Read time: 3 minutes

Bill O'Reilly Uses Bogus Quote To Attack Time Magazine Journalist

Bill O'Reilly has a shaky relationship with the truth. But when somebody else says something that he feels is not accurate, he unleashes his patented fatwa, such as when he recently attacked a journalist for lying - an attack based on an O'Reilly lie!

Bill O'Reilly has a shaky relationship with the truth. But when somebody else says something that he feels is not accurate, he unleashes his patented fatwa, such as when he recently attacked a journalist for lying - an attack based on an O'Reilly lie!

God told Bill O'Reilly to write "Killing Jesus." So, given his messianic delusions, it's no surprise that Holy Father Bill declared war (or is it jihad?) on those who did not lavish "Killing Jesus" with praise. And now that a Time Magazine writer described the movie version of Bill's divinely inspired tome in a less than flattering turn of phrase, Bill unleashed his wrath during one of last week's "Tip of the Day" segments.

In a review of the religious movie, "The Young Messiah," Time Magazine writer John Anderson, made the unforgivable mistake of describing the movie, based on O'Reilly's "Killing Jesus," has having been "critically eviscerated" And them were fighting words for Bill who began last Wednesday's "Tip" segment by reading the offending quote which also acknowledged that the film, produced by National Geographic, broke NATGEO records.

Bill cited "a couple of problems;" i.e. that his book is "not a novel, it's non fiction and it was nominated for an Emmy in the best TV Movie category." (Laughter was heard in the background). O'Reilly claimed that he "asked Mr. Anderson who doesn't like me very much" [offered no specifics on that] to provide back-up on his 'critically eviscerated' statement, he's hiding right under the desk we can't reach him."(More laughter) The quote, "Killing Jesus, last year’s critically eviscerated TV movie based on Bill O’Reilly’s novel, broke NatGeo viewership records." was shown as O'Reilly read it.

O'Reilly proffered his bullshit tip: "You expect this type of stuff on the net, but even publications like Time Magazine allow pretty much anything to be printed these days, that's just wrong and if you're going to be a news magazine, be accurate. The whole thing is out of control." He concluded by informing us that "Killing Jesus" will be shown this Thursday on NatGeo "in case you'd like to see it."


↓ Story continues below ↓

Couple of problems - The movie version of "Killing Jesus" did get some negative reaction. Charisma News said that it "watered down Christ's life and teaching." Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 57% rating. The Guardian's headline read, "Bill O'Reilly's film is touted as history. But facts aren't sacred to him." The National Catholic Reporter's headline read " 'Killing Jesus' is remarkable but doesn't give the whole picture." Christian fundamentalists had a big problem with it as noted by one site which described it as "just the latest example of a Hollywood “Christian” film that distorts the Bible, misrepresents the Christian faith and blasphemes the name of The Lord Jesus Christ."

But take my word for the criticism. O'Reilly had a hissy fit over the criticism which he blamed on the good old "secular-progressive agenda" which is engaging in an "assault" on "Judeo-Christian values."

The other bigger problem is that O'Reilly changed Anderson's quote. Anderson did not use the word "novel" to describe "Killing Jesus." He wrote, and I quote, "Killing Jesus, last year’s critically eviscerated TV movie based on Bill O’Reilly’s book, broke NatGeo viewership records."

You expect this type of thing on biased right wing media, but isn't Bill O'Reilly supposed to be a legit "no spin" journalist? If you're going to be "fair & balanced," be accurate. Oh, wait, Fox News isn't really fair & balanced!

Crossposted at News Hounds.
We watch Fox so you don't have to!

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.