Bill,
Many years ago I worked for the New Orleans Saints of the NFL. I was a part of the film crew. For the everyday football fan it was truly a job to die for. Flying around the country with the team, staying in the best of hotels, top of the line food, access to the press box as well as the field, rubbing elbows with the swells and getting to know professional football players on a first name basis. It was the kind of stuff of which contests are made.

After two years I quit that job. The reason was simple. I never got to see the game. I was at work. I took the job because I loved the game and over time I came to miss the game.

These days I am wondering if perhaps you and David Letterman have something in common. Neither one of you watch your show. If you watched your show and listened to the things you say I think you would be embarrassed. Your verbiage is one contradiction after another but, in fairness, you are at work.

You took the job because you loved the show and now you can’t even see the show. A tragic irony to be sure because you are missing a true spin doctor at work. You have become a twenty-first century Judge Roy Bean riding into town atop a wagonload of snake oil.

A few posts ago (see spin I) I cautioned you about judging people before all of the facts had been laid out. It’s unseemly behavior and not to be expected in the milieu of the fair and balanced.

I have suspected for some time that you are a recovering judge and your appearance on FOX was part of your twelve step program.

Perhaps the vicious attacks on Judge Cashman became as difficult for you to handle as an alcoholic working in a tavern. For whatever reason you fell off the wagon big time last night.

During your interview with Geraldo, himself just back from a seedy photo-op at the funeral of a non-relative, you were talking about this fellow in England whose wife and child were found dead in Massachusetts.

Another tragic case out of the same mold as Scott Peterson. At the end of your bobble-heading with Geraldo you said “yeah he did it”, in defiance to the very caveat I had given you in spin I.

Lastly, during the email segment, you responded to an email from some viewer (probably a premium member) who said the goon in Florida was a hero for punching the teacher who allegedly assaulted his daughter. Your admonition to the writer included the following, “...justice is only served when all the facts are known.”

Believe me, Bill, you need to start watching your program. If you watched your show and listened to the things you say I think you would be embarrassed. Your verbiage is one contradiction after another.

William,
I am beginning to have a few concerns about your “fair and balanced” placard. As I tune in nightly I am not seeing very much of anyone disagreeing with you. The program seems to be taking on the flavor of Rush Limbaugh. I have racked my non-premium brain to recall a guest that has disagreed with you recently.

Thursday’s presentation was rife with example. The first was some redheaded Vermont senator. Her credibility was shot the minute she opened her mouth. You said that the democrats in the Vermont house were planning to resist voting on the laws you suggested and you asked her if that were the case. Her response was that she didn’t know! Just another incredible politician. Just another republican with blinders.

She is in the senate and has no idea the goings-on in the house. If that weren’t enough to generate sadness within me for the residents of the green mountain state she continued by supporting Governor Douglas, a republican like herself. It was her contention that Governor Douglas had taken a great deal of action in the Cashman situation.

You told her that in your opinion the governor was missing in action and had, for the most part, hidden under his desk. Her response was that she agreed with you. I was ROFLMAO. It’s almost as if your guest are screened in advance and warned not to be disagreeable. Either that or your guests lack the courage of conviction to take you on. Yes Bill. I agree with you, Bill. You are right, Bill. On and on and on; ad nauseam.

Bring out the regular contributors who always agree. Who better than the head-nodding, backstabbing, two-faced, bootlicking, weasel; Morris the Chat? I did find it amusing that you had to ask him to let you get a word in edgewise. Once the switch is flipped on there’s no stopping those of his ilk. It reminds me of pulling the string on a chatty Kathy.

Commenting for the one thousandth time on his underachieving book he said that nobody but nobody could successfully take on Hillary except Condi Rice. You interrupted, imagine that (?) And said there were two or three others who could (e.g. Giuliani, McCain).

Can you guess what Morris the Chat responded to that? Would you believe he said that you were right? In essence he was saying that he was wrong, once again, and you were right, once again. I guess he should have entitled his grossly lackluster book “Condi and Hillary and anyone Bill O’Reilly says”.

Once again I was forced to ROFLMAO. The no spin zone is truly entertaining. When are you going to invite Rush to appear, or Sean Hannity? If you want me to stop ROFLMAO, invite Phil Donahue back. Now that was a truly entertaining segment, eh Billy?

Bill,
I guess I should cut you some slack after last evenings display of a no spin zone actually spinning out of control. For quite a few hours after your performance I wondered just what might be bugging you. The only diagnosis that made sense to me was post traumatic stress syndrome. You are a veteran of the “war on christmas”, a bloodless, albeit hysterical, campaign that has since drifted into a ten month hiatus. The psychological impact must be demoralizing and the loss of a bloviatable issue; devastating.

But trying to make the Judge Cashman issue a lightening rod for civil unrest has fallen far short of it’s mark. So short that you had to stoop to lying by omission just to have something to talk about in your Talking Points last night. I mentioned in my last writing that you would have to bring this down to the lunatic left. Sure enough, you did.

You said that the Brattleboro newspaper ran an editorial saying that “lengthy jail terms without rehabilitation accomplish nothing”. Two sentences later you launched your attack on the newspaper, the phalanx of which was that the newspaper said “lengthy jail terms accomplish nothing”. With that you were off on a three minute berating of the Brattleboro paper concluding that the editor was clueless and the entire publication was rife with left wing lunatics.

You left out two important words. “...without rehabilitation...”. Call me a non-premium but “lengthy jail terms without rehabilitation accomplish nothing” sounds pretty sensible to me. I thought that was the idea behind penitentiaries anyway. Come to think of it, your paraphrase of “lengthy jail terms accomplish nothing” makes sense too. I guess it’s all in how you spin it.

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?