O'Reilly Refuses to Have Conason on The Factor

[stewert]

Joe says O'Reilly is the only person who has refused to have him on his show. That's because he is afraid of Joe,
he is afraid of informed intelligent liberals. Just more proof O'Reilly is a republican.

Quote:

The wingers are starting to whine defensively, and it's no accident that the loudest would be Bill O'Reilly. In
Monday's Daily News he offers this silly, self-pitying rant about the Franken embarrassment -- as if Fox & Friends
and so much of the other pap served up by the Murdoch machine were not tainted by hateful rancor.

Oh, and O'Reilly is also the only cable TV program of any significance so far to decline hosting me to discuss my
new book, "Big Lies." (But the Daily News ran an excellent item on the book by Rush & Molloy.)

As they say in Levittown, Long Island, where the all-spin guy claims to have grown up: He can dish it out but he
can't take it.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/08/18/whiner/index.html

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. More proof...

Of O'Reilly's intellectual dishonesty and cowardice.

As if we needs more proof. As if.

[JNelson6563]

2. O'Really should be afraid of Joe

I on the other hand, would be delighted if he stopped by to chat with me! ;-) Anytime Joe, open invitation!!

Julie

[JohnyCanuck]

3. MWO calls O'Reilly a chicken

and wants everyone to email him and ask him why he won't have Conason on his show. This is the email I sent yesterday.

Hi there Mr. Oh Really?

Mediawhoresonline.com says you're too chicken to have Joe Conason on your show . Did Al Franken calling your a liar about your repeated claim to have won a Peabody when you really didn't get you all shook up or what?

Here's an idea. After the law suit against Al is laughed out of court, why don't you see if you can talk your bosses at Fox into suing MWO for calling you a chicken. Pawwwwk, pawwwk, pawwwwk.

Regards
xxxxxxx


From the main page at www.mediawhoresonline.com :

CRYBABY CHICKEN ALERT
Faux's Bill O'Reilly Afraid to Host Joe Conason

How many times have you heard Bill O'Reilly squawking about how various Democratic politicians or activists are so terrified by the prospect of facing his laser-like ability to ask the questions they hope to avoid answering that they refuse to appear on his show?


Bill O'Reilly
Now comes word that it is O'Reilly himself who has refused to allow himself to undergo scrutiny by Joe Conason, author of the devastating new book, BIG LIES: The Conservative Propaganda Machine and How it Distorts the Truth.

Yes, the host of "O'Reilly Factor," Faux's Flagship screaming head show, is terrified of finally facing a tough and informed liberal who is skilled in combating every tactic in the winger propagandist's bag of tricks, such as constant interruption, sneakily reframed questions, and even O'Reilly's specialty - shouting "SHUT UP!"

[BuelahWitch]

12. Should we send O'Really some rubber chickens?

Just like the guy in Congress got fruitcakes? I'd suggest real chicken, but that would smell.

On the other hand...

[nostamj]

13. yellow feathers...

easier to mail, makes the point.

[Old and In the Way]

4. Can Fox be sued under "Truth in Advertising" law?

Seeing they are demonstrably neither fair, nor balanced seems that they could slapped with a cease and desist order for the continued use of misleading advertising.....it certainly would be entertaining to turn the tables on these guys....

[arcane1]

10. nope, they've been there, done that

the court determined that FOX can lie on the air during newscasts, because the FCC guidelines are not laws, per se, but 'guideleines'

I'll look for the link

on edit:

On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of irate
advertisers.



Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron Rupert Murdock, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public airwaves.



In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.
http://www.netfeed.com/~jhill/RupertMurdoch.htm

[dusty64]

5. What a baby.

I can't believe anyone actually takes him and any other of the extreme right shills seriously.

[Walt Starr]

6. Liberals should boycott O'Reilly RIGHT NOW

It should be a public boycott too.

State emphatically that because O'Reilly is afraid to have Joe Conason on The Factor that they will never appear either.

There goes a big part of O'Reilly's schtick. He said Gore was afraid to go on the factor. Now any liberal politician can simply claim solidarity with Joe Conason.

[Orrin_73]

7. Joe would ripp him apart

bill is a chickenshit.

[realFedUp]

8. Just one more reason not to watch O'Really.

:-)

[Kanola]

9. Annthrax also would not face Joe on Kudlow and Cramer

Claiming scheduling difficulties...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/110840p-100142c.html

[Oracle]

11. I don't understand this line...please explain...

"(But the Daily News ran an excellent item on the book by Rush & Molloy.)" Who's Rush & Molloy?

[nostamj]

14. rush & malloy = gossip page in the NY daily news

no relation to limbaugh or Mike