Skip to comments.Bill O'Reilly Advocates Gun Confiscation in Interview with Stewart Rhodes‏
Posted on 02/20/2010 5:19:50 AM PST by IbJensen
Bill O'Reilly Advocates Gun Confiscation in Interview with Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes
Last night Feb 18th, Stewart Rhodes appeared on Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly show The Factor in response to the previous nights appearence of the SPLC's Mark Potok who once again attempting to smear Oath Keepers. both videos are below
Mark Potok on Bill O'Reilly - Wed. February 17th
Stewart Rhodes on Bill O'Reilly - February 18th
After the show with Stewart, The internet lit up with articles and comments all over the place discussing Bill O'Reilly's comments supporting gun confiscation during Hurricane Katrina as well as the Oath Keepers organization in general. One of the most active discussions was over at Sean Hannity's message board.
We also came across the Gateway Pundits which in a short article titled, Bill O'Reilly Supports Gun Confiscation During Weather Emergencies, the author made a great statement saying, "Last I checked, the Second Amendment doesn't mention anything about severe storms." included in the article was a statement made from the Instapundit adding:
That's funny. O'Reilly calls the opposing position "extreme," but such gun confiscation is illegal under federal statute, and as a matter of constitutional law; in fact, the city of New Orleans lost a lawsuit over gun confiscation during Katrina. But then, O'Reilly's no libertarian, to put things mildly. And he's consistently weak on the law, also to put things mildly. Still, he should have been better briefed for this show, as he came across looking like a fool, and making his "extreme" guest look sober and well-informed by comparison.
In addition David Codrea over at the Gun Rights Examiner wrote a great article on the show and commented on Bill O'Reilly's statements. Check it out here.
`He's a gun grabber. Guns scare him unless they're in the hands of a qualified central government storm troooer.
I’ll never understand why people watch this “blowhard”
I’m still trying to figure out what Beck is doing teaming up with this guy.
I think his dream is to work for Obama
That's what I do and it works wonderfully well!
He supports gun bans during the very circumstance we’d need them most. With this logic, we should allow fire extinguishers, but ban their use in a fire.
[The Second Amendment’s] central purpose is to arm We the People so that ordinary citizens can participate in the collective defense of their community and their state. But it does so not through directly protecting a right on the part of states or other collectivities, assertable by them against the federal government, to arm the populace as they see fit. Rather the amendment achieves its central purpose by assuring that the federal government may not disarm individual citizens without some unusually strong justification consistent with the authority of the states to organize their own militias. That assurance in turn is provided through recognizing a right (admittedly of uncertain scope) on the part of individuals to possess and use firearms in the defense of themselves and their homesnot a right to hunt for game, quite clearly, and certainly not a right to employ firearms to commit aggressive acts against other personsa right that directly limits action by Congress or by the Executive Branch and may well, in addition, be among the privileges or immunities of United States citizens protected by § 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment against state or local government action.
(Laurence H. Tribe, 1 American Constitutional Law 902 n.221 [3d ed. 2000]
‘O’Reilly calls the opposing position “extreme,”’
Short version: BOR is an ignorant tool. ;-)
“I think his dream is to work for Obama.”
Matthews can only hump one leg at a time...
I’m not familiar yet with Oath Keepers but if Ted Baxter thinks they’re crazy, the org is worth a looksee. They must be doing something right if Baxter is sceeerd of them.
I saw this.
BOR may be the dumbest rich man alive.
The man has no breadth. Rush called it. He’s Ted Baxter.
Bill O’Reilly is an a**hole! Glenn Beck is quickly following in his footsteps. Is FOX being infiltrated by the far left?
Oathkeepers membership went thru the ceiling after oreilys
comments about gun control and other crappy remarks to the founder of ok’s.
PLEASE JOIN OATHKEEPERS AND BE A TRUE PATRIOT
Has been working on this end since he tried to discredit the Swiftboaters.
O’Traitor is a POS—who watches this ####?
What Rhodes should have said in response, and what anyone should say in response in the future to a gun grabber...
When weapons are confiscated, it’s the law abiding citizens who give them up. The bad guys do not. It’s the bad guys who commit crimes in times such as Katrina, law abiding citizens do not.
Simple, but it always gets left out for some reason...
“Bill OReilly is an a**hole! Glenn Beck is quickly following in his footsteps. Is FOX being infiltrated by the far left?”
You’re right about that...and Beck has either gone nuts, or he’s intentionally reading off Marxist play sheets—while saying just enough to make you think he’s ok—I’ve gotten where I don’t trust his motives. Liked him about a year ago. But when he started saying people should be put in jail for what they believe...(yeah, bring back the Alien and Sedition Acts!), that was my last straw with him and when I realized he was not a Constitutionalist. Don’t know what his game is...
No question. He is an inch deep and a mile wide on the issues.
O’Reilly is a con man, and Beck is his mark.
BOR - slowly inching toward the Dark Side...
Or some bodyguard protecting his butt.
It is *extremely* important to remember that "Fair and Balanced" is NOT the same thing as "objective reporting."
To be "Fair and Balanced" they must at times invent situations that appear to be the exact, balancing alternative on the political right that actually exists on the left.
A trivial example would be B0R talking about the few, isolated examples of "rude and crude" language on FR and equating it to the ever-present filthy expletive fest on DU. That comparison is "Fair and Balanced" but it is nowhere *near* to the objective truth.
Fox, who appears to be backing their convenient definition of "moderates" at this point, is creating more "Fair and Balanced" inventions through reporting that makes Tea Party members appear to be as hateful and violent as left wing, bomb-throwing environmental whackos and the extremist right-wing militias of prior decades. This makes Fox appear "Fair and Balanced." And again, they are nowhere near "objective" and true reporting.
If Fox were to report objectively then they would have to compare the leftist, f-bomb ridden sites with our site which hosts daily prayers and zots people who behave boorishly or incite personal attacks or violence. Making those comparisons would be "objective" but not "Fair" in Fox's successful and profitable definition of the word.
(long post, sorry)
Finally, Fox doesn't seem to be able to report such things as the actual, accurate numbers, size and scope of the Tea Party movement because it would be at *least* 60%-25% with 15% of the people clueless. That would be truthful but not at all "Fair" according to Fox. Truthful accuracy would make Fox appear biased because the fact is that the Tea Party movement is 9mmense and is moving slowly like an iceberg to reshape the political and media landscape for a long time to come.
Fox fears this simply because they have a profitable business now and don't want it upset. If somebody - like the Tea Party movement - doesn't break it then they won't have to fix it. They are trying to maintain the status quo in a time of great change.
Good luck on that one, Fox.
BOR has one objective in life, taking care of BOR.
I can't stand it when he positions himself as "champion of the little people" populist BS.
give him a break, he’s a “teacher” from long island...
Fire Extinguisher ban. (Ya can’t make this stuff up)!
Ticonderoga Sentinels Always on Guard Protecting America`s Freedom
O'Blowhard came over as the madman, not Rhodes. "Fair and Balanced", he is not.
Yeah, doncha just love it when O’Reilly says, “I’ll give you the last word,” then after the guest gives a killer reply, O’Reilly tries to jump all over the guest’s reply to shoot it down?
‘Last word’, my backside. BOR is a liar, big time.
Oh, and he doesn’t do very much of his own research, but leaves it up to his staff. That’s why he’s such a lightweight, and a blowhard.
Bill O’Reilly and Keith Oberman two of a ind?
Same here. Would rather watch the cat lick herself than watch that blowhard. Same with Hannity.
“I once liked OReilly, but he’s become an Obama sympathizer with a knack for the sensational and salacious.”
Never, never, never, trust a Harvard grad, ever...
I saw a clip of that incident. O’Reilly is every bit as dangerous as “the Brady bunch”—perhaps more so because he casts himself as somewhat of a conservative. No spin zone? Hardly. Lotta-spin-zone is more like it.
Many of us think of Fox as less biased than the rest of the media. Perhaps it is, but there’s a lot of leftie crud in those newscasts, let alone the “opinion” shows.
In his heart of hearts, Beck is O’Reilly-Lite. Beck does interesting investigative segments, and touches on history from time to time, but when it gets down to the nitty-gritty, he’ll call Tea Partiers loons right along with O’Reilly. I used to be a fan, but now I only watch occasionally. I hardly ever watch O’Reilly, except for awhile on Wednesdays to see what Dennis Miller is up to.
Absolutely correct. In fact, in the clip I saw, no one (not even the Oath-Keeper) even bothered to mention that these armed “looters” during Katrina were shooting at people. The citizens who had their guns confiscated were put at extreme risk, while the looters continued to operate as they had been.
I'm not so sure it's not the other way around. Certainly, viewers of both are "marks."
The two hosts, with Beck playing Costello to O'Reilly's Abbot, embarked on a "tour" to stoke their egos and to shill their books, I know what will evolve from this too-close relationship if it continues much longer.....i.e., some of their worst political traits, genes, cells, grey matter, whatever, will be transferred/exchanged/absorbed between them in a process right out of a sci-fi horror movie. Unfortunately, Beck will not be a winner in this unholy alliance, to be sure.
Beck has to knock off the road shows and the regular appearances on the Factor.....and be his own man.....and hopefully blossom in the "way he should go" as the Bible says. He has the talent if he doesn't become O'Reilly Lite......or burns himself out like a super-nova.
O'Reilly is a very toxic and pernicious man with an overlay of seductive leprechaun-ish charm. We should NOT turn him off when he appears on the screen. Every bit of lying, dismissively-arrogant, weasely, Obama-protecting, FR-hating pearls of poison which comes from his lips should be posted here whenever necessary.
He has too wide an audience and too many millions of viewers who fall for his words to tune him out and let him operate unhindered.
I consider it a duty and a "freep" to watch him regularly and to take notes.
(....see my tag line).
Because he frequently brings to light issues and facts that would otherwise remain unknown to the folks who don't surf the 'net constantly. He's a PITA, bending over backwards to be "fair and balanced" to the point of appearing to be neutral on evil in some cases, but the net effect is that more awareness of some issues is raised than would be otherwise.
I agree. BOR is one of the few - sometimes the only one - who questioned Rev. Jesse Jackson’s finances and who has exposed Judges who have given a pass to violent pedophiles. And he has supported Meghan’s Law.
I never read it, but I understand in his very first book he made it clear he wasn’t a 2A supporter. I have never understood why folks think he is “conservative”. I don’t know how in the world one can claim to be “conservative” but not see the need for the 2nd A. Anyone who supports any kind of gun control is a statist, pure and simple. The rights of the state above the rights of the people. IMHO, the state doesn’t have ANY rights. We let it do a few things for us but those aren’t rights.
He even admitted it on-air so it is a fact. He said “President Obama should hire...ME! Your humble correspondent to clean up his PR image or he will be a one term deal”
Couldn’t believe what I was hearing.
That is a good quote. The lefties knew they were in deep trouble when their favorite lefty lawyer, Tribe, gave us that quote. That pretty much took the wind out of their sails.
I suspect that had he taken another tack we might be in a very different place now and at times I wonder if we might not be better off if we were but this is the path he chose. I know he hopes we can wrest control of the gummint from the lying bastards but I am not as optimistic. The question becomes how much deeper do we let the gummint dig the hole before we finally say "enough" and when we say it, just how do we do so? He says with votes. I don't know. Stalin said he didn't care about votes as long as he got to count them. We trust our gummint to do the counting. Is there anything else our gummint has proven to be trustworthy about?