Right-wing commentator Bill O’Reilly attacked actor John Cusack for making an ad that criticized John McCain. In his uniquely patronizing tone of voice, O’Reilly smarmed:
“There’s no question that Mr. Cusack is peddling propaganda. That is not good, John. Not good.”
Oh no he did NOT just go after Lloyd Dobler! That is a Holly Won’t capital offense. I would comment further but Jossip read my mind:
John Cusack is an actor, which, according to Bill O’Reilly, does not make him qualified to speak publicly about political issues.
Bill O’Reilly is a homophobic and racist blowhard, which does not make him qualified to speak publicly.
A love a good Friday afternoon snark, don’t you?
Related posts:
- Perez Hilton Takes a Swipe at Gordon Ramsay’s ‘Sexist’ Comments Okay, so Gordon Ramsay is maybe not the most tactful...
- Bill O’Reilly Sends Producer to Stalk Critic of Rape Comments Bill O’Reilly might want to explain this before I start...
- When Can Bill Cosby Expect His Apology? Thanks to the best commenters on the Internet for reminding...
- Race Expert Brings the Heat to Bill O’Reilly on MJ Coverage Hoo boy. Bill O’Reilly really got into it with a...
- Bill Clinton: Putting an End to Obesity With Burgers and Shakes Today the Centers for Disease Control sponsored their inaugural...
“John Cusack is an actor, which, according to Bill O’Reilly, does not make him qualified to speak publicly about political issues.”
Well, you have to admit. He’s right. Haven’t you been reading “Deceiver”? 99% of actors/actresses are obviously retards, that couldn’t find their assholes with a funnel, and a ball bearing.
Don’t we all talk about political issues, famous or not?
We all don’t have money or play Lloyd Dobler jlynn. Who is that by the way? What character? I don’t usually say this about actors but every movie I’ve seen with John Cusack, he plays the same character.
But O’Reilly has been swiping at actors since the last election. From what I know.
Hello Pot?
It’s me, kettle.
I think Bill’O should receive a life long Deceiver award. He is the most hypocritical talking head on TV … bar none! I swear to god, if I ever see him in public I’ll punch him in the head as hard as I can. My fantasy is a blind-side right hook to his ear. Should put him right out. Uh-oh, if Bill hears about this he’ll send Fox security after me.
WOW,Zorg!
Those are the EXACT feelings I have for Senator Barack Hussein Obama.
REALLY, if I ever see Barack Hussein Obama in public I’ll punch him in the head as hard as I can. My fantasy is a blind-side right hook to his ear. Should put him right out. Uh-oh, if Barack Hussein Obama hears about this he’ll send the Secret Service after me.
O’Reilly is a NOBODY!
Obama could turn this country upside down with devastating results.
The wrong “Right” in this country only ever bitches about celebs saying something political, calling them unqualified, uneducated, etc., when they disagree with them. But it’s OK when their allegedly conservative Hollywood friends speak up on their behalf, even if those people are behind some of the violent H’wood product that they decry as liberal-based and bad for this country … Bruce, Mel, Governator Ah-nohd, and others as examples. They’re no more qualified than blowhard-king O’Reilly and similar d-bags, but if the righty talking heads agree with what they say, then who cares about qualifications! And pass the popcorn!!!
Right on!
O’Reilly is a pompous blowhard but hardly a right winger. Wish that he was though. For all his talk about calling people out when they spin he went so soft on Hillary and inexplicably defends Obama all the time. He is good about calling bullshit on a lot of things the MSM does prefer to ignore. Cusack is an example of the typical Hollywood whining bitch who has the luxury of his wealth to fantasize about a world that isn’t reality. Oh, and he had one good movie, Gross Point Blank. Name another thing in that was even remotely good. And no, that stupid movie of him playing Peter Gabriel is not the answer.
What was that movie he was in about his girlfriend leaving him for a hippie played by Tim Robbins. He owned a record store and Jack Black was in it, what the hell is the name of that movie? That was a good one.
Oh yeah, and “Being John friggin Malkovich”!
“Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” is another good one.
Sorry, I’m a fan, I think he’s a good actor and has done some good films.
Hank Aaron, shut up. I notice that you’re a bigot. You managed to use Barack’s middle name twice, but what’s Bill’s middle name. Where’s that?
Bigot. That’s what you are.
High Fidelity.
NotJamieThankGod
Jun 15th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Hank Aaron, shut up. I notice that you’re a bigot. You managed to use Barack’s middle name twice, but what’s Bill’s middle name. Where’s that?
Bigot. That’s what you are.
Lolz what? Obama used to refer to his own middle name in interviews before it became taboo to even mention it.
Who the hell even knows Bill O’Reilly’s middle name? If mentioning someone’s middle name is the best example of bigotry you can come up with, either bigotry ain’t what it used to be, or there is so little bigotry around that you need to clutch at ridiculous straws to paint people with different views to you as racists.
And why the constant accusations that O’Reilly is a racist? Please don’t bring up opposition to illegal immigration as an example of racism.
Oh and, O’Reilly is one of the most highly rated segments on TV, he must be doing something right. Maybe it’s just that all Americans are racist and bigoted KKK members in disguise? Or maybe liberals are so out of touch that you think you’re qualified to classify views that represent a huge segment of the population, as racist.
Everyone has the right to express thier opinions.
Everyone had the right to tell the person expressing their opinons they are full of crap.
I’m suppose to feel all tingly inside because John Cusack thinks his serious, give me a break, expression of his political views is going to make people change thier minds on who they are voting for?? Give me break. Stop crying about who is saying what and listen to what the candidates are spouting.
I think Bill is righ on most issues, and is a relatively smart man. He is respectful and tactful in every interview he gives. Put him up against the other mainstream anchors, and you can see that he is MUCH better.
Now, onto the point of Hollywood. I think the point he is making with these celebrities is that people feel that just because they can pretend to be someone on TV and make $20 million for it, they automatically know how the world works, how it should be run, etc. The point Bill is making is that most of these people should just stick with what they do. Just because you can pretend to be a good action star, does not mean you should preach how to balance the economy, save the world and environment from pollution, etc. Jerry Seinfeld had a good skit after receiving an award which is funny…where he states, “We make this big deal about being actors. We get so much praise, and all we did is repeat some lines someone gave us a couple days prior.”
“He is respectful and tactful in every interview he gives. Put him up against the other mainstream anchors, and you can see that he is MUCH better.”
In interviews, Bill does manage to remain civil. It’s the rest of the time that he indulges himself with some pretty nasty character assassination.
Actors are as idiotic or intelligent as the rest of us lumps of flesh. One thing that most of the have that the rest of us don’t (other than tons of money, if they’re successful) is lots of downtime to do stuff like read and study. So if you happen to get an actor that has brains popularity concern about politics, you can end up with some pretty informed opinions.
The best one that comes to mind in Tim Robbins. I’d put him up against any political pundit in a heartbeat. A face-off between Tim and Bill would leave Bill on the floor, because Bill has an unfortunate habit of cherry-picking his facts to fit his opinions. He’d probably end up shutting of Tim’s mic.
Cusak, like the rest of his ilk, especially Robbins — and most talking head, political pundits (O’Reilly included) and even BLOGS for that matter — are prime examples of argumentum ad vercundiam.
Argumentum ad Verecundiam: (authority) the fallacy of appealing to the testimony of an authority outside his special field. Anyone can give opinions or advice; the fallacy only occurs when the reason for assenting to the conclusion is based on following the improper authority.
A. Occasionally, this argument is called the “argument from prestige” and is based on the belief that prestigious people cannot be wrong. In these cases, the fallacy is best termed the “snob appeal” variety of the ad populum.
B. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between the ad verecundiam and the ad populum (q.v., ad populum) when the authority cited is a group with status.
Consider this example from an popular logic text: “Those who say that astrology is not reliable are mistaken. The wisest men of history have all been interested in astrology, and kings and queens of all ages have guided the affairs of nations by it.”
C. The informal structure generally has the basic pattern:
Authority on subject x, L says accept statement p.
p is outside the scope of subject x.
p is true.
D. Many advertising campaigns are built on this fallacy. Popular sports figures, musicians, or actors endorse products and, in proper context, this fact is offered as a reason we should use those products.
E. Examples of the ad verecundiam fallacy:
1. The brilliant William Jenkins, the recent Nobel Prize winner in physics, states uncategorically that the flu virus will be controlled in essentially all of its forms by the year 2,050. The opinion of such a great man cannot be disregarded.
2. The United States policy toward mainland China was surely mistaken because Shirley McLaine, the well known actress, said, at the time, she had grave misgivings about it.
III. Uses of the ad verecundiam.
A. Proper experts and authorities render valuable opinions in their fields and, ceteris paribus, should be believed when we are unable to come to a conclusion on more secure grounds.
B. To qualify as an authority, the individual must be generally recognized by peers in the same field when the peers hold a similar view. (Examine, for yourself, why this condition is not an instance of the ad populum fallacy.)
And Cal (above) is a perfect example of what author Harry Mount (in his book Carpe Diem: Put a Little Latin in Your Life) calls a “wanker”:
I highly recommend the Mount book. It’s far more readable than the blather above.
Okay, I don’t usually write anything, but some of these are funny and others written by morons (of which in America we have millions!).
I happen to love Bill Orally, er O’Reilly only because he is such a total jerk that he makes me laugh. My idiot parents love him (all for the wrong reasons) but he is pure entertainment. It is even more fun to watch Keith Olbermann make fun of Billy-boy and his twisted antics and to top it all off, he is friggin’ rude to his guests!
In this case I happen to like John Cusack both as an actor and his so-called “propaganda.” But the Republicans and the right always say Liberal’s & Dem’s are spewing lies and propaganda while they are doing more of it themselves! It’s simply that there are so many American Morons that are blind to it. The whole Bush Administration for eight years has been smoke & mirrors & lies and there are still American Morons that don’t believe it! And if Bush had been a Democrat he would have been impeached way long ago!
Obama sure has his work cut out for him and I hope that he is up for it, because we sure do need help after the mess Bush has made of things!
John Cusak’s an actor? Could’ve fooled me.
SpideyTerry-
See comments 10, 11, and 12
Was Cal Burke’s comment copied from a textbook or something? Damn.
So Bill O’Reilly is a jerk but Kieth Olbermann isn’t?
The whole Bush Administration for eight years has been smoke & mirrors & lies and there are still American Morons that don’t believe it! And if Bush had been a Democrat he would have been impeached way long ago!
Obama sure has his work cut out for him and I hope that he is up for it, because we sure do need help after the mess Bush has made of things!
Rigggght… Let’s hope Obama gets right on with raising the capital gains tax in a period of economic slowdown!11!!!! That’ll sort out those damn gas prices.
One of the main gripes conservatives have with liberal talking heads is that for eight years they’ve done nothing but tear away at the credibility of the Bush administration to the point where the average person on the street thinks it has been “all smoke and mirrors.”
Never mind that Bush overthrew brutal dictatorships in Afghanistan and Iraq and gave those country free elections, quadrupled aid to Africa (try finding that fact reported anywhere in the media), presided over a very healthy economy until midway through last year when the subprime mortgage collapse began to take its toll, and saw carbon emissions and pollution significantly reduced under his watch (also a fact, google it) while Kyoto signatories like Canada have increased their output of pollutants..
It only takes one empty-headed celebrity like Cusack to spout liberal Democratic propaganda to reinforce it further in the public’s minds.
As for O’Reilly cherrypicking facts, er.. Not that liberal media would ever do such a thing but you may notice coverage of Iraq having dropped to almost nothing since it became apparent Bush’s surge strategy is actually working.
Never mind that Bush overthrew brutal dictatorships in Afghanistan and Iraq and gave those country free elections -
Yeah, Hitler also overthrew the ‘terrorist’ government of Poland. Its called a War of Aggression.
quadrupled aid to Africa -
whoopi do. A few dollars (which, lets face it are hardly worth the paper they’re written on) aid, while allowing Corporations to continue their theft of the continent is hardly a fair exchange.
If you cannot see that the neo-con policies are allowing a tiny fragment of the world population to become extremely rich, while consigning the vast majority to grinding poverty, then you are not looking.
BetterRed. You invoked the Nazis. Your arguments no longer have any validity. Besides sounds like your a commie by the looks of your name. There are still workers paradise type places around the world. China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam. If Communism is so great I bet you could be in anyone of those places in 48 hours if you really tried.
And will you guys quit with “neo-con” already please? You have no idea how stupid that sounds.
Yeah, Hitler also overthrew the ‘terrorist’ government of Poland. Its called a War of Aggression.
Right, Bush is Hitler. And instituting free elections where there was previously a brutal dictatorship is the same as invading Poland. Credibility, you can haz it?
quadrupled aid to Africa -
whoopi do. A few dollars (which, lets face it are hardly worth the paper they’re written on) aid, while allowing Corporations to continue their theft of the continent is hardly a fair exchange.
So Bush now controls investment regulations in African nations?
And would these be the eeeeviiilll corporations that provide millions of jobs in Africa and pay huge taxes? You think African nations’ economies would be better off without investment from corporations? That if resources were nationalized by tinpot dictatorships, the locals would be better off than they are now? Naive much?
If you cannot see that the neo-con policies are allowing a tiny fragment of the world population to become extremely rich, while consigning the vast majority to grinding poverty, then you are not looking.
Either that or I’m not ignorant and paranoid like you, and I am able to understand the concept that one person having wealth doesn’t mean they stole it from someone else, and are preventing that person from gaining their own wealth.
If you’d like some examples of where evvviiillll corporations have seen their assets nationalized “for the people” try Venezuela for starters.. Any idea what they pay for gas there?
Is that Peter f*cking Framton?