O\'Reilly Overdose

I don't usually watch Bill O'Reilly's show, but tonight I was doing a job in a house where it was on, and I couldn't very well make them turn it off so I had to put up with it. If any of our readers caught it and have multiple other samples to compare it with, please tell me if he was especially abrasive tonight. Even I, politically world-weary as I am, was surprised. O'Reilly, a Catholic, was bashing the Pope for his opposition the Iraq invasion. He questioned the Pope's commitment to Good, suggesting that since he wasn't as much of a war-hungry hard-on as the Fox News cabal, maybe he wasn't so opposed to Hitler or Pol Pot. These names he mentioned again and again.

This leads me to ponder a broader question, how politically conservative Catholics are handling the war and the official opposition to it. Based on the sample that I know, they seem to ignore the church on this one. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

Oh yeah, O'Reilly also had a guest on from San Francisco, and told her she was from the "capital of secularism." First, what's so bad about secularism again? I thought that was that whole Enlightenment thing. And second, my immediate reaction to hearing this was to think, "maybe that's why it's so fun." I have been contemplating moving out there ever since I went to a Mises Institute event there last October. Really, I am in love with that city.

So is O'Reilly always this bad? If so, we are in deep shit. Millions of people agree with his positions.

Share this

J Philip, I thought

J Philip, I thought precisely the same thing after I posted. The Pope's antiwar rhetoric is not ex cathedra in the same way that his anti-gay marriage rhetoric is. This issue has come up before with some of the Mises/Rockwell crowd being very Catholic and also very pro-market. However, the war issue seemed much closer to a moral question when the Pope weighed in on it than the details of how welfare states should be run did.

O'Reilly is a right leaner

O'Reilly is a right leaner who doesn't toe the conservative line on some issues. He sees himself as a maverick. I tend to agree, for better or worse. He likes that he isn't easy to categorize, and sometimes strikes me as taking a view to remain unpredictable.

Conservative catholics simply disagree with the pope on the war as a matter of conscience, which is valid on matters not considered dogmatic. Prudential Judgment (papal opinion) does not carry the weight as Dogmatic Judgment (Church teaching). This allowed people as high up as Cardinal Pell of Australia to defended the Iraq action based on the Just War Theory. Simply put, conservative disagreement is typically with things that are not dogma. Liberal catholics, on the other hand, take issue with matters that "infallibly taught" & are not open to conscientious opinion such as abortion, artificial con(tra)ception, and pre marital sex. To me, that would be the more compelling question to pose.

What's interesting is that

What's interesting is that he seems so much more reasonable when he's not doing his show. He was on Bill Mahr last week, and even Whoopi noted the disparity.

Actual positions aside, I think he just throws bombs for the sake of ratings, which is fine I suppose. Regardless, he is always like that on his show.

The described conduct seems

The described conduct seems par for the course with O'Reilly... at least as of 3 year ago, when I watched him a bit.

Randall, Most Catholics in

Randall,
Most Catholics in the USA take the things they agree with that the Pope says, and follow those. And the ones they don't agree with, they leave alone. My wife's family is very heavily Catholic, and they don't seem to have a problem with the whole birth control thing (all my uncles have had vasectomies). I don't know if Catholics in Europe follow the pope's edicts, but here they seem to take it or leave it as they see fit. Just my opinion...

WRT the Pope and the Iraq war, I don't see the value in trying to Bash someone like the Pope over it. I happen to think he was wrong, but I think he's proved, through all his time on this Earth, that he's working from the principal of Good. As with many people I disagree, having different methods to achieve the same goals is nothing new.

I used to watch O'Reilly

I used to watch O'Reilly regularly not very long ago. He usually brings controversial topics into discussion and he his not afraid to say controversial things. I don't agree with him on many things and most of times I find his treatment of his guests terrible! But sometimes I feel that he shows his guests their proper place! After I discovered blogs, I almost stopped watching hosted shows on TV.
Ashish

I only watch O'Really? when

I only watch O'Really? when I have this masochistic desire to get all :furious:. Same goes for the lugnuts on their morning show, "Fux N Friends" (wherein, I heard perhaps the most amazing statement in television history: "if you disagree with the war on iraq, then you support the rape and oppression of women")

O'Really? is just an angry populist, a bully, a pathetic old coot who attempts to sell his image as "for the little guy" (one of his books is called "whose looking out for you"?). Maddox has some good things to say about him. He is, by most measures, the epitome of the "gutless populist", one who claims to have principles, and makes pleas to certain established principles, only to eschew any principled stand when it comes to offending his precious sensibilites or supporting the neoconservatives.

No, Randall, what you saw is par for the course with this hack. And if you really want a comical read, try reading his book(s). My fiancee's dad had "Who's Looking Out For You", so I checked it out. Ha, he basically demonizes everyone who disagrees with his (contradictory) viewpoints, and, again, tries to reinforce his tired role as "protector of the little guy". Blah, fucking opportunist.

Only O'Reilly knows if he

Only O'Reilly knows if he believes even half of what he says. Personally I think that he is probably correct some of the time, wrong some of the time and lies about crap for the remainder (for which there is ample evidence), and is obnoxious all of the time. My biggest problem with him is that he has my elderly parents brainwashed -- they have been known to follow his lead slavishly to a point that really borders on criminal. So I got a kinda personal beef with him.

As a Catholic, I think I

As a Catholic, I think I agree with everything besides drug use, premarital relations, and indulgences; the first two because I don’t see how it is possible that they severe relations with God in every case, and the last because of its origins.

I’m reading Tom Woods’ new book, The Church and the Market
, right now, which talks about the compatibility of libertarianism and Catholicism, and there’s a lot of good stuff in there. I think a lot of Catholics just don’t really think about it, they get caught up in the two party system and either pick Republican because it’s "pro-life” or Democrat to help the poor. Then they just adopt the rest of the party platform figuring they're picking the lesser of two evils.

Randall, I am not familiar

Randall,

I am not familiar with the Mises/Rockwell crowd. Is that a long explanation (somewhat new to the blogosphere)? I will be the first to admit that the pope's emotion about the Iraq war, while not dogmatic, was intense. Saying that it would be on Bush's conscience is pretty heavy. Have a great night :mrgreen:

I am not familiar with the

I am not familiar with the Mises/Rockwell crowd.

At a tangent, this somewhat touches on my recent about the libertarian dialect. Randall assumes his listener has some familiarity with the Austrians over at Mises.

am not familiar with the

am not familiar with the Mises/Rockwell crowd. Is that a long explanation?

For a short explination, here's the website that represents the Rockwell crowd and the website for the Mises crowd.

Well I don't know about

Well I don't know about Catholics in general, but Dan Darling is one who believes that the Iraq war met the requirements of Catholic Just War doctrine on grounds of Saddam's harboring of Ansar al-Islam (a sub-group of al Qaeda, who is ast war with the US).