Skip to content

The O’Reilly Factor’s Insult to Its Viewers Generally and to African Americans in Particular

September 25, 2009

In what universe is a professor of rap music an expert on foreign policy?

I am a big fan of The O’Reilly Factor. I think O’Reilly has done heroic work in taking on the media left, in speaking up for the little guy, in pursuing sex offenders and corrupt judges and being a stand up guy on a whole host of issues. I watch him regularly and regard him as a pioneer in honest television.

That said, I find his continued promotion of Professor Marc Lamont Hill an embarrassment to his own standards and an insult to the intelligence of African Americans particularly and his entire audience generally. Tonight he interviewed Hill for an entire segment on the subject of Iran, as though Hill had anything intelligent to say on the subject. Mr. Hill do you think we should give Iran three months or six months to let the UN inspectors in? How would Marc Lamont Hill know? How would he even be in a position to make an intelligent speculation?  By his own account, Hill is an expert on “hip-hop culture,” i.e., rap music. His academic degree is in education. What are his views on foreign policy worth, unless putting him on was designed to show up the shallow views of the left? Hill is in fact a knee jerk leftist, a defender of ACORN and a man whose attitudes toward race are a throwback to the sixties. I wonder if O’Reilly understands that putting on such a lightweight feeds the racism of low expectations. There are  very intelligent blacks (and leftists) who could provide an interesting foil for conservative views if that was the agenda. Having a Columbia professor of rap music comment on the foreign policy views of Karl Rove (who was featured in the preceding segment) is demeaning to Rove and embarrassing to every African American watching. First we have a figure involved in every major foreign policy decision of the Bush administration who happens to be white. Then we have an aficionado of rap music who happens to be black? What does that say to the television viewer?

If O’Reilly wants to bring Hill on to defend Ludacris or some other morally-challenged rapper then fine. If he is the best defender that ACORN can get, then fine too. But spectacles like tonight’s segment are like circus sideshows that reflect poorly on the judgment of the Factor’s producers and are unworthy of the Factor itself.

Editor’s note: Here are some of Professor Hill’s previous appearances on the Factor:

  1. theblanque permalink
    September 25, 2009 7:04 pm

    Wait, wait…

    Dr. Marc Lamont Hill is an expert on rap music?

    Bill O’Reilly asked an expert on rap music to comment on Iran?

    That explains so much…

    • Joe permalink
      October 16, 2009 2:20 pm

      So Hill has a Ph.D in English, and Horowitz has a Master’s in English Literature, but Horowitz is more qualified in his opinion about foreign relations with his Master’s than Hill is with his Ph.D?

      • swemson permalink
        October 16, 2009 4:20 pm

        Yeah… you’re precisely right…

        Why you ask ?

        Because David Horowitz is a brilliant man with decades of real life experience dealing with these matters from both sides of the debate, whereas Hill, is a bigoted race baiting kid with a twisted world view, whose affirmative action PhD isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on…

        Get it NOW ?

        • Sean permalink
          October 16, 2009 4:38 pm

          Let me get this straight. Hill has Ph.D. which is based on facts and scholarly sources. As opposed to Horowitz, who only uses his personal opinions and experiences to qualifiy him as more informed.

          Let me educate you. In today’s global world, you only have to watch tv, read the newspaper, and read zillions of articles on line (crdible sources based on facts) to be informed and make conclusions on what you see and hear. If you can read, the facts, and have evidence to back up what you say, that makes you credible. That is why people have what is called a Ph.D. They can back up what they say with evidence (sources and research).

          A bigoted racist can have 50 years of real life experiences and it will still make him a bigoted racist. That includes Horowtz and you.

          Also, how do you know he recieved a PhD through affirmative action? Did you ask him? Did you read it somewhere that stated this evidence?
          Or, did you assume this because he is black? That’s called racist. But, you already knew that.

          Man, I am so glad that Obama became president. Why? I will tell you why. All the hidden racists are coming out in full force. And “we” better be scared of people such as yourself.

          • swemson permalink
            October 16, 2009 7:32 pm

            I know he’s an ignorant racist and bigot because I’ve heard him talk on far too many occasions…

            Anthropology of Education ???

            A degree in such a made up subject is by definition a BULLS*^T degree….

            Man, I am so glad that Obama became president. Why? I will tell you why. All the hidden racists are coming out in full force. And “we” better be scared of people such as yourself.

            You’re the racist my friend…. Not I

            And we’re not buying your BULLS*^T indignation any longer…

            Your shake down game is gone….

            Go try working for a living and stop whining !

        • Lou permalink
          October 16, 2009 8:50 pm

          I see. But let me point out a couple things out. Apparently, in a right-winger’s mind:

          1. A man with a Master’s in English Literature from Cal-Berkley is more academically qualified than a man with a PHd from the University of Pennsylvania.

          2. You can call a black man with a PHd a “race-baiting kid” and in the same breath assume that his doctorate is a product of Affirmative Action???

          3. You can deem Anthropology of Education a “made up subject”, as if he is even remotely aware of the field.

          You can challenge the validity of Dr. Hill’s ideas and opinions, just as I can challenge the validity of Mr. Horowitz’s. Some things we may agree on and other things we will not. If you expect us to police and correct the ‘lunatics’ on the left, then I expect you guys to police those on the right that ‘aren’t too bright”.

        • MIKE LUCK permalink
          October 16, 2009 9:55 pm



          • Jack Hampton permalink
            October 17, 2009 10:51 am

            Mike out of Luck
            You find it in your caps key. LO)lolol

        • John permalink
          October 17, 2009 12:14 pm

          Do you enjoy being so bigoted? Should we also deport Blacks as well?

        • amadz permalink
          October 17, 2009 3:19 pm

          D. Horowitz a devil.

    • Sean permalink
      October 16, 2009 4:21 pm

      Help Me! I am confused. How is a man educated with a terminal degree not qualified? Someone please explain to me!!!!! Are journalism degrees what qualifies a person to be an expert for television and political science? Please tell me what are the qualifications for these reporters and journalists are other than “covering” stories and coming to their own conclusions, without viable sources.

      • Luis Vazquez permalink
        October 24, 2009 5:38 pm

        Orestes Ferrara was an italian who went to Cuba as a volunteer to fight for Cuba’s independence from Spain when he was a very young man.

        After Cuba gained its independence, he became a citizen and entered politics, at the same time he became a very distinguished writter and was regarded as one of the most brilliant intelectuals in the country.

        During the 30s he had a very heated debate with an adversary and this man, trying tom show how intelligent and educated he was, told Ferrara;

        “SENATOR; You are talking to someone who went to Havana University for several years”.

        Ferrara, with a smile on his face, replied calmly’

        “Sir, the bus on ROUTE #9 have gone by the Havana University dozens of times a day, for many, many years and it still cannot read or write.

    • October 24, 2009 3:07 am

      Given that a guest appears on O’Reilly (or whatever news show) and gives his/her opinion, then it should be clear all that Mr. Horowitz is saying that just because one has a high level of education does not mean they are an “expert” in that subject.

  2. J Williams permalink
    September 25, 2009 7:56 pm

    I think it is unfortunate for O’Reilly. I too have wondered about the credentials and credibility of Mr. Hill. He’s a regular Fox contributor but rarely contributes anything critical. For a contributor to be effective they must approach an issue with knowledge of all aspects of the issue debated and then argue the points logically. Mr. Hill has never done so. He simply parrots the talking points with rapid speech.

    I’ve said before that Bill O’Reilly “appears” to be comfortable enough in his ratings that he feels compelled to shift into entertainment mode and silliness. I rarely watch unless there is a particular guest or advertised issue of personal interest.

  3. bruce nahin permalink
    September 25, 2009 8:01 pm

    I thought Dr Hill was a PHD in ” AFRO-AMERICAN STUDIES”- although I never agree with this articulate young man..lets not call him a specialist in ” Rap” music as that is inappropriate. No I dont think there should be ” Afro-american studies” etc as a degree- a class or two perhaps within sociology or Poli Sci, not a degree- but Lamont got one- so let’s acknowledge the accomplishment- he could have been on the streets selling drugs- but has elevated his lot- good for him- BUT having said all that- he is an Obama Apologist and clearly no expert on anything outside” AfroAmerican Studies” which doesnt include Geopolitics

    • stuart permalink
      September 26, 2009 10:27 pm

      Yes, the problem with Hill is that he’s not all that knowledgeable about most of the topics O’Reilly calls on him to comment about. He’s also often grating to listen to, for he’s partial to a rat-tat-tat style of speaking when he’s on the attack, cramming half-developed points, facts ripped out of context, and non-sequiturs into his bursts of speech.
      Horowitz is right that if a serious liberal or leftist is what O’Reilly seeks, there are far better people out there. By the way, I’m also irritated when he has Alan Colmes on. Colmes is smug, derisive, and vapid. As for liberals who acquit themselves well, Juan Williams comes to mind. Williams, unlike Colmes, does not dedicate himself to running interference for Obama or other Democratic bigwigs such as Lil’ Nancy.

    • Jack Hampton permalink
      October 18, 2009 2:58 am

      That was his speciality so what do you mean?

  4. Swemson permalink
    September 25, 2009 8:02 pm

    Giving O’Reilly the benefit of the doubt, I get the impression that the reason he keeps using Hill, is that he knows that the more people watch him, the more they will come to realize how utterly stupid and racist the crap that the left puts out actually is….

    I only watch O’Reilly these days when interesting guests like Bernie Goldberg, Newt, Glenn Beck, or Dennis Miller are on, and since I DVR everything and watch it later, I ALWAYS fast forward through his segments…

    Every time he opens his mouth, I think of the Cheshire Cat… Remember Carol’s classic ?… The Cheshire Cat would disappear, and only his toothy grin would remain… There’s nothing behind Hill’s toothy grin either….

    • theblanque permalink
      September 25, 2009 8:30 pm

      Giving O’Reilly the benefit of the doubt, I get the impression that the reason he keeps using Hill, is that he knows that the more people watch him, the more they will come to realize how utterly stupid and racist the crap that the left puts out actually is….

      Which is still an abuse of his audience; one does not have to resort to deception to demonstrate the idiocy and bigotry of the Left–as Glenn Beck has demonstrated well enough.

      It is a black mark on O’Reilly to do what he has done–and continues to do!

      • Swemson permalink
        September 25, 2009 9:41 pm

        OK.. but O’Reilly is locked into this “fair and balanced” blueprint for the show that requires him to present opposing sides on every issue…. Is Sharpton, who Bill also uses occasionally, any different… ?

        Isn’t every word that comes out of his mouth just as predictable as Hills ?

        When someone with a PhD speaks nonsense, doesn’t it sound just a little more outrageous, because of the PhD ?

        Sometimes it seems that most non-MD’s who want people to refer to them as “Doctor” are a bit pompous to begin with… Using that honorific on Hill seems just as ludicrous as referring to a charlatan like Sharpton, as “The Reverend…..

        • Luis R Vazquez permalink
          October 16, 2009 10:24 pm

          I would like to read more comments on people like Ken Blackwell and other blacks, who are more interested in advancing the progress not only of their race, but of all americans alike.

    • September 26, 2009 9:57 am

      I agree with that comment completely! That is the one that suggests O’Reilly is giving a stage to a subject that should be seen and heard for what he/she is. I like O’Reilly but I am not a huge fan. He works too hard at riding that middle rail for my taste. He gives the “benefit of the doubt” more often I could. And my biggest complaint is that like the left, he stretches reality to in an effort to equalize issues and acts that not even close in the damage and insult they create. He just bends over left to darned far for me.

  5. rodgers permalink
    September 25, 2009 8:16 pm

    I too am a great admirer of Bill. I believe that Bill’s inventory of Black thinkers that he can have come on and will come on is limited and Hill is acceptable, even if not an expert.

    • David Thomson permalink
      September 26, 2009 12:28 am

      I am not absolutely sure—but I think Mark Lamont Hill is a paid guest. It is my understanding that he is considered to be a Fox “contributor.” Such individuals sign annual contracts with the network and are guaranteed minimally $65,000. A mere “guest” is not paid even one thin dime. At most, Fox picks up their travel expenses.

      Those who have earned a soft science Ph.D. rarely use their title in a public setting. It usually indicates someone suffering from an inferiority complex.

      • Joyce permalink
        September 26, 2009 12:35 pm

        $65,000.00 a year to contribute to Fox/O’Reilly? Lordy mercy! Where can I sign up? I can do a much better job than Hill.

        • Swemson permalink
          September 26, 2009 12:39 pm

          But how bright is your smile ?

      • winoceros permalink
        September 27, 2009 11:35 am

        I’ve got a current sociology instructor on an online course (!) who refers to her M.S. after her own name all the time. Yeesh.

        The second time, years ago, I saw Hill on O’Reilly I went to the web to find his bio. Appalling. Publishing? Nil. Reputation? Nil. Why????

        • Swemson permalink
          September 27, 2009 1:42 pm

          Hill’s PhD is the perfect example of that old definition of PhD’s

          Piled Higher & Deeper.

          • Sean permalink
            October 16, 2009 4:49 pm

            Go back to school and get your PhD. You will be so proud of yourself when you are finished.

            They tell me that the GED is easier now. It should take you about 10 years to 1) get your GED 2)get your 4 year degree 3) get a masters, and 4) finish a PhD program. Yeah, I say you can be finished in ten years. It will take about 15 to 17 years if you work full time. I know Burger King has flexible hours.

            Come on, we really need more educated people in the world. Because I know, you can’t have a high school education and say the things that you say. That is called “ignorance!!!”

            Its a wonder that you can even read. Oh snap, maybe that is the problem. You don’t even understand what you are reading. Don’t worry, they have readng classes, too.

            • swemson permalink
              October 17, 2009 3:34 pm

              Those who can do….. do

              Those who can’t do… teach !

              I only had one year of graduate school before I joined he Marine Corps in 1968…

              And I’d love to take that clown on, on virtually any academic subject at all, (with the exception of “black studies” of course)

  6. fiftyfifty permalink
    September 25, 2009 8:45 pm

    Marc Hill this guy would fine racism in a bag potato chips.

    • Joseph Cottrell permalink
      September 26, 2009 3:15 am

      Of course he would – potato chips tend to be all white!

  7. Kenneth Gareau permalink
    September 26, 2009 2:24 am

    What he is doing with this issue parallels other issues he has done. Tonights segment on the Muslim prayers in D.C. had him bring on the representative, Ms/Mrs. Edina Lekovic, from MPAC. He had Beck on and said that we should not worry about Socialism and Communism because they have not been a threat since Reagan (my words to indicate time frame.) In the instances above he has nver in recent times brought on Robert Spencer or you to discuss the relevance of Islam and Edina’s remarks or you for counter balance on Communism position. With Edina tonight he also said that he can relate to being smeared because like her he is faithful to his religion, Catholicism, as she is to hers, Islam; and when the press smeared all Catholics for the deeds of a few priests and pedophelia he felt it was wrong. This attitude probably stems from the fact that he clings like stink on poop to the notion that Islam is a religion of peace and it is a moderate religion taken over by zealous Jihadists.

    Someone should wake this man up!

    • jbtrevor permalink
      September 26, 2009 5:23 am

      I happened to catch that segment of O’Reilly and was shocked at his comparison of the few Catholic Priests pedophiles to the outrageous behaviour of Muslims who kill, rape, terrorize and seek world dominance.

      The Catholic Church has never taught the ascribed behaviour, Islam has.

      As to why he has Prof. Hill on…I don’t get it either, David.

      • BibiothecaSacra permalink
        September 26, 2009 7:35 am

        Seriously, a “few” Roman Catholic pedolphiles? Maybe you consider 1268 Roman Catholic priests, cardinals, bishops, and lay-people in your organization, (I dare not call it a ‘church’), that have either been indicted, imprisoned, or who have escaped under civil settlements, a “few”. I consider the 10’s of thousands of children irreparably harmed by your organizaion a modern day ‘holocost’ resulting for a systemic corruption driven by corrupt doctrine. A little humility and repsentance madam is the tone of the day for you, not denial or self-justification for having been born in a theo-sophical cult claiming histoical roots for which is cannot substantiate. Shame on you for not listening to the reformers and remaining in an old wrong and an old deception.

        • theblanque permalink
          September 26, 2009 12:44 pm

          Yes, 1268 out of 1.115 billion is a “few”.

          I’d love to know where you got the “10’s of thousands of children” figure.

        • Swemson permalink
          September 26, 2009 2:03 pm

          Equating islam with catholicism… hmmm

          Well to start, both religions have a totally irrational view of anything related to sex..

          Islam relegates women to the status of domestic slaves, & covers them up with robes and masks, less they shame the men by letting any other man see more than their eyes… The men use their fingers to wipe their asses for fear that something ungodly, like toilet paper, would touch their “holy of holies”.. Their religion has kept them enslaved to a life that disgracefully denies the very essence of what it means to be human… why, so their evil rulers, those hateful mullahs, can maintain their authoritarian control over them…..

          Now catholicism teaches that sex is “original sin”… That the most natural and joyful act that humans can undertake, is evil… But everyone does it anyway, so they’re forced to seek forgiveness from the Pope’s nearest local franchisee, and put their coins in the plate after services… The catholic suppression of sexual desire in all of its field agents, is so cruel and unnatural, that eventually, a good percentage of them just flip out.. Who wouldn’t ? Sexual repression that severe leads to all kinds of perversion, and yes, there are MANY of them that succumb….

          Mssr. LeBanque says that; “Yes, 1268 out of 1.115 billion is a “few”.”

          But we weren’t talking about catholics, we were talking about catholic priests, and yes, 1,268 priests fondling alter boys from ANY one religion is a very big deal indeed..

          And I think that “10’s of thousands of children” is a horribly low estimate.. This crap didn’t start yesterday, the catholic church has been around for quite a while, so if 1,200 kids got molested ever ten years for the last 500 years, (remember I’m not counting the previous 1,500 years) that number becomes 6,000,000 kids… i.e.: what the catholic church is doing to its congregation is pretty much the same as what our new messiah is doing to the American public…

          The bigger question to me however, is what would human civilization be like if nobody ever came up with the absurd idea that there’s an all knowing, all powerful invisible man up in the sky who controls every single aspect of the lives of every person on earth… ? ( oh… and loves us)

          OK, so let’s add one more factor to this tragic fairy tale. Did you ever notice that each and every religious group is ABSOLUTELY SURE, that THEIR god is the one true god and all others are bogus….?

          BTW, Whatever happened to all of those other gods, like Zeus, Thor and Neptune, whatever became of them ? Did they just become obsolete, get replaced by newer models ?

          So in my view, that most people simply despise of course, I say that religion itself is the true cause of MOST of the misery that man has suffered over the ages…(especially right now) In the same way that the left uses race to divide us, religion has been using a whole slew of invisible men and fairy tales for the exact same purpose over the centuries…. Religion has NEVER been about god… religion is about the priesthood, and their desperate need to maintain their power over mankind…

          So you’ll have to forgive me, when I get nasty and abusive, every time I hear people claim that the only way to defeat the 7th century barbarians who are trying to kill us all, is by getting down on our knees with our heads bowed, and praying to our invisible friend to conquer the invisible friend of the mullahs…

          Don’t forget folks, getting down on your knees with your head bowed, is the perfect position to assume when you’re about to be beheaded !

          • The Inquisitor permalink
            September 27, 2009 5:50 am

            Rather harsh words, Swenson.

            I agree that the sexual repression preached by some religions is harmful, perhaps just as harmful as the trash culture’s promulgation of Murphy Brown single parenthood. But sex isn’t all there is to Western Civilization’s experience with religion. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

            I could list a number of positive contributions of Christianity, but I will settle on the one that I consider to be of paramount importance today. It serves as a bulwark against the state. All totalitarian regimes try to destroy religion. They cannot allow allegiance to anything but the state.

            P.S. The author of the statistics included lay-people, that is all Catholics.

            • Swemson permalink
              September 27, 2009 11:50 am

              It’s true that, “totalitarian regimes try to destroy religion”.. but they do so because they want COMPLETE control over the people, and they must compete for that control with the church, which has also sought power over the people for thousands of years…

              But whatever strategic role religion plays in blocking totalitarian regimes now, it more than makes up for by all the horrors that religion has brought down upon humanity over the centuries.

              Religion is the single biggest cause of war (9/11). It divides people, which breeds violence (Northern Ireland), it teaches bigotry (KKK burning crosses) it tries to eliminate its enemies (Salem Mass, the Inquisition) and force itself on non-believers (the Crusades) It has been responsible for more murder, misery and mayhem than any other factor in history… It has even aided and abetted totalitarian regimes like the Nazis whose main organizational tool was hatred of the jews, and whose murder of millions of people didn’t seem to bother the vatican very much…

              And let’s not forget that it’s the direct cause of more than 1000 years of islamic brutality….

              Yes, my words about the church were a bit harsh, and also well deserved.

            • The Inquisitor permalink
              September 27, 2009 12:47 pm

              You seem to be living in the past. I don’t know of any Christians who want to use the Iron Maiden on witches or anyone else, do you? If there were then their past might be relevant. Muslims do cling to their barbaric past and therefore should be held accountable. Moreover, the wickedness that Christians were responsible for in the past was not an integral part of their religion.

              One might just as well say that White people are inherently evil because they condoned slavery in the past. Generations of people, those who are religious and those who aren’t, change over time.

            • Swemson permalink
              September 27, 2009 1:59 pm

              I disagree…

              Christians still try to force their belief system on others. And many, on both sides of the aisle believe like I do, that they wouldn’t hesitate to force all of us to live by their rules if they thought they could get away with it..

              The difference between christianity campaigning for laws that prohibit abortion and gay marriage, are the same as what Islqam is doing, albeit in a far less violent a manner…

              I suggest you watch an incredible program called Judgment Day on NOVA, from PBS. You can watch it on the PBS website:


          • October 17, 2009 1:17 pm

            you seem very smart and very dumb all at the same time…..

        • jbtrevor permalink
          September 26, 2009 2:59 pm


          My point was, the behaviours described are taught in, sanctioned & expected of all men in Islam, it isn’t in Catholicism…on that they should not be compared.

          To be sure Pedophilia by Catholic Priests or anyone is one of the vilest crimes committed in this country and in my opinion far too tolerated.

          You are correct, my use of the term “a few” was ill-chosen and after some thought deflected form the point I was trying to make (above).

          I live in VT where pedophilia is rampant and tolerated; a matter of much concern to Bill O’Reilly…on this Bill & I agree.

          • Luis Vazquez permalink
            September 27, 2009 10:11 pm

            To those of you who keep talking and discussing religion, I recommend to look for a book- a little over 100 pages- titled the Ruins of Palmira, written by a french philosopher, CONSTANTINO “COUNT” OF VOLNEY.

            Once you read it, you will find out that discussing religion is not worth the while. EACH ONE OF US LOOK FOR THE SAME OBJECTIVE. THE DIFFERENCE IS IN THE ROAD WE FOLLOW.

            I have learned to appreciate the individual by who he is, not by what he believes in.

        • Jack Hampton permalink
          October 18, 2009 3:01 am

          Horse Apples

      • theblanque permalink
        September 26, 2009 12:59 pm

        I was far more shocked by his claim that he was a faithful Catholic; his cafeteria Catholicism is pretty well known.

    • Geppetto permalink
      September 26, 2009 9:16 am

      We have a world full of pundits, politicians, etc. who have yet to make even a modest effort to familiarize themselves with fundamental Islamic teachings and attitudes that are at the root of much of the violence and turmoil occurring around the world. The mantra of the politically correct West is, “Islam is a religion of peace” despite the mounting evidence that the exact opposite is true and there are few with the courage to accept, much less publicly speak, that truth.

      Where are the major media interviews with Robert Spenser, Hugh Fitzgerald, Brigette Gabriel, Pamela Geller, Daniel Pipes, Dr. Walid Phares, Geert Wilders and many others who have unimpeachable credentials and experience relevant to this subject? Where are the networks with the curiosity and courage to air in prime time, documentaries like Obsession, Fitna, Farewell Israel, The Third Jihad? Do they not know or care or have they not heard?

      Judging from their relative silence, what they likely know and what they’ve heard is the venomous outrage that emanates from the global Muslim propaganda machine that viciously and sometimes physically attacks those who publicly condemn Islamic radicalism and the Muslim hierarchy. And, indoctrinated and committed to the Western notions of political correctness and multiculturalism, they apparently become too confused, disoriented and intimidated to believe their lying eyes and ears in the face of the overwhelming evidence.

      As with Hitler, his Nazi regime and the holocaust they’ll all be wringing their hands, perhaps when it’s too late, wondering why nobody noticed what was going on, some would say for centuries. Pundits like Oreilly will be at the head of that list assuming he and his ilk still have an international stage to express their views.

      Unless we recognize that the Judeo/Christian view of tolerance, freedom of choice and the separation of Church and State is in no way comparable to the Islamic world view of intolerance, rejection and domination of all who are not Muslim, we are doomed to a life of subjugation; the return of slavery on a global scale.

      Maybe it’s too outrageous and therefore unbelievable a concept. Islamic fundamentalist, not “radicals,” are counting on it, intending to “destroy our miserable house from within,” the Grand Jihad. We don’t have a clue, evident by the spinning of our military wheels in the Islamic muck of the Middle East in a vain attempt to “win the hearts and minds.” September 11th was a wake up call but we, unwittingly, got up on the wrong side of the bed.

      • Joseph White permalink
        September 26, 2009 2:51 pm

        Where are the major media interviews with Robert Spenser, Hugh Fitzgerald, Brigette Gabriel, Pamela Geller, Daniel Pipes, Dr. Walid Phares, Geert Wilders and many others who have unimpeachable credentials and experience relevant to this subject? Where are the networks with the curiosity and courage to air in prime time, documentaries like Obsession, Fitna, Farewell Israel, The Third Jihad? Do they not know or care or have they not heard?

        They are afraid they’ll be sued by CAIR, MB, MBIA, etc. These are the same folks that can’t beat us in a fair fight, so they go to the courts and try to win there. The other reason may be that the big four are so far up obama’s backside that they can see his teeth from inside his mouth. They don’t want to speak against their chosen messiah. After all, he calls islam a peaceful religion.

        • Luis Vazquez permalink
          October 24, 2009 6:23 pm

          Joseph: They are afraid to suffer the same fate as FOX NEWS.

          You must keep in mind that Barak Obama, Rham Emmanuel and Axelrold are the new Rockefellers, JP Morgan, etc.

          They control the Big Corporations and they decide who gets the BIG ADVERTISING MONEY.

      • Swemson permalink
        September 26, 2009 3:21 pm

        If you haven’t heard Pat Condell speak on the subject of Islam, then you’re really missing something…

        These are all SHORT videos… and they’re all spot on !

        Pat’s a former stand up comedian who couldn’t find anything amusing left in this world gone mad, so he started speaking his mind in the most forthright and entertaining manner imaginable..

        There are dozens of his videos on all sorts of subject that are also worth looking at…

        • The Inquisitor permalink
          September 27, 2009 10:15 am

          Thanks for putting me on to these great videos. I laughed out loud.

          • Swemson permalink
            September 27, 2009 12:59 pm

            I’m glad you liked them…

            Sometimes it’s easier to get your message out with humor, rather than anger…

  8. Keithstir permalink
    September 26, 2009 2:46 am

    Has the the format of the ‘Factor’ increased it’s airtime on cultural issues more in the last year or two? (or is it just me) Marc Hill might be part of the game plan as opposed to someone who actually has an opposing opinion without the cultural ‘spin’.

    His opinion on events that affect us is no more relevant or significant than anyone I talk to throughout the day. As a matter of opinion, I find hm annoying.

    Bring on Thomas Sowell or J.C.Watts. Individuals I have a great deal of interest in hearing their views.

    • Kenneth Gareau permalink
      September 26, 2009 2:56 am

      For Keithstir,

      I would agree if that is what O’reilly or any one else that directs the content of the show is striving for.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 26, 2009 12:56 pm

      I think the backdrop behind O’Reilly on the set, should be a stained glass window.

  9. jac mills permalink
    September 26, 2009 3:56 am

    I agree that O’Reilly’s use of Marc Hill is a sham. My gut tells me Hill is on that show because he is black. He is a motor-mouth with speed of talk his only contribution. But I am not surprised he is used because O’Reilly’s show seems to be deteriorating as a news program. It is now more an entertainment show, with the likes of Culture Quiz and Body Language segments, etc. Hannity is more relevant now as a political commentator. O’Reilly may have the ratings now, but if his show were replaced by Glenn Beck’s show, for instance, ratings would soar. Prediction: this will be O’Reilly’s last contract with Fox. Rupert Murdoch does not suffer fools for too long.

    • 6mmppc permalink
      September 26, 2009 8:49 am

      jac, I think you hit on many correct assumptions. Hill is on the program because he is black, and plays O’Reilly’s game. Of course he’s getting paid. His opinion is 100% pro black, regardless what the subject is. Same for his opinion of Obama, he could do no wrong. Hill offers no reasonable commentary on anything unless it’s black.

      As far as O’Reilly’s show goes, you are again correct, it’s not a news show anymore. This Culture Warrior thing is ridiculous. Hoover is an air-head with no clear thought in her head. Nobody cares about Culture Quiz. Where is the coverage of real news and current events?

      I also believe he unfairly uses Beck on his show. He brings Beck on, asks him about his opinions, Beck tells it like it is, and O’Reilly’s ratings go up. Beck should realize this.

      With Beck’s rating going up all the time, Beck ay very well replace O’Reilly in prime time.

      • Swemson permalink
        September 26, 2009 3:08 pm


        Hill is NOT 100% pro black..

        To be “pro” black, you must be an advocate for their well being. The kind of racist garbage that Hill spouts, is NOT doing one damn bit of good for the blacks.. He’s just perpetuating the fallacy that all their problems are caused by white racists, which doesn’t encourage them to get off their fat welfare asses, and start to take responsibility for their own lives…

        And NO… I’m not speaking about ALL blacks.. !

  10. The Inquisitor permalink
    September 26, 2009 4:44 am

    I thought Hill taught at Temple.

  11. Lighthorseman permalink
    September 26, 2009 5:22 am

    Thank you David and all commentators! I thought I was the only one who felt that way. I always cringe when Hill is on. Maybe we are all jaded with the fact leftists just don’t think normally.

    O’Reilly would benefit by having real leftist black spokespersons who are qualified in the arenas to be discussed. Better yet, Bill ought to serve as moderator with Dr. Sowell and some left wing black spokesman or woman. Dr. Sowell would clean all of their clocks.

    • Samuel permalink
      September 26, 2009 2:38 pm

      Thank you Lighthorseman. Your thoughts parallel mine so close I’d thought I was writing them.


  12. Beverly Partain permalink
    September 26, 2009 5:44 am

    I haven’t watched O’Reilly in a long time…Beck is my man and I trust him implicitly. My honest opinion is that O’Reilly tries to ride the fence and doesn’t take a stand….give me Beck who says what he means, means what he says, and doesn’t change it tomorrow.

  13. Janet permalink
    September 26, 2009 5:47 am

    I agree with everything you’ve written relative to Bill O’Reilly and “Dr.” Hill, David, and all my feelings and comments have already been noted above, except to say that I usually watch Bill in the evening in my bedroom and whenever he hosts “Dr.” Hill, I automatically remember that its time to brush my teeth. Last night I thought the contrast between him and the African Amberican Mothers hosted by Glenn Beck earlier was truly amazing. When I have thoughts such as those, it gives me comfort to realize that I am not in any way a racist.

  14. September 26, 2009 6:05 am

    I have been uneasy about Dr. Hill’s commentaries since day one, and I thank you for putting my gut feelings into articulate sentences!!

  15. Judy permalink
    September 26, 2009 6:10 am

    The Bill O’Reilly show seems to have taken on a different tone this year and not for the better. I too have been disappointed with Marc Hill, Al “show me the money” Sharpton,Ms Lekcovic putting a happy face on Islam, and others that have no substance and limited contribution. Dr. Hill’s answers are predictable and so pro-Obama he appears to be an Obama commercial. His constant state of staccato quick-jab responses are unnerving and irritating. I turned on Red Eye last evening only to watch Hill being introduced as a professor of African-American studies at Columbia. I turned it off. I suggested Professor Sowell via email last year to both O’Reilly and Beck. His brilliant insight and analysis of the cause and effects of the Progressive Movement is spot on and highlight the destruction of the family, economy and religion. JC Watts is another guest that offers intelligent and relevant analysis.Keithstir, you are correct when you note that O’Reilly’s show has taken a lean to pop culture and pop entertainment.

  16. Teddy permalink
    September 26, 2009 6:11 am

    I too, wish that Bill would not have Dr. Lamont on his program. He has some other good segments but has a lot of sexual content as well. When we know that that is coming on we totally turn it off. The most interesting in my opinion is when he discusses serious subjects with people who know what they are talking about. The world is in a frightful condition and to have these silly segments is beneath him really. Please Bill wake up!!!

    • Swemson permalink
      September 26, 2009 12:47 pm

      O’Reilly and Hannity showed the clip of Carrie Prejean so many times, that they demonstrated how the sexual repression of the catholic church, is almost as bad as it is in Islam…

  17. JJsoltis permalink
    September 26, 2009 7:25 am

    Bill O has lost it.In my mind, ever since before the election he stated on his radio show that he saw NO real difference between Obama and McCain.
    Bill is the clown at the party.
    Give me Beck for serious content.

  18. BibiothecaSacra permalink
    September 26, 2009 7:25 am

    Maybe we missed the intent here? Dr. Hill is the token guest and a lead-in to attrack more black viewers to the OReilly Factor. Colin Powell could have been invited but he hasn’t the credibility with young viewers and would not attract the intended young black audience even though he is a better skilled and well educated, (and even though a liberal, I respect). Bill is a businessman, however mislead he is, he makes “end justifying” decisions in order to communicate his message. I sort of like Bill and respect his work but he is a rather narrow man and has no moorings other than a pseudo Romanist (catholic) mentality. He is basically well educated on the issues, poorly educted in matters of logic but strongly opinionated and very hard-headed. He has a hard time seeing through any other monocular than his own. I am a conservative, Christian, and formally/classically educated. Bill lost me a long time ago not due to his conservatism, but due to his inability to see past his next segment. He has no vision or ability to grasp the cultural flux of the day. He has completely misread the heart and soul of Obama, (which is very malignant and very deceptive), in favor of an “end justifying” goal. Shame on Bill OReilly and shame on network news.

  19. Bob permalink
    September 26, 2009 7:57 am

    Hill is an education professor at Columbia. Why is he the expert on political or cultural blackness on Bill’s program? Look at the national educational system’s breakdown and then hold that image up to Lamont’s world-view. You will see a defunct proposition.

  20. Don Jones permalink
    September 26, 2009 8:17 am

    I couldn’t agree moore,

  21. Joseph White permalink
    September 26, 2009 8:23 am

    When I saw, “Professor of Rap Music,” I almost lost my breakfast. When did universities start teaching classes in Rap? and what does that have to do with education?

    It is fluff courses like that, that allow people to get degrees that mean nothing. The fact that O’Rielly uses him as a foreign policy expert just demonstrates that even the Factor can make a mistake.

    If he wanted serious debate, he could have asked Colin Powell, or any of Obama’s Czars, what they thought. We might have gotten a more serious debate.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 26, 2009 12:50 pm

      He can’t get Powell..

  22. MaryAnn permalink
    September 26, 2009 8:36 am

    I always turn the sound off when Hill comes on. Professor of rap music? LOL!

  23. ElanaSe permalink
    September 26, 2009 8:51 am

    It’s not for nothing his show called “O’Reilly factor”. It’s all about and around O’Reilly all the time. He tries to be balanced to prove that he IS a registered independent indeed, but “fair” I wouldn’t call it.
    But I have a different approach to this particular guest of his – Marc Lamont Hill. He is a very young man. How old is he? Ready? 31. There is a huge potential in this “debate” – Hill becomes actually exposed to the sane right ideas (what many leftists avoid) and forced to give valid answers (which he can’t most of the times). He brings bogus arguments and talks about issues he doesn’t understand, but the bottom line is that he IS BEING EXPOSED.
    At the same segment I and my spouse were talking about the same issue and I recalled (surprise!) David Horowitz, devoted leftist in the past. And I said, that I won’t be surprised if in 10 years Marc Lamont Hill will become some sort of soft right winger thanks to that influence of the Fox news segments.
    It’s a long term impact, it might happen it might not, but as a leftist (not far) in the past I would give it a shot.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 26, 2009 12:53 pm



      I tried to make the same point in my earliest post on this blog…

  24. Bob Schwalbaum permalink
    September 26, 2009 2:00 pm

    Bill O’Reilly’s greatest nightmare is being labelled a “right-wing nut” a la Glenn Beck.

    To recommend Dr. Thomas Sowell (a REAL PHD!) as a replacement for “Dr. Hill” is preposterous.

    By letting Hill rant, it makes O’Reilly seem almost normal, while Dr. Sowell would show up O’Reilly as the true windbag that he really is.

  25. Eileen permalink
    September 26, 2009 4:46 pm

    I totally agree that Lamont Hill is a waste of time on the O’Reilly Factor. I think he is lacking in intelligence to answer and debate the issues.

  26. Rich Hall permalink
    September 26, 2009 6:07 pm

    I have to say I generally trust Bill O’Reilly. David Horowitz is one of my HEROS ( Love you, man! ). Marc Lamont Hill seems to be stuck on racist victimology and is predictably boring. He wastes everyone’s time while on TV.

    IRAN is such a serious threat both to our national security and very likely to our economy, why not have some truly intelligent, knowledgeable and cogent voices such as Robert Baer and Michael Ledeen?

  27. Luis Vazquez permalink
    September 26, 2009 8:54 pm

    Here I agree one hundred percent with your judgement.

    I must admit that as much as I respect Mr. O’Reilly’s political and social views, he confuses me with some of his points.

    I believe that he is trying to appease the left by inviting some of them to his show. Maybe, just maybe, he is trying to expose them and that is good, if that is the case.

    Relating to This Professor Hill, I think that Lamont Sanford is better suited for representing his peers than him.

    It is a good thing that most of his words are unintelligible.

  28. Esteban Cafe, World permalink
    September 26, 2009 9:05 pm

    I wonder if this is a nod to the Black community? A producer likely approached Mr. O’R and pointed out that his ratings for this population segment were very low and, if he got them up, he’d be grandly rewarded.

    We should be concerned only if Blacks respond to a editorial news program because there is a rap afficianado as guest. I”m more interested in hearing from Blacks who have a Fair and Balanced view of welfare, reparations, Katrina, etc. Where are they and who is giving them a mic or pages in the NY Times.

  29. Wally permalink
    September 26, 2009 9:33 pm

    Why do you watch O’Reilly. I am a conservative and I find him a pompous, arrogant charlatan…just like O’Bama. His mantra “Looking after the little guy, you” is such a crock. Yes, I do occassionally watch, but I can only watch so long until I get sick of his act…..wake up. Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Russ Limbaugh & Sean Hannity have so much more class then this fool. Did I say I can’t stand him!

  30. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 27, 2009 2:34 am

    It is more than obvious that you are anti Catholic and might verge on being ahater in the mold of a nazis or the KKK. You mention nothing about the steps taken to remedy the church of the vile molester which pricipally stem from having there siminary schools taken over and run by homosexual pedophiles and the church investigated and are taking the steps to root out this problem. You toss out the oldest chrictian church in extent by demeaning it as simply an organization. That would be like saying all Baptist were child molesters of who we have had one baptist minister that has been convicted of molesting over thirty young boys in my home town alone. this problem is not something that is unique to the Catholic church but to many denominations because the molesters are attracteded to these fields because of there exposure to the young. The Catholic church handled it badly at first but have now taken the agressive steps necessary. It is crime and problem that all churchs must be wary of just as Little League Baseball or the YMCA, You might consider affilliating yourself with the Taliban seems it would be a good match for you.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 27, 2009 11:18 am


      When you say:

      “the molesters are attracteded to these fields because of there exposure to the young.”

      You prove that you don’t understand the problem at all…

      The church doesn’t ATTRACT pedophiles… the church CREATES pedophiles, by forcing them to live a life of celibacy…

      The church teaches that sex OF ALL KINDS is original sin.. By conning someone into a life of celibacy, based on the fairy tale of a virgin birth, they’re literally creating walking time bombs….

      “Celibacy is the cruelest of all perversions”

      • September 27, 2009 11:31 am

        I think you’re off base in suggesting that celibacy creates pedophilia in priests.

        Throughout history there have been plenty of priests who have ignored the requirement of celibacy. And they just have sex with adult women. Being forced to be celibate doesn’t pervert people into being attracted to children. Got any research Swem?

        • Swemson permalink
          September 27, 2009 1:36 pm


          I’m certainly not claiming it makes all those who are celibate become perverts..

          What I actually AM saying is that celibacy itself is a perversion that causes many practitioners to eventually just flip out and find sexual gratification wherever they can, and in a number of different ways… alter boys being the most commonly discussed. I don’t doubt that many who join the clergy are already homosexual…. but the facts speak for themselves..

          When the church demands that priests become celibate, they force them to live an UNNATURAL life, and as the old saying goes, you can’t fool with mother nature…

          • Kenneth Gareau permalink
            September 27, 2009 1:47 pm


            Your posts really bring out your warped views on “religion”. David asked you to cite studies proving your assertions, you give us none, just your opinion. Opinions you can have as your own but not your own facts. You also mix terminology, in one case using the term “Religion” and in the next breath you use the term Church. It appeas you have a separation of “Church and Religion” issue. They are not the same.

            Celebacy makes people “flip out”, wow science at its best!

            • Swemson permalink
              September 27, 2009 3:59 pm


              Your response to what I said, is exactly what I expect from brainwashed religious loons…

              Yes my OPINIONS are my opinions… but if you think I’d ever fall for that old trick of trying to argue against religion by using logic or scientific evidence, you’re even a bigger fool than I think you are…

              Your side of the argument is based upon thousands of years of fairy tales and superstition, which according to most religious folks is “sacred” and therefore cannot be debated…

              Nobody in all of man’s history has ever produced ONE IOTA of real evidence that proves the existence of any kind of supreme being….. and the only thing that’s more idiotic than trying to prove the existence of a god, is trying to prove that no such thing exists…

              You can’t prove a negative… You (all religious folks) are the ones walking into the party having a conversation with the little green man on your shoulder… why would I ever try to use logic to argue with anyone that crazy that no such invisible green man exists…

              You’re the ones pushing this insanity…I don’t have to prove one damn thing to you…..

          • jbtrevor permalink
            September 27, 2009 1:50 pm

            Jack/David, please excuse my interference with your exchange, but I have to say …

            Swemson, “celibacy itself is a perversion” is your opinion and certainly not supported by the centuries of it’s practice by not only Catholic men + women but other faiths as well, Buddhists, Hindus,etc. and psychological data.

            Lack of sexual control is a perversion.

            • Swemson permalink
              September 27, 2009 4:20 pm


              I must respectfully disagree..

              Mankind exists via sex.. it’s one of the most basic parts of our identity… and one of the most joyful things that humans can do…………. And the church calls it original sin…

              By declaring natural sexual behavior sinful, the priests con the innocent into coming to see them and to pay them to forgive their sin in order to insure that their ticket to fantasyland isn’t revoked…

              IMHO. it’s the most disgraceful shakedown ever perpetuated on mankind…

              To propose that anyone spend his or her ENTIRE life denying the very basic essence of who and what they are, is to ask them to behave in a totally unnatural way… and while many may pull it off, it’s still an absurd and unreasonable way to live….

              And the most visible proof of that happens to be the millions of alter boys whose lives were ruined as a result…

              Lack of sexual control can be a serious problem, but it isn’t necessarily a perversion… for most of my high school and college years, I had zero control over my sexual urges… I literally couldn’t get enough…

              Does that make me a pervert…???

            • jbtrevor permalink
              September 27, 2009 5:31 pm

              Pervert: a person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable especially in sexual behavior

              Swemson: I had zero control over my sexual urges… I literally couldn’t get enough…


      • Swemson permalink
        September 27, 2009 6:16 pm


        Show me a NORMAL young man from 15 to 25, who isn’t horny all the time….(and as I’m certain you know, I’m saying that tongue in cheek !)

        If that’s perversion, I guess that all of my friends and I are perverts…..

        Funny… I thought perverts never get over their urges, and… sorry to say, mine have been going downhill at a pretty good rate now that I’m in my 60’s

  31. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 27, 2009 2:58 am

    Please excuse my interference in your post but be assure you have nothing to repent for in regard to molesting young boys you were just the taget of a drive by bigot believe it or not if this guy owned a restaurant and could he would have a sign saying no Catholics allowed.

    Now David your post was right on the mark I listened to O’Rielly and to Lamont Hill several times but can no longer watch a segment while he is on he contributes nothing and yes he basically has a degree in rap music. I believe Bill has him on going over board to be fair and balanced but it is not fair to the viewers that expect a sensible debate I go else where till his segment is over. I feel it is to bad that Danny Glover will not appear so Bill cannot debate this genius. I will also have to add that despite still being a race hustler Al Sharpton has grown somewhat. His conduct during the Michael Jackson debacle was out right dignified compared to others including the father Joe Jackson. “Oh did I tell you our new record lable is gonna have Blue Ray Technology?

  32. Joy permalink
    September 27, 2009 5:27 am

    Glad o’Reilly has come in for such a well-served critique by people who seem to have more Conservative blood running in their little fingers than O’Reilly has in his whole body. Michael Savage is right in referring to him as “the Leprechan!” (sp?) I think O’Reilly’s day of usefulness has come & gone: He really did help build up that network (Fox News) and bring in millions of viewers; but as this movement has grown and is constantly developing, O’Reilly seems to be left behind. Being an “independent” (more of a fence-sitter, if you ask me) is not altogether correct – and it’s become somewhat of a boring mantra.

    Bill is arrogant and his d.o.m. persona still cannot be easily masked (he has a hard time – and so does everyone else! – listening to and WATCHING that Russian babe with the boobs & decollectage being the English-language linguist!). And talk about a weird relationship: What gives with/between Bill & that oddball “body-language expert?” And although I like Marilyn Carlson on the morning show, she & Hoover, bleached blond to a fare-thee-well, are cheapend by the blond look (almost de rigeur on Fox!), and their answers/commentaries are totally predictable; without real wit & verve, these two are totally boring.

    Yes, Bill’s reticence to REALLY criticize the mocha messiah, his use of the always predictable M. L. Hill (boy, did HE grab a nifty gig to augment his Columbia U. salary!) and his own very bad case of “bloviating” have all become nails in the coffin of what used to be his “top dog” status. He’s no longer the Fox “giant” that he used to be. But he did serve an extremely useful purpose in growing that network to the important outlet for generally Conservative opinion it is today.

  33. Evergreen78 permalink
    September 27, 2009 7:02 am

    I think Prof. Hill is on the Factor to do exactly what he does. He’s certainly not going to come on there & say, “Bill, you’re absolutely right.” I think he talks fast because O’Reilly never lets anyone finish a sentence. I say this because on Red Eye (which I seldom watch), Prof. Hill is one of the best guests. He fits right in & is witty & clever & FUNNY. Go figure.

  34. Claire Solt permalink
    September 27, 2009 9:31 am

    It is tokenism. while it is better than just calling the so-called black leaders like Sharpton, it is not much better. It is patronizing to blacks who have true exspertise in every field. Shows get stale because they rely on rolodexes that bring on the same people over and over.

  35. David Thomson permalink
    September 27, 2009 10:03 am

    I double checked and verified that Marc Lamont Hill is a listed Fox “contributor”—and that means he is being paid for his appearances. This not ready for prime time fellow reportedly gets minimally $65,000 annually for his efforts.

  36. Janet permalink
    September 27, 2009 11:40 am

    I think in light of the above verified salary all of us who occasionally, at least, watch O’Reilly should email him “either Dr. Hill goes, or we go”.

    • September 27, 2009 12:10 pm

      There’s nothing wrong with having Hill on or paying him for commentary. The problem is having him talk about stuff that he’s not qualified to talk about. It’d be like having David Horowitz on to talk about rap music.

      • Luis R Vazquez permalink
        October 16, 2009 10:38 pm


        Who knows? As I recall, in the Radical Son, Mr. Horowitz mentions that he was very involved with blacks in Oakland, CA during the 60s.

        It is possible that he knows more about BLACK CULTURE, than Professor Hill.

  37. MarR permalink
    September 27, 2009 12:26 pm

    I was watching the night this occurred and I immediately switched the TV to something else until it was over. However I want to make a point about O’Reilly that I have made before and believe even more so. O’Reilly is FIRST and FOREMOST about O’Reilly! Always has been and probably always will be. Yes, he has done some outstanding things and his show does bring things that other shows do not. That being said I take a lot of what O’Reilly says with a certain grain of salt. He has always been a shameless self promoter- (I know all of us have this in us to a certain extent as it is part of the human condition). He however consistently (watch closely if you doubt this) tries to take a middle ground on almost all subjects and then interjects his own middle view as the ONLY rational one there truly is. He does this repeatedly on virtually every issue and utilizes the “independent” moniker as uniquely his own. I would have little probelem with it if it were a rare phenomenon, however after a while the hubris gets overwhelming. As far Lamont-Hill goes- he is an embarrassment, but O’Reilly utilizes him to show he is more broad minded than his competitors- ie-Hannity and Beck. Personally I find Hannity’s show much more intellectually challenging as he routinely
    has leftists with the intellectual capacity to fairly engage.

  38. Kenneth Gareau permalink
    September 27, 2009 2:37 pm

    Swemson said: “Christians still try to force their belief system on others. And many, on both sides of the aisle believe like I do, that they wouldn’t hesitate to force all of us to live by their rules if they thought they could get away with it..

    The difference between christianity campaigning for laws that prohibit abortion and gay marriage, are the same as what Islqam is doing, albeit in a far less violent a manner…

    I suggest you watch an incredible program called Judgment Day on NOVA, from PBS.”

    As Reagan would have said, “There you go again”. You use the term “FORCE”. Legally changing through laws, where applicable, or through Constitutional Amendment, when the Law alone would be un Constitutional, is not forcing… it is our system of government. In case you have not read history up until the start of the progressive movement in earnest in the late 1890’s we did not have the extinction of God in the USA that we have today. In fact even Massachussetts was still collecting taxes which were used to fund churches in the state. Each state was left to institute the free practice of religion of its choice and many states had till that time the character of the specific “church which dominated by population, in those states. Maryland was considered Catholic, Massachussetts was protestant etc.

    On the other point, the fact that our laws and if necessary our Constitution can be changed by the people is both a “blessing and a curse”. I hope you do not mind the biblical paraphrase here. That it can be either is why we need an educated and vigilant public. Islam and Christianity are not even close to equal either in what they seek or in their methods. Not here in the US and certainly not in the rest of the world they both inhabit. The vast majority of Christians and Jews look to persuasion to accomplish the change of heart and mind. Christians do not get any reward for the deeds of others, whether those deeds are good or bad. Each must stand on their own. Oh and the God of Christianity and the Jews established GOVERMENTS to allow us to govern ourselves according to his laws. Our founders knew about atheists and those who were agnostic etc. They understood that these people would not gain a foothold in the government or if they did they would once discovered be removed by the electorate as not fit to remain in authority. But they left that to the people to decide at the ballot box and as I am sure you also know that is why there is no religious requirement found for any office in the land. But that idi not erase their concern but felt the informed people would remedy the situation Instaed we get people who are products of a government education (mostly the last 20 years being the really extreme problem) who have only been taught what the government needs them to know to be good serfs and workers.

    I would no longer believe anything on PBS without a filter than I beleive anything you have posted upon which I have so commented. I now see from whence your political views eminate. (Had to type quickly please excuse typos and spelling)

    • Swemson permalink
      September 27, 2009 5:18 pm


      Your main point here, is that creating laws that prohibit behavior doesn’t constitute force.. that it’s just “our system of government”

      And who’s being WARPED here sir ?

      What the hell do you think makes laws meaningful ? It’s the government’s power to deprive you of your freedom and liberty if you disobey…

      Are you so brainwashed that you can’t understand that YES, IT DOES CONSTITUTE FORCE !

      And NO, it is NOT our system of government.

      The ONE and only principal that both our government and the American way of life are based on is the idea that INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS ARE SACROSANCT ! If you agree that individual rights are sacrosanct because god mandated them to be, then fine… we agree but for different reasons… I’d love nothing better than to live in a community where everyone followed the 10 Commandments… if for no other reason that it would eliminate crime.

      But NO… you do NOT have the right to impose ANY of your religious ideas on me by FORCE of law.

      “Our founders knew about atheists and those who were agnostic etc. They understood that these people would not gain a foothold in the government or if they did they would once discovered be removed by the electorate as not fit to remain in authority.”

      What a pile of crap… The “secular progressives” WHO WE BOTH HATE, are firmly in control of our government right now, or has that escaped your attention…. And despite your bigoted and ignorant opinions, the fact that

      “there is no religious requirement found for any office in the land”

      includes the idea that we also have the freedom to NOT believe in any god at all…

      To add to your obvious ignorance, in your next post you write:

      “Thanks for finally showing your true nature and your contempt for those who do not think like you. Take your Secular Progressive ideas and move on. You will love this one: I’ll pray for you!”

      The only things I actually hold in contempt are STUPIDITY and DISHONESTY.

      You’re not the first fool on this blog to think that all atheists are secular progressives…. Who the hell do you think make up a big part of the Libertarian movement… ?

      I’m totally with the liberals on all issues related to religion and civil liberties.. why the hell should I care of a couple of gays want to go through some silly ritual… But more importantly why DO YOU CARE SO MUCH…?

      What business is it of yours what they do….? It doesn’t affect you in any manner whatsoever… but you’re so brainwashed that you’re happy to walk around for hours holding up signs protesting it… I thought that one of your religious virtues was supposed to be COMPASSION… where the hell is your compassion for them ? If going through that silly ritual adds a little comfort to their unfortunate lives, WHY THE HELL SHOULD YOU OBJECT ?.. Aren’t gays also god’s children… ???

      And I’m also not some silly recent graduate of of the liberal academic world, in fact I’m an advocate of system of PURE LAISSEZ FAIRE CAPITALISM…and proud to have been a capitalist throughout my life….. and I also happen to be a 63 year old former member of the United States Marine Corps, who had the balls over 40 years ago, to put my life at risk to defend YOUR right to live the way YOU want to…..

      So maybe it’s YOU who should get off his high horse, and show some RESPECT for me you pompous sanctimonious jerk..

      What the hell have you ever contributed to this great country ?

      [ Please accept my apologies for that last statement if you did indeed serve in uniform] 🙂

      • Kenneth Gareau permalink
        September 27, 2009 5:49 pm

        Let us see what type of argument you have descended to! “What the hell”, “What a pile of crap”, “WHO WE BOTH HATE”, “You’re not the first fool”, “Who the hell do you think”, “why the hell should I care”, “where the hell is your compassion”, “WHY THE HELL SHOULD YOU OBJECT”, “So maybe it’s YOU who should get off his high horse, and show some RESPECT for me you pompous sanctimonious jerk..”

        I applaud your service during Vietnam. For that you get the respect it is due. For the rest of the pure adhominem attacks you get shit! I am 62 so what does that make me but 62 and 63 for you? Your statements do not earn you respect. You have no idea of my background, no idea of history and even though you served and defended the Constitution you have no idea what it was based upon, nor, I will assume at great risk of what the term assume usually means, have you read anything beyond your obviously limited scope based upon your inability to be civil during a discussion supposedly based upon fact and not opinion alone. I beleive your inability to control your emotions stems from the wordes you used to describe yourself in an earlier post: “Lack of sexual control can be a serious problem, but it isn’t necessarily a perversion… for most of my high school and college years, I had zero control over my sexual urges… I literally couldn’t get enough…

        Does that make me a pervert…???”

        Let me quote specific sources for the answer to this:

        “Recovery for the addict, with or without a partner is based on understanding of how recovery works, how sexuality and sex (two different things) work, a spiritual and personal sense of self, understanding of “hunger and satiety or satisfaction” and the patience to reach this goal. This sounds so very simple and, in reality, like the Program of recovery, it is. However, it is not easy!

        Reprinted from the Society for Sexual Heath Newsletter (Summer 2006)”

        and this:
        Kafka MP.
        McLean Hospital, 115 Mill Street, Belmont, Massachusetts 02478, USA.

        Disinhibited sexual desire, clinically manifested as hypersexual desire disorders, can be operationally defined by considering three behavioral domains associated with sexual motivation or appetitive behavior: (a) sexual preoccupation (time/day consumed by fantasies, urges, and activities), (b) the repetitive frequency of enacted sexual behavior (total sexual outlet/week), and (c) adverse consequences associated with repetitive sexual behavior: Data are presented suggesting that clinical samples of males with paraphilias, paraphilia-related disorders, and sexual coercion may be associated with disinhibited sexual appetite. These conditions need to be addressed by an integrated combination of psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacologic interventions that specifically target disinhibited sexual appetitive behaviors, their antecedents, and consequences. Although combination therapies (empirically based specific psychotherapies in conjunction with psychopharmacological treatments) have demonstrated superior efficacy in many Axis I psychiatric disorders, such combination therapies to reduce paraphilias, paraphilia-related disorders, and adult sexual coercion are currently underutilized in both North and South America and Europe.”

        I will not reply to the sane portions of your response for fear of upsetting you further with fact or dare I say a possible agreement in some small areas. When you can control yourself, which it is obvious even to a casual observer you have trouble doing even at the age of 63, discussion might be possible.

  39. Kenneth Gareau permalink
    September 27, 2009 4:16 pm


    Thanks for finally showing your true nature and your contempt for those who do not think like you. Take your Secular Progressive ideas and move on. You will love this one: I’ll pray for you!

    • Swemson permalink
      September 27, 2009 7:25 pm

      Why does my atheism intimidate you so much ?

      As I said immediately above, the only things I actually hold in contempt are STUPIDITY and DISHONESTY.

      As I just wrote in another blog, I don’t go around shouting at religious folks…… all I do is speak my mind when they shove their crap in my face… and that’s exactly what happens here whenever one of you pinheads starts caterwauling about how only prayer to god will protect us from radical islam…

      There are millions of silent atheists like me who have just been chuckling to themselves for years about religious nonsense every time we confront it… but for me, 9/11 changed all that, and I no longer keep it to myself….

      But don’t worry, I’ll never cause you any harm, because to me, religious folks, for the most part (other than the Muslims) are simply harmless children who pose no danger to me… Since most of the “blue laws” have gone away, and since I’m not a female, or gay, nothing you can say or do really has any effect on me whatsoever..

      So enjoy living the way you wish… I most certainly DO respect your right to think and behave as you like…. as long as you don’t try to force your ideas on ME…..

      But don’t expect me to keep quiet any longer when you parade around waving your cross in my face..

      George Carlin had a great routine about the 10 Commandments.. after discarding several of them for being redundant, he added a new one which I truly wish all of you would follow…. it goes like this:


      • Swemson permalink
        September 27, 2009 7:27 pm

        PS: Please don’t waste your time praying for me….

        You’ve obviously already wasted enough of your life in that foolish pursuit….

      • Joseph White permalink
        September 27, 2009 9:02 pm

        Faith is the evidence of believing in things not seen by mortal eyes.

        I have faith that there is air, even though I can’t see it.
        I have faith in Gravity, even though I can’t see it.
        I have faith in humanity, even though people don’t act humane.

        It is not a crime to believe that there will be a better world, nor is it a crime to try to share faith with someone.

        Take into account this: Earth sits in the 3rd orbit from the sun. It’s in a perfect place to hold water, have a stable environment, and is host to life. While Mars, one orbit out, once had environment that was life sustaining, but isn’t anymore. Mercury, the first orbit, is so hot that life can not exist as we know it.
        Is this just a cosmic accident that Earth is where it is? Personally, I don’t think so, and it is testament to a greater power that created our home.

        Consider also that we breath out CO2 and plants use it to make oxygen. That in itself is a small perfection of design.

        But, I didn’t start this with a lecture in mind, I was simply going to remind you that our country was founded by deists, who came here to escape religious persecution, and the first amendment prevents the government from having a state religion.

        I, myself, don’t mind your mindset, and I live by Pascal’s bet, and if when we die, I am wrong, and there is no god, I will have just wasted my time believing in something that makes me a better person. Unlike a majority of Christians, I don’t think you’ll go to hell, I just think (but don’t have proof,) that what hell is, is eternity separated from God.

        I am more akin to the Hebrews who practice judiasm. The afterlife will either be there or not, but I will do what good I can while I am on Earth. And unlike some of my fellow believers, I think that God doesn’t have Gay people, he dislikes their version of sex. After all, it’s disgusting to think that someone would stick his phallus in someone else rear end. It’s just not natural, that’s all. (and that goes for anal intercourse between hetrosexuals too.)

        The fact that you and millions of Atheists laugh at the other 80% of us, just sort of shows that you are prejudiced about this thing that you don’t believe in. Who knows, we might just be right. As for Extremist muslims, the only way to know what they were thinking, would be to ask them, but then again, they are dead. The living one’s are just filled with hate and in my opinion are weak willed, and that’s why they want women covered head to toe, and beat them. Because they are afraid of themselves, and they strike back at what they are afraid of.

        • Joseph White permalink
          September 27, 2009 9:25 pm

          “I think that God doesn’t have Gay people, he dislikes their version of sex” should be, “doesn’t hate gay people.” Stupid computer lagged a bit and I didn’t catch that misspell before I sent.

          • Swemson permalink
            September 28, 2009 9:03 am

            Oh, and now you’re telling me about the subtle nuances of his thought process…. hmmm, ?

            You’re beginning to sound like one of his franchisees ..

        • jbtrevor permalink
          September 28, 2009 5:27 am

          Joseph, very nice

          My mother used to tell me (I don’t think it’s an original)…

          “For those who do not have faith, no answers will suffice.
          For those who have, no answers are needed”

          • jbtrevor permalink
            September 28, 2009 5:28 am

            Should read:

            “For those who do not have faith, no answers will suffice.
            For those who have faith, no answers are needed”

            • Swemson permalink
              September 28, 2009 10:40 am

              For those who have rational minds, & who are already well on their way to figuring out the answers,

              No faith is needed !

  40. Keith permalink
    September 27, 2009 6:33 pm

    Bill O’ Rielly is a overpaid journalist, not an expert in politics, his shows are entertaining, not very informitive to me.
    He has to get somebody thats not an expert in politics, but in Hip Hop music, somebody that makes O’Rielly looks smarter than he really is…?

    • Swemson permalink
      September 27, 2009 7:15 pm

      I agree with you about O’Reilly, except for the ida that he’s overpaid…

      That’s just capitalism Keith… radio and television personalities are paid according to the amount of advertising dollars they bring in… that’s all, and I don’t think you’re going to argue about the fact that he brings in one hell of a lot of revenue to Fox…

  41. Kenneth Gareau permalink
    September 27, 2009 8:02 pm

    stewartiii said: “Why, he’s unqualified to talk about anything except hip-hop and ACORN! Contrary to insults like “a professor of rap music”, Dr Hill in fact holds a PhD from the University of Pennsylvania and holds an associate professorship in Education at Columbia University.”

    Here is what was said by David “President” Horowitz: “Mr. Hill do you think we should give Iran three months or six months to let the UN inspectors in? How would Marc Lamont Hill know? How would he even be in a position to make an intelligent speculation? By his own account, Hill is an expert on “hip-hop culture,” i.e., rap music. His academic degree is in education. What are his views on foreign policy worth, unless putting him on was designed to show up the shallow views of the left? Hill is in fact a knee jerk leftist, a defender of ACORN and a man whose attitudes toward race are a throwback to the sixties.”

    Where does he say Dr. Hill is unqualified to talk about anything by his reerencing positions the good Ph.D. has taken, which by no extrapolation from his total education would qualify him as an expert on the military or foreign affairs?

    In this instance the credentials are the issue, as well as the focus of the majority of his writings and inclinations. A Ph.D. in psychiatry gives me no academic standing in fields other than my specialty? Otherwise we might go to a Ph.D. in physics instead of a physchiatrist, since they are both Ph.D.’s and their degrees both begin with “P”.

    If you seach for the good Ph.D.’s “CV” by his own writings a very sizeable number of books, writings, and other publications focus specifically on hip hop culture.

    Then if your game look at what many in acedemia have to say on the content of a degree in Education as it relates to reality in todays society. Many not all, and not a majority, beleive it not to be worth the paper it is printed on. Google it yourself for references.

  42. Hal Kohn permalink
    September 27, 2009 11:29 pm

    Hill has been featured on Fox too often as an advocate for Obama. The words of praise for Obama, and what Obama has in his heart and mind, spill out so easily from his mouth. He must have been paying attention in kindergarten when Obama songs were sung.

  43. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 2:18 am

    You have got to be kidding me he gets 65K to stutter and sound like an idiot. O’Reilly is doing that intentionally because having the boob on makes him look and sound smarter than he really is. Kind of like the ugly girl that would hang out with the pretty girl hoping to get a date.

  44. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 2:52 am

    I resent your comparison of the Catholic church to a murderous cult. It is surreal to say the least and you have devoloped a repressed dismissive attitude toward the church one day you will realize how misguided you are. I can also add this during two years of war it was Catholic priest that I saw in the hot areas where the 122 rockets and B40’s were landing and the bullets flying they gave solace and hope to all not just catholics. I believe that David pointed out very well your folly in regard to calibacy. There has been a long and exhaustive study undertaken and acted upon by the church in regard to the horrible abuse that occurred and I have stated part of the finding of the cause and it started at the siminary schools. But even with that break down that was by no means anywhere near the majority of priest. I can only assure you that you are misguided and will agree to disagree. This church has not florished and survived for thousands of years by luck. It will continue to survive and do great and good work. Next to the United State the church is the second greatest source of charity in the world. I have disagrements with some things and some priest but not to recognize the basic goodness of the church is a mistake or intentionally bigoted I will not ascribe either motive to you.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 28, 2009 10:16 am

      Resent whatever you want.. I really don’t care,,,.

      You’re lovely tale about the priest in combat, proves nothing… and the solace & hope that he delivered were mostly lies…

      And please don’t tell me about studies that the church has done to answer the pedophilia problem..

      An INVESTIGATION of the church, sounds like a contradiction in terms… but at very least, you can expect it to have just about the same validity as ACORN’s own investigation into their problems will have.. BTW: I don’t think I ever said that the MAJORITY of priests were pedophiles, I believe what I said was that MANY were… and if they found 1,200+ recently, how many do you think there were over the last 2000 years… ?

      It’s true that the church has played a huge role in the history of mankind, and in the history of America as well, from the crusades to the inquisition, and to the burning of witch’s in Salem Mass…….

      But faith is the opposite of reason, and the dramatic advances in knowledge in recent years, are heralding the rapid demise of the church as an influence on society, and it’s about time…. 15 to 25% of Americans today claim no religious affiliation at all, and I think it’s safe to say that many more were nontheists as well, but were hesitant to admit that for obvious reasons..

      Religion is anti mind, and therefore anti man… and it isn’t about god.. it’s about the clergy, and their need to keep man under their control… granted, they have a different line of BS than Obummer’s, but their objectives aren’t all that different…

  45. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 3:05 am

    Very good observations. I could get the idea your an old cop that has studied people for years. That is meant as a compliment.

  46. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 3:16 am

    Celibacy causes people to flip out that might be the most absurd comment I have seen so far worthy of Pbauer. Then by your idea human beings are no better than beast of the field with out moral reasoning or intellect. That takes the cake as my dear grandmother would say. lololol I wonder when Mother Teresa flipped out? Pathetic.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 28, 2009 10:22 am

      It causes SOME people to flip out…. and the statistics prove that…

      And the only thing that makes us BETTER than the other beasts in the field is that fact that we possess a RATIONAL mind, that enables us to take nature and shape it to suit our needs.. There’s nothing “holy” about that.. it’s just the way things are.. but thinking is a volitional pursuit, and people who cling to old fairy tales and superstitions, have clearly opted out of that process…

  47. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 3:29 am

    Just wanted to say that was a superb comment reference celibacy.

    • jbtrevor permalink
      September 28, 2009 5:34 am

      Thanks, my smile for the day.

  48. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 4:00 am

    The comment of millions of alter boys is an out right lie so I cannot put any trust in any of your other comment.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 28, 2009 10:28 am

      It’s a lie… ?

      All I said was that based on recent stats, and some quick statistical analysis, I believe that the total over the centuries probably runs into the millions…

      You want to call me a liar, then back it up…

  49. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 28, 2009 10:51 am

    Yes it proves that you know nothing and a waste of my time. Helping and aiding those that are wounded and scared along with the medic gives them hope and makes there survival chances much better. Anyone that spent anytime much at all in any war knows and understands that. You are simply a bitter old man in a way I feel sorry for you. I am also done with you. Now you may rave on.

    • Swemson permalink
      September 28, 2009 11:08 am

      When I was in my early 20’s, I too had doubt’s.. but I believe that the thing that made me reject the god idea completely was my years in the Marine Corps in the late 60’s and the absolute horrors that I saw in Viet Nam…

      If you think that everything was designed and created by a “loving god”, then I really have to tell you sir, that I think he did one hell of a crappy job, and is certainly NOT worthy of any respect even if he DID exist…!

  50. Noland permalink
    October 16, 2009 3:33 pm

    You people make me want to puke.

    As for you, Horowitz (obviously a Jew), who the hell do YOU think YOU are to comment on what is or isn’t “an insult to the intelligence of African Americans”?

    You people need to know your facts before you speak out of your rear ends:

    In Fall 2009, he joins the faculty of Columbia University as Associate Professor of Education at Teachers College. He will also hold an affiliated faculty appointment in African American Studies at the Institute for Research in African American Studies at Columbia University.

    Since his days as a youth in Philadelphia, Dr. Hill has been a social justice activist and organizer. He is a founding board member of My5th, a non-profit organization devoted to educating youth about their legal rights and responsibilities. Dr. Hill also works closely with the ACLU Drug Reform Project, focusing on drug informant policy. In addition to his political work, Dr. Hill continues to work directly with African American and Latino youth. In 2001, he started a literacy project that uses hip-hop culture to increase school engagement and reading skills among high school students. He also continues to organize and teach adult literacy courses for high school dropouts in Philadelphia and Camden.

    In 2005, Ebony Magazine named him one of America’s top 30 Black leaders under 30 years old.

    Dr. Hill is the author of Beats, Rhymes, and Classroom Life: Hip-Hop Pedagogy, and the Politics of Identity and the co-editor of Media, Learning, and Sites of Possibility and The Anthropology of Education Reader. He is currently completing two manuscripts: Knowledge of Self: Race, Masculinity, and the Politics of Reading; and You Ain’t Heard It From Me: Snitching, Rumors and Other People’s Business in Hip-Hop America.

    Trained as an anthropologist of education, Dr. Hill holds a Ph.D. (with distinction) from the University of Pennsylvania. His research focuses on the intersections between youth culture, identity, and educational processes. He is particularly interested in locating various sites of possibility for identity work, resistance, and knowledge production outside of formal schooling contexts. Particular sites of inquiry include hip-hop culture, urban fiction, and African American bookstores.

    • swemson permalink
      October 16, 2009 6:58 pm

      And race baiting bigots like you and Dr Hill make most of us want to puke too….

      We understand your game… you’ve been running this shake down racket of yours, playing on white guilt, and depending on political correctness for cover, ever since the closing years of the civil rights movement…

      Sure.. blacks were treated horribly 150 years ago, and look at where black society is today… with a revoltingly high number of young people growing up in ghettos, while a small middle class, and a few members of the intelligentsia try to distance themselves from the vast majority of the black stereotype, by having the lowest fertility rate of any other racial/social/ethnic group in America.

      You spit out your hate and venom at David Hororwitz… “A JEW” because just like other bigots, the Jews are a convenient scapegoat for hateful racists like you to pick on…

      Well 6 million Jews were murdered 60 years ago… I think that puts the Jews in even a higher position than blacks if we’re grouping people by their degree of historical suffering.. Do you see the Jews looting stores and burning down their neighborhoods when a Jew is arrested…. ?

      Bernie Madoff is a Jew… Do you see the rest of the Jews protesting his arrest the way 99% of the blacks protested the OJ Simpson verdict ?

      No.. You see a tiny minority of people who have been persecuted for centuries who now have the highest rate of education, and creative and scientific achievement in the entire world…. Jews, who represent less than a quarter of 1 percent of the world’s population have received 22% of all Nobel Prizes awarded since 1901… And you just hate them don’t you…. Why ? Because they show the vast majority of your community up for the most pathetic bunch of whiners in American history that they are…… You hate them for the same reason that the Moslem world does…

      You still think that what happened to SOME of your great, great, great, great, great grandparents entitles you to a free ride today…. ?

      Well piss off.. I don’t have a bit of guilt … My great grandparents were busy running from the Russian Pogroms and the Nazis in the early days of the last century… So if you think, that I have any responsibility for something that neither I nor my ancestors did, to someone (you) who nothing even happened to, you’re wasting your time… It doesn’t work any more ! We don’t owe you SH*T !

      So take your hate, bigotry and racism and sell it elsewhere..

      We know who and what your are, and we’re not buying your BULLS*^T any longer…

      ESAD !

      • Julie Trevor permalink
        October 16, 2009 7:26 pm

        Zing, good one Swemson

      • Luis R Vazquez permalink
        October 16, 2009 11:04 pm

        Swemson: One hundred points for you.

        It has been part of the socialist’s strategy to play the RACE CARD from the beginning.

        It is time that we all start denouncing these tactics as a way to censor our thoughts.

        Do you want to know what discrimination is?

        I give you one example: Two days ago Michelle Obama visited the FREEDOM TOWER in Miami.

        This is a site that to the cubans fleeing from the persecution of The Assassin Brothers Castro in the sixties and seventies, means what the Statue Of Liberty means to the millions who came from all over the world looking a better tomorrow during the last decades of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the Twentieth.

        That is why we call it the the FREEDOM TOWER.

        And what did MS. Obama do? She totally ignored the plight of the cubans who still suffer the Tyranny in Cuba, and instead asked all the present there to go to work as volunteers, something that was forcibly intituted by the communist regime in Cuba.

        I wonder if MS Obama would like to ask her people to work under conditions that would remind them of the slavery suffered by their ancestors.

      • Jack Hampton permalink
        October 17, 2009 3:22 am

        Swemson that was very good. One of my ancestors originally arrived in America as an indentured servant. These white slaves did not as a rule live out there indenture ship because they were treated worse than black slaves. The black slaves were real property and the owner, the planter wanted to protect them. He knew that he would eventually lose the indentured servant so he did not care that much about there welfare. I believe every group of people was slaves at one time. Wonder if I could get reparations for the slavery of my ancestor?

        • swemson permalink
          October 17, 2009 3:52 pm


          I’m curious about your terminology… I think that an indentured servant is quite a bit different than a slave.

          I have a cousin who served many years as a flight surgeon in the Air Force, in exchange for the Air Force putting him through medical school… Isn’t that technically a form of indentured servitude.. ?

          Is there such a thing as voluntary slavery ?

          The commies will of course say that working for a big evil corporation is.. but I think you know what I mean…

          • Joseph White permalink
            October 17, 2009 4:36 pm

            I’m not Jack, but I can provide a few answers.

            The only way that an indentured servant is different from a slave, is that supposedly Indentured servants only served for a limited number of years, in order to pay off the debt that incurred moving them from where they were, to where they ended up. But, in reality, they were every bit as much a slave as people who were bought.

            Indentured servants didn’t get paid, but they did eventually become free. I suppose that’s one reason they were kept alive. I guess it was that, “One day he’ll be my free neighbor, and I don’t want to piss him/her off.”

            As for working for a corporation, what else can you do? At least the corporation pays you well while they get rich off of your toiling.

            • swemson permalink
              October 17, 2009 5:55 pm


              When you write :

              As for working for a corporation, what else can you do? At least the corporation pays you well while they get rich off of your toiling.

              It doesn’t sound like you at all.

              The far left has been accusing capitalism as getting rich off the backs of poor laborers for years… But is the stereotype accurate:

              The modern day corporation isn’t owned by 2 or 3 fat little Monopoly men wearing top hats and black suits carrying bags of loot around all the time…. with thousands of workers toiling for pennies and living in squalor…. It’s owned by thousands of stock holders, the majority of whom are working for a living and a comfortable retirement…

              Skilled workers in manufacturing jobs make pretty good livings… enough to live well and send their kids to college… Lately, the unions have forced the wages of many workers way above the real market value for their work… look at the auto workers, whose compensation, considering all benefits and retirement pay, cost GM over $80 per hour…. And now the unions themselves own big chunks of those companies….

              What do you think that’s going to do to their standard of living long term… ?

              There’s a big difference between economic and political power…. & I think that you know that.


              • Joseph White permalink
                October 17, 2009 6:08 pm

                Thanks for noticing that I didn’t sound like myself. Part of me was trying to unsuccessfully show people how stupid is sounds to blame the corporations for everything, and part of me, (The part that has worked for large corporations,) was echoing the sentiment that at least they paid me well for what I did.

                The fact that I worked for medical corporations has very little bearing on the fact that when stockholders get involved in medicine, you get capital to get new equipment, but at the same time, those stockholders don’t seem to care that there are living breathing people in pain in hospitals. It seemed at times, that they were more interested in their money, than they were by the fact that hospitals are rarely money making ventures.

                I guess I sometimes just get really ticked off by money being the most important thing in people’s lives. However, I know that punishing them with taxes isn’t the way to get them to listen.

                • swemson permalink
                  October 17, 2009 7:24 pm


                  I guess I sometimes just get really ticked off by money being the most important thing in people’s lives.

                  That’s way it’s supposed to be…

                  The whole idea of capitalism, if understood correctly, is that the selfish desire for profit, is NOT incompatible with the effect that the company’s products have in the marketplace…

                  A shareholder who invests in a pharmaceutical company does so in the expectation that they will be profitable.. In order to be profitable, the company must create drugs that help cure disease (an oversimplified explanation, but you get the idea)

                  Most stockholders don’t even know what the companies that their mutual fund owns even make.

                  It’s precisely the profit motive that creates wealth and makes new things possible….

                  Don’t decry it… embrace it. It’s the central beauty of capitalism & the free market system… everyone’s goals exist in harmony with everyone else’s….

          • Jack Hampton permalink
            October 18, 2009 3:15 am

            Not all indentured servitude was voluntary. On many occasions relatives sold young kids into servitude that would not be what I call voluntary because they had nothing to say about it. Also My first ancestor that arrived here on a Ship out of England was called the Goodspeed his indentureship was because he was with the losers fighting to put Stewart on the throne those were not really voluntary when you consider the other option the rope.
            Best regards ,Jack Oh hey how do you Marines get those round hats to fit on those square heads? Hehehe
            Mr. White most indentured servants did not live out there service because they were treated worse than slaves.

            • Jack Hampton permalink
              October 18, 2009 3:18 am

              It should have read, That was called the Goodspeed. Just cannot type but I am not giving up.

            • swemson permalink
              October 18, 2009 1:28 pm

              Fair enough Jack…

              Some indentured service is clearly not voluntary..

              But no example of slavery that I’ve heard of has ever been voluntary

              BTW: Marines aren’t square heads, we’re jarheads.

              • Luis R Vazquez permalink
                October 18, 2009 10:48 pm

                Whatever the form of the Marine’s head, we all should be thanfull they exist.

                I take any of those heads and frame it, instead of a dozen of Harry Reids, Bernie Franks, Christopher Dodds or even any of the Kennedy’s.

                • swemson permalink
                  October 18, 2009 11:29 pm

                  Even though he was a bloody dem, JFK earned some respect in the south pacific..

                  Unlike Kerry & Gore, he was the real deal when the crap hit the fan

                  • Luis R Vazquez permalink
                    October 18, 2009 11:55 pm

                    Swemson: Since when is commanding a PT boat merit enough to become President?

                    He went to the White House because the corrupt ways of his father Joe Kennedy.

                    Khurushev and Castro showed his lack of courage and his political incapability during THE MISSILE CRISIS of 1962.

                    Thanks to his flexible back bone, a country, Cuba, was denied freedom for life.

                    His promise to persecute every cuban exiled who dared to organise any type of expedition from anywhere in the USA, Central or South America sealed the fate of millions who are still suffering death, torture and jail.

                    He became an inflated heroe because he was lucky his boat was hit by a bullet.

                  • swemson permalink
                    October 19, 2009 10:16 am

                    That’s cool the way you twist my words around

                    Since when is commanding a PT boat merit enough to become President?

                    Did I say that driving the boat qualified him to be prez.. ?

                    I DON’T THINK SO… check it out for your self..

                    He became an inflated heroe because he was lucky his boat was hit by a bullet.

                    HIT BY A BULLET ???

                    His boat was rammed by a destroyer and sunk, and he swam great distances across shark filled waters to save his men, pulling them behind him…

                    What I was saying, was that out of the list you presented:

                    Harry Reids, Bernie Franks, Christopher Dodds or even any of the Kennedy’s.

                    was that JFK earned SOME respect in the south pacific

      • Barry Bonds permalink
        October 17, 2009 7:49 am

        Typical racist calling someone else a racist.

        Swenson, you are a pathetic lowlife building up straw-men and tearing them down to the delight of your vapid fan base.

        The entire world hates white people and slowly but surely you people will be a bad memory and it won’t be because of our so-called hate it will be your hate which destroys you.

        You can hate blacks all you want and you can quote non-sourced statistic after non-sourced statistic but that will never change the fact that while blacks have issues internally, there has never been a black government responsible for as many deaths as white people have perpetrated upon themselves.

        The funny part is that the true power structure in this country don’t care about race. They know that there is nothing that black skin can do to them. They know that they are secure as long as people like you find boogie-men in the most innocuous places. You’re an idiot. You quote statistics and study black dilemma not to help find a solution but to revel in their misery. You are beyond pathetic.

        The top wealth in this country virtually owns the rest of the country – white on white crime. Big Tobacco – white on white crime. Big Pharm – white on white crime. And the list goes on and on. If you can’t see that its because you’re stupid.

        • Joseph White permalink
          October 17, 2009 8:50 am

          there has never been a black government responsible for as many deaths as white people have perpetrated upon themselves.

          1) South Africa
          2) North Africa
          3) Central Africa

          All black governments fighting other black governments and killing everything in sight. Let’s also not forget that black tribesmen still kill black tribesmen, and now they have more powerful weapons to do it. Forget for a moment that they are black christians and animists being killed by black muslims, it’s black on black.

          I won’t deny that Cigarette smoking kills, and that it’s targeting children, but it’s still not the same as black gang fighting black gang and killing each other in drive by shootings.

          There was a time, when I thought everyone would grow up and be an adult, but I can now see that it’s never going to happen. Why? Because everyone thinks only of themselves and whatever small bit of power they can gain, not about helping their communities or getting people out of gangs, or even putting an end to starvation.

          Maybe we all get what we deserve.

        • Jack Hampton permalink
          October 17, 2009 11:02 am

          Barry Buns
          Well aren’t you a sweetie Yea nothing racist about you. Were you one of the machete yeilding Hutu that hacked up the Tootsie. Say about 300k Oh yea you must be one of the sun people of peace.

        • swemson permalink
          October 17, 2009 3:20 pm

          Barry Bonds says

          The entire world hates white people and slowly but surely you people will be a bad memory and it won’t be because of our so-called hate it will be your hate which destroys you.

          The top wealth in this country virtually owns the rest of the country – white on white crime. Big Tobacco – white on white crime. Big Pharm – white on white crime. And the list goes on and on. If you can’t see that its because you’re stupid.

          If what you say wasn’t so sad, I’d have to laugh at you.. but I can’t, because you’re obviously a serious threat to American freedom & liberty..

          And it’s not because you’re black, and a parasite… It’s because you’re a COMMUNIST

          BTW: thanks for proving my point about racists like your pal Noland.

          • fiftyfifty permalink
            October 17, 2009 8:04 pm

            I see your still having problems getting alone with others you know what your mommy told you about running your mouth on that keyboard.

            The king of the insults. So tell us what province you and your unit were in Vietnam.

            You and you are so special but me and us and the brothers — PWND

            • swemson permalink
              October 17, 2009 8:50 pm

              go away !

        • Luis R Vazquez permalink
          October 18, 2009 10:52 pm

          Barry: Are you still using that stuff that banned you for life from the game, or are you on something stronger?

      • Jack Hampton permalink
        October 18, 2009 3:22 am

        Dang Swemson
        I did not know you had a fan base. I learned that from the black racist. Can I get your autograph?

        • swemson permalink
          October 18, 2009 1:29 pm


    • Luis R Vazquez permalink
      October 18, 2009 11:19 pm

      In your first parragraph you show all or part of your education and the culture you practice.

      In desscribing Mr.Hill and enumerating all his gained merits as A JUSTICE ORGANIZER AND AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNIST A.C.L.U. you are also telling us who he really is.

  51. AgentLemon permalink
    October 17, 2009 12:24 pm

    lost all interest in the article right about “I watch him regularly and regard him as a pioneer in honest television.” there.

  52. Martha Millsaps permalink
    October 17, 2009 2:41 pm

    After scrolling through most of the comments I conclude that despite the many objections to Mr. Hill’s presence on Fox News for a variety of reasons, the real problem is a lack of understanding of David Horowitz’ ascendance on the national scene as a Conservative. The foundational moment arrived when as a born and bred “leftist” he began to see what he terms “the dark underside of the radical cause” he had embraced. In his own words he “had to face the savage personal attacks by my former comrades that were designed to warn others to remain within the fold.”

    David Horowitz is a hero in his own right. He is also a published writer of note. He stands alone at times in a fight to preserve what remains of parity on college campuses so that conservative students have a voice in the midst of the endless profanity of liberalism with its total disdain for conservatism and its contempt for Christians and Jews alike.

    I am not an expert on Mark Lamont Hill but I wonder if he has had much of a challenge in academia since the trend is to embrace left wing causes on most campuses. Has he had to be protected from snarling crowds because of his point of view? Because of his age Prof. Hill has probably had little or none of the real life experience of David Horowitz facing down irrational and angry opponents on college campuses, I doubt he has not had to ply his trade in a hostile field because as author Horowitz points out in “Radical Son” quoting a prominent academic figure (p. 405) “the power base of the Left in America is in the universities.”

    Since I studied at Columbia University and am a graduate of an Ivy League Woman’s College, I can admire firsthand the enormous contribution David Horowitz has made in exposing the radical agenda of the “left,” and of its no-compromise, relentless drive to control thought and to drive a politically correct agenda. Honest debate is forteited more often than not. As recent as this week Jim Gilchrist, a military hero, and an opponent of illegal immigration was canceled as a scheduled speaker at Harvard University.

    It is more important than ever to understand the fundamentals of Marxism. It is no longer an intellectual exercise but an urgent necessity. It is here and we are watching our freedoms disappear at the same time we fight to maintain some kind of perspective. The only reason to watch Mark Lamont Hill is to understand the jargon of a Marxist idealogue and one who is probably not just a “useful idiot.”

    • Luis R Vazquez permalink
      October 18, 2009 11:35 pm

      Martha: Dr…? Hill has all the merits of an ASSOCIATE OF THE A.C.L.U.

      For this, he does not have to suffer the rigors AN ACADEMICIAN should endure.

      Being AN ORGANIZER OF THE POOR MASSES and being able to instruct them how to vote several times, for the same candidate, in the same election is sufficient.

      After all; Is it not the only merits required to become PRESIDENT OF THE USA?

  53. Janet permalink
    October 18, 2009 1:52 pm

    Well said, Martha, and thank you for your sage advice.

  54. October 18, 2009 3:58 pm

    Thank God, someone woke up at FOX NEWS! Ithought I may have been the only one who wondered about Mark Lamont Hill. He was no match for O’Reily. Why did O”Reilly want him on the program? Dr. Hill was only a fast mouth, always planning his replies while O’Reilly, or anyone, else was speaking. O’Reilly must have had a mental lapse. I hope he keeps people on his program who are qualified to speak to the subject at hand. Out here in TV land the rest of us are not all ignorant. We know when we are hearing elemenents of reality. Thank you FOX for finally taking action. Please do not foist this type personality on us again. Regards.
    Dr. Stanford Linzey

  55. Len Powder permalink
    October 18, 2009 9:06 pm

    This whole incident with Marc Hill must have been a major embarassment to Bill O. I wondered what his thinking was in having this man appear on a regular basis. Mr. Hill was constantly espousing his victimology theory and it made for dull and irritable viewing. I finally concluded that Mr. O must be trying to extend his audience to the minority viewers who generally detest FOX. Why would he make this foolhardy move when he was already the top-rated cable news host? Does he share some character flaws with overpaid and greedy CEOs and CFOs on Wall Street? Hey Bill, stop worrying about Glen Beck! Even is he surpasses your ratings you won’t have to worry about making the next mortgage payment – like I will!

    • Luis R Vazquez permalink
      October 18, 2009 11:02 pm

      I always liked Bill O’s ways of presenting the facts, althought I am not always sure of what his purpose is in bringing in certain people.

      I guess he wants to make good on the Motto, FAIR AND BALNCED.

      For my liking, he should be bore definite in his opinions, or Glenn Beck will overtake him on the polls.

  56. Luis R Vazquez permalink
    October 19, 2009 6:20 pm

    OK Swamson: I apologize for misunderstanding your point and for not remembering the circunstances in which his boat was sunk.

    After accepting my errors, I still think that his dealing with the Soviets and his promise to safeguard the Castro tyranny from any future attacks by the cuban exiles was wrong.

    This is one of the worst acts committed by an american president and will always be a stigma FOR THE USA.

    • Joseph White permalink
      October 19, 2009 6:40 pm

      JFK didn’t deal with the soviets. This was a bit before I cared about what happened in the world, but I remember him threatening to blockade cuba and sink any soviet ship that was carrying nuclear missiles to cuba.

      He was ready to go to war over this.

      JFK was our last good democrat president. He was a hawk, and he was patriotic.

      I’d have to research his feelings about Castro.

      • Luis R Vazquez permalink
        October 19, 2009 6:48 pm

        Joseph: Have you researched the so called KENNEDY-KHURUSCHEV ACCORD?

        Evidently you have not.

        Look for it. It is available for anyone who cares to find out how that crisis ended.

        Maybe you have depended too much on the MEDIA.

      • Luis R Vazquez permalink
        October 19, 2009 6:51 pm

        Joseph: Have you researched the so called KENNEDY-KHURUSCHEV ACCORD?

        Evidently you have not.

        Look for it. It is available for anyone who cares to find out how that crisis ended.

        Maybe you have depended too much on the MEDIA.

        One more thing: LYNDON Johnson was better than him. Hands down

        • swemson permalink
          October 19, 2009 7:21 pm


          We were talking about slavery, indentured servitude, reparations, and then we got back into left vs right philosophy again, your point about Kennedy is irrelevant to the subject….

          I never said I liked him….

          He won the presidency because his corrupt father paid off he Chicago political machine to get the union vote there, and because he was good looking and charismatic, which Nixon clearly was not….

          He was in many ways the first madison avenue elected president….

          That said, he was far less offensive than Bobby, who was truly an arrogant, nasty and offensive little snot…

          Perhaps the worst legacy that JFK left us, was the pack of evil 2nd rate sociopaths that tried to emulate him.. Clinton & Kerry

  57. Linda permalink
    October 20, 2009 5:04 am

    I cannot tell you how thrilled I am that someone has finally caught on to this guy. I had the misfortune of sitting through a class with him a year or so ago. It was an agonizing waste of my time and money. The man didn’t even know how many members there were in the House of Representatives. Needless to say when he showed up on O’Reilly the only logical conclusion I could make was that Bill didn’t want to work too hard in some of these debates. “Dr.” Hill made an easy adversary because he is as dumb as a box of rocks. When my daughter entered Temple, I advised her to steer clear of him. His promotion to Columbia reaffirms my belief that Ivy League degrees aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. Thanks, David for all the great work you do.

  58. October 29, 2009 11:52 pm

    Hill’s not perfect, and I disagree with him most of the time, but at least he makes an attempt to ferret out reason in the quagmire of FOX silliness. I don’t particularly care that Hill is keen on knuckleheads like Mumia Abu-Jamal. It seems crazy to me, but so does the guff coming out of the O’Reilly/Hannity microphone each time Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens bludgeons them with the Sledgehammer of Reason.

    FOX messed up. Hill is one of the few ultra-left faces on TV whose ultra-left politics don’t come off as snide or condescending. That’s a rare commodity, no?

    • Jack Hampton permalink
      October 30, 2009 6:38 am

      Fox messed up by bringing him on in the first place. But do not worry he will probably be appointed Rap Czar.

      • Luis Vazquez permalink
        October 30, 2009 9:09 pm

        Or he could be named Dance Instructor for the White House personnel.

        Don’t we already have a Hula Hoop queen?


  1. Top Posts «
  2. Fox’s Affirmative Action Baby Whines « NewsReal Blog
  3. Bonehead Of The Day | Black & Right
  4. Marc Lamont Hill Becomes Bob Parks’ “Bonehead of the Day” at Black and Right « NewsReal Blog
  5. The Marc Lamont Hill Affair « NewsReal Blog
  6. The Marc Lamont Hill Affair | Prayer And Action
  7. PoliGazette » Radical Leftist Marc Lamont Hill Exposed
  8. Marc Lamont Hill’s Overrated Black People List: Michael Eric Dyson « NewsReal Blog
  9. Marc Lamont Hill’s Overrated Black People List: Michael Eric Dyson | Prayer And Action
  10. Affirmative Action Failure — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami
  11. Kincaid: Fox News Fires Marc Lamont Hill « NewsReal Blog
  12. CROSS-EYED LEFTY FIRED BY FOX NEWS « The Sports Pig’s Blog
  13. Dr. Marc Lamont Hill fired from Fox News « Social Irritants
  14. NewsReal’s Victory: Marc Lamont Hill Has Been Held Accountable « NewsReal Blog
  15. Fox’s Affirmative Action Baby Whines – by David Horowitz | FrontPage Magazine
  16. Ailes & Murdoch SACK Marc Lamont Hill « PR Linked
  17. Fox News Fires Marc Lamont Hill… « The Gifted Life
  18. David Horowitz should stick to pianos « Wuzhatnin

Comments are closed.