Skip to comments.What's hate got to do with it? (O'Reilly: "I spend [big] money protecting myself against evil.")
Posted on 10/18/2005 2:09:30 PM PDT by churchillbuff
...Gauging the animus against O'Reilly has always been a rough art, but by his own estimation "it's gotten worse. Now it's so bad that I spend an enormous amount of money protecting myself against evil."...
the embattled life of O'Reilly has become an increasingly strange and scary one.
As O'Reilly puts it, here are the facts: There are death threats. He has to hire bodyguards. He can't check into hotels with his family. People on the street with cell phones are stealth paparazzi, capable of snagging a picture one minute, then posting it on the Web the next. He adds that during the past year he's had to "even get more stuff to make it more difficult for people to get through the wire. Who wants to live like that?"
And as a direct consequence of the lawsuit - which was settled for undisclosed terms and which both parties agreed to never speak of publicly - O'Reilly must have a third person present whenever he conducts a rare interview like this one, or talks to someone on the phone. (Dave Tabacoff, executive producer of "The O'Reilly Factor" is the minder on this early fall day.) "Anyone can accuse me of anything and [then] it's on a Web site." So little wonder that when Bill O'Reilly is asked about his future after his current contract ends a little more than two years from now, he blurts out one word even as the question is asked: "Retirement."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
A blowhard has to blow out sometime....Oreilly is out of gas...oh well.
Yes, please retire.
But lefties want peace, and love and kum-bi-ya, why is he afraid???? Because more people died in the name of the so-called "greater good" than for any other reason.
I have done business with this man and the terms overbearing, pompous and self involved do not begin to describe his abrasive character.
That said, he sure made a pile of money since he joined FOX. I wonder what he earns in total on an annual basis? My understanding is he gets paid off the ratings which determine the cost of advertising on his show. he is the ratings leader by a wide margin so I believe he does quite well.
I believe Billy Graham took similiar precautions because there were so many people eager to bear false witness.
But if he retires don't the terrorists win?
Hey B.O. Had you not been an ignoramus regarding the Swift Boat Vets I'd have cared. You blew it!
O'Reilly makes this stuff up to make himself seem relevant, important and controversial.
He is not, in fact, relevant enough to either the far left or the far right to get anyone to hate him enough to actually hurt him. The most he can do is to irritate people enough to toss off a quick email or snail mail to him... Not enough to actually get off their posteriors to actually do anything to him.
O'Reilly is no more than a Geraldo Riviera without the mustasche and sense of style.
If he retires, who's going to look out for me?????
His blaming the neonazis for the rioting in Toledo was way over the top.
The real question is "Who's looking out for #1?"
watch me - no don't watch me - no I mean watch me - I've changed my mind don't watch me - hey you idiot watch me.
Poor guy even can't go to the back room of a Thai sex club without getting his mind blown. Or talk on the phone without some strange humming noise interfering.</sarc>
Not only is he a pervert and a phony. He's an idiot!
Sounds like he's making his bed for a new, final blow-out of a contract. Maybe after that, he'll retire.
I rather have someone like BOR on the air than not.
I agree. He said, "Public safety trumps free speech". Like you can only speak your mind as long as no one else violently objects. What an idiot.
Maybe if he were an advocate of the Second Amendment, he could carry his own protection! I know for a fact that he is not.
By his standards maybe we should sacrifice an LA cop or two to prison every year. Maybe the police in Benton Harbor Michigan shold stop trying to arrest minorities. If we do those things just maybe the locals won't riot....at least not till they find a different reason.
It's like saying we should negotiate with terrorists.
But, on the bright side, if any state in the union legalizes live public sex acts, you can be sure Bill will be on top of the story.
It is my understanding that his measures weren't THAT draconian --- i.e., wife in hotel room.
I believe it was always had two or more male witnesses present when anywhere near a woman not a member of his family.
But maybe it depended on the time and place.
And to expound a bit --- it was well known that certain groups were hoping to falsely accuse Graham and had actually set out to do things.
Something like a woman claiming an attack on an elevator --- proved false by a security camera tape --- being the trigger for the precautions.
Next on FOx-The Paranoia Factor.
scumbag gotcha sites like Huffington are all about the "ugly shot". Funny thing, this frame by fram parsing until you find an unflattering shot of a public figure cuts both ways. But it's so cheap maybe we should let it remain the exclusive province of lowlife liberalistas.
He could probably use the unconditional loyalty and obedience of a dog now and then. :)
This phony gasbag will NEVER run out of gas. His retirement can't come soon enough. But I really hope nobody hurts him because that would result in more idiots paying attention to him.
"His blaming the neonazis for the rioting in Toledo was way over the top."
Yep, then he promptly has a Black Panther on his program. According to Bill, the first amendment can be shot down with violence and looting. He seemed OK with the notion that it's OK to race-hate whitey on the national mall but it's not cool to piss off black folks in some neighborhood in Toledo.
And I always liked Orielly, I must be an idiot too. He gets a little loud sometimes, but we all should. Where's all this venom come from?
Have some Cheese with that Whine.
Wow, he really said public safety trumps the 1st amendment? Hardly a case of "fire" in a crowded theater, Bill O... this was another case of HECKLERS VETO as was attempted out here in Carlsbad, California at the illegal immigration forum held by Bill Morrow and attended by Gilcret and Tancredo.
He had some credibility a good five years ago, now he's nothing more than a blowhard egomaniacal liar. When he lied to Drudge about what turned out to be completely true, Bill O doing a syndicated radio show opposite Rush, I was done buying into the "I'm for the little guy" shtick.
Pretty ironic when he takes a Nazi style position against some pretty pathetic Nazis.
I can't stand his lefty attitude on the issues. But I do admire his work on Jessica's Law.
It seems to me that this is a man fully wound up with much tension and stress in his life. The company holding his life insurance policy must be investing like crazy in anticipation of paying out, since he looks like a heart attack just about to happen.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my miscellaneous ping list.
Thanks for the ping!
That having been said, I don't always necessarily agree with what O'Reilly does. But if he is truly doing what he thinks is right, then he should shut up.
I enjoy O'Reilly's broadcasts. I don't share the negative opinions about him but I do think he's showing signs of stress lately.
The security precautions are a part of contemporary celebrity, unfortunately. Imagine the randy average troll most on the internet have encountered from time to time and then multiply it by millions on a weekly basis and you can begin to maybe understand what many public figures who make their opinions known experience from the general public.
People start searching for your home address, your children's photos, your home numbers and then showing up, loitering at your door, sitting in your parking areas, following you when you leave, return, and the worst are when you "ignore" them (refuse any interaction, prevent access to your family and private life), become aggressive. There are a lot of those last type, unfortunately.
The public has become far more destructive about public figures. And a high level of security is necessary to maintain your work in the public if you're an entertainer and/or someone who opines for a living (as does O'Reilly).
The alternative is to move to a very private place, have someone else in another location conduct all your business (personal included) and never use your actual identity outside family and employees...along with a number of other measures.
But, the point is here, that I still enjoy O'Reilly's broadcasts but think he needs to deal with a higher degree of stress and perhaps, threat, than he is presently able to process personally. And accept these risks because the world is getting rougher with every passing week.
And, at least the state of California now has the anti-stalking laws, so the worst who harass and threaten can be processed. And are.
I didn't get that from what O'Reilly said about the Toledo issue.
And having that guy on from the Black Panthers was an informative move (and display) because it allows the viewers to evaluate that guy and the movement he says he represents...entirely anarchist, terrorist, opposed to the very country itself, suggesting they're forming their own government and don't recognize "the United States" and it's government as something they are to relate to, respect, be a part of, all of it.
Without seeing and hearing all that that B.P. guy said (as same with the various Farrakhan people who appear lately), it'd be a case of most reasonable people saying that no one would actually be THAT extreme, that they were being misrepresented, etc., while seeing/hearing them provides the opportunity for others to see that, yes, they actually ARE that extreme, are not being misrepresented.
O'Reilly takes positions about things and I don't always agree with him but who does with anyone else? But he makes for interesting broadcasts and guests and he does stand up for most that is honorable and reasonable and right, on average.
Yes, he's showing signs of stress. Best to allow him to do so, as you would yourself under similar circumstances.
I share the mystery, being a viewer who generally values what O'Reilly has to say and his broadcasts, mostly.
I THINK it's because (and I don't agree with O'Reilly on this issue), O'Reilly is continuing to say that the "doesn't blame the illegals...I'd do the same thing if I was in their shoes...I blame the politicians" as to the issue of illegal aliens in the country and continuing to enter illegally.
I THINK O'Reilly makes these statements to deflect criticism because he's big on personal responsibility and yet indulges "illegals" about this by "not blam(ing) them" and saying he'd do the same thing (immigrate illegally, defy immigration laws). It ruins his credibility...
He does defend the MinuteMen and does not speak out in criticism of/about them, but then he takes this grey-area position about personal responsibility where the issue of illegal aliens is concerned.
So, that may be the burr under the saddle of those who are now turning on him. Which I think is too bad because it's an extreme-type rejection of his total worth and contributions.
Bill O'Reilly strikes me as the kind of guy who if you did not recognize him would make sure you knew he was.
I don't have a lot of sympathy for him paying the price of fame that he so avidly sought.
"O'Reilly takes positions about things and I don't always agree with him but who does with anyone else? But he makes for interesting broadcasts and guests and he does stand up for most that is honorable and reasonable and right, on average."
I agree completely. It's just the Toledo thing is one of the things I disagree with him on. The "they should have known better" arguement is lacking, IMO. I belive when people can't exercise their 1st amendment rights for fear of black riots, something is terribly wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.