Here's the deal, O'Reilly was spot on with his remarks. Muslims did kill us. The women of "The View" and everyone on the left, have no right to seperate Muslims from extremists. None and here's why. They include all Christians in the same group. When a nutty Christian shoots a baby killing doctor, they don't call him a "Christian extremist". No, they blame all forms of Christianity and make the general statement that all Christians share the views of the extremist. Whenever any Christian says anything that they disagree with, all Christians are lumped into the same group. Let's not forget that hypocrosy is the cornerstone of liberal idealogy.
There is one big difference betweeen these two examples. When the brain-sucking baby doctor was sent to have a face-to-face meeting with the devil, Christian groups and Christian leaders all over the United States denounced the act. Muslim groups have not done that with 9/11, any of the previous attacks on us or any of the subsequent ones. Islam is a cultist, terrorist organization that does not resemble any other religion on earth. It is steeped in violence and murder and has been that way since its inception. The Marine fight song begins "From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli". Why is that? It's because Thomas Jefferson sent marines to Tripoli to rescue captured American sailors being held ransom by Muslims. They've been terrorizing the planet for 1400 years. It wasn't Christians who killed Jewish athletes at Munich. Think my views are extreme? Check out the monthly jihad report over at The Religion of Peace.
Christians have done plenty of things in their history. One thing that the different forms of Christianity and it's followers have done that Islam has not is evolve. Remember, Islam denounces creativity and free thinking. It strikes me as funny how many leftists can support a cult that stands in direct opposition to everything that liberals value.
Anyway, back to my "Bill O'Reilly is a fucking pussy would hide behind his wife if a burglar broke into the house" rant.
I quit watching O'Reilly years ago. He was going to investigate Dan Rather for Rather's attempt at using forged documents to take down a sitting president. An attempt that was exposed in minutes by the blogosphere and that cost Rather his job but nothing else. O'Reilly came to Rather's defense saying that there was no way he believed it to be intentional and that he was going to do his own investigation. Even though other people at CBS lost their jobs before Rather, mostly for saying "We tried to tell him not to do it". O'Reilly wasn't buying it. Rather was a good guy. Shortly after that, O'Reilly was caught up in a sex scandal. The scandal went away with some money and the investigation into Rather never happened.
Why is that do you suppose?
Here's what I think. When the Rather story broke the O'Reilly one was just getting ready to. Bill's not stupid. Instead of nailing Rather to the cross, O'Reilly gives him a free pass and then Bill doesn't bring down the wrath of Rather, Brokaw etc. The O'Reilly story was barely news.
It's odd to me. O'Reilly is the most watched program on the news networks. More people stop to watch him for 30 seconds then Olberman and Maddow see in a week. Wouldn't this have been a prime opportunity to take him down? There was an agreement struck here.
Hey, if you don't like this "off-the-wall where did that come from conspriracy theory with absolutely no basis in facts type of thinking" you are at the wrong place. Remember, you're talking to a guy who wants to see Bigfoot.