It kills me how these people act all judicious one day and duplicitous the next. Their professional lives are on record for all to see, but they are the last ones who would ever look back to examine the consistency of their questioning.
How can Hannity be the hallmark of reasonableness that became the catalyst for my documentary — and yet be someone who spreads the very plague that has crippled the nation?
How does Chris Matthews reconcile his hammering of Bush loyalists all those years — when he turns around to become like the apologists he assailed?
I happen to agree with a lot of O’Reilly’s criticism of Obama (and Mr. O’Reilly was right on the money with Trayvon). But that doesn’t change the fact that I recognize Bill for being who he really is.
O’Reilly’s half-hearted rebuke on Rumsfeld is intended to make you believe that he’s “fair and balanced” — and he’s a master at playing this game. “Oh, look how objective I am in criticizing the Secretary.” Please — it’s better than nothing, but like I said in my program — incisive inquiry demands far more than making critical commentary on the readily obvious.
O’Reilly has a lot of you suckered into the sham of his schtick. Someone who is truly fair and balanced would have exposed the aluminum tubes in the interest of accurately informing his viewers.
He never even mentioned them — and blew off anyone who did.