Bill O Reilly's "white establishment" comments

Deleted User wrote: »

It's amazing how every time I post anything against the grain I'm replied to with something I didn't say. Obama would have fully nationalised (or state-paying) healthcare) if he could, as would many of his supporters, they're only going to vote one way. Obama would be more in favour of benefits or "entitlements" for poorer people and so on than Romney would.
It's a pretty simple statement of fact that O'Reilly made and it's hilarious seeing people trying to paint it as something else. The old "establishment" of white male voters is no longer what holds the balance of power, I don't see the issue with this statement. This quote:

again is something I can't see any offence in. Expansion of government programmes and entitlements that Democrats want coincide more with what women and minorities want and surprise, surprise, those people are more likely to vote with the candidate whose views and promises coincide with their views and desires.

And the same logic applies to the Republicans, but guess what Bill focuses on. Something tells me he was doing more than just pointing out fact

There is something really satisfying knowing how much this ****head and the likes of Trump are fuming at this election result.

Sneering at Bill O Reilly isn't going to make you any less of an uninteresting uneducated nobody. People like you are the same trash that those "test your iq" spam ads are all over the place about. You all make me sick

That's a figure of speech.

It is his purpose. Fox News is owned/run by cousin of Bush...yeah that Bush. It is a right wing establishment in US. A brainwashing machine. Tune out.

Deleted User wrote: »

So recent immigrants are a majority now?

It's Mr O'Reilly who says that the "white establishment is a minority now" (watch the clip on the link in the OP)

Anyway, I believe that, depending on how one differentiates between "white" and "non white", the number of children born in the US in the latter category has exceeded those born in the former in recent years.

All of which means that in a generation or two there could be a "white" minority in the USA, depending on definition and on whether you think such a distinction is relevant.

Americans LOVE statistics. Just read their sports reports: rushing yardage, pass completion ratio, Runs Batted In, etc etc

Statistics are all very comforting. They are collections of facts and give one the impression that one's arguments are based on solid foundations. But the problem with statistics is teasing out the fine distinction between facts and truth.

Like so what if you identify one family of multiple ethnic ancestry as "white" and another as "latino"? Are there any grounds for predicting how such people will live, work and vote in the future?

None at all.

The strength of America is the way its core values CAN allow people of any faith, colour, gender and outlook to assimilate with the broad mass of the people. There is no guarantee that this will happen; after all the race laws in existence in many states of the southern US at the time of President Obama's birth were almost identical in tone, letter and spirit, if not in target, with Germany's notorious Nuremberg Laws.

But the preamble to the Declaration of Independence which asserts as a "self evident truth" that "all men are created equal" and are "endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights that ...include life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" allowed, nearly 200 years after these words were written, the descendant of a black slave to demand that this "promissory note" which had always been "returned marked 'insufficient funds' "when it had been presented by black people should be honoured at last. (See the full text of Martin Luther King's "I have a Dream" speech).

It should be perfectly possible for immigrants of any ethnicity to buy into the essential values of the American republic. And in time, many of them will become every bit as self-centred, paranoid and obnoxious as Mr O'Reilly and other Irish Americans of his ilk.

Today, statistics show that the Republican party is favoured by white males and distrusted by latinos, women, Jews and above all, blacks. These all prefer the Democratic party of Barak Obama.

But it wasn't always thus. The Democrats used to be the party of segregation and white supremacy. The Republicans were the party of emancipation and personal liberty. Republican grandees like Charlton Heston went on Martin Luther King's civil rights marches. It was utterly in keeping with the values of that party.

There should be no place for the paranoia espoused by O'Reilly in America. Still less should he try to identify the mildest form of social democracy as championed by Obama as an un American virus imported by undesirable immigrants.

He's on to a loser anyway.

His whole rant reminded me of a scene from the Sopranos.

Stinicker wrote: »

When Lehman Bros. went bust what did GWB do? Nothing he did nothing and left them go burst in the biggest bankruptcy ever, this was pefect market sense.

GWBs government started the TARP program after Lehmans collapse, starting the whole QE policy which Obama is just continuing. He did not do nothing, in retrospect maybe it would have been better if he did in fact do nothing.

hooradiation wrote: »

The meltdown on bullshit mountain is glorious to watch.

Between Trump going full retard and this delightful temper tantrum, the internet is truly living up to its potential as the best possible source for unintentional hilarity.

Holy sh!t that was hilarious

I liked this bit:

When I'm at the Wal-mart or grocery story I typically pay with my debit card. On the pad it comes up, "EBT, Debit, Credit, Cash." I make it a point to say loudly to the check-out clerk, "EBT, what is that for?" She inevitably says, "it's government assistance." I respond, "Oh, you mean welfare? Great. I work for a living. I'm paying for my food with my own hard-earned dollars. And other people get their food for free." And I look around with disgust, making sure others in line have heard me.

I know where he is coming from, the Government is so totalitarian not letting its citizens starve

His best one is his idea for a Button:

"Only Nazis support Seat Belt laws"

FloatingVoter wrote: »

The guy is a museum piece - his generation has had their moment in the sun. And they screwed it up. Lets let gay black women on welfare run things - it cannot produce a worse result than his ilk did.

BTW with a name like O'Reilly I doubt he'd get into the inner circle in certain golf clubs in the Hamptons (sniff sniff)...

We won. Forward.

Who is 'we'?