O'Reilly on the War - Substituting Facts with Ego

O'Reilly on the War- Substituting Facts with Ego

Bill O'Reilly is one of the most hated figures in mainstream news media, and it's not hard to see why: his abrasive personality, gigantic ego, and unwillingness to admit mistakes tend to annoy everyone - especially those on the left - to no end. O'Reilly isn't as bad as people think - he often makes some very valid points. Unfortunately, his blind support of the war in Iraq has left him grasping at straws in order to save face.

O'Reilly begins his article by questioning the credentials of some of the speakers who appeared at last weekend's peace rally in Washington D.C. "I submit the vast majority of Americans would cringe if Ms. Sheehan, Reverend Jackson, or Mr. Nader were ever given even an advisory role in U.S. overseas affairs," O'Reilly quips, ignoring the fact that these people aren't asking to oversee foreign affairs. Instead, they're specifically lobbying for the end of a war that has cost the United States billions of dollars and nearly 2,000 lives - with no end in sight.

O'Reilly then criticizes "cut-and-runners" (his term to describe anyone who shows even the slightest opposition to the war) for claiming the Bush administration has sent American kids to die. He argues that we have an all-volunteer military; nobody was forced to go to Iraq. Unfortunately, Bill's argument is flawed: how does this justify the invasion of Iraq?

Finally, Bill complains that opponents of the war have no strategy to defeat the fascist regimes of the Middle East because they don't believe the United States has the right to do so. While this statement may be true, O'Reilly fails to provide any argument actually supporting that America does have the right to dethrone foreign dictators. Also, he fails to acknowledge the fact that our action in Iraq may have done nothing to make the world a safer place.

Bill O'Reilly is a smart man, and provides unique insights to most issues. Unfortunately, his own pride and inability to admit wrongdoing has completely consumed him here, and his flawed, evasive arguments severely hurt his credibility in this editorial.