Bill,
Don’t you think it’s about time to come clean on this boycott thing? Clear the air for we less enlightened than you and your premium members.

A few months back you said that you would not endorse any boycott. You clung to the high ground claiming that it was a mean spirited approach to any problem. You weren’t particularly keen on the boycott of Aruba saying people that know the facts can make up their own minds.

Since then you have called for people to discontinue their subscriptions to various newspapers across the land including St. Petersburg, Dallas, Los Angeles and San Francisco because they were not in line with your no-spin thinking. What is the difference between calling for a discontinuation of a subscription and a boycott?

Since then you have said that tourists should not spend their vacation dollars in San Francisco because the city was not in line with your no-spin thinking. Well, call me non-premium but that sounds a lot like a boycott to me.

The other evening, with the sad voice of a child disillusioned, you lamented that US News & World Report had shattered your belief in their publication because it was not in line with your no-spin thinking. You suggested that people neither purchase nor read the magazine. The very next evening you underlined the matter by posting an alleged email from a viewer asking what magazine they should read since you had denounced their usual resource. You recommended Time. Once again, to a non-premium like me, that sure sounds like a boycott; an underscored boycott.

A topic for another day would be what kind of Kool Aid drinker would write you an email saying, in essence, “Gee, Mr. O’Reilly, since you told me what not to read please now tell me what to read”. Talk about the most ridiculous item of the day

Last month you and Morris the Chat were bobbing heads about that New York Times poll that directed the respondent to the desired answer. You were in agreement that the questions themselves invalidated the answers. Now comes the Bill O’Reilly Poll: If the powers that be don’t take drastic action against judge Cashman, will you boycott Vermont? How valid will those results be?

You will probably get an email the next day saying something like “Gee, Mr. O’Reilly, I was going to the grocery to buy a pint of Ben & Jerry’s but now please tell me which ice cream I should buy”.

Unsubscribe, don’t visit, don’t purchase, don’t read, all sound the same to a non-premium. It all sounds like boycott. It all sounds like do it my way or I will do my best to close you down. I will fill the airwaves with as much negative publicity as possible under the guise of fair and balanced and the ruse of no-spin. The very essence of the bully pulpit.

Hey Bill,
It seems to me that someone as educated as you would realize the power of words. It’s words that make your no-spin zone a spin-zone. An adjective here or there and before you know it a picture is painted. One of the most glaring is the constant reference to the lunatic left.

The other evening one of your guests was a member of the Vermont legislature. The discussion was surrounding the ridiculous slap-on-the-wrist issued by judge Cashman in the rape of an unfortunate child. He pointed out, as an aside, that the judge is a republican as is the governor. You responded that you didn’t care about that.

That isn’t true, Bill. You are disappointed that these guys aren’t democrats. If they were you would have been on that fact like gravy on rice. You would have paraded out the usual suspects, Ann Coulter, Newt, Morris the chat, etc. and preached to the masses about the country going to hell in a handbasket because of these predictable lunatic left judgements.

You set the stage for bringing in the lunatics this morning during a brief interview by phone with the morning crowd at FOX. You mentioned that the Vermont house had sent the matter to a committee. You added that the house is headed up by a democrat. Needless and pointless information considering your remarks on your own program that you didn’t care about the judge and governor being a republican. It won't be long before your no-spin will make this an issue with the left wing lunatics in the Vermont house.

You concluded your morning telephone interview with a most insightful remark. Concerning the Vermont travesty you said that there were not two sides to the story. Does that sound to you like a fair and balanced host? If you want to be perceived as fair and balanced how about coming up with an alliterative phrase for right wing hubris?