Powered by i.TV
April 18, 2014

Bill O'Reilly is at it again

by Bob Sassone, posted Jan 11th 2006 7:07PM

It seems as if everyday, Bill O'Reilly does something else to prove what a vile human being he is.

On his show the other night, O'Reilly responded to the criticism of his "war on Christmas" talk over the past several months, most notably from Dateline's Josh Mankiewicz. Mankiewicz, like me and others, said that the whole anti-Merry Christmas thing is a myth. And what does O'Reilly use as proof that the whole anti-Merry Christmas story is valid? This:

Well, I guess they missed the Gallup poll that said 69 percent of Americans opposed dropping the greeting "Merry Christmas" and nearly half the country thinks Christmas is under siege. Why is that laughable?

Here's why Bill...

Just because the Gallup poll conducts a phone poll about something, doesn't mean that particular something is legit. I mean, why are they even conducting the poll in the first place? Not because it's a legitimate news story, but because news organizations like you are making it into a news story. See the difference? Let's put it in the right context.

And look at that poll question! If someone called you and asked you if you were against getting rid of the phrase "Merry Christmas" of course you would say you were against it! How does that prove that there is a real "war on Christmas" going on from the left? "Nearly half the country thinks Christmas is under seige." You know why? Because you keep telling them it is.

 

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

21 Comments

Filter by:
Rick

Of course this is appropriate for a blog on TV. O'Reilly has a TV show, he is a TV personality. Thank goodness he has no real power except preaching hate to those that are looking for a reason to hate.

July 13 2006 at 1:49 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Nicholas

"How awkward would it be to say "Merry Christmas" to somebody, only to learn they're Jewish and celebrate Hanukkah?"

How awkward would it be to say "Happy Hanukkah" to somebody, only to learn they're not Jewish and celebrate Christmas or Christianity?

January 12 2006 at 5:37 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Canton

"There are plenty of places around the US where you are not allowed to display a nativity."

Right, like capitol lawns and courthouses. Displaying a creche in a public place like that could be considered sponsorship of Christianity. State-sponsored religion is what the early settlers wanted to get away from, way back when.

"Or how about Macy's where they no longer say Merry Christmas."

How awkward would it be to say "Merry Christmas" to somebody, only to learn they're Jewish and celebrate Hanukkah?

January 12 2006 at 2:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Nicholas

I said it before, and I'll say it again-- leave the political debate off this blog, and stick to just the TV shenanigans. Otherwise, start a "Politics in the Media" blog or something.

January 12 2006 at 2:10 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
const

Canton, if the holiday season is about tolerance and inclusion as you say, then O'Reilly is right.

There are plenty of places around the US where you are not allowed to display a nativity. Or how about Macy's where they no longer say Merry Christmas.

Great to see the ACLU is all about inclusion and tolerance. At least for their own narrow point of view.

January 12 2006 at 2:01 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Geekwad

Christmas is not Christian. It's not a Christmas tree, it's a pagan tree. The idea that the mythical Christ was born in December is contradicted by the New Testament. The most vocal opposition to Christmas has historically come from CHRISTIANS who were better educated in their faith's history than is common today. Several US states have in the past banned observance of Christmas (nice religious freedom there) due to this Christian influence. Until roughly a thousand years ago, the church taught that it was not pious to celebrate birthdays, and the celebration of Christ's birthday was a blasphemy.
Christmas itself was created "out of thin air." It was originally a political tool to manipulate people. Now it's a commercial tool to manipulate people. All this moral outrage just makes me sad.
If it IS the case that Christmas is in decline, three cheers for that. I'm tired of the gift culture. I'm tired of the rah rah for the home team. I'm especially tired of the valuing of faith over critical thought. It's as though people WANT to be lied to, and it's disgraceful.

Another thing. I think it reflects poorly on this forum that many people seem to think television is just for fluffy entertainment, and that serious discussions of its content should be avoided. Television changed the world, and it's not done yet. If we are not critical in our consumption of its messages, it will not be a change for the better. For shame!

January 12 2006 at 1:53 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Patrick R

"Patrick, OReilly IS NOT the first person to point this out. This story has been around for some now."

I have nothing to counter that since O'Reilly is the first person I've heard vocalize this concern, so fine I'll go with it. Nevertheless, O'Reilly appears perfectly happy being a poster boy for the cause.

"The season is a holiday BECAUSE its Christmas."

That's a pretty elitist way to look at things. For you and many others, yes, but that type of thinking condescends to and belittles everyone with a differing point of view. Lots of festivals land around this time of the year and all are equally valid as far as the people celebrating them are concerned--Kwanzaa included. Hanukkah also lands in late December. Then we have the Western new year (also a holiday). The Chinese new year comes a little later, but also around mid-winter (January/February). There are various Winter Solstice festivals that are celebrated differently around the world as well.

"No one is forcing people to buy trees and decorate them."

And no one is preventing them, either. So what's the problem?

"As for Kwanzaa, you should do some research yourself. You don't call a holiday founded in 1967 and is observed exclusively by African Americans in the United States between DEC 26TH to Jan 1 a figment of someone's counter-reaction to Christmas?"

1967 is nearly 40 years ago, which to me does not qualify as "out of thin air". The world can change drastically in 5 minutes, so 40 years is fairly substantial when you consider the celebration has endured this long. I guess we'll have to disagree on the semantics. Either way, what gives you, me, or Bill O'Reilly the right to deny someone their right to celebrate anything they want (regardless of whether you feel it is "made up")? If someone wants to celebrate Kwanzaa and feels it is important to them, how does this take away from your ability to celebrate Christmas? It doesn't. Hence, no story.

Thanks for the discussion. I have nothing left to add on this one.

January 12 2006 at 1:38 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Canton

"The season is a holiday BECAUSE its Christmas."

No, the season is a holiday BECAUSE of Winter Solstice, a pagan holiday the Christians sort of appropriated in a very crafty (and successful) effort to "convert the heathen" as it were. If it weren't for Solstice, Christmas as we know it wouldn't exist.

It's remained a holiday because of Christmas. And Chanukah. And Kwanzaa. It's a very auspicious season all-around, a season of (and this is going to sound corny) togetherness. So why be exclusive? It's not about political correctness so much as tolerance and inclusion.

At least, that's the way I understand it...

January 12 2006 at 1:11 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Elliott

Next we'll have Bill telling us that gay people are proposing a ban on straight marriage. Oh majority...

January 12 2006 at 12:38 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Sy

Patrick, OReilly IS NOT the first person to point this out. This story has been around for some now. OReilly's ratings has been way up there before the Christmas story ...I don't know what he has to boost but his ego. If it was an anchor on CNN story, then you might have an argument.

The season is a holiday BECAUSE its Christmas. To represent it as something is nothing but the PC crap. No one is forcing people to buy trees and decorate them.

As for Kwanzaa, you should do some research yourself. You don't call a holiday founded in 1967 and is observed exclusively by African Americans in the United States between DEC 26TH to Jan 1 a figment of someone's counter-reaction to Christmas? Matter of fact, it was founded by a POLITICAL activist and it was formed out of thin air.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwanzaa

January 12 2006 at 12:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Us

From Our Partners