Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

O’Reilly Blames McChrystal’s Downfall On His Liberalism

Reported by Ellen - June 29, 2010 -

Not long ago, I wondered whether Fox News would continue to heart Gen. Stanley McChrystal after it was reported that he’s a liberal who banned Fox News from his headquarters. I figured that using McChrystal to attack Obama would take precedence over vanity on Fox. But for Bill O’Reilly - nott so much. He made a point of explaining to his Factor audience last nigh (6/28/10)t not just that McChrystal was out of step with the rest of the military in disliking Fox but that his own liberal viewpoint probably caused his downfall. And while O’Reilly was at it, he also made a point of explaining why his ambush “interviews” are fair game and nothing like the work of that “weasel with a capital W” reporter from Rolling Stone.

As O’Reilly introduced the segment, a photo of McChrystal appeared on the screen with “Liberal Warrior?” as a caption. Similarly, the FoxNews.com video is called Did McChrystal’s Liberalism Lead To His Downfall?

McChrystal’s “ideology” was “the only explanation” for what happened, O’Reilly told his guest, Bernard Goldberg. “When I heard that he’s an avowed liberal who turned off Fox News in his office which, as you know, is the most widely watched network on all army and marine and naval bases all over the world, by far… I went, ‘OK, maybe his own ideology brought him down.’ ...I think you live by the liberal sword, you die by the liberal sword.”

Goldberg replied, “Exactly, exactly. This is why God created irony. If you’re a liberal military man and you take a liberal journalist, you know, into your confidence and then he turns around and screws you, I mean, that’s what we call ironic.”

Methinks O’Reilly is suffering from something of a guilty conscience about his own tactics. He said - apropos of nothing related to McChrystal, “We ambush people sometimes on this program and you don’t really think that’s appropriate sometimes, but you know why we do it? Because that’s eye to eye, that’s face to face, OK? We’re gonna come and we’re gonna ask you, right in your face, what you did, why you did it, give you a chance to explain yourself.”

Right. Give you a chance to explain when you least expect it, when you’re not prepared to have a camera thrust in your face and maybe even when you’re on vacation. You can tell how much some of those ambushees appreciated that "opportunity." Who wouldn't see the fairness and journalistic integrity in having a stranger with a camera surprise you with a question like, "Why are you trying to ruin Christmas?"

The difference between between the ambushes and Rolling Stone, in O’Reilly’s mind, seemed to be that unlike his own staff, Michael Hastings, the Rolling Stone reporter who wrote the McChrystal article, is a weasel. And McChrystal is a liberal. O'Reilly said, “This Hastings is a weasel, Bernie. He’s a weasel. You know he’s a weasel… This is a weasel with a capital W., that any intelligent military person would say, ‘Hey, you, out of here!’ But I think McChrystal is a liberal. I think the guy sold him, Hastings sold him a big bill, and he took it. They had a few pops in the Irish pub in Paris and bang, that’s what happened.”

Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »