@ doors17: Oh, I’d love to see how the Donald’s “negotiations” with ISIS would go.

I can just imagine it. The first ISIS hostage to die on camera of a heart attack and collapse (while pooping and pissing his pants) BEFORE his head can be cut off.

Well that or ISIS suddenly becoming billions of dollars wealthier.

Before they kill Trump just on principle. (Hell, Trump’s kids would probably just say, “Go ahead. Not one dime to you. Until we see our father’s dead body.”)

Is Tantaros an ignorant hate-filled ho who spreads her legs for anyone with a $20? Just asking.

Does anyone think Tantaros really gives a crap about Israel or anti-Semitism if it weren’t a way to trash talk Obama? Does anyone think Tantaros knows what anti-Semitism really is? Does anyone else think Tantaros has lipstick-smudged posters of Hitler lining her bedroom walls? Just asking.

@ truman: I remember that Cronkite show (though the early 1970s Saturday morning version). As I recall, it wasn’t “fictionalized” as much as it was “dramatized” (basically a precursor to all those docudramas we see on The History Channel and the like). The stories were done with as much historical accuracy as possible and as little of the mythology that surrounds a large deal of US history. If anything, their only flaw was not having as much knowledge as we now have (and they didn’t seem to be as agenda-focused as some programs that seem to be so prevalent on the History Channel et al).

(I also remember a PBS series hosted by Steve Allen called “Meeting of Minds.” The concept here was that Allen would hold a panel discussion of various historical figures—like a panel of Emily Dickinson, Attila the Hun, Charles Darwin and Galileo. Completely scripted but done in a way so that everything seemed spontaneous just like a real panel show.)

Aside from the extensive nitpick, this is just a case of SSDD for FoxNoise.

What I’d like to know, though, is exactly when, according to FoxNoise, was the United States supposed to be the advocate for the world’s Christians? The US, according to the Constitution, is a secular state—one that has no established church (or faith) and actively prohibits such an establishment (no matter how much the right-wing wants to change that). That would suggest (at least to reasonable people) that the US shouldn’t express any more concern for a group of murdered people simply because they happen to share the same overall faith as morons of a particular entertainment news network.

And—this is probably a needless question to ask—but does FoxNoise provide as much outrage or concern when Muslims in THIS country are killed or have their homes or places of worship burned or defaced? (Hell, as you pointed out, Priscilla, FoxNoise doesn’t seem too concerned when ISIS goes around slaughtering other Muslims—or even other religious groups. I don’t seem to remember much coverage at FoxNoise about the Yazidis.)

As an aside, the majority of Christians in the Middle East belong to various Orthodox denominations as well as “Eastern Catholic” denominations (an absurdly esoteric concept—they largely accept the authority of the Pope in Rome but may or may not have their own particular rituals and observances that don’t coincide with official Vatican procedures) but very few Protestants who, somewhat ironically in FoxNoise terms, make up the majority of Christians as a whole in the US. (Most Americans understand the various distinctions between Protestant denominations and understand Roman Catholicism and maybe a bit less certain about Mormonism, but I’m pretty certain the majority of American Christians couldn’t begin to grasp what differences exist between the Maronites and the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch or the Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem or the Assyrian Church of the East. Of course, the majority of the Western European Roman Catholic Crusaders couldn’t tell the difference either—which is why so many Eastern Christians died at the hands of their “fellow” Christians and the Eastern Churches that escaped destruction were so frequently “converted” to “real” Christian churches.)

From O’Reilly’s book: “I would like you to unhook your bra and let it slide down your arms. You can keep your shirt on;”

Um, what? This almost sounds like something you’d expect Joey Tribbiani to say. With Joey, though, it actually would sound so sexy a woman would actually try to do it.

Has Bill ever actually seen a woman wearing a bra underneath a shirt? Unless the woman’s wearing a strapless bra, simple physics prevents the bra from “sliding down” her arms (and, of course, a strapless bra isn’t going to slide down the arms in any way) if she’s wearing a shirt. The straps (which hook over the shoulders) are going to get caught up at the sleeves. I can’t believe that a straight man who’s actually been married to a real woman and one who presumably wore bras wouldn’t have any concept of how bras work when putting them on and taking them off.

@ Joe: Well, I would rather hear something a bit deeper than the millions of “thank yous” so many winners do at the podium. I frankly don’t care to hear an actor thanking his 2nd grade teacher who forced him to be “Third Tree (No Speaking Part)” in the 2nd grade “talent night” school production or an actress pulling a “Now don’t you regret not inviting me to your Sweet Sixteen party, Sheila Levinsky?”

The problem for conservatives is that their positions don’t really resonate with “the people” as much as they think they do. Look at elections. In 2010 and 2014, conservatives were only able to win because of a smaller electorate. It’s been proved time and again that conservative voters are more likely to go out to the polls—but especially when there’s no Presidential race to lure in voters. When a typical Presidential election draws between 55 and 60%, the mid-term elections usually pull no more than 40% (and in districts where there’s little competition, that figure can be as low as 25, or even 20%) and the “odd-year” elections (usually for local races such as city and county officials), the rate can drop to as little as 10%. But, voters typically identified as “conservative” or “conservative-leaning” are most likely to vote in all these elections (which helps explain why you get state legislatures dedicated to banning—or at least, heavily restricting—abortions even when a slight majority of voters support abortion rights).

You’re NOT going to hear any conservative actor or actress in Hollywood going to the podium to accept an award and make some diatribe against illegal immigrants or ranting that feminists need to quit complaining about equal pay. They know better than that because they actually need to appeal to as many potential viewers as possible and it’s kind of hard to appeal to an audience after you’ve just stood up and proved you have little empathy for anyone else. The “liberal” messaging at the Oscars was done in an INCLUSIVE manner. Rosanna Arquette wasn’t suggesting that men should make less money than women—but that women should be able to make as much money as men. Graham Moore was trying to tell people to be more accepting of “weirdos” and that it is okay to be a “weirdo,” especially if the alternative is to commit suicide; only a heartless person would come out on stage and say “Weirdos should be locked away and undergo electroshock treatments or just kill themselves so we don’t have to deal with them.” Common and John Legend’s comments were pointed reminders that voting is a right, not something that should be restricted, a sentiment that even conservatives should be able to appreciate (but, unfortunately, it’s conservatives who’ve been doing their damnedest to restrict people’s voting rights).

Hmm. Wonder where all the Levin sycophants came from? And so early in the day at that.

Looks like Ellen REALLY touched some nerves.

From one of the Maloy quotes:

As O’Reilly describes it: “A major riot ensued and many were killed. I was right in the middle of it and nearly died of a heart attack when a soldier, standing about ten feet away, pointed his automatic weapon directly at my head.”

Now, that’s at least two lies that I can see right there. First, the “heart attack.” Don’t you actually need to HAVE a heart in order to suffer a “heart attack,” much less DIE from one? And secondly, the soldier standing “ten feet away” bit. Oh come on. If BillO was really “right in the middle” of the riot, how does he know the soldier was pointing at him and not someone behind him? (Also, why do I get the feeling that BillO wasn’t as sympathetic towards the Occupy Wall Street protestors across the country when they had weapons being pointed at them?)

I guess Dennis forgot that the most supremely unqualified Secretary of State just happened to be a GOP WOMAN: Condoleezza Rice. I mean, this is the same woman who was Dubya’s National Security Advisor (perhaps the “Security” should be in quotes?) on 9/11—and had actually handed Dubya the Presidential Daily Brief titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US” a full month before 9/11.

Then again, I’d certainly like to know what Miller’s qualifications are to discuss any politics. He started off as a stand-up comic, who managed to get on SNL for some 5 or 6 years where his greatest contribution was to anchor “Weekend Update” (he certainly didn’t manage to stand out in any of the sketches, much less create a memorable character unless fellow cast members, Jon Lovitz and Phil Hartman and Dana Carvey). After leaving SNL, he didn’t really do much of note. Which, I suppose, is enough qualification as a “political analyst” when it comes to FoxNoise.

Well, d d, the very fact that O’Reilly claims (as you quote) “In Buenos Aires we were in a combat situation after the Argentines surrendered,” proves to be a bit troubling when it comes to factual phrasing.

I have never before heard the phrase “combat situation” used in connection with “after _____ surrendered.” A “surrender” indicates the END of a “combat situation” so it’s kind of hard to be IN a “combat situation” without any “combat.” Furthermore, there’s absolutely NOTHING on the web suggesting that Buenos Aires was ever attacked during the War; in fact, the British Secretary of State for Defence (per the Wiki article on “Operation Black Buck”) said that the British had NO intention of striking any target on the Argentine mainland. (Guess where Buenos Aires is? Hint: It’s NOT on any island controlled by Argentina and it’s NOT in the middle of the ocean on a floating platform.) So, if Argentina was assured (by the ENEMY) that the mainland was not going to be targeted, why would the capital city be “in a combat situation?”

It makes no sense—unless O’Reilly is, um, “embellishing the facts.” Or, as it’s also known, “lying.”

Oh, Bill’s just upset because the majority of his audience don’t have the necessary long-term memory* to be aware that he’d be gone. And anyone who did notice his being gone would simply assume he’s been moved to a time slot after their bedtime (or they’d been asleep during his show).

*I honestly believe that even goldfish have longer memory spans than the typical FoxNoise audience member.

Well, Father Johnny, what’s stopping YOU from signing up and taking the fight to the “heathens?”

Oh, right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq-be7Y_yyY

I feel it worth reminding Ms Pavlich that a substantial number of Christians around the world “believe gays should be killed.” Maybe she’s forgotten the origin of Uganda’s “kill the gays” bill (that, thankfully, was ruled against Uganda’s constitution), but a certain “Scott Lively” (currently of Massachusetts) had a very large hand in crafting that legislation (and is currently facing the prospect of a lawsuit brought by LGBT Ugandans for his part in the measure). And Uganda isn’t alone in its maltreatment of its LGBT citizens. Zimbabwe and Malawi (both with majority Christian populations—estimated at 85% and 68%, respectively) have jailed men and women (more men) for simply being LGBT in public, and even in private.

I’m guessing she’s also sort of ignored the whole treatment of the LGBT community in Russia which has seen a substantial rise in hatred directed at LGBTs—including murder—and the authorities actually have the gall to claim the videotaped beatings and murders were perpetrated by other LGBTs, looking for “rough sex.”

And they may be a tiny minority in this country, but there are so-called Christian Americans who would openly advocate death to LGBTs if they thought they could do it without any repercussions. I mean, look at Roy Moore in Alabama. He won’t openly say he wants LGBTs dead but his actions certainly indicate he doesn’t believe that any LGBT person has any human value.

I really wish all these so-called religious figures would remember one very important thing: According to their Holy Book, only one person knows when the “end times” will happen—God. And, as the Book of 2 Peter notes (repeating Psalms 90), “that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” With that little bit of information, the “end times” could last for centuries before Jesus/God returns. (Of course, the “end of days” has been prophesied since the 1st century turned into the 2nd century.)

When I saw the headline on the front page, my first response was “Yeah—you and your fellow shills.”

After reading how poor widdle Megyn felt she was treated, well, all I have to say can be expressed by the following https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAlTOfl9F2w

On a slightly more serious note, well Megyn, you know what they say about karma: Payback’s a bitch. Just remember how hurt your widdle feewings got the next time you decide to verbally attack someone else. Of course, I doubt that you’ve got the necessary empathy for that. You do work for FoxNoise, after all, where empathy is reserved for those who truly don’t need it.