Bill O'Reilly comment today

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JWarren

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
4,632
Location
MS and LA
I was on my way home from work today and I heard something VERY interesting on Bill O'Reilly's show. Before I tell it, let me give a bit of background.

I fluxuate in my level of agreeing or disagreeing with the man, but I do tend to listen to him on the way home from work. A couple years ago, I decided I'd always be at odds with him due to one comment he made on the air:

"I don't think anyone ought to be able to have an AK-47."

Today, I heard something interesting. Bill O'Reilly was commenting on Romey (spelling?)-- the MA gov's flip-flop on some issues like Abortion. While he made it clear he was not endorsing the man, he pointed out that it isn't uncommon for someone to change an opinion on things after time passes.

Then he used himself as an example: (pretty accurately paraphrased)

I used to be a strong supporter of gun control. I used to believe that no one really needs a gun. Then Katrina hit and I saw what was going on down there. Now I am against gun control. I think everyone ought to have a gun in the house now. If I were down there during Katrina I'd want a bazooka to protect my family.
Click to expand...


This is huge, guys. Bill hasn't been a friend to us in terms of 2A, and I'll accept his change of opinion. I will be listening VERY carefully to see if he sticks to this opinion. He has a huge audience-- and most are the ones we need as a part of our foundation.


John
 
Why do people always bring up bazookas? Antis always get all irrational and say "nobody needs a bazooka". Now O Reilly says he would have used a bazooka. Why all the exageration? What's with all this bazooka stuff all the time?
 
I may be over-optimistic, but I see some mileage here.

Whenever I hear a liberal complain about the Patriot Act or something like that, I simply point out, "The Government is simply driving through the hole you left in the Bill of Rights when you ripped out the 2nd Amendment."

Maybe we can all agree the Bill of Rights is sacred, and if we don't like part of it, well, we'll just have to live with that -- lest parts we do like get trashed.
 
That's funny, and interesting. I don't know if it helps or hurts to have O'Bill on your side, but I guess time will tell. I think it's cool he brings some issues to light, but sometimes it seems a bit personal and inconsistent, I don't want to get into examples, but anyway, it's good any time someone makes that kind of realization public...

Karz
 
I also remember him saying something to the effect that he didn't think ordinary citizens should be allowed to own "assault rifles", and I stopped putting much credence in anything he said at that point in time. I still don't watch his show much, but when I do he sounds so condescending.

In the few times I watch him he often calls guests he doesn't agree with a "nut, idiot, lunatic, etc... because him and most Americans don't agree with the guest". As smart as O'Reilly is, I don't believe he would resort to such personal attacks if he could win the debate in the arena of ideas. That he resorts to such demagoguery just indicates to me that his verbal opponents may well be right.

When he came out against the 2nd Amendment I immediately and correctly identified him as the elitist he is. Now that he sees a "need" for firearms, he wants one. Funny he didn't heed the lesson of the Rodney King riots.

It doesn't sound like much is changed, other than that he now sees how someone might need such a tool.
 
Sometimes it takes an event of the magnitude of a Katrina for people to go "Heyyyy...wait a minute..." :D
 
I agree with Bill on many, but not all issues. I'm glad he came arounf on the 2nd.

Much of the "elitist" criticism levelled against Bill is because he is a very intelligent individual, and so being, he doesn't suffer fools gladly.

BTW, I love the rev. Martin Niemoller quote in your sig line. The whole quote is:

First, they came for the communists, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't stand up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the catholics, and I didn't stand up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by then there was no one left to stand up.
Is there a lesson for us today in what Reverend Niemoller said?
 
Last edited:
Bill O'Reilly does whats best for Bill O'Reilly. If that means supporting the RKBA so be it, but in his heart he is not a true 2nd Ad defender. Its probably just a PR stunt to gain more audience viewers. He is smart enough to know we like it when people mention, and support the RKBA in the media so he believes if he mentions, half heartly that he supports RKBA then we will start watching him. I should point out within the last year he stated that no civilians should be allowed to CCW, or own assault style rifles. I am suprised he believes people should be allowed to one firearms since he is a strict authoritarian with little understanding of people's rights.
 
First, the comment is old.

Second, Bill O' Reilly is the *last* person I'd want *individually* on my "side."

I'm sorry. I know that's not very High Road, but the man's commentary makes me ill.

jm
 
cbsbyte,

It is possible to realize that one is mistaken and have the moral courage to admit it. Especially if one is of considerably above average intelligence.

One of the most bitter anti-gunners in the country a few years ago was Ken Hamblin, "The Black Avenger." An extremely intelligent man and a syndicated radio talk show host and brilliant journalist. He studied the issue, realized he was on the wrong side, and became a very strong pro-gunner.

Perhaps the same thing is happening to O'Reilly.
 
Bill O'Reilly makes his money producing sound bites on subjects he is completely ignorant of. He regularly lies and makes up statistics. He has no integrity.
 
It is possible to realize that one is mistaken and have the moral courage to admit it. Especially if one is of considerably above average intelligence.
Click to expand...

Now he might believe it is ok for peons... civilians to own a registerd firearm for self defence. But only if after going through a registration process similar to that of NYS. Which is no easy feat of accomplishment. He believes in very restricted gun ownership which is granted by the state. He does not actually believe in the 2nd Ad as written by the founding fathers. Yes it is a step better than what he previously believed, but only a small step. I use to watch is up until a year ago, to see what the Authortarian Republicans where up to. It was hard to stomach at times. When the RKBA subject game up he would rediculed people who own more than a few firearms. Calling them nuts and crazies. He called the majority of people on THR nuts. I should add that it is clear O'Reilly is a very intelligent person but he is stuck in his own dogma and will never change to support people's rights.
 
Why do people always bring up bazookas? Antis always get all irrational and say "nobody needs a bazooka". Now O Reilly says he would have used a bazooka. Why all the exageration? What's with all this bazooka stuff all the time?
Click to expand...

Because it's fun to say. BAZOOKA.

Yeah, I honestly don't know what the hell a bazooka is.
 
I fluxuate in my level of agreeing or disagreeing with the man, but I do tend to listen to him on the way home from work. A couple years ago, I decided I'd always be at odds with him due to one comment he made on the air:
Click to expand...

Same here but it seams like a trend lately I think some people have seen the outcome of the Zumbo incident, and now want to appeal to gun owners. Just this week as well Glen Beck has made positive 2A statements.
 
I don't agree with Bill O'Riley on many things, but I do respect him because he speaks his mind, and actually feels something is right or wrong. How many times have we seen people give their opinion and it's simply the party line. They honestly couldn't care less, or haven't given any thought to where they should stand.

I wish we could get more humans into political offices , rather than political machines bred from whatever cesspools career politicians come from.
 
It would be interesting if we could get the radical talk show hosts to do a segment on gun control. O'reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, Reagan, and the others. maybe we should email or call their programmers, and see if we can push them into it?
 
I saw O'Reilly on 60 Minutes this Sunday, and he told Mike Wallace he supports gun control.

:confused:
 
Whenever I hear a liberal complain about the Patriot Act or something like that, I simply point out, "The Government is simply driving through the hole you left in the Bill of Rights when you ripped out the 2nd Amendment."
Click to expand...

awesome
 
I think the talk show hosts avoid talking about gun control because the few times we bring it up, we all call in and it's all they talk about for the rest of the show.

Good to see that O'Reilly can think and change his mind. I suspect his and many folks' comments about "AK-47s" and "Assault Weapons" (including Charlton Heston) assume that they are talking about fully automatic guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
Bill O'Reilly
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
Nekron
N
M
  • Locked
O'Reilly on guns?
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Deanimator
Deanimator
M
  • Locked
Bill O'Reilly's Gettin' a Gun
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
Henry Bowman
H
G
  • Locked
Very Disappointed w/ Bill O'reilly
2 3
Replies
74
Views
3K
George Hill
G
N
  • Locked
Bill O'Reilly Chickens Out
Replies
19
Views
1K
WonderNine
W
Back
Top