Bill O’Reilly Blows Up At Laura Ingraham In Epic Segment Over His ‘Thump The Bible’ Comments

Mediaite ^ | April 2nd, 2013 | Josh Feldman

[Corporate Democrat]

Bill O’Reilly tonight responded to criticisms from the right over his commentary last week that gay marriage opponents need to do more than just “thump the Bible” if they want to win the argument. After a Talking Points Memo largely focused on mocking liberal media attempts to gin up a feud between himself and Rush Limbaugh, O’Reilly brought on Laura Ingraham, who actually told O’Reilly he was wrong in saying what he said. O’Reilly was stunned with Ingraham, shouting over her and telling her “I’m disappointed in you.”

RELATED: Conservative Radio Host: Bill O’Reilly’s Mockery Of Gay Marriage Opponents A ‘Hanging Offense’

Ingraham first surprised O’Reilly by agreeing that there actually is a feud of sorts going on between him and people like Limbaugh, given Limbaugh’s harsh condemnation of O’Reilly’s commentary. O’Reilly dismissed the idea he and Limbaugh are enemies, saying “I don’t care what he says, he can say whatever he wants.”

Ingraham agreed with O’Reilly that gay marriage opponents are not always good at making their case, but said O’Reilly unnecessarily insulted them. O’Reilly insisted he made an “honest point” about gay marriage, and shocked Ingraham by saying that opponents cannot cite the Bible in a policy argument. Ingraham told O’Reilly he was being disrespectful, which led O’Reilly to tell Ingraham he’s “disappointed” in her.

O’Reilly scolded her for criticizing her for his “accurate description,” saying he doesn’t really care whether it was unhelpful or if anyone took offense, it was an “accurate and honest attack.”

Watch the fiery segment below, courtesy of Fox News:

[Intolerant in NJ]

I wouldn’t be so sure about the SC...you're probably right - the Court ordering any religion to provide marriage to gays against their own teachings and practices would seem a clear contradiction of "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof" - but given the deceitfulness of the typical leftist, Sotomayor et al would probably claim that since the court and not congress was giving the orders, all was well.....

[Intolerant in NJ]

Well yes there are some outliers like the Unitarians and some renegades even within the major sects, but so far I’ve been surprised at how well the majors like the Methodists have held out against the pressure to officially recognize same-sex marriage - we’ll see how long they last.....

[RedHeeler]

No, I am NOT part of your inclusive “we.” The lost elections, supposed public opinion and (soon enough) SCOUTUS decisions- have absolutely no bearing on right or wrong. Wow. BOR is wrong to the bone, as well as anyone who concedes with his idiotic meanderings. Get a moral compass and check yourself.

[RobO1125]

I do have a moral compass, but it’s dictated by logic and my beliefs. Cherry picking certain passages while ignoring others is rather disingenuous to me. Not directing that to you specifically, but it’s what I’ve seen from the social conservative wing of the movement by and large. All it leads to is becoming to the political paradigm what the token religious candidate is in the GOP primaries every four years: a voice to be heard, but ultimately having no impact. We all need to think pragmatically since this is a war for the future of America. It’s a war we dare not lose.

[CottShop]

[[I know you write better than your last post.]]

Yeah, not so much- I’m actually surprised when my posts are legibile-

[[Kinda agree with you.]]

Woo hoo!

[[Maybe, sorta and kinda.]]

Deflated sigh

[RedHeeler]

Good deal. Felt the same. All the best.