The Instigator
mikelwallace
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
Jlconservative
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Bill O'Reilly is a hippocrite.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,245 times Debate No: 2741
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (9)

 

mikelwallace

Pro

Bill O'Reilly claims that he is completely fair and balanced, and that his tv and radio shows are a "no spin" zone. He even criticizes and attacks other networks when they are unfair. For doing this, he is a hippocrite, for he is neither fair nor balanced. Those who read this debate should know that I am a conservative, I am not getting my belief of this from far left idealogue websites and smear blogs, but from my own oservations. Though I agree with much of the politics Bill professes to believe in, I feel that he is dishonest, insincere, and hippocritical.
Jlconservative

Con

Jlconservative forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
mikelwallace

Pro

mikelwallace forfeited this round.
Jlconservative

Con

Jlconservative forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
mikelwallace

Pro

I suppose I will post an argument even though my opponent has dissapeared.

For my first argument, I will give a recent example. As we all know, Bill criticizes other networks a lot for being unfair. Recently, he went after MSNBC, calling them irresponsible. His reasoning was that a reporter on the network made a crack about Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson watching the Super Bowl together. It was some subtle joke about Richardson (a hispanic) passing the guacamole to Clinton.

http://www.youtube.com......

In the above video, O'Reilly goes after the network, not for the comment, but for failing to apoligize and condemn the unfair comment. However, just a few days before that, Bill had a guest host named Michael Smerconish on "The Radio Factor" and he was speaking about why Mitt Romney would not get the nomination. The following is what was said in the "no spin zone":

"No wonder some Americans are reluctant to support Mitt Romney for president. A Gallup poll conducted in the days after Romney delivered his "Faith in America" speech found that 17 percent of voters said they wouldn't vote for a Mormon presidential candidate. That's the same result Gallup got when asking a similar question about Romney's father, Michigan Gov. George Romney, when he was running for president.

"NO DOUBT THESE people are largely Christians (like me) and Jews.
We're clearly aided by an ability to spot a whopper when we hear one, a skill obviously lacking in Scientologists and Mormons. Maybe it's our grounding in the Old and New Testament that enables us to easily size up the preposterous nature of the customs that guys like Cruise and Romney follow.
I'm thinking we have certain street smarts emanating from our belief in the Good Book that's given us the ability to filter out obviously bogus beliefs.
After all, we know that the earth was created in seven days, and that the son of its creator was born to a virgin mother. Indeed, a star over Bethlehem led three wise men to the scene of Jesus' birth, and, 30 years later, he walked on the water of the Sea of Galilee.
If only the Mormons and Scientologists would take the time to read those stories - and with them learn about the great flood that Noah survived by building an ark and loading two of each animal onboard, or the drowning of Pharaoh's army after Moses parted the Red Sea - they'd surely come to their senses over the obviously fictitious lore surrounding L. Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith.
Heck, say what you will in this time of war with radical Islam, but not even Muslims would fall for the trappings of faith that Cruise and Romney have."

Would you call these comments a bit unfair and unbalanced? This was a blatant attack on Mitt Romney based on his faith. His intellegence and logic are belittled because of his Church. In the days to follow, Bill O'Reilly recieved several letters, emails, and phone calls about these comments being allowed to go unchallenged in his "no spin zone". Bill refuses to comment, it just never happened. Interesting huh? I also recall Bill going after Cindy Sheehan for comparing Radical Islamists to freedom fighters. He said that he would not stand for anyone comparing freedom fighters to radical islam on his show, never. Yet, in these comments, Romney is compared to radical islam based on his religeon? Why won't Bill simply condemn these unfair comments? One week later, after recieving complaints from many LDS people, O'Reilly had a special on his show about the different religeons. He did not mention the faith. His guest attempted to bring up "the Mormons" and Bill quickly turned away from it. Yet another opporitunity to fix the damage done on his airwaves, and he refused to comment. Bill O'Reilly is quick to judge the other networks when they are unfair, but does not take the responsability that he feels others should be obliged to take.
Jlconservative

Con

Jlconservative forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Muhafidh 9 years ago
Muhafidh
In fact, "Pro" lost this debate. I think he may have provided some evidence that Bill O'Reilly is a hypocrite, but he didn't even address the possibility of his being a "hippocrite," which by definition would be a type of horse that exercises good judgment. Do you believe Bill O'Reilly is a wise-horse? If so, then vote "Pro." Otherwise, you too may be a wise-horse...
Posted by mikelwallace 9 years ago
mikelwallace
haha...no kidding man. Maybe he got caught up with something though.
Posted by birdpiercefan3334 9 years ago
birdpiercefan3334
wow, mikelwallace, your opponent is sure...um...gung-ho about debating you.
Posted by mikelwallace 9 years ago
mikelwallace
If anybody would like to debate this topic with me please let me know.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Johnicle 9 years ago
Johnicle
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by JonJon 9 years ago
JonJon
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 9 years ago
Vi_Veri
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by birdpiercefan3334 9 years ago
birdpiercefan3334
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
mikelwallaceJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30