Is Bill O'Reilly a god?

[PUGalicious]

Bill O'Reilly is 'da man — especially if you ask him. Think Progress reports this morning that in an interview yesterday on Fox News's Neil Cavuto, "Bill O’Reilly claimed that his reporting intimidated oil company CEOs into lowering gasoline prices":

O’REILLY: I have guys inside the five major oil companies - my father used to work for one of those oil companies by the way - who have told me that in those meetings they look for every way to jack up oil prices after Katrina, every way, when they didn’t have to. They got scared because of my reporting and reporting of some others. They said, “Uh ho.”

CAVUTO: So wait a minute, you’re not, you’re taking credit for gas prices being down from where they are?

O’REILLY: I said my reporting and some reporting of others. They got scared.

Watch in Quicktime

So not only is Bill O’Reilly saving Christmas, he’s making it cheaper for you to get to the mall. Is there anything this guy can’t do?

He's much too humble to ever tell you this, but Bill O'Reilly is "apparently" omniscient and omnipotent. The only thing holding him back from being a diety is omnipresence — unless his omnipresence on the airwaves counts. Is Bill O'Reilly a god?


(Originally posted here)

[jdsplaypin]

He gets his point across and does it well. Even if you disagree with him you clearly understand his viewpoints.

[Keith]

He gets his point across and does it well. Even if you disagree with him you clearly understand his viewpoints.

Exactly. He may be a little arrogant, but most of the time he is correct, and he always makes good points. Bill never claimed to be a god......that comes from the perception of others who disagree with him and won't admit that he is an intelligent, truthful, man.

[Didaskalos]

...that comes from the perception of others who disagree with him and won't admit that he is an intelligent, truthful, man.

Intelligent? Sure.
A man? I would think so.
Truthful? ROFL................. now that's funny.....

[Curt]

Intelligent? Sure.
A man? I would think so.
Truthful? ROFL................. now that's funny.....

Cant take the truth..huh?

[Didaskalos]

Cant take the truth..huh?

I have this funny thing where I expect the "truth" to be true. Just the way I am.

[okieopus]

his point are almost always wrong.

and his arrogance is of the chart

[fromdust]

his point are almost always wrong.

and his arrogance is of the chart

what points are you talking about?

[Shaggy]

his point are almost always wrong.

and his arrogance is of the chart

Incorrect. He is right almost all of the time, and because he is, the democrats and the liberals shake in their shoes.

[jdsplaypin]

He is arrogant, i'll give you that.

[Curt]

I personally like to hear what O'Reilly has to say and I do beleive he is right most of the time. I also like Limbaugh and Nugent because they are willing to stand up for what is good for this country.

[fromdust]

if he had anything to do with the price drop he needs to get back into the game, becuse they are back up again.

[PUGalicious]

No, apparently Bill O'Reilly can't. He certainly has a hard time telling it.

[PUGalicious]

How do you know it's not?

[Curt]

How do you know it's not?

My point exactly, none of us were there to witness the events that it says took place so I cant say it is or isnt. So, how can someone say O'Reilly is telling the truth or not, I mean, what would he gain by lying?

[Didaskalos]

My point exactly, none of us were there to witness the events that it says took place so I cant say it is or isnt.

But the bible is an account of the people who were witness to the events being recorded. This is how historical documents work. Is there any historical document that you would consider accurate? How do you know the civil war happened? How do you know George Washington was a real person or was ever really our first President?

So, how can someone say O'Reilly is telling the truth or not, I mean, what would he gain by lying?

Because his truths are measurable as fact or fiction. Case in point.

O'REILLY: Under President Clinton, the tax rate climbed higher than at any time in history except in World War II.

Year - Income Bracket - Tax Rate
1955 - 44,000 - 52,000 - 59%
1965 - 52,000 - 64,000 - 53%
1975 - 88,000 - 100,000 - 60%
1985 - 169,020 and up - 50%

Clinton raised the rate to 39.6 percent for couples making over $250,000

His statement was simply untrue. Was he uninformed or trying to mislead? What does he have to gain, an uninformed public who will continue to ignore history and help him push his Libertarian ideals.

[Curt]

[QUOTE=Didaskalos] How do you know the civil war happened? How do you know George Washington was a real person or was ever really our first President?
QUOTE]
Because there are photographs of both that to me are pretty much proof and way too many artifacts for me to deny it. So now, which version of the Bible is accurate?
Dont you think that over the years and as many versions of it that have been written there is alot of room for doubt? I mean, several people could re write a Dr. Suess book and change this or that but in the end still get the same message across, doesnt mean it's true. I dont doubt the Bible and I would like to think it is true, I am just looking at things different ways. By the way, thanks for the stats, what would we do with ya.

[Didaskalos]

Because there are photographs of both that to me are pretty much proof and way too many artifacts for me to deny it.

So history is accurate back to the point it was photographed? I tend to allow for a broader time in history based on historians accounts but I am just trusting that way I guess

So now, which version of the Bible is accurate?

The most accurate is of course going to be the first account written (speaking of books of the bible rather than the bible as a whole). I am sure many Christians on this forum will cringe but I will easily admit that I have no confidence that every version of the bible sitting on store shelves is completely accurate in its transcription/translations. I, for one, do not think this has to impact its message. Still, I think there have been quite a few discoveries of ancient writings that bring credibility to scripture (not the least of which being the Dead Sea Scrolls). I happen to read (primarily) the New International Version because the team they put together to publish it was quite impressive. At the time, they also had the Dead Sea Scrolls at their disposal as well as very early translations of the bible which are not nearly as far removed from the original writings. I trust it as the most accurate english translation. I do however put some trust in scholars who are able to read and understand much earlier greek and latin translations of the bible.

Dont you think that over the years and as many versions of it that have been written there is alot of room for doubt? I mean, several people could re write a Dr. Suess book and change this or that but in the end still get the same message across, doesnt mean it's true.

Are you trying to convince me that the bible is wrong or trying to convince yourself? I am convinced it is true and you seem less convinced. As this thread is not about biblical defense, I do not want to go on for paragraphs providing a defense but you are welcome to start a thread and I will happily go through the tedious process of showing the accuracy of scripture. In short, yes, there is room for doubt. This is the reason I, as a natural skeptic, have spent so much time looking into the issue. I wasn't overly convinced until I had invested the time.

By the way, thanks for the stats, what would we do with ya.

I guess I find stats entirely more interesting than others do. Of course, my studies were in the social sciences and they helped convince me that everyone has a theory but until one tries to measure its accuracy, it is fairly worthless.

[PUGalicious]

There are photographs of George Washington??? Wow, that's amazing, considering the camera hadn't been invented yet.

[Curt]

There are photographs of George Washington??? Wow, that's amazing, considering the camera hadn't been invented yet.

I meant of the Cival war..DUH..and what would we do with you also, thanks for setting me straight, I can now go on about my day and know that I have someone looking out for me.

[Didaskalos]

I meant of the Cival war..DUH..and what would we do with you also, thanks for setting me straight, I can now go on about my day and know that I have someone looking out for me.

You did say there were photographs of both and I only referred to the civil war once... so was the DUH applied to the right person??? I wanted you to feel all warm and cozy knowing there are two people looking out for you.

[Curt]

You did say there were photographs of both and I only referred to the civil war once... so was the DUH applied to the right person??? I wanted you to feel all warm and cozy knowing there are two people looking out for you.

Yes the DUH was applied to the right person in my book. I feel so warm and cozy now that I know I have two people looking out for me..but I should have also known you two would call each other again for backup..see that is one thing at least I do not need is back up...I may be wrong alot of times but I at least dont need someone else to watch my back..I am a big boy and can handle myself..some cant.

[Didaskalos]

see that is one thing at least I do not need is back up

No, you need it, you just don't realize it...

I may be wrong alot of times

We do agree on something...

but I at least dont need someone else to watch my back..I am a big boy and can handle myself..some cant.

I have not called on anyone today but if it makes you feel better to avoid discussing the issue with distraction, be my guest. I have become quite accustomed to those who refuse to discuss the issue attempt to distract from the issue.

[Randy]

Yes the DUH was applied to the right person in my book. I feel so warm and cozy now that I know I have two people looking out for me..but I should have also known you two would call each other again for backup..see that is one thing at least I do not need is back up...I may be wrong alot of times but I at least dont need someone else to watch my back..I am a big boy and can handle myself..some cant.

And I thought I was the only one that noticed that. After reading through many posts, I noticed the similarities, and how one always backs up the other one. Keep up the good work, mariner. Like you, I don't need anyone to back me up either.

[PUGalicious]

I meant of the Cival war..DUH

I certainly could have misunderstood. Let's go back and look at what you said...

How do you know the civil war happened? How do you know George Washington was a real person or was ever really our first President?

Because there are photographs of both that to me are pretty much proof and way too many artifacts for me to deny it.

You may have mispoke, but I didn't misunderstand what you actually said.

thanks for setting me straight, I can now go on about my day and know that I have someone looking out for me.

Anytime! Glad I could help make this a batter day for you.