I think it would be fair for you to handle O’Reilly as roughly as he handles people, but if that’s not your style, so be it. My problem with the O’Reilly interview is that it came on the heels of the Beck/fascism article and the Hannity/Michelle’s clothing bashing article. Too much FOX hack promotion.

Roger Ebert had a bit to say about O’Reilly the other day:

Thoughts on Bill O’Reilly and Squeaky the Chicago Mouse

 

 

By Roger Ebert / April 7, 2009 

Dear Bill: Thanks for including the Chicago Sun-Times on your exclusive list of newspapers on your "Hall of Shame." To be in an O’Reilly Hall of Fame would be a cruel blow to any newspaper. It would place us in the favor of a man who turns red and starts screaming when anyone disagrees with him. My grade-school teacher, wise Sister Nathan, would have called in your parents and recommended counseling with Father Hogben.

Yes, the Sun-Times is liberal, having recently endorsed our first Democrat for President since LBJ. We were founded by Marshall Field one week before Pearl Harbor to provide a liberal voice in Chicago to counter the Tribune, which opposed an American war against Hitler. I’m sure you would have sided with the Trib at the time.

I understand you believe one of the Sun-Times misdemeanors was dropping your syndicated column. My editor informs me that "very few" readers complained about the disappearance of your column, adding, "many more complained aboutNancy." I know I did. That was the famous Ernie Bushmiller comic strip in which Sluggo explained that "wow" was "mom" spelled upside-down.

Your column ran in our paper while it was owned by the right-wing polemicists Conrad Black (Baron Black of Coldharbour) and David Radler. We dropped it to save a little money after they looted the paper of millions. Now you call for an advertising boycott. It is unusual to observe a journalist cheering for a newspaper to fail. At present the Sun-Times has no bank debt, but labors under the weight of millions of dollars in tax penalties incurred by Lord Black, who is serving an eight-year stretch for mail fraud and obstruction of justice. We also had to pay for his legal expenses.

There is a major difference between Conrad Black and you: Lord Black is a much better writer and thinker, and authored a respected biography about Roosevelt, who we were founded to defend. That newspapers continue to run your column is a mystery to me, since it is composed of knee-jerk frothings and ravings. If I were an editor searching for a conservative, I wouldn’t choose a mad dog. My recommendation: The admirable Charles Krauthammer.

Bill, I am concerned that you have been losing touch with reality recently. Did you really say you are more powerful than any politician?

That reminds me of the famous story about Squeaky the Chicago Mouse. It seems that Squeaky was floating on his back along the Chicago River one day. Approaching the Michigan Avenue lift bridge, he called out: Raise the bridge! I have an erection! 

 

Re: the O’Reilly interview:

Liz, you surely know, and much better than the rest of us, that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar!

I can’t figure out what is truth and what is not in the Johnston/Palin story. I certainly would not ask Tyra Banks about it. Both kids have sounded sincere and honest when I heard them speak for themselves … who knows. I feel for both of them and their child and hope that they all can successfully escape any untoward influence.

Liz, you need to do things your way and the fact that you do is what makes you a success. It is refreshing to read that you like Bill O’Reilly although you seldom agree with him - I am sure that most people know at least one person that they would share that sentiment about.

 

Liz,

Please keep us posted on the travails of Roger Friedman! 

And I loved your interview with Bill O.  I’m not a confrontational soul, so I appreciate interviews that don’t draw blood and make me squirm.  I wish more of us could agree to disagree and still like each other.  It might help us listen a little more closely to what the other is actually saying.

Penn & Wright?! What about Liz and Dick?  : )

I don’t believe in drawing blood either.  I could never understand why anybody would consent to be interviewed by people who will ask them a question, then proceed to talk over them, spit, and embarrass them.  If these people doing the interviewing don’t agree with the answer they get, it’s down hill from there.  Civility gets lost in translation.

Lady Liz, you go girl.

And yesterday some were poo-pooing soap operas? Some of this stuff smacks of the stuff! The Roger Ebert thing is a hoot. Liz’s interview with Bill was civil, entertaining, and as Sam says, you gets more with honey than vinegar. Liz could have dredged up the court case some years ago between Bill and his young female producer who accused him of phone sex, the kind that curls ones toes and turns them purple. Liz probably could have asked him all sorts of pertinent questions but then Bill would have gotten that petulant look on his face, torn off his tie, and walked out. P.S. Never knew that about cows and milk––hmmm––does that hold true for us humans too? What’s in a name, indeed!

As I wrote in the interview— I like Bill O’Reilly. I seldom agree with him and he knows that and he doesn’t give a damn. This was just two people talking. Sorry there was no mud wrestling for Arianna’s turf.

By Liz Smith

 

Liz, I respected you before. However, my respect quotient for you has sky-rocketed even further……..Living proof that people can "Respectfully"agree to disagree!