Bill O’Reilly likes to boast about being independent but he was quacking an awful lot like someone looking out for Republicans last night as he demanded that former President George W. Bush “be generous to the country” and campaign for Mitt Romney in what O’Reilly called a “vital, vital election.”
In an interview with former Bush spokeswoman and current Fox News host Dana Perino, O’Reilly scolded her for backing up Bush’s decision to sit out the campaign:
O’Reilly: This is a vital, vital election. Because it’s going to set the course for how the United States operates economically – whether we’re going to be quasi-socialist European or go back to capitalism. …You’ve got a two-term president sitting it out? Sitting it out?
Perino: He’s got to be true to himself.
O’Reilly: No, he doesn’t, he’s got to be generous to the country.
Perino later said she doesn’t think Bush will go to the Republican convention. “It’s probably the right thing to do.”
O’Reilly, seemingly addressing Bush, laughably said, “I’m not rootin’ for anybody but don’t you want to rally the party?”
As the segment was closing, he told Perino, “I just think the country’s in such bad – not bad it’s such in shaky…”
He didn’t finish the sentence.
Of course, what nobody mentioned is that Romney may not want Bush to campaign for him. Recently, at a fundraiser with former VP Dick Cheney, Romney refused to allow the media to take any photographs. The Los Angeles Times explained:
Because of the unpopularity of Bush and Cheney, Romney has kept his distance — never appearing publicly with either man during his 2012 campaign. Though both leaders are admired by many in the Republican Party base, any perception of closeness with Romney could be harmful as the unofficial Republican nominee seeks to draw in independent and moderate voters.
So maybe Bush and the GOP see him as being generous to Romney by not campaigning for him. I guarantee you, Bill, that the left would love it if W. did get out on the stump and tell voters that Romney was his kind of guy.
All is forgiven and grateful we are on the same side of the political fence.
Rob is a long-time News Hounds reader and commenter although rather spotty lately. I’m guessing he figured we all knew where he was coming from.
Joseph has been a real regular lately and we’ve had quite an influx of RWers so it’s pretty understandable that he thought you were one of them. This is what happens when you don’t keep up with News Hounds on a regular basis! :)
Try something along the lines of
“Here’s something I overheard at work today. . . .”
Alternatively, you could’ve simply started off that second paragraph with “I overheard the above today . . .” or “That was the type of crap I overheard today . . .”
It helps alleviate any potential confusion. You might note that both Aria and mlp! weren’t entirely sure of your meaning as well.
As to your rather snide little “try reading,” I’ve got a hint for you: Learn how to write with some degree of comprehensibility instead of expecting others to decipher your comment. I really don’t have time to deal with stream of consciousness writing; if I were taking a lit class where I had to deal with it and were being graded on it, I would but this isn’t a lit class.
I think most here at Newshounds know which side of the political fence I find myself on and the moderators know me by another name which usually comes with more radical responses to the psuedo-conservatives, which I have attempted to “cool it” when using my real name.
Dumbya did Rrrrrright by me!
And I’m not sure Rob is a bad guy, either, Aria.
But if he is….fuck him, too.
Dubya was THE worst President in history. Your complaining about Obama’s performance on the economic front is completely absurd since Dubya took this country from a massive budget surplus into a massive deficit DURING his first term of office. And that deficit grew worse and worse as the years went on—a deficit which was inherited by Obama whose every move was criticized by FoxNoise for two years when he was then forced to deal with a bunch of moronic neophyte politicians who didn’t know their way around a budget.
As for “intellectual honesty,” I don’t believe you’d know what that was if it were a brick wall and you ran headfirst into it.
Overheard it today by gawd from some of the people I work with hearing everyone of them doing nothing more than repeating almost verbatim what Newshounds tells me was delivered on Fox the night before.
A conversation I chose not to join because of a total lack of anything that remotely resembled intellectual honesty.
Seeing one incompetent chickenhawk trust-fund legacy out on the stump for another one may be the only way some people will realize what we’d be in for if Willard gets in the WH . . .