Latest Eruction From Bill O'reilly

[Rich]

As if it isn't bad enough he decides to rewrite the history of the Lincoln assassination, the death of Jesus, and World War II to fit his wack job agenda...now he has to reveal to the world the grand conspiracy to silence George Patton.

 

I accidentally pciked it up and leafed through it in Barnes and Noble before I realized what it was...I feel like I need a bath in industrial strength disinfectant now.

 

When did we decide to cede the high ground on everything to these mouth-breathers?

[Guest Jason L]

I'm still trying to figure out exactly who likes Bill O'reilly. Never thought trolls could be that well paid.

[JasonJ]

Christianity is a philosophy not a religion.

 

Alrighty...

[BansheeOne]

I saw that movie.

[Brian Kennedy]

Rich, did you read Harry Yiede's Fighting Patton and if so what did you think of it? I just skimmed it but I guess the thesis was that the Germans didn't exactly think he was a superhero or anything...

[Richard Lindquist]

I wouldn't want to buy a book by O'Reilly and wouldn't buy this one.

 

One thing that always impressed me about Patton (and also about MacArthur) was their ability to get a lot out of imperfect subordinates. Patton always stayed with a general even though he had a rocky first battle (Patton felt a commander had to grow into the job). This is in sharp contrast to Hodges who left a trail of relieved corps and division commanders behind him. While Patton (and MacArthur) often bruised the feelings of their subordinates, they also stayed with them and got results out of people who were out of favor with Eisenhower, Bradley, and Hodges.

[RETAC21]

Just seeing the cover it's very clear that many trees were sacrificed for nothing. Even the ebooks electrons were wasted.

[Marek Tucan]

How the heck does he get so good ratings on amazon?

[Justin]

What is so bad about his books? I have never read any of them and don't plan to. I just see a lot of people complaining about how awful they are but not providing a lot of substance about why.

[Ken Estes]

Excellent comparison, Richard. I suppose he wrote it IOT keep his following within the Whackadoodle Wingnuts, who likely revere P for his supposed wish to continue WWII vs the USSR and who willfully kept Nazis in office in local governments because they supposedly knew how to run things. In real life, Patton often said things to purposely astound and perplex. What he really thought might not even be revealed in his papers.

[Mike Steele]

Ah the TN brain trust has "The Limbaugh Effect" I see. Lots of people "Think" his books are trash, therefore they must be, however they haven't read them so they don't actually know.....

[Ken Estes]

So, we also "are not allowed to criticize." I'm taking Rich's opinion as an informed reaction to the book. And you?

[Richard Lindquist]

So, we also "are not allowed to criticize." I'm taking Rich's opinion as an informed reaction to the book. And you?

Well, leafing through it and reacting aren't quite "fully informed". I do respect Rich's opinion though I could see where others could go along with O'Reilly. I heard the conspiracy theories on Patton's death twenty years before I ever saw O'Reilly on the tube. They have been floating around (that the Commies saw Patton as a threat and wanted to get rid of him).

 

While I am pretty conservative, O'Reilly grates on me and I can't watch him even if I am agreeing with what he is saying.

[Skywalkre]

Ah the TN brain trust has "The Limbaugh Effect" I see. Lots of people "Think" his books are trash, therefore they must be, however they haven't read them so they don't actually know.....

I am shocked to see you're the one post this in here...

 

Do some basic google-fu on his Lincoln book. At best there was basically no editor involved and real shoddy review work done given the misspellings and errors. That's still worthy of criticism since so many out there doing the same don't make these basic mistakes (but don't sell as well because they don't have O'Reilly's name on the cover). At worst there's some real questionable stuff going on in the book with at least one article claiming one incident he discovered is flat out made up that he came across. If I did that in any of the papers I submitted in one of my history classes I would have been looking at a failing grade for it and rightfully so.

[Yama]

Wasn't Patton's accident a low-speed collision where he suffered fatal injuries largely due bad luck? Seems like it would be pretty difficult to build a credible conspiracy theory around that.

[mnm]

No it wasn't, it was something else entirely, the murder conspiration is a smokescreen.

[RETAC21]

No, it was a conspiracy by the automotive industry who didn't want to incorporate safety features in military vehicles. You think it a coincidence that both Patton and Walker died in traffic accidents?

 

"coincidence"

 

Edited September 27, 2014 by RETAC21

[Jeff]

 

While I am pretty conservative, O'Reilly grates on me and I can't watch him even if I am agreeing with what he is saying.

 

 

I've never read any of his books and don't intend to so I can't speak to that but I don't consider BO to be a conservative, he's a populist with little underlying ideology to what he says other than how he happens to feel about an issue on a given day. I remember being very excited to get Fox News so I could see his show. I lasted 10 minutes before I realized he was an arrogant blowhard who perhaps is a canny salesman but is no where near as smart as he thinks he is. Can't stand the guy. Everytime I stop and listen to him, I'm reminded why. Calling him a conservative is an insult to conservatives.

[lucklucky]

Conspiracy thories about Patton exist since he died in the car accident.

[Mike Steele]

 

Ah the TN brain trust has "The Limbaugh Effect" I see. Lots of people "Think" his books are trash, therefore they must be, however they haven't read them so they don't actually know.....

I am shocked to see you're the one post this in here...

 

Do some basic google-fu on his Lincoln book. At best there was basically no editor involved and real shoddy review work done given the misspellings and errors. That's still worthy of criticism since so many out there doing the same don't make these basic mistakes (but don't sell as well because they don't have O'Reilly's name on the cover). At worst there's some real questionable stuff going on in the book with at least one article claiming one incident he discovered is flat out made up that he came across. If I did that in any of the papers I submitted in one of my history classes I would have been looking at a failing grade for it and rightfully so.

 

 

Well I OWN the Lincoln book, And it full of (Gasp) History. The parts about the battles around Appomattox were interesting. And I found it to be a good read, about half fact and half entertainment, so about par for the course for todays market.

[Mike Steele]

So, we also "are not allowed to criticize." I'm taking Rich's opinion as an informed reaction to the book. And you?

Rich's "informed opinion" was based on "I accidentally picked it up and leafed through it in Barnes and Noble before I realized what it was..." Not the stuff of informed opinion, Rich could (and has) done better, so thats understandable. Like I said the "Limbaugh Effect". And you are certainly allowed to criticize, and I am allowed to give it the weight it deserves.

[Mike Steele]

 

 

While I am pretty conservative, O'Reilly grates on me and I can't watch him even if I am agreeing with what he is saying.

 

 

I've never read any of his books and don't intend to so I can't speak to that but I don't consider BO to be a conservative, he's a populist with little underlying ideology to what he says other than how he happens to feel about an issue on a given day. I remember being very excited to get Fox News so I could see his show. I lasted 10 minutes before I realized he was an arrogant blowhard who perhaps is a canny salesman but is no where near as smart as he thinks he is. Can't stand the guy. Everytime I stop and listen to him, I'm reminded why. Calling him a conservative is an insult to conservatives.

 

Agreed Jeff. I watch him so I can see him piss Kirsten Powers off.

[Skywalkre]

 

 

Ah the TN brain trust has "The Limbaugh Effect" I see. Lots of people "Think" his books are trash, therefore they must be, however they haven't read them so they don't actually know.....

I am shocked to see you're the one post this in here...

 

Do some basic google-fu on his Lincoln book. At best there was basically no editor involved and real shoddy review work done given the misspellings and errors. That's still worthy of criticism since so many out there doing the same don't make these basic mistakes (but don't sell as well because they don't have O'Reilly's name on the cover). At worst there's some real questionable stuff going on in the book with at least one article claiming one incident he discovered is flat out made up that he came across. If I did that in any of the papers I submitted in one of my history classes I would have been looking at a failing grade for it and rightfully so.

 

 

Well I OWN the Lincoln book, And it full of (Gasp) History. The parts about the battles around Appomattox were interesting. And I found it to be a good read, about half fact and half entertainment, so about par for the course for todays market.

 

Are you telling me you're knowledgeable enough in the area to know what you're reading has no issues? There's folks who are who bring up some fair criticism of the book. Enjoying something doesn't mean it's good history.

[Mike Steele]

 

 

 

Ah the TN brain trust has "The Limbaugh Effect" I see. Lots of people "Think" his books are trash, therefore they must be, however they haven't read them so they don't actually know.....

I am shocked to see you're the one post this in here...

 

Do some basic google-fu on his Lincoln book. At best there was basically no editor involved and real shoddy review work done given the misspellings and errors. That's still worthy of criticism since so many out there doing the same don't make these basic mistakes (but don't sell as well because they don't have O'Reilly's name on the cover). At worst there's some real questionable stuff going on in the book with at least one article claiming one incident he discovered is flat out made up that he came across. If I did that in any of the papers I submitted in one of my history classes I would have been looking at a failing grade for it and rightfully so.

 

 

Well I OWN the Lincoln book, And it full of (Gasp) History. The parts about the battles around Appomattox were interesting. And I found it to be a good read, about half fact and half entertainment, so about par for the course for todays market.

 

Are you telling me you're knowledgeable enough in the area to know what you're reading has no issues? There's folks who are who bring up some fair criticism of the book. Enjoying something doesn't mean it's good history.

 

Im Knowledgeable enough about the Civil War.

[Guest Jason L]

 

 

While I am pretty conservative, O'Reilly grates on me and I can't watch him even if I am agreeing with what he is saying.

 

 

I've never read any of his books and don't intend to so I can't speak to that but I don't consider BO to be a conservative, he's a populist with little underlying ideology to what he says other than how he happens to feel about an issue on a given day. I remember being very excited to get Fox News so I could see his show. I lasted 10 minutes before I realized he was an arrogant blowhard who perhaps is a canny salesman but is no where near as smart as he thinks he is. Can't stand the guy. Everytime I stop and listen to him, I'm reminded why. Calling him a conservative is an insult to conservatives.

 

 

You forgot to add the part that he generally feels about as petty and horribly spiteful about any given issue as is humanly possible. Otherwise exactly spot on.