Gay Patriot Header Image

Consolation Prize

Posted by V the K at 3:44 pm - April 19, 2017.
Filed under: Big Journalism

Reports indicate Bill O’Reilly is out at FoxNews. This will bring some bitter, hateful joy to the left; sort of a consolation prize for not winning Georgia 06 after being assured that it would flip to the Democrat and herald the end of the Trump Presidency. They’ll have to settle for this, and they’ll tell themselves that this makes “Right Wing Nut Jobs” miserable and that will make them as happy as 12 year old girls who just found out that one girl they don’t like buys her shoes at WalMart

  1. This actually won’t cause any tears on the right. Read the comments at the link. Nobody cares and a lot of people will be happy to see him go. We aren’t emotionally invested in him the way the left is in Rachel Maddow and Bill Maher.
  2. Bill O’Reilly will get a multi-million dollar buyout of his contract. He’s got enough money to live out the rest of his life on that same resort in Tahiti Obama retreated to.
  3. Leftist hero Keith Olbermann is still reduced to ranting on YouTube from his basement.
Share

66 Comments

  1. Everything I know or think I know about running FoxNews you could hide under a gnat’s nit. But I will blubber away, anyway.

    The driving demographic for The Five and O’Reilly is people in their 70’s. Sort of like catheters. But that is what FoxNews has built its numbers on. They may be thinking of aiming for a new demographic and even bigger numbers, but that would mean they are going head to head with the competition rather than owning a sizable niche.

    I would love to see the Tucker Carlson level of reporting increased. Sharyl Attkisson would be a wonderful addition. Greg Gutfeld with a sharp producer would be great. Charles Anderson from FoxBusiness is as solid as they come.

    My dream show would be: FauxNews. It would rip into the alphabet soup networks and expose their steamy and seamy crap and set the record straight. It would name names, take scalps and dare them to come clean.

    Comment by Heliotrope — April 19, 2017 @ 4:19 pm - April 19, 2017

  2. Trump got 62,984,825 votes.. On a good day Fox gets 2 million viewers. Fox is hardly the “voice” of conservatives and Republicans.

    Check this out :
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_U.S._states

    This clearly shows why liberals are so unhappy.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 19, 2017 @ 4:36 pm - April 19, 2017

  3. #1 – Everything Helio said and then some!!

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 19, 2017 @ 4:46 pm - April 19, 2017

  4. The left goes crazy under Bill Maher. The guy is really just a comedian, he’s no intellectual. Bill O’Reilly, who cares about him, let him do a fifth rate radio show like Michael Savage.

    Comment by Pawfurbehr — April 19, 2017 @ 5:21 pm - April 19, 2017

  5. Never was an O’Reilly fan… even when I agree with him, I just don’t connect. But, for me, he’s just some guy on telly.

    Waiting for a tire repair this evening, the O’Reilly-FOX split was the lead story on ABC Nightly News. It’s a bigger story for the left than it is for me at any rate.

    Comment by KCRob — April 19, 2017 @ 7:43 pm - April 19, 2017

  6. Two of the five women who received payouts from FNC or O’Reilly received them after Roger Ailes’ departure. This would have been after their “thorough and careful reviews of the allegations.” That means they reviewed the allegations and didn’t care. They only started caring when the sponsors started quitting.

    FNC’s decision was based on money, not ethics or propers values.

    O’Reilly will be fine though, as VtheK indicated (celebrated? hmmn, seems ambiguous) in point #2.

    Here’s a real good articles on the NYTimes who accelerated attention to the case:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/business/media/bill-oreilly-sexual-harassment-fox-news.html?_r=1

    Just as a refresher, Bill O’Reilly, a man who used his power to sexually harass women in the workplace, and his fame to retain his power and position, kept going for years and years until over fifty advertisers took their money away. I think what VtheK was trying to say in the end is that the sad part is that he got away with it for so long. I hope that was the point anyway. He does profess to be a family values kind of guy and believes in doing the right thing. That’s what I want to believe anyway. Cheers.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 19, 2017 @ 7:52 pm - April 19, 2017

  7. Cray,Cray:

    We wondered in vain why Clintoon got away with turning the Oval Office into a romper room with a girl the same damn age as his own kid. But that, it all turned out, was reduced to what the meaning of “is” is and he never had sex, with that woman, Miss. Lewinsky and blah, blah, blah.

    O’Reilly “screwed” up and brought shame on himself and his network and they axed his turkey neck. I doubt that anyone here gives a rat’s patoot what happened to the big gas bag on FoxNews at 8 pm. If FoxNews tried to find a way to escape the inevitable, tell me again how that is not part and parcel of the whole “entertainment industry” mind set.

    Please, dear God, don’t start up the “sexual harassment of women in the workplace” double standard machine on Bill O’Reilly until you can demonstrate moral rectitude on every other leading news whorehouse.

    Here’s a deal. Until Hollyweird launches an effective Mother Teresa level of moral rectitude campaign, lets not get our shorts in a bunch over what the likes of Bill O’Reilly gets his high opinion of himself into.

    Entertainment people seem to have a penchant for a high degree of moral insecurity.

    Comment by Heliotrope — April 19, 2017 @ 9:01 pm - April 19, 2017

  8. Brian Williams was a bigger trophy to laugh at & O’Reilly hasn’t been replaceable for years. He’s always promoted more laws, more legislation & bigger government. Literally. I believe this is why his passing is not such a big deal among the factions on the Right. The allegations & history of settlements are just nauseating. Like catching sight of a wart near a dinosaur’s genitals.

    Comment by Hanover — April 19, 2017 @ 9:13 pm - April 19, 2017

  9. [Oops, mean …O’Reilly hasn’t been irreplaceable for years. …

    Comment by Hanover — April 19, 2017 @ 9:14 pm - April 19, 2017

  10. Breaking News (for Libs): Hillary lost. Big time (we’re talking two generations now expected for Dems to be out of power).

    Comment by Hanover — April 19, 2017 @ 9:20 pm - April 19, 2017

  11. Helio, help me out. I have vague memories of a TV program… set in an ad agency… critically acclaimed… won a truckful of awards … in which all the males bosses at the ad agency routinely sexually harassed the women who worked there… and the show kind of glorified it.

    I think it was called “Crazy Advertising Guys” or something like that.

    Comment by V the K — April 19, 2017 @ 9:44 pm - April 19, 2017

  12. Please, dear God, don’t start up the “sexual harassment of women in the workplace” double standard machine on Bill O’Reilly until you can demonstrate moral rectitude on every other leading news whorehouse.

    My comments were about how a news network allowed this continue for years for multiple people, not celebrities who get away with it verses ones who don’t (eventually). It was a systemic problem in that particular workplace. And, yes, stuff like this goes on in Hollywood, and it’s inexcusable. But, I’m not aware of this happening before at another “news” network. If it has, then please enlighten me.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 19, 2017 @ 9:49 pm - April 19, 2017

  13. Entertainment people seem to have a penchant for a high degree of moral insecurity. – heliotrope

    And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything…

    Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything. DJT

    Comment by rusty — April 19, 2017 @ 9:51 pm - April 19, 2017

  14. and the show kind of glorified it.

    Depiction isn’t glorification. Do you have an example of how it glorified sexual harassment? As well as how it should have been written so it was clearly not glorifying it?

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 19, 2017 @ 9:52 pm - April 19, 2017

  15. Cray, as an example, of something similar, The Furry Raiders who dress in military uniforms and wear armbands that is claimed to be a parody of the Nazi swastika are claimed to be glorifying Naziism simply by existing.

    If that argument holds, then Mad Men glorifies sexual harassment.

    Comment by Craig Smith — April 20, 2017 @ 12:48 am - April 20, 2017

  16. Hi Craig, Is The Furry Raiders a scripted television drama? I haven’t heard of it before.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 1:18 am - April 20, 2017

  17. I watched most of the seasons of Mad Men. I can’t say it was my favourite series, but, from a technical point of view it was polished, and, from a script POV, it was often engaging. It was a television series from 2007 until 2015 that was set in the late 1950s through late 1960s centred around Don Draper, a farm boy who reinvented himself under someone else’s identity and became an extremely successful advertising executive on Madison Avenue. The series also explored an ensemble of characters who either worked in the the advertising field and/or were connected to one of the main characters, which included Peg Olson, who was essentially a co-lead. The stories aimed to depict the social mores of the time while also conspicuously shining a light on more contemporary themes (as good television drama strives to do). One of the central themes of the show concerned women functioning within the “good ol’ boys” network of that industry and at home and what they faced. Part of that included an empathetic approach to the inequality they dealt with, what they were subjected to, as well as what men “got away with.”

    So, when VtheK throws out a comment like:

    I have vague memories of a TV program… set in an ad agency… critically acclaimed… won a truckful of awards … in which all the males bosses at the ad agency routinely sexually harassed the women who worked there… and the show kind of glorified it.

    I think it was called “Crazy Advertising Guys” or something like that.

    He’s going to have to do better than that if he actually wants to prove that was the case.

    The series didn’t “glorify” sexual harassment by showing that it happened. It acknowledged that it happened and it showed how the characters responded and how it did or didn’t affect them.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 2:06 am - April 20, 2017

  18. Cray, as an example, of something similar, The Furry Raiders

    No, it’s not similar. But, I’m also not arguing that a bunch of Furries with armbands (I googled it) are Neo-Nazis. And even if people are, it has nothing to do with a television show. Or what I just argued, anyway.

    This is next-level f*ckery, Craig, lol. I’m probably one of the least popular posters on here (if not at the very bottom), but come on.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 2:16 am - April 20, 2017

  19. Mad Men, one of the most overrated, boringest series ever, next to the Sopranos.

    Comment by Pawfurbehr — April 20, 2017 @ 6:33 am - April 20, 2017

  20. I guess Vince never noticed that the difference between the cool characters on Crazy Advertising Guys and the uncool characters was that the cool characters were successful at harassing women and the uncool characters weren’t.

    Comment by V the K — April 20, 2017 @ 8:35 am - April 20, 2017

  21. Um, certain echelons of our society get away with things others don’t. I know you don’t care for the Humanities, but that’s Sociology 101, Jimmy.

    And, that doesn’t preclude the experience of the female characters either.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 8:43 am - April 20, 2017

  22. Um, certain echelons of our society get away with things others don’t.

    Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example.

    Comment by V the K — April 20, 2017 @ 9:27 am - April 20, 2017

  23. Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example.

    So, you won’t actually defend your original assertion in #11. Super.

    Sorry for giving you more credit and thinking you would. My bad.

    —-

    Also, I’m going to quote this from Russ H #13, as it appears to have gotten caught in a filter and it might get missed:

    Entertainment people seem to have a penchant for a high degree of moral insecurity. – heliotrope

    And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything…

    Grab them by the pu55y. You can do anything. DJT

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 9:34 am - April 20, 2017

  24. Cray, Cray:

    Here is my point: Those of us who understand sin and recognize our wrongs and attempt, but even fail, to be better understand compassion and hypocrisy.

    Liberals make it up as they go. They are amoral about a lot of things, apply situation ethics to other things and love the slippery slope where everything is relative and nothing is actually verboten.

    When liberals tsk-tsk and shake a finger at Bill O’Reilly, they get an erection. When conservatives tsk-tsk and shake a finger at Bill O’Reilly it is a morality tale warning about “how the mighty have fallen” and how “there but the grace of God go I” and something that chastens them.

    I hope to God you understand the difference between acknowledging your weaknesses and being a blabber mouthed hypocrite.

    Comment by Heliotrope — April 20, 2017 @ 10:12 am - April 20, 2017

  25. Isn’t it funny that CrayCray thinks O’Reilly isn’t an entertainer?

    Isn’t it funny that CrayCray thinks O’Reilly harassing women is morally worse than Mrs. Clinton condoning the rape committed by her husband?

    After those gems, CrayCray objects to being called a “moron”. Okay.. I will stop that and call CrayCray “morally bankrupt”.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 20, 2017 @ 10:13 am - April 20, 2017

  26. Since you keep bringing up Clinton, I wonder if your hard-on for using him as an example in this thread is as stiff as the one Ken Starr and friends had for wanting to nail him to the wall with a soiled blue dress (oh, but, PLEASE infer from that comment that I’m SO pro-B. Clinton, @sshats).

    Hey TnnsNeandertha1, have you ever heard of Americans getting their news from Fox? It certainly isn’t “entertainment” for the majority of the dunderheads who watch it.

    And, if you’re going to accuse me of viewing “Mrs. Clinton condoning … etc” then you better back yourself up. Oh wait, your MO is to make up stuff! And then follow that up with calling ME a moron morally corrupt.

    What’s that line from TheLiveWire? Shhh, TnnsNe1, the adults are talking.

    Keep throwing spaghetti against the wall, guys. Maybe something will eventually stick.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 10:37 am - April 20, 2017

  27. Liberals make it up as they go.

    Fox News is run by a bunch of liberals? Got it. 😉

    Please reread Comment #6 and get back to me when you’ve actually allowed it to soak in and comprehend it. Thanks.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 10:41 am - April 20, 2017

  28. I just find O’Reilly’s downfall kind of sad. I was never a fan but I think a lot of people got made aware of progressive idiocy by he and Fox news. It’s like Bill Cosby’s being dragged through the mud after all the laughter and entertainment he had brought to people through many years. It’s all tainted now and just illustrates how human we all are and how compartmentalized our lives can be. I get no schadenfreude from this episode.

    Comment by Rex — April 20, 2017 @ 10:59 am - April 20, 2017

  29. “Fox News is run by a bunch of liberals?”

    #fakeconservatives

    Comment by damaged justice — April 20, 2017 @ 11:00 am - April 20, 2017

  30. Sociology one of the most useless subjects, invented by Karl Marx himself.

    Comment by Pawfurbehr — April 20, 2017 @ 11:03 am - April 20, 2017

  31. Better put some ice on that, al-Cray-da. (As your hero, impeached sex offender Bill Clinton, said to Juanita Broadderick.)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — April 20, 2017 @ 11:20 am - April 20, 2017

  32. The discourse from the conservative side in this thread is unfortunate. At least TRY to throw one across the base.

    Where’s RSG when you need him? Ted B? Even an empty insult from Sean L or Basquiat Fan would be better than this drivel. This thread is full of a bunch of third-stringers. Sad!

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 11:42 am - April 20, 2017

  33. —And, if you’re going to accuse me of viewing “Mrs. Clinton condoning

    Cray : So, you did not support Mrs. Clinton as a Senator? SOS? POTUS candidate in 2008 or 2016?

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 20, 2017 @ 12:02 pm - April 20, 2017

  34. Cray : So, you did not support Mrs. Clinton as a Senator? SOS? POTUS candidate in 2008 or 2016?

    You really are throwing spaghetti against the wall if you’re going to add positions she didn’t even get elected to. You can’t comprehend Post #6, can you?

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 12:27 pm - April 20, 2017

  35. #34.. that is why you are morally bankrupt. You support Mrs. Clinton.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 20, 2017 @ 12:33 pm - April 20, 2017

  36. Mrs. Clinton was an elected Senator. Mrs. Clinton was an elected primary winner for the Democratic party. Mrs. Clinton was confirmed as SOS (Senate confirmation is an election by Senators).

    So, 3 our of 4 of the positions I referred to were elected positions.

    Morally bankrupt people split hairs – “I did not have sex with that woman”

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 20, 2017 @ 12:39 pm - April 20, 2017

  37. that is why you are morally bankrupt

    And this is why you’re deluded. Splitting hairs.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 12:49 pm - April 20, 2017

  38. I’m not going to waste any more time arguing about a TV show that was cancelled three years ago, but the takeaway message of Crazy Ad Guys was “If you grope every woman you meet, you’ll be so adored in your profession that you can get drunk at work and take off for months at a time without repercussions. Eventually, you’ll become wildly rich and write the best advertising jingle of all time.” Jon Hamm’s trophy case says I nailed it.

    Come to think of it, the “grope every woman in sight and become rich and famous” worked out pretty well for Bill Clinton, too.

    Comment by V the K — April 20, 2017 @ 12:54 pm - April 20, 2017

  39. the takeaway message …

    Um … the overarching message was that you can never escape your past and that, while in the-short term, it can pay to be an @sshole given the right circumstances, in the long-run, it catches up with you and you have to live with yourself. Like, did you even watch the show? Your interpretation is bizarre and uprooted from reality.

    I’m not going to waste any more time arguing

    No, you’re just going to make a false statement and then fail to defend it. And then whine about being called out. And then say something about Bill Clinton. Because that never gets old.

    that was cancelled

    It didn’t get cancelled. The creator ended the series. Why do you keep making up sh#t?

    I nailed it.

    If there’s a nail-gun in your hand and “it” is your head, yes, you nailed it alright.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 1:23 pm - April 20, 2017

  40. And craycray still doesn’t deny supporting a woman who supports rape and a rapist.

    Comment by TnnsNe1 — April 20, 2017 @ 1:47 pm - April 20, 2017

  41. And craycray

    No, I don’t support a woman who supports rape or a rapist? Do you?

    You throw this around like so many others so often hoping that “Bill Clinton raped” is FACT. Did he? I dunno. It’s possible. I wouldn’t put it passed him. It was never proven. But, I don’t rule it out. Was Broaddrick lying? I dunno. Was she telling the truth? No idea. She could have been. It is pretty much “he said/she said,” sadly. And I would say the same thing about any other person Republican or Democrat in that position.

    If there were two or three or more who accused Clinton of RAPE, then that changes things a bit. i.e. “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” It was like with Cosby, you have to be pretty deluded to think he didn’t drug and rape women about the time the 12th or 13th person comes forward.

    Does HRC support a rapist? Well, like with Broaddrick, you’re going to dredge one instance from the 1970s when she was a defence attorney at a legal aid clinic. A DEFENCE ATTORNEY. Not a prosecutor. A DEFENCE ATTORNEY. Shall I repeat it one more time? It’s not like you’re going to get it.

    It’s funny. You can’t even talk about things with any patterns or consistency. You just point your finger and go, “Look at that. BAD! And YOU ARE BAD because YOU’RE NOT POINTING YOUR FINGER EITHER!”

    Of course, after I addressed your stupid f^cking examples, you can’t even extend me the respect and circle back to my original comment about the systemic problem at Fox News. No one has. You all rather bury your heads in the sand and say, it’s okay that a conservative got caught. It’s sad, but it’s okay, because liberals have been caught doing the same thing (actually, no one yet in this stupid f!cking thread has offered any relevant comparison to what happened at Fox News).

    Really, you’re certifiable. I’m starting to think more commenters are also certifiable here than I realise. But, then, I’m a bit nuts, so no wonder I hang out here.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 2:13 pm - April 20, 2017

  42. I’ve never cared about Bill O’Reilly. Having said that: That one story of him supposedly “grunting like a boar” and calling a black co-worker “hot chocolate” is, as they say in Hollywood, On The Nose.

    Meaning that it appeals to liberal prejudices/fantasies of Bill O’Reilly rather too precisely. Nothing’s impossible, and I can’t know what happened there; but only a moron would be unsuspicious of how Too Good To Be True (for liberals) that one story is.

    O’Reilly’s problem is that there are enough other stories to make him an ongoing liability. Michael Jackson-style, with the stream of expensive payouts that makes him look fully-guilty even if he is only guilty of lesser offenses.

    And I won’t miss him. Now, if they got Tucker Carlson…that would hurt.

    If there were two or three or more who accused Clinton of RAPE, then that changes things a bit.

    CCP, Hannity has an article for you: http://www.hannity.com/articles/election-493995/heres-the-long-list-of-women-14730379/

    I’ll focus your attention on JUST the examples where the women state clearly that Bill Clinton inflicted his genitals and/or sex behavior on them against their will.
    – Paula Jones: “Bill Clinton propositioned and exposed himself to her” – i.e., exposed against her wishes.
    – Juanita Broaddrick: has a “rape rape” story. (I’m using Whoopi Goldberg’s ill-conceived phrase, there)
    – Kathleen Willey: another “rape rape” story.
    – Eileen Wellstone: another “rape rape” story. This one dates back to Clinton’s student days in 1969.
    – Helen Dowdy: unwanted groping from Clinton.

    I’ll leave out Elizabeth Ward Gracen; there is a “rape rape” story there, but she has not maintained it consistently enough for me. So, that makes 5 women with serious charges of unwanted sex interaction, including 3 full-on “rape rape” stories.

    “Did he? I dunno.” Except that it is a lot of smoke. If God ever wanted me to make a guess before He tells me the real answer, I would say yes.

    Anyway, that’s why “Bill Clinton is a rapist” has become a thing. It’s several accusers.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 3:33 pm - April 20, 2017

  43. P.S. And the thing with Hillary: In addition to the fact that she helped Bill trash or intimidate the several accusers – you know, when the accuser is supposed to be believed and all – in one of her cases, she beat a 12 year old girl who was really raped.

    Yes, she was a defense attorney. And there is audio tape of her laughing about her victory.

    You want to dwell on that fact that she was a defense attorney? OK, let’s dwell on it. We all know there are good defense lawyers and sleazy defense lawyers. Honorable, and dishonorable. In which category goes a defense attorney who not only trashed a 12-year old actual rape victim, but laughed about it afterward?

    Having said all that: Thanks for showing up and making a few points. I appreciated your link at #6. I think everyone here understands that sexual harassment is unacceptable, and that O’Reilly probably deserves some bad consequences.

    I wouldn’t agree that sexual harassment is necessarily worse at Fox than other media companies, or is more deplorable if it happens *at* Fox. Because our media is so very biased, that I would expect the sexual harassment at the other companies to go relatively unreported.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 3:59 pm - April 20, 2017

  44. you can’t even extend me the respect and circle back to my original comment about the systemic problem at Fox News. No one has.

    OK, I’ll give you that respect.

    Roger Ailes and now Bill O’Reilly = “systematic problem at FoxNews.” Your words, not mine.

    Question: Are there systematic problems vis a vis sexual harassment at other outlets such as NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, the NYT, the WaPo, etc? Are we to be assured that their laundry has been checked they have come out Grade A clean or might we be right to suspect that the wagons have been circled against FoxNews? Is the old “casting couch” just at work at FoxNews? How about Fox Business News? How about David Letterman?

    But, since Ailes and O’Reilly have been axed, it is open season on Fox News. Heck, it is even a “systematic problem at Fox News.”

    Oh, but it is OK for Clinton, Teddy Kennedy, John F’n Kerry, John Edwards et al to play around, because they are social justice warriors and their little peccadillos are nothing compared to the great, everlasting good they have done. Ditto Jesse Jackson and his love child.

    Hypocrisy only applies if it involves a person who has integrity and is not on board with moral relativity and situation ethics. You see, if you are principled, if you are a religious person, one misstep and you are trash.

    From what I understand, Ailes and O’Reilly were consistently involved in improper actions. Good riddance. However, both men are highly talented, high achievement people. You may rightly criticize the Murdoch clan for not being proactive enough. But, please, don’t tell us that the rest of the alphabet news outlets are puritanical strongholds.

    There.

    Now just what are you defending, CrayCray?

    Comment by Heliotrope — April 20, 2017 @ 4:19 pm - April 20, 2017

  45. Heliotrope – Exactly. It isn’t that the problem is “systemic” at Fox (and thus implicitly limited to Fox). It’s that we’re watching yet another politically-engineered pile-on.

    The dirt is there, at the other companies. I must admit to having no specific knowledge of it. I “know” just because that is how life works – and in particular, how the entire media and entertainment industries work. I’ve seen enough left-liberal hypocrisy in my time to know that lefties are capable of anything, anywhere, anytime. Even Saints Bernard and Fauxcohontas are, in fact, ordinary politicians-for-sale. If sexual harassment happens at Fox, it’s impossible that it wouldn’t happen at the other media companies also. We’re just not told about it. Because attacking Fox is the goal.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 4:28 pm - April 20, 2017

  46. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2f13f2awK4

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 4:42 pm - April 20, 2017

  47. Hillary trashing the 12-year old victim’s character (even though she knew the rape was real) – see about 1:30, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akO1mCpg4w8

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 4:49 pm - April 20, 2017

  48. Craycray..Clinton raped the woman in the blue dress… Liberal standards dictate that a man in power who has sex with woman has committed rape. Mrs. Clinton stood by her man..Therefore she condones rape. So do you, as long as it is committed by a liberal.

    Comment by tnnsne1 — April 20, 2017 @ 6:04 pm - April 20, 2017

  49. the problem with fox news going left is that the left will have its news monopoly again. that was the good thing that fox news did it broke the left’s forty news monopoly.

    Comment by salg — April 20, 2017 @ 6:18 pm - April 20, 2017

  50. With Tucker Carlson taking over the 8pm slot, I don’t think Fox is going left. But maybe I missed something? that you had in mind?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 20, 2017 @ 6:22 pm - April 20, 2017

  51. Hi, ILC. I checked out your link. Thanks. I never understood Whoopi’s “rape rape” comment in the case of a Polanski (and lowered by estimation of her), as he was charged with rape and then in the plea-bargain he plead guilty to “Unlawful Sexual intercourse with a minor,” which, to me, was still rape. Is that what she was referencing? That it wasn’t “rape,” but “unlawful …”? Either way, there was penetration. Polanski clearly raped a minor. That was never a question (for me).

    So, when people call Clinton a “rapist” in the plural sense, that confused me. It’s all very ambiguous and seems convenient to call him that when what he as been mostly accused of is sexual assault. I would also say that–based on the accusations–calling him a sexual harasser wouldn’t fit either, as it’s too lenient. The exposure/groping run strong and I don’t know what the most apt descriptor would be other than he was accused of multiple acts, many of which that could be described as sexual assault, but, in only one instance, rape, which was never proven (and we don’t know if it’s true or not, which it may well be).

    Clinton CLEARLY forced himself on women and sexually harassed them (which I never understood and rubbed me the wrong way, considering he was charismatic and handsome, so why be such a dick about it and abuse women?). And I wouldn’t put the accusations of exposure passed him either. But labelling him a “rapist” doesn’t seem accurate.

    I wouldn’t call Trump a rapist either, despite his ex-wife Ivana testifying in a deposition that he raped her, as well as in the context of the Jane Doe-lawsuit that was filed (and then dropped). That just seems a bit extreme (to me). But, I’ll give it a think.

    However …

    Clinton raped the woman in the blue dress

    I don’t know how to respond to that.

    So do you, as long as it is committed by a liberal.

    You making these false accusations is really tiresome.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 8:03 pm - April 20, 2017

  52. Cray Cray: while I’m honored by the mention, just a tiny correction: it’s BASTIAT_Fan…as in Frederic Bastiat. He was a genius; read some of his work. It changed my life. Maybe you’ll gain some insight into how us libertarian/conservative types think.

    Comment by Bastiat_Fan — April 20, 2017 @ 8:14 pm - April 20, 2017

  53. We all know there are good defense lawyers and sleazy defense lawyers.

    Fair enough.

    I appreciated your link at #6

    Thanks.

    Oh, but it is OK for Clinton, Teddy Kennedy …

    No. But, I’ve said this before. Multiple times. Tired of repeating.

    But, please, don’t tell us that the rest of the alphabet news outlets are puritanical strongholds.

    I’m not.

    The dirt is there

    Well, I for one can’t wait until it comes out, if it’s there. But, why tease? Especially when you don’t think it’s going to come out. I’m now curious.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 8:25 pm - April 20, 2017

  54. I’ll give you that respect.

    Thank you, btw.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 8:28 pm - April 20, 2017

  55. I must admit to having no specific knowledge of it.

    I was rereading and I misread this originally. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I missed the “no” part. 🙁

    Because attacking Fox is the goal.

    Gabriel Sherman interviewed 600 people for his 2014 book. Surely, if there is something somewhere else, there’s an investigate journalist out there who can do the same kind of footwork at another network, no?

    But, do you mean, someone on the left smelled blood and encouraged Gretchen Carlson to file that suit? Her actions basically signalled to others that it was okay to come forward. It seems kind of similar to way women kept coming out in the Bill Cosby situation.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 8:57 pm - April 20, 2017

  56. *And, just to be clear to everyone, similar in the respect of the domino effect. Cosby was accused of raping. Ailes and O’Reilly were accused of sexual harassment. Those were different situations, but similar in the way when a crime has actually been committed and people have remained silent that they give themselves license to finally speak when they see there are others with similar stories.

    But, Fox News kept covering it up until Murdoch’s son stepped in and made a paradigm shift and sacked Ailes. But, then kept covering up O’Reilly until until 50 advertisers pulled their money. But, I suspect it would go down the same way IF this happened at another network.

    But, interestingly enough, I think ILC is right. It turns out that Sherman had an incentive to make Fox News look bad, as he was in negotiations with MSNBC, as I’ve just discovered. Hmmn. I’m going to have to give this more thought.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 9:09 pm - April 20, 2017

  57. My question is, why does anybody still watch television “news”?

    Comment by Juan — April 20, 2017 @ 9:13 pm - April 20, 2017

  58. MSNBC Phil Griffin seems like someone who would be worth investigating for something, considering he perjured himself on a witness stand to protect his own and/or his network’s and/or Ed Schultz’ interests. I don’t quite understand the motivations (though I’d love to understand why), but his lying seemed to be intended to benefit Schultz and/or maybe the network, if that meant paying Michael Queen more money.

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 20, 2017 @ 9:26 pm - April 20, 2017

  59. There is & was no “systematic” abuse at Fox News. There isn’t at any of the news rooms or corporations. They’re not criminal organizations. Any misbehavior? That’s a human failing & a mistake on the part of anyone. There is no evidence that O’Reilly’s behavior was condoned or institutionalized. None, whatsoever. So, the little Libs can cheer all they please. O’Reilly wasn’t irreplaceable. He wasn’t even a real Conservative. He was left of center Right & he’s gone now. Actually, Brian Williams & his indeed institutionalized lying & fabrications was more of a scandal. Because there are money grabbers, every single day, who target men because they’re ripe for the pickings. None of this is ideological or related to political parties. O’Reilly is gone & you can bet the final decision on replacing him will have to be brilliant. There are no sad faces over any of this on the Right. Sorry to burst your bubbles, Libs. You lose, yet again. Cheering over a non-issue is a failure.

    Comment by Hanover — April 20, 2017 @ 9:47 pm - April 20, 2017

  60. Cray Cray: while I’m honored by the mention, just a tiny correction: it’s BASTIAT_Fan…as in Frederic Bastiat. He was a genius; read some of his work. It changed my life. Maybe you’ll gain some insight into how us libertarian/conservative types think.

    Ah, I f*cked up. I’m sorry! Thanks for the head’s up, though. I put him in my “to do” folder for school holiday in July.

    I also forgot to give a shoutout to KCRob. He’s been quite fair and measured whenever he responds to others (including me).

    Comment by CrayCrayPatriot — April 21, 2017 @ 12:31 am - April 21, 2017

  61. The lady, CrayCray, doth protest too much…

    The lady, CrayCray, supports a morally bankrupt woman who condones the rape of women.

    Comment by tnnsne1 — April 21, 2017 @ 7:12 am - April 21, 2017

  62. My question is, why does anybody still watch television “news”?

    Because the airport departure lounges won’t let you change the channel.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2017 @ 9:26 am - April 21, 2017

  63. My query @ #44 has gone unanswered:

    Now just what are you defending, CrayCray?

    There has been a tremendous amount of smoke in this thread, but where is the fire?

    So far, the only definitive statement out of Cray,Cray is his charge of “systematic problem(s) at FoxNews.” Is that what Cray,Cray is defending? That Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly = “systematic problem at FoxNews?”

    Or is this just some sort of babblefest?

    Comment by Heliotrope — April 21, 2017 @ 9:48 am - April 21, 2017

  64. I never understood Whoopi’s “rape rape” comment in the case of a Polanski (and lowered by estimation of her), as he was charged with rape and then in the plea-bargain he plead guilty to “Unlawful Sexual intercourse with a minor,” which, to me, was still rape. Is that what she was referencing?

    That’s the incident. IIRC, Whoopi’s meaning in context was that Polanski was a technical rape, non-traumatic in the sense that the victim had the experience of consenting… as opposed to a “rape rape” that is traumatic because it violates the victim’s firm non-consent with force and/or fear.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 21, 2017 @ 11:59 am - April 21, 2017

  65. Except that the girl Polanski raped was 13 years old (i.e. incapable of giving consent) and furthermore, he had given her drugs and alcohol so she wouldn’t resist.

    I’m thinking Whoopi would have considered that “rape rape” if the perpetrated hadn’t been a venerated liberal director.

    Comment by V the K — April 21, 2017 @ 12:12 pm - April 21, 2017

  66. Yeah. I called Whoopi’s phrase “ill conceived” and was using it a bit ironically (or as a slag on her).

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — April 21, 2017 @ 12:19 pm - April 21, 2017

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.