Alfonzo Rachel - Bible Thumpers Unite: Hear Why So Many Christians Feel Hurt by Bill O'Reilly's Commentary

Bill O'Reilly insulted Christians on Fox News Channel when he referred to them Bible thumpers. While Zo agrees with O'Reilly to a degree, he is upset that O'Reilly adopted a very liberal attitude towards morality. Does defense of gay marriage really require national television hosts to ridicule the faithful? Hear more on the ZoNation.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Kevin McCullough - Why Bill O'Reilly is Wrong About The Bible

For the last two weeks Bill O'Reilly has committed multiple journalistic mis-steps.

As long as he is allowed to define the terms of the narrative of what happened they will not be corrected. His failure to do so is a massive public relations problem and a mis-step in itself.

He owes a significant demo of his viewership an apology. He owes them one quickly so that his previously demonstrable prejudice against people of faith does not cause unintended long term effects.

"The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals,” O’Reilly said on his evening broadcast March 26, 2013. “The argument on the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible.”

The final half of that statement is erroneous. Some would assert--knowingly so. In saying it O'Reilly is either ignorant of the process, or negligent of the facts.

Laura Ingraham attempted to help him see as much on April 2, 2013, but the host ran over his guest and used her as a rhetorical punching bag. He also compounded the original problem.

"I made a very honest point... That if you're going to stand up for heterosexual marriage, and exclude gay marriage, if you're going to do that... You've got to do it outside the Bible. You can't cite the Bible. Because you'll lose if you do," O'Reilly attempted to explain.

When Ingraham very politely attempted to explain that the statement was itself disrespectful, the host went off.

"It's not disrespectful... In their private life they can. We're talking a policy deal here," O'Reilly shouted at Ingraham. "Don't you understand (eyes squinting with a soured look plastered on his face) the difference between private beliefs, and public policy? There was no insult at all to any Christian belief system in that comment. There was no insult!"

But Mr. O'Reilly there was, and you added another insult in the follow up with Ingraham. Here's where you went wrong:

1. In the first statement O'Reilly asserted that the side arguing in favor of leaving marriage defined as it has been for over 5000 years had done nothing but "thump the Bible." The term itself is always used derogatorily and usually in demeaning fashion to describe those who study sacred scripture, adopt its principles for their lives and attempt to be true to its meaning. It should be understood that the group O'Reilly was really describing wasn't any specific religion at all, but rather all people who are devout to the sacred moral law of their religious beliefs--be they Evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Mormon, Buddhist, Muslim, etc. But O'Reilly is aware of the culture war, specifically measured out against Christians and as such he has to be aware of how the term is used to demean pro-family voters specifically.
2. His original statement is entirely inaccurate. In the Supreme Court arguments, and much more thoroughly in the many court cases leading up to it, and from the very earliest of the public debate over whether marriage should be changed and redefined, the pro-family side has always used abundant amounts of historical precedent, documented research, and case law to argue it's side. Perhaps Mr. O'Reilly just plain didn't pay attention, but Senior Counsel Paul Clement arguing on behalf of DOMA before the Supreme Court used specific previous historical precedent and case law to argue--for example--the federal government's right to limit the institution of marriage and the laws governing marriage. Clement rightfully argued that the federal government had banned polygamy, and in some cases expanded marital protections from the civil war era. These and other arguments had literally zero to do with the Bible, or even religious teaching.
3. By asserting that the Bible itself, and the moral code it argues for can not even be "cited" is to arrogantly ignore the will of the people of the nation, who base much of their life on the moral codes contained therein. It is also completely disingenuous. The original basis for most of our basic laws stem from the ten commandments. The original version of any form of recorded law is the Bible, and the founders of the United States sought the God of the Bible (Nature's God) in establishing the most moral system of law our world had ever seen. So to assert--as O'Reilly clearly did--that the Bible can not so much as even be a piece of the discussion ultimately dooms, what is largely an issue that is based on moral behavior, to be decided upon entirely secular or non-moral, amoral, or immoral viewpoints. To refuse even citation from the Bible, is to also arrogantly assume that 5000 years of humanity that observes its moral code from the Bible, was unenlightened and unworthy of a voice in a discussion as important as this.
4. By claiming that the citizens of this nation do not deserve a place in this debate is to misunderstand federalism and the individual's control of government in our representative Republic. But to assert that those citizens may only engage the debate if and only if they disallow the impact of their moral character, moral beliefs, and moral code to contribute to what in essence amounts to a discussion of morality is disrespectful--to most of America. Remember that in all but one state, where voters have been allowed to decide the matter of redefining marriage have the voters ever actually done so. Even in quite leftist states like California, the voters have--in overwhelming numbers--on multiple ballots--rejected the idea of redefining marriage. You also need to understand Mr. O'Reilly that people who live by the Bible, generally tend to allow it's impact to touch all areas of their lives, hence it's almost impossible for one to both believe the Bible privately and it not have an impact on all things in their lives publicly.

The idea of the First Amendment is to protect religious people and practice from coming under assault by the force of the federal government. But no where in our nation's founding, nor courts, has there ever been an idea upheld that said religious people can not participate in the governance of our nation.

Mr. O'Reilly, respectfully, you owe American Bible-believers an apology, but if you wouldn't listen to Limbaugh, Ingraham, or McCullough, at least listen to your instinct to hopefully not permanently injure your prospects with one of the most important demos to your show.

After all Bible-believers also firmly believe in... forgiveness!

Kevin McCullough

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays (7-9am EST) & "Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11pm EST) on 289 stations & Sirius/XM . His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change" is in stores now.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Is Bill O'Reilly becoming Ted Baxter

Bill O'Reilly thinks to highly of himself. Bill talks over people, will not let anyone get a word in edgewise and attacks anyone who does not agree 100% with his viewpoint. This session with Laura Ingraham is NOT an isolated incident. Bill also defends Barack Obama on many issues which are indefensible. This is why I do NOT use Bill O'Reilly videos on this website. RG (WJF)

Background on O'Reilly Losing His Cool:

O’Reilly in a late March show said that gay marriage proponents have successfully defined it as a civil rights issue, which he called a “compelling” argument that social conservatives have yet to counter.

“The other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible,” O'Reilly said.

Rush Limbaugh took umbrage at this. On his own radio show last Wednesday (3/27/13), he took out after O’Reilly, calling him “Ted Baxter," after the pompous anchor from the old Mary Tyler Moore show.

O’Reilly had “marginalized” many religious Fox News viewers with his statement, said Mr. Limbaugh.

“A lot of them do have a very deeply held religious belief about what traditional marriage is,” said Ingraham.

O’Reilly countered that he was not insulting people’s religious belief.

“Why did you use the word ‘thump?’ ” asked Ingraham.

“Because that’s the way you get it across,” said O’Reilly.

Mary Tyler Moore - Shut Up Ted

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Laura Ingraham - Do Morals Really Matter

On the "New York Times" Web page, Tom Edsall, who has spent most of the last 30 years covering politics for the "The Washington Post" and "The New Republic", has some advice for the GOP. He draws upon some recent polling data to argue that, quote, "The Republican Party can afford to marginalize Christian right leaders because Evangelical/social conservatives are not going to vote Democratic.

Thus, Republicans can, as he puts it, concede defeat in the culture war in the hopes of picking up some more socially liberal voters. Mr. Edsall might want to check with Governor Mike Huckabee who knows a thing or two about evangelical voters. Huckabee suggested that evangelicals will, quote, "Take a walk from the GOP if the party ends up supporting gay marriage."

But of course, the question of what sort of culture our children are going to inherit is a lot more important than the results of any one election. The social issues aren't merely a political football to be used by grasping politicians seeking to win power. They really do establish the framework for many aspects of American life from our schools to our churches and of course, to our families. These are very serious matters. They should be taken seriously.

So instead of worrying so much about political tactics, Republicans might want to consider focusing on what they truly believe in. And what type of country they want to have.

The time has come for a serious debate within the GOP over all of the social issues with all sides making the best case for what they think is right. Only then can the GOP reach a new consensus and then maybe move forward in a united effort to reach the rest of America.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

The Laura and Kirsten Show - Fox News Sunday

Laura Ingraham and Kirsten Powers on the Fox News Sunday Panel Plus... discussing the election, the Patraeus scandal, the Tea Party, and pretty much not agreeing on anything.

November 11, 2012

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Fox News Sunday - Barack Obama Regime's Benghazi-Gate

Chris Wallace and the 'Fox News Sunday' panel, Brit Hume, Bob Woodward, Laura Ingraham and Jeff Zeleny, discuss Libya, in the web exclusive Panel Plus.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Laura Ingraham - Bill O'Reilly Boils Down "Obamacare" and "Fast and Furious"

Bill O"Reilly defines in very clear terms EXACTLY what has happened in regards to the SCOTUS ruling on "Obamacare" and the 'contempt of court' vote for Attorney General Eric Holder in the "Fast and Furious" case. Which direction do the American people want to go in the future of our country?

Click Link below to see Democrat Senators up for Re-Election.
Democrat Senators That Should be Defeated in 2012

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Laura Ingraham - The President's Economic Vision

Author/ National Radio Talk Show host, Laura Ingraham filling in for Bill O'Reilly, offers commentary on the President's Economic Vision. A spirited discussion ensues between Michelle Fields -- Daily Caller Reporter, and Steve Murphy -- Democratic Consultant/Former Obama Media Advisor as they weigh in on the vital facts surrounding this hot issue topic.

June 8, 2012

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

BREAKING NEWS on Eric Holder and Fast and Furious

CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson spoke with Laura Ingraham today (10/4/11) about her latest bombshell report on the Obama administration's Operation Fast and Furious scandal. Judging from the White House's reaction to her investigation, it seems officials there know they are in deep, hot water.

 
1:31 - In between the yelling that I received from

Eric Shultz

Justice Department yesterday, the spokeswoman--who would not put anything in writing, I was asking for her explanation so there would be clarity and no confusion later over what had been said, she wouldn't put anything in writing--so we talked on the phone and she said things such as the question Holder answered was different than the one he asked. But he phrased it, he said very explicitly, 'I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.'

6:05 - Laura: So they were literally screaming at you?

Tracy Schmaler

Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. [Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?] Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House."

7:33 - Laura: Do we know the exact number [of guns] that went over to Mexico?
Attkisson: We know more than 2,000 in Fast and Furious and I will soon be reporting on the fact that that is not the only case. 2,000 for that operation according to the agents involved.

8:28 - ...It is sort of a drip, drip. And I'm certainly not the one to make the case for DOJ and White House about what I'm doing wrong. They will tell you that I'm the only reporter--as they told me--that is not reasonable. They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable, I'm the only one who thinks this is a story, and they think I'm unfair and biased by pursuing it.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Rangel and Ingraham Spar in No Spin Zone

New York congressman Charles Rangel and radio host Laura Ingraham go head to head over Rep. West's controversial comments, poverty in black communities, Obama's policies.

"So you have this 21st Century plantation ... where the Democrat party has forever taken the black vote for granted, and you have established certain black leaders who are nothing more than the overseers of that plantation, And now the people on that plantation are upset because they’ve been disregarded, disrespected and their concerns are not cared about...

"So I’m here as the modern day Harriet Tubman to kind of lead people on the Underground Railroad away from that plantation into a sense of sensibility."
Rep. Allen West

Aug 18, 2011

---

Related Post: Are African-Americans Unhappy With Obama?

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Rep. Darrell Issa says Attorney General Eric Holder is dangerously inept

Congressman Darrell Issa ripped into Attorney General Eric Holder on Laura Ingraham's show this morning regarding the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

The Barack Obama Administration is 'Stone Walling' Rep. Darrell Issa and the investigation. Example of subpoenaed 'redacted' documents below.

Sep 12, 2011

---

Related Post: Tribute to Brian Perry
Related Post: U.S. Government Running Guns To The Mexican Drug Cartels
Related Post: Fast and Furious - Your American Tax Dollars at Work
Related Post: Operation Fast and Furious - Holder - MS 13

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Laura Ingraham Show - Allen West slams tea party "schizophrenia"

Congressman Allen West (FL-22) wrote a letter to the American people today explaining his vote in favor of the Budget Control Act.

Excerpts from the letter:

"The Budget Control Act is far from perfect but the hard reality is that fiscal conservatives control only one-half of one-third of our government. This bill will make sure the President does not receive a blank check to continue his spending binge and the old ways of Washington, DC - blindly increasing the debt limit without spending cuts- are over. This vote is historic- it’s the first time we are raising the debt ceiling with cuts greater than the increase.

I learned when I was a solider at Fort Irwin National Training Center that when Officers waste too much time trying to come up with the perfect plan, they fall short because they are too inflexible or divided to see the path to victory. However, if you can come up with a 70-75 percent plan and execute it well, then you can win- and that’s what we have in the Budget Control Act.

The Budget Control Act is not perfect, but it is the 70 percent plan that my colleagues and I can execute to 100 percent.

It is now time for the focus to be on the United States Senate to produce a plan to take this country forward.

My fellow Americans, I ask you: If I had voted “No” on the Budget Control Act, who would I have been voting for?"

Representative Allen West

---

Related Post: Paul Ryan - Explains Cut Cap and Balance
Related Post: Jeannie DeAngelis - Allen West Nips Back

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Laura Ingrahm - Interview With Speaker John Boehner

John Boehner revealed how being part of the Debt Ceiling negotiations was like working with “two groups of people from two different planets, who barely understand each other.”

10:35 PM EST July 22, 2011

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Laura Ingraham - 32nd anniv of Jimmy Carter's "malaise" speech - Obama remix

The man who was supposed to bring hope and change competes for the title of worst modern president.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Laura Ingraham - Interviews Harry Alford - A Must Hear

Laura Ingraham is the most listened-to woman in political talk radio in the United States. "The Laura Ingraham Show" is heard on hundreds of stations nationwide and has been addicting legions of listeners since its launch in 2001. Always smart and entertaining, Laura is a regular Fox News contributor and the principal substitute host on The O'Reilly Factor. She is the #1 New York Times bestselling author of four books--The Hillary Trap, Shut Up & Sing, Power to the People, and new smash hit The Obama Diaries, released July 2010. A former litigator and Supreme Court law clerk, Laura is a graduate of University of Virginia School of law and Dartmouth College. She is also an avid supporter of our troops and a variety of military organizations. Laura lives in the Washington, D.C. area with her two children.

Harry Alford, president and CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, blasted President Obama's anti-business administration in an explosive interview. 

Alford, a 2008 Obama supporter, labeled the administration "Marxist" and "fanatical." "They might as well put on the brown shirts and swastikas," he said.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---