creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Bill O'Reilly
Bill O'Reilly
28 Dec 2013
Teenage Werewolves

Back in the 1950s, "Little Joe Cartwright" starred in a movie called "I Was a Teenage Werewolf.… Read More.

21 Dec 2013
The Christmas Spirit

Anyone offended by public displays of Christmas needs to see a psychiatrist. Are we clear on this? You are a … Read More.

14 Dec 2013
Merry Christmas, 1913

One hundred years ago in America, Christmas was a mighty different situation. Based on newspaper reports, MyHeritage.… Read More.

The Media Endorse Barack Obama

Comment

Writing in this space two months ago, I laid out the media advantage that President Obama has in his quest for reelection. According to a study done by the Pew Research Center, 32 percent of journalists say they are liberal, 53 percent moderate and just 8 percent conservative. Ask John McCain how the press treated him in 2008 if you want specifics on the tilt toward Obama.

A great illustration of media bias is the recent dustup over Sandra Fluke. She is the liberal activist trotted out by the Democratic Party to deflect the contraception issue away from the "church-state" controversy the White House was losing and into the more emotional "women's health" arena. Nancy Pelosi herself organized a press dog-and-pony show for Fluke, who portrays herself as a law student having a rough time paying for birth control pills. She wants the feds to pick up the tab through mandated insurance benefits even though the pills cost about $9 a month at places like Wal-Mart, and are distributed free at health clinics under Title Ten legislation.

But you won't find those facts being discussed much in the national media. No, for them, Fluke is a victim of a cruel system that wants to unduly burden American women.

Sure.

Of course, Fluke was handed an enormous gift by Rush Limbaugh when he made demeaning comments about her. Immediately, the committed left-wing media machine, led by the amazingly dishonest Media Matters website, cranked up two themes: that Limbaugh should be deported to Tonga, and that he is the real power behind the Republican Party.

MSNBC, which is now partnered with Media Matters in the quest to disseminate left-wing propaganda, went wild, and so, to a lesser extent, did other national media outlets.

The story line is that because the Republican candidates did not call for Limbaugh to be sent to Guantanamo Bay, they endorsed his attitude toward Fluke. The analysis was so hysterical that it could have been a Jon Stewart bit, and in fact it was.

The bigger picture is this: Voters who do not pay close attention to public policy and political controversies are at the mercy of so-called "prevailing wisdom" — that is, what they hear around town, from their friends, etc. As long as most of the media, including the entertainment industry, promote one particular candidate for president, that person will have a major advantage in November.

But informed voters know the fix is in, although there's little they can do about it. A Pew survey taken in January found that 67 percent of Americans believe there is bias in news coverage. They are right, and it is toward the left.

Few in the press are reporting the truth about Sandra Fluke. That is an indicator of what the American media have become, as well as what is likely to come as the election campaign unfolds.

Veteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of the book "Pinheads and Patriots: Where You Stand in the Age of Obama." To find out more about Bill O'Reilly, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 BillOReilly.com

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM



Comments

4 Comments | Post Comment
Re: Bloom Hilda: You nailed another one. All I would add is that O'Reilly doesn't understand the cost issues in healthcare at all. Doesn't understand much else either, hee hee, except how to sell snake oil commentary.

"President Obama is trying to force health insurance companies to provide things such as female birth control free of charge. Of course, the companies will pass the cost of that on to consumers in the form of higher premiums." The reason the health insurance companies are willing to go along with Obama's fix is that birth control is a money-saving proposition in healthcare.

Facing up to the true cost of ignoring the healthcare needs of those who have traditionally been ignored is also ultimately a money saving proposition too--you just have to be willing to look into the future beyond the length of your nose to see the long term benefit. The so-called "conservative" right wing seems to be constitutionally incapable of doing that. It doesn't fit the tantrum throwing, I-want-it-now mentality that is so prevalent among tea-partiers and fellow travelers these days.

This too shall pass. Or we extinguish ourselves as a civilization.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:12 PM
Right on Bill. Only a biased media would buy the argument that people refusing to buy other people's birth control is preventing availability. Birth control is readily available. If you want it buy it, like anything and everything else. There are various forms available including the very inexpensive form of keeping your pants on, through to abortion. The issue is having a government believe it has the authority to force one person to pay for something for someone else. The very idea of forcing people to pay for someone else's consumption is a violation of rights and an over reach of government, but when the force requires people to violate their religious beliefs it only makes the over reach so clearly unacceptable. The fact that public media is unable to point out the core of the argument and instead focus on the false argument of denial of availability, which is clearly not the case at all, is just one more proof of the liberal bias. Forcing someone to buy someone else's birth control is no different than forcing people but buy others phones, cars, food, movie tickets. If you want something buy it, if you don't have enough money make more. the liberal goal is to deny the fundamental of economics. they want everyone to have everything they want without any concern for cost. Make someone else pay for your wants and need so you can consume all you want. Which of course cannot work.
Comment: #2
Posted by: C Moellers
Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:08 AM
Right on Bill. Only a biased media would buy the argument that people refusing to buy other people's birth control is preventing availability. Birth control is readily available. If you want it buy it, like anything and everything else. There are various forms available including the very inexpensive form of keeping your pants on, through to abortion. The issue is having a government believe it has the authority to force one person to pay for something for someone else. The very idea of forcing people to pay for someone else's consumption is a violation of rights and an over reach of government, but when the force requires people to violate their religious beliefs it only makes the over reach so clearly unacceptable. The fact that public media is unable to point out the core of the argument and instead focus on the false argument of denial of availability, which is clearly not the case at all, is just one more proof of the liberal bias. Forcing someone to buy someone else's birth control is no different than forcing people but buy others phones, cars, food, movie tickets. If you want something buy it, if you don't have enough money make more. the liberal goal is to deny the fundamental of economics. they want everyone to have everything they want without any concern for cost. Make someone else pay for your wants and need so you can consume all you want. Which of course cannot work.
Comment: #3
Posted by: C Moellers
Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:08 AM
Re: C Moellers

Jeeesh, C. Moellers, you hit the nail on the head, excellent, right on,

The very idea of forcing people to pay for someone else's consumption is a violation of rights and an over reach of government

Exactly, I agree with every word you said, standing up, clapping and cheering. But I have to pay for Bush's war and Halliburtons consumption for years, I have to pay for Santorum's disabled kid that his wife should not have had at her age and Sarah Palin's diasbled kid that she shouldn't have had at her age. Harsh, very, everytime someone does something stupid like get pregnant in their 40's, odds are we are going to pay. I don't want to pay for your Viagra, or that obese person's diabetes drugs, I also don't want to pay for your oxygen for your COPD, because you smoked for 50 years, or that open heart surgery because you ate meat and fast food every day of your life. Need I go on? Cost shifting is the heart of insurance, I pay for everyone else when I take care of myself. A preemie can cost millions, there was a crack baby in L.A. that was born 16 ounces, the medical bill was 2.2 million. Irresponsibility is very expensive and we all pay. It isn't fair, but it has to be spread, no persons premium can cover what catastrophies may happen. Birth control is a drug like any other drug and any plan should cover it. Birth control is cheap, babies are expensive, the republican disconnect, you should be screaming for bonus money if you are on birth control That would lower the deficit. You picked the wrong side of this argument, I will gladly pay for your vasectomy, then you can consume all the sex you want.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Bloom Hilda
Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:30 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Bill O'Reilly
Dec. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
David Sirota
David SirotaUpdated 19 Sep 2014
David Harsanyi
David HarsanyiUpdated 19 Sep 2014
David Limbaugh
David LimbaughUpdated 19 Sep 2014

26 May 2007 Dinner for Two -- With Tony or Jane?

26 Jun 2010 The Chaos Factor

19 Apr 2008 The Pope and Me