O'Reilly sued for sexual harassment!!!

O'Reily sickens me. I read part of the documents and I was so repulsed that I literally had to walk away. He makes me sick.

I know people who are registered Republican who haven't made up their mind. Undecided doesn't mean there's no party affiliation.

Wait, I correct myself, he's an Independant, not Libertarian. I apologize, I got it confused.

As far as not allowing a Libertarian candidate on his show, I don't know anything about that. I don't recall him saying they're not allowed. But I have heard him mention them. Maybe he's under the same impression a lot of people are about Libs... that they are all drug supporters. I have heard them referred to as hippies a lot of times, though the ones I know personally are far from that. It's possible he doesn't have them on because they never stand a chance in hell of winning. He had Nader on, but I think that was due to the controversy surrounding some states' refusal to put him on the ballot. And also because of the entertainment value because Nader is nothing if not entertaining.

Like him or not, he's innocent until proven guilty.

Originally posted by deeprivergal
O'Reily sickens me. I read part of the documents and I was so repulsed that I literally had to walk away. He makes me sick.

Ii could'nt read them either but we still do not know if she said anything. For all we know, yeah maybe they were both having consentual phone sex, and she played him to get money. Maybe its al BS. We won't know anything until the damn tapes are played live, unedited.

A Muslim-American, Dr. Imad-ad Dean Ahmad, was invited to appear on Bill O'Reilly's TV show tonight to take "the anti-Bush stance" against a Muslim-American supporter of Bush. A few hours ago, Dr. Ahmad publicly stated, "I was actually in the car being driven to the show when his deputy called me and informed me that although they would identify me as a Muslim supporter of [Michael] Badnarik [the Libertarian presidential candidate], that I was not allowed to mention Michael's name on the show! I declined to accept those terms and they had the driver bring me back."

This is the third time since June (or July, I can't remember) that O'Reilly's "no spin zone" show has done something like this to either Badnarik or a supporter. The specifics:
badnarik.org...
badnarik.org...
O'Reilly seems to be free with mentioning Ralph Nader's name quite often on his show, but he seems to be terrified to mention either Badnarik's name or the Libertarian Party on his show.

"At the studio they pressed real hard and he admitted that he planned to vote for Badnarik. When he saw the panic in their eyes he realized that despite their �fair and balanced� claims, they were Bush supporters."

It's easy to understand really. O'Reilly works for Fox, and Fox works for Bush. Bush wont' allow the truth to get out so Fox won't allow Badarik to tell the people the truth. Simple as that.

Yeah, that's because O'Reilly knows that he's a bought-off and paid-for newsfaker. Hence, can't have something approaching reality on his show.

Your examples concerning Badnarik don't even begin to touch on O'Reilly's plastic fakeness. I recall when O'Reilly went psycho on a 9/11 victim's family-member, Jeremy Glick, and threatened to beat Glick up because Glick didn't buy into the U.S. government's 9/11 fairy tale. For more on O'Reilly's threat of physical violence, see:

"The O'Reilly Factor," Ben McGrath, The New Yorker, September 1, 2003 Issue:

newyorker.com...

For the transcript of the interview before the threat was made off-camera in the studio, see:

Bill O'Reilly vs Jeremy Glick (The Transcript):

www.oreilly-sucks.com...

And recently O'Reilly chickened out on a challenge to debate people on the abuses of the Patriot Act. For more on that, see:

"O'Reilly chickens out of his Patriot Act challenge--The 'No Spin Zone' now spinning out of control," PRWEB, July 24, 2004:

www.prweb.com...

Originally posted by Mynaeris
Strange nobody is giving O'Reilly the benefit of the doubt?

Everybody felt sorry for New Jersey's Mc�Greevey when he came out to prevent the guy from blackmailing him. I must say personally I felt sorry for his wife not only did he cheat on her, but he also paraded her onto the stage like a show dog to dsiplay her support for his lifestyle choices.

And everybody wanted Dan Rather to be right about his manufactured evidence... now CBS in their vast honesty are going to investigate the issue after the election. Just in case Kerry wins and they won't really have to deal with the fall out.

I guess its a democrat thing.

[edit on 13-10-2004 by Mynaeris]

Know, its a moral windbag, blowhard thing. Rush and Bill don't deserve the benefit of the doubt because they never give it to anyone else. And I didn't see Republicans giving Clinton the benefit of the doubt either, so its a bi-partisan thing, not just Democrat. If the allegations are false then fine, but whether its proved to be consentual or not, he's still going to have to exlain the taped conversations of him being a moral degenerate. If your going to put yourself in the position that Bill has in the media you should know better or at least be incredibly careful.

He screwed up, not anyone else. I wonder how long it will take for the tapes to get out on the net?

Well if the girl does win the civil suit, I believe we will see a huge dip in Oreilys rating, which will get him cancelled or most likely he'll resign if he loses the civil suit. I personally hope he gets whats coming to him, but he has a lot of $$$$$$$, so I see some expensive lawyers coming which they will distort that facts, and we will see what happens then.

If anything he had an affair, a brief fling. Show me a case where the accuser/prosecution wants the defence to be quite. She wants 60 million from O'Reilly out of court, and O'Reilly should be the one who is offering out of court not her. She just wants money. O'Reilly wants to tapes to be played publicly, the prosecution does'nt.

O'Reilly is innocent until proven guilty.

He's a bum, what do you expect?

Even if he had an affair, that's in direct contradiction to the fact he sells himself as a moral stalwart. That fact makes him a hypocrite, and everyone hates a hypocrite. While not being as bad for his career as being guilty of this lewd harrassment, it will still give him a hell of a black-eye.

Althought it'll save him a bunch of money!

I read quite a few pages of the Smoking-gun document..
But not all of it...Is there anything other than the defendant claiming she was forced into "PHONE SEX"?

How is one forced into phone sex?

Originally posted by PistolPete
Even if he had an affair, that's in direct contradiction to the fact he sells himself as a moral stalwart. That fact makes him a hypocrite, and everyone hates a hypocrite. While not being as bad for his career as being guilty of this lewd harrassment, it will still give him a hell of a black-eye.

Good point, but Jimmy Swaggart got caught doing something quite similar (similar being a "moral" person cheating) and their are still people that follow that waste of space. Actually, now that I think about it O'Reilly and Swaggart are quite alike in many ways...huh...never realized that before

O'Reilly's fake news is what is tearing this country apart, and his threats of physical violence are completely WRONG. I am not a tempermental person who believes in physical violence, but if O'Reilly ever challenged me, I would gladly take him up on that offer

Hypocracy and Egoism have replaced any bit of sense that people once had...sad, very sad indeed!

And this BOZZO made jokes about Bill And Monica, now...how does it feel to be on the other end of the Gun?

oh man! I want this trial on TV, just imagine this jerk trying to shut up the judge because he does not like what he is hearing?

WHERE IS PAY PER VIEW WHEN WE REALLY NEED IT?

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by Amuk

Who would have thought Oreilly liked women?

One of these days O'Reilly's gonna go down in flames. A-holes like him always f*** themselves up. They can't help it.

Maybe he can call Rush to get some help and encouragement.

Text Bill O'Reilly a pervert? I'm shocked.

Yeah...right

I guess that old saying of "what goes around; comes around" is, oh, sooo true.

And when it comes around, baby...WATCH OUT It boom-a-rangs thicker than pig mud with vomit.

Splat

Originally posted by Jazzerman
Good point, but Jimmy Swaggart got caught doing something quite similar (similar being a "moral" person cheating) and their are still people that follow that waste of space. Actually, now that I think about it O'Reilly and Swaggart are quite alike in many ways...huh...never realized that before

True, like Swaggart, O'Reilly has a loyal fan base that probably in light of 100% irrefutable evidence would still maintain his innocence. But the people on the fence might be swayed. Possibly enough viewers to knock him out of his vaunted "highest rated cable news program" label.

That would hurt his ego.

deleted double post

[edit on 15-10-2004 by Amuk]

deleted triple post

[edit on 15-10-2004 by Amuk]