Egomaniac: one who has an obsessive preoccupation with one’s self, i.e., one who is intolerably self-centered.
Ignoramus: a person who does not know much: an ignorant or stupid person.
Several weeks ago Bill O’Reilly revisited the issue of Obama’s birth certificate during the viewer letter segment of his cable news program on Fox.
It was a bit surprising given the fact that the “King of Spin” has taken his fair share of criticism for repeatedly proffering misinformation and lies about Obama’s past. It was perhaps even more unexpected given the fact that the Fox network has recently dished out a number of tantalizing morsels about Obama’s questionable past; tidbits that had been previously ignored or purposely concealed from its viewing audience for years. Perhaps Fox got wind that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Lt. Mike Zullo of the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse were soon to reveal “universe-shattering” information about the fraud in the White House and there was now a growing concern amongst the “powers-that-be” that failure to get up to speed regarding the true story about Obama’s serial identity fraud could prove to be an epic embarrassment for the network whose ignominious slogan is “Fair and Balanced.”
Why should the egomaniac talk about the Obama birth certificate?
So what on earth was O’Reilly’s motivation to talk about Obama’s BC this time? Hadn’t he derisively put this issue to bed many times before? Could it possibly be that O’Reilly was going to temper his previous remarks about the legitimacy of Obama’s birth certificate and actually issue a mea culpa? Not likely it would seem. Hard to imagine that the intractable egomaniac would go there but perhaps he was under orders to create some wiggle room on the issue given Fox’s recent, albeit tepid forays, into Obama’s phony life narrative. Or would O’Reilly simply double down (the more likely scenario) on his lies in an attempt to further hoodwink his audience and keep the eligibility issue on the back burner?
* Note from TPATH: of all the email Bill O’Reilly has no doubt received concerning his ignorance and cover ups, check out the one he chooses to put on the air. “You make too much money”? This immediately puts Harley into the “kook class”. Looks like Billy Boy has spent more time reading “Rules For Radicals” than Forged Birth Certificate Affidavits.
When O’Reilly posted a letter that stated in part that the viewer was “mad as hell” because “Obama’s birth certificate had been debunked,” O’Reilly turned to Heather Nauert, a Fox cohort, and asked her: “What do we know about it [the birth certificate]?” This was a seemingly odd question coming from the omniscient O’Reilly. After all he has told his devotees repeatedly that he had investigated the controversy surrounding BO’s BC and there was nothing to it.
Nauert’s dutiful response was that “…the president released his birth certificate originally in 2008 and then again in 2011 because people were upset that the first BC didn’t have signatures.” [Really? That’s the only reason? Wow, great reporting Heather! Oh and by the way, that piece of crap issued in 2008 was NOT a birth certificate.]
O’Reilly then asked Nauert if it [BO’s BC] is a legitimate birth certificate. Nauert responded emphatically that the birth certificate is “absolutely legitimate.”
“ABSOLUTELY LEGITIMATE,” Nauert repeated, offering of course, absolutely no evidence or any explanation as to how she came to this conclusion.
Well that settles it. Fair and balanced, objective reporting at its best! Fox shill sticks to the script and reinforces O’Reilly’s consistent yet deceitful message. The viewers at home are none the wiser. If O’Reilly says so it must be true and if his fair haired lackey backs him unequivocally how can there be any doubt that the story they are peddling is anything but true? After all we all know that Bill is looking out for YOU!
At first I thought it might be possible that Nauert had been invited on the show because she actually had some new information or insight to share about the BC? Perhaps she had been doing research on the birth certificate and was now prepared to either set the record straight or perhaps provide a correction or clarification based on HER investigation. Did she have new irrefutable evidence one way or the other? Or was her presence nothing more than a clever ploy to provide some measure of cover for O’Reilly in the event he might have to soon set the record straight or at least do some backtracking in light of the seeming change in tone at Fox.
Well it turned out to be nothing more than business as usual. Brazen lies again. Nauert was simply an eager stooge whose task was to parrot the talking points put in front of her thus reinforcing O’Reilly’s repeated misinformation and lies on an issue that frustratingly for him, just won’t go away.
Here’s the deal. O’Reilly, like Obama is a fraud. He is dishonest and a disgrace to his profession. O’Reilly touts himself as an advocate for the truth; a journalist and former investigative reporter who is “looking out for you”; a “simple man” speaking up for the average American; a purveyor of the facts who allows “no spin” on his program and whose stories are “fair and balanced.” The reality is that O’Reilly is an overpaid, pompous egomaniac whose journalistic ethics and credibility are questionable at best. On the issue of Obama’s birth certificate he is a joke. He has made up his own facts and failed to offer any proof of his assertions on this issue. His analysis of the Obama birth certificate controversy has been biased, buffoonish, supercilious and downright dishonest. He has failed to offer any opposing opinion or debate on the issue. He has mocked and ridiculed those who dare to question him on the issue. Consider for a minute some of O’Reilly’s whoppers:
“The Factor investigated the president’s birth in Honolulu and found factual evidence that he [Obama] was born there.”
“We’re going to put this to bed tonight. He [Obama] does have a legitimate birth certificate. The state of Hawaii says they have it. And we have no reason not to believe that.”
“We very early on did an investigation into Barack Obama’s birth certificate,” O’Reilly said, noting that his team had turned up two Obama birth announcements in local Hawaiian newspapers, “[So] I just dismissed it but you made a big deal out of it.”
“Sheriff Arpaio has not provided any evidence to back up his assertions [i.e., Obama’s BC is a forgery].”
“I am very busy. I looked into the birth certificate myself and found that there were two separate birth announcements made in Honolulu newspapers on the day Barack Obama was born.”
Regarding the “theory” that Obama is not even an American citizen: “That theory has been out there for awhile. The Factor investigated and found out it’s bogus.”
If you report, you have to get it right
Those who report the news have a responsibility to provide the truth. A democratic society depends on its citizens having reliable, accurate facts and this “journalistic truth” is a process that begins with honest research and verification of the facts.
The preamble of the Society of Professional Journalists states that its members believe “…that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public through thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility. “
Once the facts of a story have been determined it is the responsibility of the journalist to convey a fair and accurate accounting/meaning of this/her report. If further facts become available, the ethical journalist will supplement his/her story with updated information in the quest for truth.
O’Reilly has failed to seek the truth, he has failed to verify the facts or do any original research regarding the Obama BC. He has failed to report truthfully on any of the myriad of inconsistencies and lies about Obama’s life narrative. He has offered no debate or opposing point of view. He has failed to report openly and honestly about the many investigations, forensic reports, court cases, press conferences and public protests that relate directly to this issue. Instead he has chosen to lie repeatedly, offered phony facts and information and has arrogantly mocked and ridiculed those who seek the truth.
O’Reilly knows this is an issue that won’t go away or else he wouldn’t keep revisiting it. Nevertheless he has chosen to avoid the truth. In so doing O’Reilly has betrayed the trust of the American people and his adoring followers are none the wiser because his message has been consistent – consistently dishonest. O’Reilly’s repeated lies about Obama’s identity fraud reinforce a narrative that is patently false and destructive to the well-being of America. O’Reilly is supposed to be a watchdog, not a lap-dog.
O’Reilly does not have the moral compass that must be the core of the responsible and ethical journalist. Thus he has no credibility as journalist and/or reporter because he is refuses to conduct himself with integrity, thoroughness and honesty.
The fact that O’Reilly knows the truth is what makes his actions even more disturbing. O’Reilly’s unabashed willingness to lie and dissemble makes him a knowing conspirator in a cover-up of the greatest crime ever perpetrated against the American people. The Obama birth certificate is a provable forgery and everyone in America deserves and needs to know that simple fact.
Heather Nauert asserts a “fact” not in evidence
So what about O’Reilly’s co-conspirator Heather Nauert? What on earth was she thinking? Nauert made an absolute fool of herself spouting the prepared lines that she was provided. Is she really that stupid? Or is she just an ignorant fool? Nauert who has a BA in Communications and a Masters degree in Journalism should have known better. Presumably she has a reputation to protect and obviously her credibility is at risk anytime she makes an assertion on air or in public.
Has Nauert not once had the inclination to scrutinize the Obama’s BC story and examine for herself the mountain of evidence that actually debunks Bill O’Reilly’s storyline? After all, this is a story that continues to fester and will not go away. She’s in the news business, can’t she see that? No intellectual curiosity to see what all the “fuss” is about? Does she not even question the very premise in the viewer’s letter stating the “birth certificate has been debunked?” Did she not even think for a second: “What is the letter writer possibly referring to? What does he mean by “debunked”? How has the BC been debunked?” Just one hour of Nauert ‘s time perusing the internet would have at minimum revealed information about the Arpaio press conferences including numerous YouTube videos outlining not just the BC forgery but also Obama’s Bogus SSN and forged selective service registration.
A reporter’s responsibility to actually vet the story would have uncovered the various reports by document examiners and software experts declaring the BC a forgery. She would have discovered a myriad of inconsistencies in Obama’s life narrative and a sincere effort on her part to verify the talking points provided by Team Spin would have revealed so many curious aspects about Obama’s entire life narrative that a responsible journalist/reporter would have had more than enough reason to pause.
There is a wealth of information available for the honest, ethical journalist/reporter to review. Instead, Heather Nauert did nothing to verify the talking points put in front of her!
Stupid and ignorant is no excuse. Nauert came on the program knowing full well that she was going to be asked about the birth certificate. She became an accomplice when she prostituted herself and stated as fact something for which she obviously had no knowledge whatsoever. Unless she knowingly lied; like Bill.
After all was she not aware of the numerous document examiners’ who have proclaimed Obama’s BC to be a forgery? Has she not gone on the whitehouse.gov website, imported the file into a publishing program and manipulated the document herself? Has she not seen for herself the myriad of anomalies in the document? Is there not possibly something to this story? Does Nauert not find it strange that Obama took so long to produce his “long form birth certificate” at great expense to the taxpayers?
Does she not wonder why Obama has claimed to have been born in two different hospitals in Hawaii by two different attending physicians? Doesn’t she find in strange that Obama claimed for 16 years to be born in Kenya? And why has she not been on the phone to Sheriff Arpaio to ask about his investigation on this issue? Would not an honest and diligent effort to dig deeper into this issue be the proper course to pursue?
“Absolutely legitimate.” Based on what? I‘ll tell you what it is based on. Bill O’Reilly’s word. Nauert was instructed to say what she said and she dutifully complied. Her sole purpose for being there was to support Bill O’Reilly’s position on the issue and also get some personal prime time exposure. There was no investigative reporting; no fact checking in play here. Just show-up, fawn, smile and lie to the American people.
Shame on O’Reilly for using Nauert as a prop to support his continuing lies and shame on Nauert for being so stupid and/or ignorant to go on national television without doing her due diligence.
So there you have it ladies and gentlemen. The egomaniac and the ignoramus. The egomaniac who is always looking out for you and the ignoramus who is looking out for the egomaniac; a pair of fair and balanced, unbiased, ethical journalists dedicated to serving the public with truth and honesty. Stalwart pillars of journalistic integrity and ethics, don’t you think?
The combined performance by O’Reilly and Nauert was so shameful as to constitute a willful undermining of the very foundational principles upon which good journalism is based. In addition, both of them (one willfully, the other perhaps unwittingly) are also contributing to the fundamental transformation of our country in a manner so devious and so destructive as to be criminal, if not treasonous. Honest journalism has the capacity to serve as a watchdog over those whose power and position may be at odds with the citizenry. Instead of challenging Obama, O’Reilly and Nauert have chosen to enable Obama’s growing despotism. O’Reilly and Nauert epitomize the widespread media corruption that is becoming the norm and is contributing rapidly to America’s demise and the demise of our personal freedoms and liberty.
Bill O’Reilly and Heather Nauert have demeaned their profession and devalued themselves; conducting themselves in a manner contrary to the generally accepted journalistic ethics and standards of what was once a respected profession. In so doing, they have betrayed their fellow Americans. They have no credibility; they can never be trusted. Like Obama, you might even consider them your enemy.
Reprinted rom “Give Us Liberty”
- Christianity Today
- Constitution 101
- Creation Corner
- Entertainment Today
- First Amendment
- Foundation of our Nation
- Guest Columns
- Human Interest
- Ignite the Pulpit
- Let's Talk
- Money matters
- Racial Issues
- Tea Party
- Trump elevator pitch
- World news
Constitution3 days ago
Executive powers – a split decision
Accountability4 days ago
More companies covering travel costs for employees seeking an abortion
News4 days ago
Abortions can continue in Texas after Judge temporarily blocks pre-Roe ban
Accountability9 hours ago
R. Kelly sues prison for placing him on suicide watch following conviction
Accountability4 days ago
Military to continue providing abortions after Roe reversal
Constitution5 days ago
Executive powers and their limits
Legislative1 day ago
Rep. Lauren Boebert in worship service speech: ‘Church is supposed to direct government’
Accountability2 days ago
Supreme Court rules President Biden can end Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy