€¦shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of REBELLION OR INVASION [emphasis mine] the public safety MAY [emphasis mine] require it.â€ So, the President has no such power. And, if public safety is the overriding government consideration, I would argue that the peaceable, law-abiding public would be LESS SAFE if denied their God-given, fundamental human right to self-defense. He even admitted that there were gangs of looters and criminals running around armed at that time. So, public safety is increased by disarming the peaceable, law-abiding citizens such as the OLD LADY that was IN HER HOME with a small revolver and was criminally assaulted by illegitimate government thugs and disarmed!? Thatâ€™s nuts if you ask me. No government on the face of the Earth has the LEGITIMATE authority to disarm the people. â€œâ€¦ all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the â€¦.â€ Since all men (including women!) have the Right to Life then they logically have the Right to defend that Life. Oâ€™Reilly is an elitist and heâ€™s grown increasingly arrogant as his ratings have increased. We can get his attention if we can effectively bring his ratings down significantly. Heâ€™s definitely NOT â€œlooking outâ€ for the people! Nor is he supporting the US Constitution except when he â€œthinksâ€ itâ€™s right. You cannot pick and choose when or what parts you support. You either support it all or you risk loss of all protections found therein. Sorry for being so verbose.
I don’t think it was an anti-gun rant so much as an “emergency exception to everything” rant. In a follow up show he non-explained his position by noting that Lincoln had suspended habeas corpus. Never mind that the habeas provision of the Constitution contains an express emergency exception while the Bill of Rights does not. Details.
Comments are closed.