Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/25/2010 3:31:57 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Scanian

O’Reilly is an idiot. He really is. Blowhard and idiot. He almost makes me cringe sometimes when he’s talking to somebody with real brains such as Brit Hume, Charles Krauthammer or Karl Rove. He doesn’t have the command of facts and detail he needs to be discussing about half of what he talks about. Also, interrupting his guests is just out of control. And then there’s Mark Lamont Hill. Puhleeze, what a clown.


2 posted on 02/25/2010 3:40:52 AM PST by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian
I haven't watched O'Reilly in years, but if this is true it just adds to the list of reasons to avoid him.

Obama's socialism is bad enough, but people who so describe him never take it to where Obama really is on the continuum. He's a fascist.

Adam Shaw says Obama is 'well spoken.' At least he didn't say eloquent. I suppose in some macabre way a man can be 'well spoken' and still make his listener's skin crawl. I have a hard time with 'eloquent' in that context.

3 posted on 02/25/2010 3:47:11 AM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian

The problem with O’Reilly is that he defines himself as being a contrarian. Will always try to take an opposing view.


6 posted on 02/25/2010 3:57:35 AM PST by AdaGray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian
Socialism is defined as an economic system under which the government owns the means of production.

In the past year and a half, the government has nationalized banks and 2 major car companies. Currently the government is trying to do the same to the health care industry. That pretty much fits the textbook description of socialism.

7 posted on 02/25/2010 4:04:20 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian

O’Reilly is so ridiculous. Obama catered to his ego and that was all it took for O’Reilly to be his champion.

I truly cannot stand that man. Well, either of them for that matter.


10 posted on 02/25/2010 4:05:55 AM PST by autumnraine (You can't fix stupid, but you can vote it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian
"Black Liberation" revolutionary communist Marc Lamont Hill on O'Reilly again

Posted on Tuesday, February 23, 2010 8:36:33 PM by ETL

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2457920/posts

12 posted on 02/25/2010 4:16:58 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian

Simply state POTUS Obama is indeed a socialist and it woul;d take very little movement on his part to become a intolerant dictator.


14 posted on 02/25/2010 4:23:00 AM PST by JLAGRAYFOX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Scanian; Lando Lincoln; neverdem; SJackson; dennisw; NonValueAdded; Alouette; .cnI redruM; Valin; ..
Adam Shaw:
... There are as many exact definitions of socialism as there are socialists. Yet they do have 
common characteristics. Love of big government, nationalization of industry, massive 
taxation, wealth redistribution, etc. all point towards socialism. Someone like the president 
would not even have to say he was a socialist in Western Europe; it would be assumed quite 
normally, without any fuss or conspiracy.
I have a lot of respect for Bill O'Reilly, but to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and 
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist 
prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is 
puzzling why self-described independents like Mr O'Reilly are doing backflips in an attempt 
to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.
All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for 
someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter. 
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just 
exactly who it is they have elected to office. With the approval numbers dropping almost daily for 
the president, it appears that it is sinking in for the generally center-right American public.  
However, when people on the right start being "concerned" about describing Obama as what he clearly 
is, in part due to the hysteria that both sides of the political spectrum exhibit when the word "socialist" 
is used, then it damages the effectiveness of opposition to him. Instead of being able to define what 
Obama's aims are in his presidency, those on the left and on the right keep pushing Obama into a slightly 
left-of-center, non-ideological fog. Such a political move is deceitful, and it does not allow the American 
public to get a clear perception of just what they have voted into the White House.
Those of us across the pond who analyze American politics know exactly who it is you have in the White 
House. Obama is not some new post-political entity. Nor is he some form of Stalinist that will set up a 
USSA. He is a normal, well-spoken, charismatic socialist who in Britain would sit quite happily towards 
the left of the Labour Party alongside figures such as Tony Benn, Aneurin Bevan, Harold Wilson, and Ed 
Balls. To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and 
it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist 
leading the country. 
Welcome to the club: It stinks!

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.)

I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention.

You are welcome to browse the list of truly exceptional articles I pinged to lately. Updated on January 13, 2010.  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

 


29 posted on 02/25/2010 6:48:45 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson