TheAgitator.com
O’Reilly Gets Ambushed
Sunday, December 11th, 2011Bill O’Reilly has a long history of sending his producers out with cameras to conduct surprise interviews on people Bill O’Reilly doesn’t like (including one producer who staked out a reporter in front of her home).
So what happens when someone ambushes Bill O’Reilly with a camera? Looks like O’Reilly smacks the guy with his umbrella, then asks the cops to arrest him.
Wait a minute… are you saying that Bill is a hypocrite? I find that difficult to believe.
Him and Michael Moore…two hypocrites.
O’Reilly is a member of the media ELITE – he is not a peasant, like the guy asking the questions. All peasants must learn to respect and adore the media ELITE, and all other RULING ELITES.
Bill O’Reilly and Michael Moore…now there’s a cage match I’d like to see. “Two men enter! One man leaves!”
How does anyone buy his “Who’s looking out for you crap.” Everything about him sucks, including apparently his wife and some cop.
Just one problem with that scene, Windy – one of them would still be around to plague us.
I love this kind of thing. You know who is excellent at this is James O’Keefe. He likes to use photography to embarrass left wingers. Many liberals hate O’Keefe, but he’s done a lot of good.
Many liberals hate O’Keefe, but he’s done a lot of good.
I’m not a liberal, and I don’t hate O’Keefe. I do think he’s a clown.
For example, it’s hard to conceive of what noble public policy goal was he hoping to achieve by luring a young female reporter onto a houseboat filled with sex toys.
leaves!”
I’d put my money on O’Reilly, if only because he’s not quite as flabby as Moore.
Operation Mockingbird.
Poor whittle O’Reilly he doesnt like it when the surfs ask him questions
You mean one of them gets to leave the cage? Damn.
Bill O’Reilly and Michael Moore…now there’s a cage match I’d like to see. “Two men enter! One man leaves!”
Two men enter. That’s it. Nobody gets out alive.
We need to propagate the meme far and wide: if you’re ambushed by Jesse Watters, just repeat “loofah” over and over as long as the camera’s running. Great if it happens every single time. Even better if third parties catch it on cell phone camera and create viral YouTube videos of Watters (and O’Reilly) getting punk’d.
Bill will be on air screaming about how it’s a conspiracy by the “far Left” to slander him — until Roger Ailes tells him to Shut The Fuck Up, as he had to do when Fox News was trying to quietly settle the Turkel case. (Come to think of it, that’s sort of the way Steve Schmidt had to deal with Sarah Palin.)
Man, O’Reilly could have really cleaned up on Black Friday with those umbrella skills, he might’ve even been quick enough to take on the pepper spray lady: http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2011/11/29/black-friday-walmart-pepper-spray-battery-jail/
Bill O’Reilly is a simple bully. Bullies can’t handle it when someone pushes back. I like the idea of repeating “loofah” when his minions ambush people. Should add “Hey, aren’t you the guys from Inside Edition?” in there too.
So, O’Reilly is embarrassed to be caught attending Newt’s fundraiser?
-jcr
@8 Mr. Balko – I read this site often and you speak well of many unconventional citizen type journalists that do some crazy things. The guys in Miami that photograph trains and the gentlemen that drive around in the RV that got arrested in Mississippi are 2 that come to mind but there have been many others. Mr. O’Keefe and his camera come around and all of a sudden your against filming public officials. I worry it’s your political leanings and associations coming to the surface without your realizing it. ACCORN and NPR were big fish caught by a small boat.
Yup. And the girl says “HELP! RAPE!” and all of a sudden you’re against pre-marital sex.
Tim P., this type of insane anti-logic doesn’t even remotely trip people up here. Step it up.
I’ll tell you what Boyd, I think it’s very possible O’Keefe was trying to sting a liberal reporter into looking stupid. However, I think what you and Mr. Balko are trying to say is that O’Keefe was planning on raping or sexual assaulting this reporter. Is that what you’re trying to say, that you think Mr. O’Keefe had a plan to commit a sex crime against the reporter from CNN? Are you or Mr. Balko saying you are aware of a plan by James O’Keefe to rape a reporter from CNN?
Basically what Tim P is saying is that citizen journalism is equivalent to shooting footage and then editing it to support a specific partisan agenda. If the mainstream media were trying to slander citizen journalists, they couldn’t do a better job than branding O’Keefe the pinnacle of citizen journalism.
Does he really tell the cop the guy hit him? Does he pursue it? The reporter does have evidence of b.o. assaulting him and should use it.
Just stop it, Tim. You’re not even making sense. Nobody even suggested that. What is true, however, is that O’Keeffe is a complete moron for doing that.
Tim P:
O’Keefe would likely be a convicted felon if his sidekick in the attempt to wiretap a senators office wasn’t the son of the US Attorney for the Eastern District of LA. The guy is a dishonest hack. Your support of him isn’t surprising though. I have yet to see you make a comment that wasn’t cringe inducing, with #19 being a perfect example. Like Boyd said. Step it up or find another place to troll.
@23 O’Keefe is not a felon because he committed no felony.
@22 Boyd mentions rape in his comments, and Balko talks about hidden sex
toys on a boat.
O’Keefe is hated here because of who he goes after, not because of his methods.
It’s interesting, George Will has a piece about the ramifications of Ron Paul running on a third party ticket. Will thinks Ron Paul would draw more from the Republican nominee and possibly get up to 7%. I would say he could get 5 or 6% but really drawing more support from Obama than from say Rick Perry who I think will be the nominee. I would use this site as an example of my reasoning as there is no way anyone here would vote for any Republican other than Ron Paul. I’m not knocking it, it’s just my informed opinion that for people who think marijuana legalization is a very important issue Ron Paul would be the choice. In 2008 I can’t imagine someone militantly for the legalization of marijuana having voted for McCain. If this site is any bell weather, “left libertarians” cough cough, hate all Republicans, and voted for Obama under the false belief he would legalize dope.
Tim P. – I will go out on a limb here and guess that very few people who visit this site would vote for Obama, even if he would disengage on the “war on drugs,” which he has proven he will not.
Opposition to the drug war is a pretty universal libertarian position and most libertarians consider it a serious issue (if not out of sympathy for harmless drug users, then out of grave concern for the general police statism that is fostered by prohibition). It’s really got nothing to do with “left libertarians”. And from a “left libertarian” viewpoint, Ron Paul is to the “left” of Obama on almost everything that matters (including economic issues), except maybe abortion and immigration, on which he is, functionally, exactly where Obama is. The Reasonoids (note: not left-libertarians) who did vote for Obama in 2008 did so, for the most part, to punish the Republicans, or because they thought (rightly or wrongly) that McCain would be worse on at least civil liberties issues.
Any libertarian who has lived through both a Democrat-run and Republican-run regime has no excuse for voting for either on “lesser of two evils” grounds. Leaving aside the moral issues of voting (to say nothing of doing so for the lesser of two evils), and the sheer mathematical insignificance of a given individual vote, the outcome just doesn’t really matter. Whoever gets elected, it’s the Viral Center that really wins.
Point being, maybe some libertarians, somewhere, did vote for Obama because they thought he’d end, or at least de-escalate, the drug war. Libertarians aren’t really any smarter than anyone else (they think they are; everyone thinks that about their own group), so of course that’s quite possible. But no prominent or vocal libertarians that I’m aware of who did vote for Obama thought anything of the sort.
#27,
There are even a number of conservative reasons to oppose the war on drugs as well. I am more of a conservative than a libertarian, but am generally in favor of total drug legalization for adults. I think the biggest problem with selling the undecided on drug legalization is that libertarians haven’t faced up to the fact that it must be a phased withdrawal that is designed to appear “sensible” and “moderate” in the early stages, not some radical throw-everything-out-all-at-once that will be guaranteed to give those who are hardcore statists a terribly simple case for blasting legalization out of the water.
What I’ve found works better with conservative-leaning people is pitching legalization coupled with an increase in legal security for life, limb and property against drug users. Legalization + a general increase in self-defense protections go well together for showing a concrete plan to mitigate many of the harmful side effects of legalization.
Of course, medical expenses are an issue, but our current health care regime is headed off a cliff with a Saturn 5 strapped to its roof already, so worst case scenario, that’s like ramping up the fuel intake…
Maybe he thought he was fighting the War on Christmas™. :)
Can you name some conservative non-libertarian reasons we should legalize drugs? I’m not saying we can’t share common ground, but all the “conservative” arguments I can think of come straight out of libertarian philosophy.
And Jesus turned the grass below their feet into potweed and spake “Let’s all watch Aqua Teen Hunger Force.”
When I join the “bribe my opponents” movement, I’ll let you know. Not that I oppose more self-defense, but “give me mine so you get yours” is exactly how we got such bad laws to begin with. Attaching baggage to a good idea can only make that idea less palatable with those who oppose it. It’s also how we end up with shitty laws.
Tim P., I was not aware of any such plan…which is just how rapists operate. They never tell their raping plans to anyone. This doesn’t make O’Keefe look good.
I rest my case.
Just pointing out:
“oppose the war on drugs” =/= “legalize drugs”
Tim P -
Why are you here? Just to troll?
Fair enough. Can you name some conservative non-libertarian reasons we should end the war on drugs?
Maybe we can spend that wasted money on overseas glory?
There’s got to be some medical help for Bill O’Reilly. For fuck’s sake, he’s been on his period for what – 20 years now?
Omar–
I can think of government spending (if you’re serious about cutting spending, look at state and federal spending on drug enforcement, prisons, and court expenses), Second Amendment rights (it’s now coming out that the ATF’s gunrunning operations– intended to build cases against drug cartels– were being considered for use as evidence that we need stricter gun control), and national security (after all, drug money supports terror, don’t you know!).
Admittedly, these have a bit of libertarian flavor to them, but they ARE in keeping with the “homeland security, guns, and lower taxes” philosophy that most Republican candidates at least CLAIM to hold.
JimBob,
I agree with your post. I’m sure there are many conservatives who are opposed to the drug war for the reasons above. In fact, I came to libertarianism from the right side of things and my opinions about the drug war changed with the reasoning you described. But…
I helped a candidate in GA run for office as a Libertarian and we tried to pitch the drug legalization thing to a group of conservatives in the same manner. They didn’t buy it in the least little bit. Basically, we challenged a world view and they thought it was silly and an unrealistic way to see things.
For them, the drug war was completely unrelated to or weakly related to gun control, gov’t spedning, terrorism, etc.
How about a nice, conservative argument from federalism: drug enforcement within a state is a matter for state laws and state police. States that legalize marijuana for medical purposes, or even for general use, should have that decision respected by the feds, who should continue to enforce whatever laws we have against interstate drug trafficking, but should have nothing at all to do with medical marijuana clinics or local drug dealers in LA.
Another conservative-friendly argument involves cost and benefits of various aspects of the drug war. Policies that crack down on doctors for prescribing pain medicine make a tradeoff: we get less prescription drug abuse, in eschange for having more people in chronic, unbearable pain. It is entirely consistent with conservative principles to say that this is a lousy tradeoff’ and that we’d be better off enforcing drug laws on people actually caught selling their pills, rather than on doctors acting within any kind of medical gray area.
“I think the biggest problem with selling the undecided on drug legalization is that libertarians haven’t faced up to the fact that it must be a phased withdrawal that is designed to appear “sensible” and “moderate” in the early stages, not some radical throw-everything-out-all-at-once that will be guaranteed to give those who are hardcore statists a terribly simple case for blasting legalization out of the water.”
Actual real world reform will almost always be piecemeal and gradual, yes, sure, but you’ll never get anywhere without being a crazy radical. Or at least, without having some crazy radicals around. If you win, the moderates will spring up when and where they matter. If you lose, you won’t have been able to do better by pandering anyway; if the radical core waters down its ideas and tries to be “sensible”, you don’t get any change at all. They just get absorbed into the Viral Center.
It never ceases to amaze me that you can’t just say “Remember Prohibition, and how awful it was, and how it pretty much created organized crime?” and win people over to legalization. Criminalizing something that’s part of human nature makes it MORE dangerous in a black market, not less. I just… GAH. And I’m from the lefty side of things. (See also: criminalizing abortion.)
I love the attempt by troll to defend O’Keefe’s sacred honor. . . Perhaps said troll (or perhaps just unusually misinformed) is not aware that everything O’Keefe “snared” people with was 100% deceptive editing. He did not go into a planned parenthood clinic dressed as a pimp. He did not discover widespread voter fraud. He did, however, get caught attempting to wiretap a state senator’s phone, for which he really should be in jail. He’s nothing but a partisan hack, but that doesn’t mean you’ll stop trying to compare him to Woodward and Bernstein.
#28
I could care less what conservative statist like Will says. We get it, conservatives dont like Paul, they can support whichever jackboot red band thug they choose.
Regarding O’Keefe to me he’s just another conservative rabblerouser trying to make a name for himself. One day he is going to mess with the wrong guy and he’s going to pay for it. As MassHole points out, if it wasn’t for his minion being related to someone in power he would be in a cage. If he was a liberal or a libertarian, cons would be screaming for him to be locked away under their favorite phrase “law and order”.
I stoped trying to convince thugservatives about the wasteful drug war, it became pointless after awhile. They dont like civil liberties (it coddles criminals according to them) and they dont want to put one of their favorite voting blocs (cops aka government street thugs) out of work.
JOR and Matt T, very thoughtful responses to my posts and some excellent points on the political spectrum as it relates to libertarians. Hated to get off the subject of O’Reilly that far, as from what I can see he looks petty in this clip, and his going to the cop for help borders on false reporting. BUT! So what? In the long run this is nothing and if BOR is wrong on an issue, say drug legalization then fight him on the issue, don’t try to “shut him down”, that’s not libertarian. Not long ago Mr. Balko wrote a great piece about how cops don’t like to investigate property crimes because there is no money in it. That was right on and you could probably write a book on the subject. However we also have far too often at this site the childish “Palin is evil, Perry is gay, Bush is a war-criminal” Kathy Griffin, Alec Badwin, Andrew Sullivan talking points echoed from left wing sites. It ruins the good things that happen here.
@43 O’Keefe doing what he is doing is as healthy to our corrupt system as the kid that ambushed BOR. You’re being childish and Kosish if you can’t see that. There was a whole lot of apologizing and backtracking from NPR and ACCORN for just some editing tricks. The general consensus among fair minded people is that O’Keefe made these 2 bastions of liberalism look like shit.
Tim P:
As far as O’Keefe’s personal traits, I’m indifferent. There’s probably an advantage to being a bit of an asshole when you’re a rabble rouser or ideologue. But as a source of information, I don’t trust anything from O’Keefe, because the videos he put out from the ACORN sting were edited in such a way as to completely change what happened. I assume anything else he puts out will be similarly edited or spun, and so I don’t think I can rely on him to tell me anything useful about the world. I am interested in reading honest journalism even from people who disagree with me, even from people whose ideas I think are repugnant. But I’m not interested in propaganda–whether from O’Keefe or from Moore or from anyone else.
Tim P, you really are an idiot if you think that deceptively editing videos to make people look bad is the same as just taking a video. It’s like comparing chocolate cake to dogshit. The video starts with all of its ingredients, and, when unedited, gives the viewer the full context and shows what actually happened. However, once it’s processed and all of the goodness (read: parts that don’t make people look bad) has been removed, the crap that you end up with is O’Keefe’s video. If my internet was working properly I’d link you to the Jon Stewart segment that makes a far better comparison, but it’s not, and I doubt you’d watch it anyway. Also, nice weasel words- got any actual factual support for that “consensus,” or did you just make it up? My money’s on the latter.
And there’s Tim P. with the concern troll along with the “we disagree with Team Red, therefore we agree with Team Blue” fallacy.
Harry Browne was on Hannity’s show a few years back.
Hannity, “Why do you support drug legalization?”
Browne, “On Constitutional grounds. If a Constitutional Amendment was required for Prohibition of alcohol, it should be required to prohibit drugs.”
Hannity, “How many joints did YOU smoke today.”
This is typical of the conservatives when it comes to the War on Drugs. I’ve heard Limbaugh offer the same “argument.”
And Tim P, Bush IS a war criminal. Sorry if that seems childish to you, but I guess it’s not impossible that “childish” things might also be factually accurate.
The reason that ACORN and NPR did a lot of backtracking is because, for all the shit they get from libertoids for supporting unions and teachers and stuff, professional leftist advocacy and community groups are like the opposite of police unions. They have almost no institutional coherence or loyalty culture and will stab their own in the back on the slightest whiff of a whiff of a whiff of scandal. (Not as a matter of conscience, mind you).
Acorn and NPR did a lot more than backtracking, they swam for there funding lives. It was a huge scandal at the time. @51 Nick you make my point. I watched a great doc on Gitmo just last week, that was made about the time Obama came into office. It was clearly slanted to the left but it was good nonetheless.
#44- Cynic in New York
I wanted to pass along a website to you but couldn’t find contact information on your website, and I couldn’t leave a message because I received an error when I tried.
This is a website listing the salaries of NY employees.
http://seethroughny.net/
[...] [Bill] O’Reilly Gets Ambushed, just like he does to other people. One definition of a bully might be someone who can’t [...]