Bill O’Reilly is still so intent on looking out for your that he is doing his best to cram “Jessica’s Law” down the throats of Coloradans whether they like it or not – and “expose” how the Denver Post is "merging" with Democrats to stifle the law – whether there’s evidence or not. Rest assured, however, this has nothing, nothing to do with the fact the Denver Post called out O’Reilly as a “fact-challenged” bigot.
For the zillionth discussion on The Factor about Colorado's failure to pass Jessica's Law, O’Reilly brought in Bernard Goldberg to bolster his argument that Democrats and the Denver Post plotted together to kill the legislation that would have imposed heavy mandatory sentences on child molesters. Never mind that O’Reilly didn’t have a shred of evidence, that O’Reilly lives thousands of miles away from Colorado nor the reasons that Curtis Hubbard, the Post’s editorial page editor (the one who called out O’Reilly), reported as to why the bill was killed. O’Reilly knows better than those Coloradans about what’s good for them!
We know O’Reilly’s heart is in the right place because he had that now-familiar “PROTECTING KIDS IN COLORADO” graphic next to his face again during this latest attack discussion.
O’Reilly played a clip of Hubbard trying to explain on The Factor – in between bursts of shouted diatribe from the “fair and balanced” host – why the Democratic Speaker killed the bill. “No one in law enforcement in Colorado supported it in 2007, 2009 or again this year. In fact, it’s only brought up when the Republicans are in the minority in Colorado, not when they had the majority. It’s been used against Democrats as a wedge issue politically.”
And in an effort to destroy Hubbard's credibility, O’Reilly proved him exactly right by proceeding to use the law as a political club against Democrats. For the sake of the children, of course.
Although it’s obvious to me Hubbard did not mean that literally no one in Colorado law enforcement supported the bill, on Friday O’Reilly trotted out two law enforcement officials who support the bill – and that was all the proof O’Reilly needed to say he had made a fool out of Hubbard. By the way, in his editorial, Hubbard was able to give full context to the political situation in Colorado with regard to Jessica’s Law without being interrupted and berated:
Its death at the hands of the (Democratic) majority party was not surprising given the bill was not supported by police, prosecutors or defense attorneys. Add in the fact that previous votes on the issue have been used in political attack ads against Democrats and that the measure has only been introduced in the state when Republicans are in the minority, and you get a sense of the politics.
Sorry, Bill, but two law enforcers with a different perspective don’t disprove Hubbard’s point. Nor do they prove that the Denver Post is in cahoots with the Democrats. Unfortunately, I can’t help but theorize that this could be a giant case of projection given how cozy Fox is with the Republicans.
“This story is important because it epitomizes what I believe is happening in the United States, that the press is no longer interested in the news. Alright?” O’Reilly began with Goldberg. He went on to suggest that not only is there “possible corruption between the Democratic Party in Colorado and the largest newspaper there (the Post)” over “the vital issue of Jessica’s Law” but that all the other media outlets are willfully ignoring it.
You may recall that last week, O’Reilly explained why he “had to” tell his viewers that the Colorado Speaker of the House is openly gay and a “fervent gay-marriage” proponent.” This week, he explained, “The press is not reporting the news any more. It’s in business to promote a certain candidate. And that’s why we did this Denver Post story. Because they’re propping up the Democratic Party – even using the same language against me.”
You got that? It has nothing to do with the fact that they both attacked him, oh no, no, no. It’s all about the integrity of the press. So as further proof of what a civic-minded guy he is, O’Reilly added, “I’m trying to get this law passed now. All I want is for the legislature in Colorado to vote on it. So everybody gets on the record who opposes and who’s for.”
Oh, really? And what’s the point of that, if not to use the vote to go after those who don’t for it? You know, just like Hubbard said the Republicans do.
In fact, Bernard Goldberg called out O’Reilly for not taking on the Republicans for not bringing up the law when they were in the majority.
“I don’t care about that. ...I didn’t want to get involved in partisan politics in Colorado,” O’Reilly dubiously answered. “But now we can’t even get the Denver media to report on this story and this is a huge story.”
Suddenly that “possible corruption” between the Dems and the Post became a done deal. “This becomes a story about a party, the Democrats, and the Denver Post, the largest newspaper in the state, actually working together and merging. This is huge!” O'Reilly exclaimed. But instead of horrified, he looked delighted.
Even Goldberg knew that was – well, crazy. “We don’t know that there’s collusion,” he told O’Reilly gently. He also came up with several other explanations for the local media not covering this “huge” story that had nothing to do with collusion - including the fact that local media doesn't like it when national media comes in and encroaches on their territory.
And as for that "huge story" that the Colorado media is suppressing in cahoots with Democrats? Why isn't this "huge" news elsewhere on Fox? Or are the other hosts in on the fix, too?