Posted on 08/12/2008 7:56:39 AM PDT by WaterBoard
On 11 August 2008, Bill O'Reilly stated on his radio show: (See 3:16 on the tape)
"John Edwards.
Look this mistress story to me...
Who cares?
Alright, I mean I feel terrible...um...for Elizabeth Edwards and the three children.
I had this story and I could have reported it to you last spring.
We knew it was true.
We knew what was going on.
But I said look...I have already hammered Edwards. I have already you know ground him into dust.
He is out of the race. He has no credibility.
So am I going to lay this on him? And the answer was no.
And there is only one reason why I didn't. And that is because of Elizabeth Edwards. Kay.
I mean the woman is a brave woman. She is suffering through cancer and I am not going to do it.
You know I got to make these decisions and I made them. And I am just not not going to do it."
People who live in glass houses......
What if he’s also suppressing news that portrays republicans in an unfavorable light? Would that be ok?
What ever happened to, “We report, you decide?”
BOR can no longer be trusted.
It's obvious that O'Reilly is salaciously interested in the ratings that will come with an Obama interview.
So much so, that Gasbag recently referred to Obama as a "patriot" as while clearly attempting to distance Obama from Jeremiah Wright and the other nasty scumbags in Camp Obama.
O'Reilly is all about the ratings.
Mainly because BOR is nothing but a talking head. He brings nothing intelligent to the table! He talks tough but his interviews are shallow and thoughtless...IMHO of course!
Nah, I think it really boils down to that Old Saying: "The Pot Calling the Kettle Black."
Bill couldn't risk the exposure. The Dems would have pounced on that opening with zeal and Bill would have looked like an even bigger fool!
Bill, so what.
Then he could have passed it to Brit Hume, Hannity, Greta, etc.
Is a reporter supposed to have an ideological compass? If so, wouldn’t that slant their reporting? That’s what everyone accuses the MSM of.
“suppressing news that portrays republicans in an unfavorable light?”
I would like to see just ONE example of that having EVER happened...
Might be hard to find, if it’s being suppressed.
“We decide. You report.”
This comment may possibly just be the best of the best four words ever written on Free Republic, maggief!
“The Pot Calling the Kettle Black.”
Are you referring to Bill’s dirty talking episode?
If he isn’t going to break any sex scandals because of a “he who is without sin cast the first stone” thing, he should resign as a newsman.
The solution to the OReily Fake is to have a true REASONING conservative on the air at the same time.
OReily is just a refugee from tabloid TV. (current affair, my how appropriate) They were there to kill off the supermarket tabloids.
Seriously if Rush was given a carte blanch news hour he would wife the floor with the screaming old media lamentation and agonies.
There's several reasons for this, at least as a general matter (I'm not sure what makes Mr. O'Reilly tick, but let me just say right up front that I don't like him and haven't liked him since he did tabloid television with Nancy Glass back in the '80's).
The number one reason is simple: if you want to get interesting, liberal people to come on your show, you've got to toe the liberal line, at least much of the time.
Unlike conservatives, who are anxious to go on any show that will give them a chance to speak out, liberals have no qualms about helping those who help the cause, and freezing out those who don't. After all, there are plenty of left-oriented shows they can go on.
The basic problem is this: nobody, no matter how big, from Bill O'Reilly to Katie Couric, can make anybody go on their show if that person doesn't want to. That's it. That's all.
Recall that the Obama campaign recently found itself unable to find space for a New Yorker reporter on the campaign airplane, right after that magazine published a cover illustration that was deemed to be unhelpful to the cause of Obama.
There are other reasons for the steady leftward drift of those media people who are, at least nominally, on the right, but this, I believe, is the main one.
Yes and BTW the "Dirty Talk" is the only thing that has been reported, BUT there is rumor of much more. So even if these rumors are NOT true he is probably hesitant to do any stories on such because then the story is about HIM and not what he is reporting on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.