Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
That's Our Bill
The Huffington Post reports on yet another clever and thorough analogy on the part of Bill O'Reilly:
The latest dispatches from the Natalee Holloway case in Aruba in a moment. But first, what do The New York Times and the mafia have in common? That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo".
The answer to that question is both The Times and organized crime routinely engage assassins. In the case of the newspaper, they are propping up character assassins.
I must confess, I do like the image of Bill Keller lying in wait, sweat on his brow, nervously clutching at piano wire as his mark approaches.
|6.16.05 @ 6:20PM|#
Never in all the history of the universe has there been an age as addicted to hyperbole as this one.
|6.16.05 @ 7:54PM|#
Sean Hannity's been beating this drum since the story broke.
Defense attorney says suspects say Holloway was drunk and had
"sexual contact" with the Dutch guy in the back of the car. Hannity
screams they're "smearing" the girl, a straight-A student,
positioning themselves to blame her once it's inevitably discovered
that she was murdered.
First, a teenager in Aruba, drinking and making out with the
locals? Yeah, that's unheard of. Particularly since, as experts
like middle-aged conservatives know better than anyone else,
reputedly smart high schoolers have absolutely no interest in
drinking or sex, much less on nominally-chaperoned trips to Aruba.
Must be special classes in law school devoted to making up
ridiculous, implausible lies like that.
Second, since when is saying a teenager may have (legally) consumed
alcohol and kissed/fondled some guy on a tropical vacation a
"smear"? It's only dickheads with FOX News shows who give it that
connotation. And if she was drunk, would anyone sane assign blamed
for being murdered and possibly raped to her? Wouldn't that just be
more evidence that she was a vulnerable potential victim, thus more
likely to be targeted by someone who wanted to rape/murder someone,
and therefore bolster the prosecution's case?
In summation... fuck those guys.
|6.16.05 @ 11:26PM|#
On the other hand, this is probably the best material Al Franken could have ever been provided as a comedian. Anyone interested in betting on how long it'll be until we see this made into a book a la "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot"?
|6.16.05 @ 11:42PM|#
"And if she was drunk, would anyone sane assign blamed for being
murdered and possibly raped to her?"
That seems to be what you are doing, despite your disclaimer
anonymo.
The 80's might be over, but it's still not okay to rape and murder
a girl who got drunk and flashed tail.
The defense attorneys are already working the, she-wanted-it
defense. And anonymo thinks it's bullshit that Bill O'Reilly tries
to clumsily defend her? Conservative defends the slut and the
opposition defends the slut-defense for the rapist/murderer. One
more indication that the political coin has flipped. Next up, Dems
promote small, responsible govt in 2006.
|6.17.05 @ 12:23AM|#
Yes Rich, even sluts don't deserve to be raped and murdered, despite what you might think. Calling her a slut acknowledges any slut like behavior she might be accused of while making it clear that that's not free reign to rape and murder her. Sorry if you disagree. And if you do, fuck you, stay away from my slut daughter you asshole.
|6.17.05 @ 12:39AM|#
You must admit, it's not often you see the phrase "clever and thorough" and the name "Bill O'Reilly" in the same sentence...
|6.17.05 @ 1:18AM|#
Those calling the girl a slut are implying she was non-white or something. Which is ridiculous, because if that were true, where's the story?
The Lonewacko Blog|6.17.05 @ 1:54AM|#
As O'Reilly points out, the NYT has not only done 24 stories on Air America Radio, they also soft-soaped the Franken Talkers meltdown. Maybe you should read the whole thing instead of just going off the first paragraph of what he said.
|6.17.05 @ 3:07AM|#
"That seems to be what you are doing, despite your disclaimer
anonymo."
It wasn't, at least it certainly wasn't my intention, and I'm sorry
if that was unclear. Nor do I think that's what Rich was doing, but
that's his business.
What I was saying was that A) Given what we know at this time, the
reported claims of the suspects that the victim was drunk are quite
likely true. 18-year-olds on trips to Aruba often drink -
regardless of their reputed academic prowess and general
good-girlishness. The opportunity to do so is one of the main
attractions to such trips (and I'm speaking from knowing hundreds
of people who took such trips within the last five years), and many
teenagers don't need much incentive to drink (ditto). Nowhere did I
imply that this was improper; I in fact said that the reactions of
the aforementioned pundits, calling such a claim a "smear" were
misguided because they read charges of impropriety into what I
perceived as a description of perfectly normal, common teenage
behavior in that environment. Those pundits cited the girl's
sterling reputation as evidence that she wouldn't have engaged in
such behavior, and I think anyone who's ever been to high school
can come up with many examples of people who match that
description, but also drank and had sex. The two are hardly
incompatible.
B) If said charges are true, they don't constitute a valid excuse
for whatever someone may have done to the victim. Those who retort
with knee-jerk accusations of "character assassination" are either
constructing straw men out of their (natural) zeal to defend the
girl; or if those making such claims are actually attempting to
sully the victim's reputation as a means of lessening their own
guilt, they're not worth arguing with, and there is no danger that
reasonable people will agree with them.
C) When I said that an intoxicated person makes an easier target
for a predator, I wasn't assigning blame to the victim. I
explicitly renounced that. Hearing- or vision-impaired persons also
make easier targets; by no means do I think they deserve it. No one
familiar with the effects of alcohol intoxication can deny that a
drunk person is easier to attack, and this is borne out by pretty
much everything we know about date rape. Even though a drunk
person, unlike the otherwise handicapped, voluntarily induced their
state of heightened vulnerability, I don't believe they share
responsibility for their fate that occured through the predatory
actions of others who violated the victim's rights for their own
amusement. If you think I do, you are factually mistaken about my
beliefs, which you no longer have an excuse for given this lengthy,
explicit rejection of the positions you ascribe to me, or you are
committing the straw man fallacy, as I suspect O'Reilly et al.
are.
Let me further state that if the accounts from Aruba of the
suspects' changing their stories are true, they've got guilty
written all over them, and I hope they get the Aruban or Dutch
equivalent of the chair. Hope that clears things up.
|6.17.05 @ 4:42AM|#
What's wrong with sluts? Sluts are great!
Seriously, how screwed up do you have to be to be angry at a girl
that wants to get down?
|6.17.05 @ 6:11AM|#
Sluts, both male and female, make life a lot more enjoyable for
the hard up. They should be thanked for their generosity, for they
often screw those that really need it. Sluts are only bad when they
continue their slutty ways after marriage. Then, they become lying,
cheating spouses, which deserve nothing but scorn.
It's sad that this young woman just out to enjoy her life was
unfortunate enough to get involved with evil. If she was murdered,
the freaks responsible should be drawn and quartered (very slowly),
and I do mean literally.
Of course, we wouldn't even know about this had she not been blonde
and white. (This is not an accusal of Americans in general, but of
the lame-assed MSM, which seems to get worse every day.)
|6.17.05 @ 7:31AM|#
"fuck you, stay away from my slut daughter you asshole."
Hey, isn't that the title of a movie they run on
Oxygen/Lifetime?
|6.17.05 @ 10:34AM|#
She's not a slut, she's just popular.
Actually, she is a free and independent spirit. And, a woman who
knows how to take charge and get what she wants. She would have
made a good CEO one day. RIP.
|6.17.05 @ 11:17AM|#
I've heard people on H&R refer to character assassins all
the time. I don't get it. So what?
Oh and Todd,
Nice!
|6.17.05 @ 12:53PM|#
FYI, and actually OT, some guys appear to define "slut"
as:
Slut -- n. 1) A girl who will sleep with anyone but me. 2) Any girl
I really want to sleep with who won't sleep with me.
And, nice one, Todd.
|6.17.05 @ 1:38PM|#
Anonymo, thanks for the defense, but let me handle that
myself:
Feminazi, feel free to go intercourse yourself; sorry that your
first inclination was to assume that I think "she deserved
it".
:)
|6.17.05 @ 2:32PM|#
By the way, I'm glad an Aruba-related item made H&R, because
I've been dying for an excuse to post this great quote I read a
couple days ago:
--------------------------------
ORANJESTAD, Aruba Jun 14, 2005 -- Aruba authorities released two
former hotel security guards detained after Natalee Holloway went
missing but continued to hold three younger men who took the
Alabama teen to a beach before she disappeared.
Officials who confirmed Monday's release of Antonius "Mickey" John,
30, and Abraham Jones, 28, did not offer any clues to solving the
mystery of Holloway's disappearance on the Dutch Caribbean island
during a student trip. ...
"I'm very happy but also disappointed," John said by telephone of
his detention since June 5. "I knew from day one that I was
innocent."
----------------
Personally, whenever I'm accused of something, it takes me up to a
week to figure out whether I'm innocent or not.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245