« News: Yasser Arafat, Enigma Machine, Annie Lennox, Emmys |
Main
| Isaiah Washington Congratulates T.R. Knight on Emmy Nom »
07/19/2007
Bill O'Reilly: Gays, Immigration, and Fraud
Bill O'Reilly has a conversation with at Rachel B. Tiven, Executive Director of Immigration Equality, regarding the struggle to pass the Uniting American Families Act.
Incidentally, if you have the chance to see Sebastian Cordoba's illuminating film Through Thick and Thin which features the stories of several committed gay and lesbian couples struggling with the immigration issue, take the opportunity. It just screened at L.A.'s Outfest, but there will surely be more screenings coming up.
Sphere: Related ContentPosted 4:00 PM EST by Andy in Bill O'Reilly, Immigration, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Watching BO, I can't shake the feeling that one day the hot air that holds his constituent parts together will just give up its bonds and there will be nothing left but a puddle on the floor. A kind of Nietzschean, post-horse breakdown where all that remains are miscellaneous appendages, a loofah, and the stench of deflated self-righteousness, hanging in the air, gagging dazed onlookers. A boy can dream, anyway...
Posted by: Acolyte | Jul 19, 2007 4:22:15 PM
Wow...I'm not so much upset with Bill O'Reilly after watching that as much as I'm kind of embarassed for him. He either does not comprehend the argument for this act, or does and simply chooses to ignore it because he can't win the argument.
Posted by: scientitian | Jul 19, 2007 4:37:15 PM
Thankfully my partner and I were able to go through this process here in Australia. That's why I moved there because the US government would not allow him into the US on a permanent basis at the same time recognizing him as my partner. I'm not saying things in Australia are perfect, far from it, but at least there was the opportunity provided. Hopefully one day it will happen in the US.
Posted by: Tony | Jul 19, 2007 4:41:30 PM
Maybe Bill O is not as malevolent and nasty as I assumed. Perhaps he's JUST TOTALLY STUPID. He made no argument in this piece that could not be applied to a straight couple. I can't believe that he could say the things that he did, thinking that it is even the flimsiest grounds for disapproving of this legislation. I guess we should actually pity Bill for his obvious lack of rhetorical skills. In that respect his viewpoint probably resounds well with most of his devoted viewership.
Posted by: GM | Jul 19, 2007 5:00:39 PM
You O'Reilly haters better remember he's defended gays when it comes right down to it. You should actually watch the show sometimes. I don't know what this strange need is to hold onto the O'Reilly=homophobe thing. It's like....you PREFER certain fantasies?
Posted by: Joe T. | Jul 19, 2007 5:10:45 PM
Joe T, I'm not familiar with O'Reilly's defense of GLBT people. When did this happen? Can you provide some examples? I've never heard him be anything but contemptuous toward everything I value.
Posted by: Brian | Jul 19, 2007 5:17:45 PM
Interesting segment. I think BO did more to highlight the real issue than he intended. It's glaringly obvious that if a straight mixed nationality couple want to settle in the U.S. they can easily do so, especially through marriage. Gay/lesbian couples cannot. Thanks Bill for making the issue much more clear to your audience. I love the look on the interviewees face when he tries to make his silly arguments. She looks like he's spouting gibberish like a 3-year-old todler.
Posted by: Brad | Jul 19, 2007 5:25:14 PM
Interesting segment. I think BO did more to highlight the real issue than he intended. It's glaringly obvious that if a straight mixed nationality couple want to settle in the U.S. they can easily do so, especially through marriage. Gay/lesbian couples cannot. Thanks Bill for making the issue much more clear to your audience. I love the look on the interviewees face when he tries to make his silly arguments. She looks like he's spouting gibberish like a 3-year-old todler.
Posted by: Brad | Jul 19, 2007 5:25:58 PM
Joe T...I'm also completely unaware of Bill O'Reilly's support/defense of GLBT people. I am aware that he recently aired a show in which he claimed that lesbian gangs were running amok in the country attacking heterosexual men, often sending them to the hospital. And I just watched this clip that Andy has provided in which he diminishes the struggles of GLBT people to keep their foreign-born partners in the US. I'd say that's pretty fucking homophobic. Perhaps you work for O'Reilly, Joe T.?
xo,
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | Jul 19, 2007 5:26:01 PM
Interesting segment. I think BO did more to highlight the real issue than he intended. It's glaringly obvious that if a straight mixed nationality couple want to settle in the U.S. they can easily do so, especially through marriage. Gay/lesbian couples cannot. Thanks Bill for making the issue much more clear to your audience. I love the look on the interviewees face when he tries to make his silly arguments. She looks like he's spouting gibberish like a 3-year-old todler.
Posted by: Brad | Jul 19, 2007 5:26:08 PM
As noted above, I think BO's a bloviating moron, but I too have heard him make uncharacteristically charitable statements about us from time to time. However, it should be pointed out to the BO groupie that no one prior to his post had insinuated that BO was being homophobic. Just a bloviating moron.
Posted by: Acolyte | Jul 19, 2007 5:36:12 PM
Wow, what an idiot.
"gays shouldn't be allowed to bring their foreign partners over because people will start committing marriage fraud in order to get US citizenship"
Um, wow, like that doesn't happen already? I don't see why the gay community should have to suffer because of straight people who might pretend to be gay in order to commit fraud.
Um, yeah, JOE T, not sure what you're talking about, but I've never heard BO say anything about the gays that wasn't at least a little insulting or hypocritical.
Posted by: Donovan | Jul 19, 2007 5:39:21 PM
Why is this hypocritical "family values" nincompoop, who settled, out of court and for a hefty sum, the well-documented sexual harassment suit brought against him by a female employee still on the air? Oh, right, for the same reason that Rush "lock-up-the-drug-addicts-except-for-me" Limbaugh is still on the air and David "marriage-is-sacred-except-when-I'm-balling-prostitutes" Vitter is still in Congress and a psychopath is running the country - we live in Upside-Down World!
Posted by: JOE 2 | Jul 19, 2007 5:59:27 PM
Though Bill comes off as his usual self during this interview, I actually enjoyed him this time because Rachel was unrattled by his moronic questions and incessant interruptions and she stayed on point, which made Bill look like an even bigger idiot all on his own. I applaud her integrity but I just don't know why she's on his show with this issue to begin with.
Posted by: JR | Jul 19, 2007 6:26:55 PM
Earth to Joe T. - Hello!!!!!!!!!! Please give examples, Idiot.
Posted by: Gregg | Jul 19, 2007 6:30:47 PM
Gregg...you cracked me up:) Thanks
Posted by: silverskreen | Jul 19, 2007 6:51:15 PM
O'Reilly must have pee'd his pants over this story - the opportunity to demonize gays and immigrants at the same time... a perfect storm of stupidity.
And if we're waiting for Joe T's examples, it's gonna be a long night.
Posted by: jerkstor | Jul 19, 2007 7:04:01 PM
I do watch the show, sometimes. I do it for the WTF moments of unintended humor, mostly.
O'Reilly is for hate crimes law. That's pretty much the only "pro-gay" statement I'm aware of. And even then, he goes out of his way to say it has nothing with the gays per se. He's for anything that punish criminals more harshly. And he thinks local officials bungle up too many violent crime prosecutions, so the federal government needs to step in.
I remember O'Reilly once mentioned he's for civil unions. But then proceeded to launch into another of his many attacks on same-sex marriage. That doesn't really count, sorry.
It's a little too much like John McCain's "Sure, they can have civil unions, but the government won't recognize it"... or George W. Bush's "I'm for states deciding" (and then threatening to veto DC's Domestic Partnership funding because it isn't a state).
Insert snicker here.
Posted by: John | Jul 19, 2007 7:16:49 PM
To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens comment about Falwell, if you gave O'Reilly an enema, he could broadcast his show from a matchbox.
Posted by: ReasonBased | Jul 19, 2007 7:20:24 PM
I think BO's defense of gay people is that we should be allowed to live as long as we don't say anything or let anyone know that we are gay. He's practically the MLK of the gay movement!
Posted by: BIMBO_ERUPTION | Jul 19, 2007 7:33:08 PM
Well I had to choose between my country (US) and the man I love(British) and guess what? I chose him. We will settle this year in the UK as they have equal immigration rights for both straight and gay couples. Further, why should I have loyalty to a country that treats me like a second class citizen on so many levels? No thanks.
Posted by: Winston | Jul 19, 2007 8:00:54 PM
Winston...as they say in the U.K., good on you! Congratulations on finding love and a better country in which to live. How I wish I could experience the same luck.
xo,
peterparker
Posted by: peterparker | Jul 19, 2007 8:21:22 PM
Well, I'm glad people here have said pretty much what I wanted to. I'm speechless about O'Reilly. The thing that really enrages me is that I don't think he's really that stupid. I think he's just trying to trick his dumb viewers into buying his bull. He knows full well his arguments don't make sense and that they apply equally to straight couples. He knows that gays being able to "apply like everyone else" (*excuse John while he takes a deep breath and counts to ten*) doesn't cut it. He's just trying to brainwash people, and he is pure evil for it.
Posted by: John | Jul 19, 2007 8:28:47 PM
I'm not sure I'd go as far at Joe T, but I do want to give O'Reilly SOME credit. I do know that he has mocked the ex-gays and pretty much said they were full of it (in much nicer words). And he does support what he thinks is equality (though we certainly would not agree about that).
I don't think he's a homophobe - he's more like a 1960's liberal. He thinks he treats all people equal but he is so heterosexist that he cannot see that he's condescending and dismissive of gay people. He's not purposefully anti-gay, he just sort of thinks of gay people as folks with peculiar fetishes that we should allow but not treat quite the same as wholesome straight folks.
Oh well. It could be worse. He's very influential and "we should be tolerant of the gay people and their odd sex habits" is probably an improvement over many of the conservatives. He is, at least, a voice against the ex-gays or the "throw em in jail" folks - though I could do without the "there'll be fraud" or "oooh, lesbian gangs" nonsense.
Posted by: Timothy | Jul 19, 2007 8:33:48 PM
BO is a opportunity based populist who tries to mirror his opinions to the latest polls so as to get the largest possible audience. This puts him right of center on many issues, except for maybe the environment. He hedges his opinions by being an in-name-only supporter of gay rights and pro-choice, while in practice he is much more rightwing. He will say he favors gay rights, but never supports laws that advance gay rights, court rulings that advance gay rights or politicians that do the same, etc.
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Jul 19, 2007 9:53:12 PM