Bill O'reilly's latest syndicated column defends Franken law-suit

"the accusation that fox is a conservative network is pure propaganda" "now fox news is striking back by putting the demonizers on notice that they will be held responsible when they violate trademarks or launch defamatory personal attacks on Fox personnel"

"fox news has become the highest rated news network on cable because we feature lively debate and all honest voices are welcome"

"we dont do drive by character assassinations and we dont denigrate opposing points of view by launching gratuitous personal attacks".

"it makes me sick to see intellectually dishonest individuals hide behind the first amendment to spread propaganda , libel and slander".

This guy is a real sicko.

if it offends O'really. That lawsuit is the definition of frivolous.

it's great when applied to right-wingers.

no, he just thinks that liberals should have no rights because we're all traitors.

See you in the camps if Shrub is re-selected: :)

"we dont do drive by character assassinations and we dont denigrate opposing points of view by launching gratuitous personal attacks".

AND

"it makes me sick to see intellectually dishonest individuals hide behind the first amendment to spread propaganda , libel and slander".

Yeah, it makes us sick when you and Faux do it on a daily basis.

The Daily Show is the highest rated news show on cable. Heck, if Sponge Bob Square Pants were to do a news segment it would get higher ratings.

I hope that's true but do you have stats to support that supposition?

And, I doubt Jon Stewart would.

But I would bet that it gets higher ratings than the oreally factor

Even Faux must be getting embarrased by his rantings and ravings.

He's obviously behind this idiotic lawsuit. The attorneys representing Faux in this suit should be sanctioned for bringing it. It is meritless on its face.

...but they can't take it at ALL. Satire has been part of the American way of life FOREVER. Look at all Clinton had to endure. It looks as if the corporate fascist wanna-bes are upset that their plan is unraveling. More and more people are questioning Dubya, and maybe we'll start to make a little progress on fixing our country.

anyone that insecure must be very unhappy.

Nah I take it back. He deserves whatever he gets.

untimely deaths.

This has been a trick of Republican bully tactics at least since Gingrich. Limbaugh uses it all the time. Like attacking someone like Tom Daschle, who had criticized him, for being "mean-spirited" and engaging in "character assassination." He loved to accuse Clinton of the "politics of personal destruction" he himself was the master of.

Ailes and Murdoch have always been very insistent, when confronted with FOX's bias, that they really are "fair and balanced." On one hand, they may really believe it, as what they see as an antidote to the "liberal media", but more likely it's because they know that without the cover of impartiality they also lose any claim to pretending their obvious Republican proganda is really news. More importantly, they seem to know it pisses us off. They know the running ridicule of liberal pretensions is at the heart of their appeal to the angry yahoos they call their audience.

that inhabit the darkenss of the GOP.

He is more tolerated than he tolerates and his own bravado will be his downfall. All of this garbage about this lawsuit, (it is, as far as I know only about the phrase, "Fair & Balanced"), will swallow up FAUX and make it seem like the cheap imitation of news programming it is.

My thought is that there couldbe no lawsuit pertaining to content, because they would then have to show they are, 'fair & balanced', which, of course they cannot do.

O'Reilly has also had it in for Franken for a long time. All has no bones calling O'Reilly a liar, and can prove it in court, or anywhere else for that matter. O'Reilly thinks he has never lied, (in itself a lie), but he really despise Franken for pointing out the fact that the Big 'O', really is a liar.

The idiots who filed Fox v. Franken would, in Illinois, be required to turn themselves in to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for filing a lawsuit without a good faith basis in fact or law for the purpose of harrassment (or another improper purpose). However, New York does not impose such a requirement on counsel. This may explain a great deal. It may explain nothing, too, as it is highly doubtful that the ARDC would act on such an action.

"Fair and balanced" was used in advertising as a description of news reporting during the Watergate era, long before there was a Fox News. On its face, then, the mark is not registrable. Given the various boycotts among politicians going around these days, it is not even an accurate descriptor (of any of the major news sources, print or media, let alone Fox), and thus cannot acquire secondary meaning.

Then there's the whole issue of exemplars. And the Victoria's Secret decision. It seems pretty clear that inadequate consideration was given to these issues; one might even question whether they were considered at all, but at the hourly rates no doubt paid to prepare the complaint somebody would have padded the bill by noting review of them.

Perhaps the law is an ass. What, then, does that make those who try to use (loop)holes?

http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/