Bill O'Reilly | Immigration | News

New:
Towleroad Tools:
« 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 Content

Posted 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!

... or by Email
RECENT STORIES:

Comments

  1. 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


  2. 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


  3. 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


  4. 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


  5. 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


  6. 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


  7. 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


  8. 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


  9. 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


  10. 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


  11. 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


  12. 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


  13. 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


  14. 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


  15. Earth to Joe T. - Hello!!!!!!!!!! Please give examples, Idiot.

    Posted by: Gregg | Jul 19, 2007 6:30:47 PM


  16. Gregg...you cracked me up:) Thanks

    Posted by: silverskreen | Jul 19, 2007 6:51:15 PM


  17. 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


  18. 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


  19. 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


  20. 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


  21. 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


  22. 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


  23. 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


  24. 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


  25. 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


  26. O'Reilly is a poor ignorant asshole, Period! The poor guy doesn't get it. All we want is to have the same right straigh people have. We are not asking for more or less...just the same..if straight people are breaking the law then they need to create a better system..but to refuse Gay people to have the same opportunity is wrong ...it's called DISCRIMINATION. PERIOD!

    Posted by: Jesse | Jul 19, 2007 10:18:38 PM


  27. Bill O'Reilly is not nearly as bad as most people in this thread are making him out to be. As an open-minded liberal living in Massachusetts I can tell you that I have heard all this negative O'Reilly bashing before - I was one of them! Then one day I decided to actually watch his show every now and then. I was shocked to learn that he isn't the hate-monger that he is often made out to be. Most people who make condemning statements towards Mr. O'Reilly never watch his show - they only respond to a sound bite, a biased news report, or what someone else tells them. I certainly don't agree with much of the so called "conservative" agenda that people associate with O'Reilly, rather, I support the protection of America's environment and regulations and education against overpopulation. The U.S. must start enforcing strict immigration laws or our land and resources will quickly disappear. Gay's must pick their battles carefully. At this time the fight needs to stay focused on the right to equal marriage. Once that is obtained - and eventually it will be - the immigration laws will, by default, reflect the right for a gay immigrant to remain in the U.S. as long as he/she is married and meets the other requirements that heterosexual couples now do. I'm surprised this was never brought up by Mr. O'Reilly as he's usually on the ball. By the way, I cannot recall even one time that Bill O'Reilly said anything against the gay community - he is certainly no Dr. Laura!

    Open boarders or any increases in immigration numbers would be disastorus to our nations resources and sovereinity. Could you imagine how many people would abuse a law that let's people into the country because they claim to be in a relationship with someone? That privilege is already abused by married heterosexual couples and remains unenforceable. I have met many people who have married an immigrant to make a profit. It's very hard to prove that someone is taking advantage of this law. After the recent government ploy to try and create another amnesty the American people are pissed and therefore demanding strict enforcement of illegals. With the renewed vigor of the American people to protect our boarders and decrease immigration this is the wrong time to ask for an exception. Once gay marriage is the law then this should not be an issue anymore. Focus on the right to marry and this problem will be solved.

    Posted by: Charles | Jul 19, 2007 11:00:59 PM


  28. I don't think the woman made a very compelling argument. I think the risk of fraud is great, and she did not answer the question of what would happen if a couple broke up immediately thereafter or if it were fraudulent. And the fact that this argument applies to straight couples as well does not make it ok. It means that this should be disallowed for all couples, and that people should immigrate as individuals and not as one half of a couple.

    Posted by: ME | Jul 19, 2007 11:18:39 PM


  29. I hate when I open this page and the first thing I read is Bill O'reilly's name. Its been like 6 hours...put up a cute guy pic or somethin' already damn!

    Posted by: Jersey | Jul 19, 2007 11:45:04 PM


  30. I am 100% behind the immigration equality movement. That said, they really need to find someone who can out-argue the stupid viewpoints laid down by people such as Bill O'Reilly. Unfortunately, Rachel Tiven just doesn't cut it, based on this one youtube video.

    Posted by: simon | Jul 20, 2007 12:17:06 AM


  31. I am TOTALLY in favor of the immigration equality platform for gays....but only because most of the gays already in the U.S. are so FUGLY that we need some fresh meat (especially in northeastern part of the country). Eck.

    TONY THE TIGER

    Posted by: tony the tiger | Jul 20, 2007 12:21:43 AM


  32. Thanks you guys for all of your support. I am in a same sex binational relationship. And after seven years our time has come. I am one of the lucky ones, my partner is from Canada. Therefore, even though I must say goodbye to my family and friends in the US, I am finally moving on to a country that will respect me as a human being. Viva la Canada. There are many binational couples that do not have the choose that I have been given. Therefore their only option is to either break up or stay in the country illegally. For more information on this topic go to www.immigrationequality.org. This discrimination has hurt far too many people. It is time to fight.

    Posted by: nola | Jul 20, 2007 12:52:06 AM


  33. We should keep our focus on the right for gays to marry in America. That is where our fight should be right now. Once gay marriage is legal we will be granted the same privileges as hetero married couples. We're so close to finally gaining this right - let's not lose focus.

    Posted by: Wolfgang | Jul 20, 2007 1:12:42 AM


  34. Well, I guess he told her. What I also have to ask is, why is she on an OBVIOUSLY "right" wing Republican run channel, trying to advocate for gay rights?

    Posted by: Chris | Jul 20, 2007 7:41:57 AM


  35. Bill O'Reilly is a hatefull ass!

    Posted by: mike | Jul 20, 2007 8:44:08 AM


  36. she did a great job.

    Posted by: halifax | Jul 20, 2007 10:41:32 AM


  37. Rachel Tiven is on the "OBVIOUSLY "right" wing Republican run channel, trying to advocate for gay rights?" because no other national media outlet is willing to cover this problem. People caught in this immigration problem truly are the "silent victims". For all intense and purposes nobody seems to care.

    Posted by: Nola | Jul 20, 2007 12:36:10 PM


  38. Bill totally lost me on this segment when he mentioned the money. Saying something like "People could just pay $50,000 for a gay marriage and then become a citizen." He must make so many millions of dollars that in his mind, 50k is chump change for an immigrant to pay. I know of some people trying to buy green card marriages offering prospective partners 5k or 10k to fake a marriage, but 50k? No way. Whatever else Bill said after that didn't matter. He proved to me with that comment that he was ignorant on this issue and the emotional toll it takes on a bi-national couple separated b/c of US laws.

    Posted by: Daniel | Jul 20, 2007 2:16:30 PM


  39. Bill totally lost me on this segment when he mentioned the money. Saying something like "People could just pay $50,000 for a gay marriage and then become a citizen." He must make so many millions of dollars that in his mind, 50k is chump change for an immigrant to pay. I know of some people trying to buy green card marriages offering prospective partners 5k or 10k to fake a marriage, but 50k? No way. Whatever else Bill said after that didn't matter. He proved to me with that comment that he was ignorant on this issue and the emotional toll it takes on a bi-national couple separated b/c of US laws.

    Posted by: Daniel | Jul 20, 2007 2:18:23 PM


  40. Charles, we're not asking for an "exception," just that the current "exception" that is made against us be lifted. If immigration is such a problem, then just as "Me" wrote, disallow hetersexual families from doing the same thing. Although I think everyone should be allowed to bring their significant others here, I can live with dropping family immigration altogether because at least then straights and gays will be treated equally. Don't tell us to pick our battles, we shouldn't have to battle at all.

    Forgive me if I sound bitter.

    Posted by: John | Jul 20, 2007 7:04:21 PM


Post a comment






Lijit Search