O’Reilly: J.K. Rowling Is A ‘Provocateur’ For ‘The Gay Agenda’ Of ‘Indoctrination’
O’Reilly: J.K. Rowling Is A ‘Provocateur’ For ‘The Gay Agenda’ Of ‘Indoctrination’
Last Friday, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling revealed that one of the central characters in the series, Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore, was gay. Though Rowling says her books are a “prolonged argument for tolerance,” some conservatives attacked the revelation, saying it was “revolting” and vindication for the late Rev. Jerry Falwell’s homophobia.
On his Fox News show last night, Bill O’Reilly joined in the fray, asking if Dumbledore’s outing was part of the “gay agenda” of “indoctrination” of “children.” O’Reilly claimed that by dropping “the gay bomb,” Rowling is a “provocateur” who is “going to let all hell break loose”:
O’REILLY: Now, Dumbledore is not overtly gay in the book.
JORDAN: Absolutely not.
O’REILLY: So you wouldn’t know whether he was gay or not, right?
JORDAN: And in fact, you don’t know anything about the sex lives of any of the teachers.
O’REILLY: Of any of them. Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time. So, I think, this is my conclusion, is that J.K. Rowling is a provocateur, did it on purpose, and now is going to let all hell break loose.
Watch it:
O’Reilly argued there are “many parents” who are “worried in America about the gay agenda and indoctrination of their children to see homosexuality in a certain way.” His guest, Entertainment Weekly Senior Editor Tina Jordan, called his “indoctrination” claims “a shallow argument,” saying “indoctrination is a very strong word” because “we all know gay people, whether we know it or not.”
O’Reilly has a history of boorishly attacking the gay community in the name of his ongoing battle against “secular progressives“:
“I don’t want [gay] people intruding on a parade where little children are standing there, watching.” [O'Reilly Factor, 03/17/06]
“Clustering” gays near children is “insane,” “dumb” and “inappropriate.” [O'Reilly Factor, 07/11/07]
“This crazy gay marriage insanity — is gonna lead to all kinds of things like this” like “somebody[]” coming “in and say[ing], ‘I wanna marry the goat.’” [Radio Factor, 04/13/05]
By going after Dumbledore, O’Reilly is demonstrating how necessary Rowling’s message of tolerance still is.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
120 Responses to “O’Reilly: J.K. Rowling Is A ‘Provocateur’ For ‘The Gay Agenda’ Of ‘Indoctrination’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
bill O'reilly is worried about what fictional characters do in their spare timee.
Well, I'm worried about james bonds cholestorol level. Why ewont he ahve me on to discuss?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:14 pmno one had to indoctrinate J. Edgar Hoover.
who "indoctrinated" Mark Foley?
who "indoctrinated" Larry Craig?
who "indoctrinated" all those Catholic priests in the 50' and 60's?
Explain please, Bill, how any homosexuality existed prior to the emergence of these "agenda" people you use to frighten and tittilate your mouth-breather audience.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:14 pmBill O', idiot and bigot. What more can be said? Why anyone but mouth breathers pay any attention to his nonsense is a mystery.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:14 pmO’REILLY: Now, Dumbledore is not overtly gay in the book.
JORDAN: Absolutely not.
O’REILLY: So you wouldn’t know whether he was gay or not, right?
So how is this "indoctrinating" children?
Someone's gonna have to explain to me how this works.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:16 pmThink Billo needs something like a fictional veto to make himself relevant in regards to fictional characters?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:16 pm‘I wanna marry the goat.’†[Radio Factor, 04/13/05]
Er, ah, Bill 0 IQ, that sounds like projection to me.
Buck Fush
October 24th, 2007 at 12:17 pmAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
I love the right. They're scraping the bottom of the barrel so hard they must be getting splinters.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:17 pmoh my god, now that I know Dumbledore is gay, I'm going to switch my sexual identity because, he was like my hero and everything....
NOT
Are some people's own sexual identity so fragile that they think that they (and by extension everyone else) will suddenly 'become gay' if exposed to positive gay role models?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:18 pmYou know, Ted Haggard wasn't "overtly gay" in the pulpit. Larry Craig wasn't "overtly gay" in the Senate.
Does that mean God (who presumably created them) is a provacateur, did it on purpose, and let all hell break loose?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:20 pmWow, could Bill O sound any gayer. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Hey Bill, if you are so close to being a homosexual that a fictional character can push you over the edge, or "indoctrinate" you. You're already gay, just in denial.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:22 pmIf you're going to say anything bad about Dumbledore being gay, it would be that he never admits to it in the books.
Why did she have to keep him in the closet?
Also, shouldn't his robes have been more fabulous in the movies if this was true?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:25 pm#9 "Larry Craig wasn’t “overtly gay†in the Senate."
umm... I have to beg to differ on this one... that whole "Naughty naughty boy" thing duing the clinton years was pretty freakin gay!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:25 pmI had no idea our children could catch teh gay from books. I was terrified enough when I heard you could get it from toilet seats. Maybe that's how teh gays got Larry Craig.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:25 pm#10 Shayne, good one...LOL.....Blessings
October 24th, 2007 at 12:26 pmNow I'm convinced. It really is the Fox Comedy channel. Ha! and another Ha!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:26 pmBill O'Sex-fiend probably got a hrad on thinking about the wizards having sex. I think he has a thing for Hagrid
October 24th, 2007 at 12:28 pmI'm now awaiting a full Ph.D. Dissertation by Mr. O'Reilly on Bugs Bunny and what a subversive "Agent Provocateur" he has been within American culture.
http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/CornyConcerto_002-741315.jpg
Bugs is always dressing up as a woman in his cartoons, kissing Elmer Fudd on the mouth, and even seducing and tricking Elmer into marrying him. This is serious business and we need to keep a close eye on Warner Brothers.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:29 pmAlso, shouldn’t his robes have been more fabulous in the movies if this was true?
Comment by Squegeeboo — October 24, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Remember the picture of Bush and Howard from 2 couple of months ago when W was in Australia on an official visit?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:29 pmSee, the reason Bill'O and the rest of the righties get so upset over things like this is that their entire lives are fantasies. They literally cannot tell the difference between reality and non-reality anymore.
So, therefore, they have to get upset over somethng like this. Dumbledore is as real as Bill'O, as far as Bill'O is concerned.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:32 pmAnd to the rest of us, Bill'O is as real as Dumbledore, but not nearly as amusing...
October 24th, 2007 at 12:32 pmO’REILLY: Now, Dumbledore is not overtly gay in the book.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:32 pm- - What, those long flowing, colorful robes aren't overtly gay? Oh wait, WWJW? (What Would Jesus Wear?)
The Republic of Stupidity
Remember the picture of Bush and Howard from 2 couple of months ago when W was in Australia on an official visit?
Nope, but now I wish I did remeber it.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:33 pmIt's also another glaring example of the "some people say" style of editorializing from the journalistic desk. E.g., "Many parents." Find one Bill. FIND ONE. Then find MANY. Then you can use the phrase "many parents..." and bloviate about the gay agenda the gays gaily gay on everyone.
Ironically, you still don't know anything about any teacher's love life in the book. You now know that Dumbledore had a childhood crush on a boy. Here's how 90%(?) of kids are going to deal with this: "Ew, gross." Done. 10% will think "Hmm", and world will move on.
He'll milk this for another couple of weeks and then he'll save Christmas again. Do people never get weary of all this?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:33 pmOK, O'Liely's brain is melting down.
Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time. So, I think, this is my conclusion, is that J.K. Rowling is a provocateur, did it on purpose, and now is going to let all hell break loose.
These are Fictional characters. Just totally unbelievable someone can be this..... stupid.
Did Rush loan Bill one of his prescriptions?
But then again this is on Faux, that thinks Al Qaeda is running in American Forests with Bic lighters of mass destruction.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:34 pmI believe that only homophobic bigots are making "all hell break loose" -- the rest of us could really care less about Dumbledore's sexual orientation, even if he was REAL, which he is not.
Apparently, Dumbledore has always been gay, but his sexual activities have never been described in the books (nor should they -- these are books aimed at minors). It's not unusual for a writer to make characters very detailed, as this can provide consistency, particularly when the characters appear in several books. Not all these background details ever hit the printed page.
J.K. Rowling only announced Dumbledore's sexual orientation because the question of his love life came up in a Q&A session. I would hardly call her a "provocateur" for this.
And one last point -- Bill-o likes to use the tired terms of "gay agenda" and "indoctrination". How come nobody ever talks about a "heterosexual agenda" or "indoctrination" of people to a heterosexual lifestyle?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:34 pmWhat the heck are they so stick-up-their-butts about this??? Gay does not equate to pedophile or 'gay witnessing'. If the reich-wing fruitcakes would quit trying to marginalize some great folks and let themselves out of the closet, maybe they might learn to smile and enjoy life instead of sneer and kvetch?!?!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:34 pmThat being said, gee maybe my childhood fave book series "Mrs. Piggle Wiggle" made me a Witch? Yeah, not thinking so - I already was one, I just didn't know it until later in life
And on that 'childrens/youth books make you "teh whatever" schtick
...reading my Nancy Drew books didn't make me a detective and there were MANY more novels in that series than HP. But, I DID want 'Titian' colored hair for a brief moment...LOL!
Hey, Bill O - put the lube and the HP book DOWN - there's nothing in it for you.
Peace to all others, gay, straight, or wavy!!
Elspeth
DOESN'T BILLO HAVE A THING FOR DILDOS?????
October 24th, 2007 at 12:35 pmbILL o'rEILLY:
"Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time."
And right well you should be, little billy, we're lurking behind the dresses in your closet, and underneath the basement stairs, and yes, verily , under your very bed!
Boo!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:36 pmI just hope Bill never finds out the truth about those hobbits.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:37 pmHow come only guys like O'Reilly and Hannity have access to the "gay agenda?" Is the gay agenda an actual document or declaration of gay or something like that? Those guys at FOX must have the only copy because I can't find it on the Internets.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:39 pmFor the first time in history, maybe Bill-o is on to something here. Maybe Rowling decided she could use a little more controversy/media attention to sell some more books/movies. Hell, maybe Rowling was just out to confuse some more kids. Ah, sigh, first rule in blogging: Bill-O is always wrong.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:39 pmOnly somebody who has never spent time with children would think that you can indoctrinate a child into homosexuality. In large groups of children there are always some that are "different" than the others. And you see the parents fretting and trying to get their kids to be more like the others. And the question is who exactly would benefit from creating more homosexuals. Is it easier on the child or the parents or the community? What exactly is the benefit of indoctrinating more gays.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:40 pmHey Bill,
October 24th, 2007 at 12:41 pmGuess what? Here in America we have capitalism. If you don't like the content of the book, don't buy it.
Bill-O is always wrong.
Comment by Jericho — October 24, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Good job Jericho, you actually figured this out for yourself.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:41 pmOh and Jericho, if you had an effing clue you would know that Rowling doesn't need to sell any more books or movies. If she did maybe she wouldn't have ended the series, do you think?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pmAlthough those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time.
Me? I worry about what idiotic talking heads do in their spare time. Oh, wait...we had an inkling as to what BillO does in his spare time. Wasn't there a lawsuit or some such? That was so much information I didn't want to close my eyes for the nightmares that were envisioned.
Worrying about what a character in a book does. Odd at best. (Do fictional characters even have spare time? Wouldn't that really be time in JK Rowling's mind?) And America eats up this drivel? Spare time? Spare ME!
Get a grip, neonutbags. Honestly.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:42 pmNope, but now I wish I did remeber it.
Comment by Squegeeboo — October 24, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
Try googling Bush+Howard. TP ran the picture at the head of a thread. They looked like they were trying out for the next Harry Potter flick.
It was hysterically funny. I had to wonder why they ever allowed someone to take their picture in those get-ups.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:44 pm"Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time."
Is that Billy's unsolved mystery of the day? What fictional characters are up to when you aren't reading about them?
What a mucking foron.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:44 pmFor the first time in history, maybe Bill-o is on to something here. Maybe Rowling decided she could use a little more controversy/media attention to sell some more books/movies. Hell, maybe Rowling was just out to confuse some more kids. Ah, sigh, first rule in blogging: Bill-O is always wrong.
Comment by Jericho — October 24, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
Why were YOU confused about being gay? Because no STRAIGHT person is, but bisexuals and gays are often confused. Tell us Jericho, is that why you HATE? All of that self loathing?
Oh, and as for Rowling needing to sell more books - bahahaha, sure! Yeah, that's exactly why she would make a children's book controversial! You're a complete fool!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:45 pmBut then again this is on Faux, that thinks Al Qaeda is running in American Forests with Bic lighters of mass destruction.
Comment by Wayne — October 24, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Why is al Qaeda trying to build an unwanted station there. I thought that was Blackwater trying to force their way in that got their location cleared by the fires.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:45 pm"Maybe Rowling decided she could use a little more controversy/media attention to sell some more books/movies."
Jericho nails it!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:47 pmShe's on the downhill slide now, the last book has been written, the last movie being considered, people would have entirely forgotten Hairy Plotter by Christmas if not for this exciting new promotional gimmick.
Rowling has gained a whole new demographic (at least one) that otherwise would never bother with her *cough* writing.
Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time...
~Bill O'Racist
huh?
Can one of you reich-wing morans [sic] translate this stupidity for us?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:48 pmHe’ll milk this for another couple of weeks and then he’ll save Christmas again. Do people never get weary of all this?
Comment by Jeb — October 24, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
That's a good point, Jeb. Dumbledore is threatening to pre-empt the War on Christmas Season. Those diabolical gay provacateurs!
October 24th, 2007 at 12:48 pmO'Reilly is clearly clueless about the gay community in general. He also, of course sees it as a some monolithic thing when the whole point of the GBLT community is difference. For example: Some people, and I suspect Dumbledore maybe be one of them, are only
October 24th, 2007 at 12:51 pmGay on Tuesdays.
http://tshirtinsurgency.com/node/18
He’ll milk this for another couple of weeks and then he’ll save Christmas again. Do people never get weary of all this?
Comment by Jeb — October 24, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
That’s a good point, Jeb. Dumbledore is threatening to pre-empt the War on Christmas Season. Those diabolical gay provacateurs!
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — October 24, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
Good job guys, you've figured out the whole gays trying to distract Billo from saving Christmas conspiracy. Good job Angels.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:51 pmi wonder if parents buying oreilly's latest children's book are aware of his own bizarre sexual inclinations.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:52 pm“Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time.â€
Is that Billy’s unsolved mystery of the day? What fictional characters are up to when you aren’t reading about them?
What a mucking foron.
Comment by Dumb_Fox — October 24, 2007 @ 12:44 pm
Now that you mention it, when I was a kid, I always wondered what my GI Joes and toy soldiers were up to when I wasn't around... I used to try to sneak up on them and catch them doing whatever they did in their spare time. Never worked. I guess their sentry system was too sophisticated for me to breach.
I wonder what that GI Joe is doing right now...
October 24th, 2007 at 12:53 pmO'Reilly wrote a children's book? This needs to be investigated. BWAHAHAHAHA.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:54 pmBy going after Dumbledore, O’Reilly is demonstrating how necessary Rowling’s message of tolerance still is.
I'd think more of the necessity of physical restraints, prefrontal lobotomy, or even pithing.....
Cheers,
October 24th, 2007 at 12:55 pm“Maybe Rowling decided she could use a little more controversy/media attention to sell some more books/movies.â€
Jericho nails it!
She’s on the downhill slide now, the last book has been written, the last movie being considered, people would have entirely forgotten Hairy Plotter by Christmas if not for this exciting new promotional gimmick.
Rowling has gained a whole new demographic (at least one) that otherwise would never bother with her *cough* writing.
Uh, guys, the Potter children's book series is already one of the most successful in history, if not the most successful. Rowling doesn't need any more readers, she has most of them already, and the phenomenon will continue for decades with new children and foreign translations. You two should really work on your *cough* thinking.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:55 pmGood job guys, you’ve figured out the whole gays trying to distract Billo from saving Christmas conspiracy. Good job Angels.
Comment by Shayne — October 24, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
Uh-oh... did we blow the whole operation?
October 24th, 2007 at 12:55 pmI guess their sentry system was too sophisticated for me to breach.
I wonder what that GI Joe is doing right now…
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — October 24, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
Didn't you watch Toy Story? All toy soldiers protect all the other toys so they stop acting like they're alive when humans are around. Yeesh.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:56 pmBill acts just like Larry. Bill and Larry have a lot in common. Bill and Larry live together in a nice brownstone downtown. Bill and Larry are never seen together though, because Bill and Larry both hate homosexuals and want to punish them. Bill and Larry punish each other in a different way. They are both members of the "Values Voter" consortium.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:56 pmAll toy soldiers protect all the other toys so they stop acting like they’re alive when humans are around. Yeesh.
Comment by Shayne — October 24, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Oh yeah. I forgot.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:56 pmUh-oh… did we blow the whole operation?
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — October 24, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Blow the whole operation? Sounds like a job for the Republicans. :)
October 24th, 2007 at 12:57 pmI don’t care what J.K. Rowling or Bill O’Reilly have to say, Albus Dumbeldore was not a faggot.
Comment by jdc — October 24, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Denial ain't just a river in... ah, never mind.
October 24th, 2007 at 12:57 pmAt least Dumbledore's Army won't have any insipid "don't ask, don't tell" policies...
October 24th, 2007 at 12:58 pmIf he chose, he could’ve turned someone into a faggot but with all that magical power I can’t imagine why he would turn himself into one.
Makes no sense at all.
Comment by jdc — October 24, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
I suppose if we were talking about Barack Obama you'd feel free to use the "n" word. Anybody else reporting this abuse?
October 24th, 2007 at 1:00 pmThe Republic of Stupidity
October 24th, 2007 at 1:01 pmTry googling Bush+Howard. TP ran the picture at the head of a thread. They looked like they were trying out for the next Harry Potter flick.
Success!!! It was on the first page of a GIS for Bush Howard
Children need to be protected from BO and other hate mongers.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:02 pmBlow the whole operation? Sounds like a job for the Republicans. :)
Comment by Shayne — October 24, 2007 @ 12:57 pm
Oh, SNAP!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:02 pmAlthough those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time. So, I think, this is my conclusion, is that J.K. Rowling is a provocateur, did it on purpose, and now is going to let all hell break loose.
Believe it or not, I agree with O'Reilly. I think that Rawlings did this to provoke discussion. But for a different reason. I believe she is trying to encourage tolerance. If a kid that reads the book finds out that Dumbledore is gay, is that going to change their opinion of the fictional character? Not unless they have homophobic parents who have indoctrinated them to hate gays. What it will do for the children is to show them that a beloved character is different, but is still to be loved and respected.
The only reason why "all hell is breaking loose" is because the Right is so defeated at this point, they are looking for any issue they can find to confligate to try to show that they are still relevant. Sorry folks, the Republican party and it's 24%ers have been proven to be irrelevant. Live with it.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:03 pmHe freely admits he "doesn't know anything about this Harry Potter stuff"--then proceeds to run his mouth.
Does that completely sum up Bill O'Reilly or what?
And don't forget his "condo in Key West" remark. Oh boy!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:11 pmHey! Look over there! A fictional character is gay!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:11 pmBill-O is a delusional paranoid bigot.
There is a restaurant in Harlem Bill-O should visit run by Hogwarts School of Witchcraft alumni. He will be surprised to learn they don't serve bugs and worms and the waiters are not purple Teletubbies.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:13 pmSuccess!!! It was on the first page of a GIS for Bush Howard
Comment by Squegeeboo — October 24, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Amazing picture, isn't it?
Hmmm... who's lookin' a little "gay" here?
October 24th, 2007 at 1:22 pm"O’REILLY: Of any of them. Although those wizards, I’m very very suspicious about what they’re doing in their spare time."
O'Really must think everyone uses a loofa in their spare time...
October 24th, 2007 at 1:24 pmBill's completely unhinged. I'm not sure he can see the line between fiction and reality anymore (if he ever could). Perhaps next week he'll call for GWB to assign Jack Bauer and CTU to take down this terrorist cell called Hogwarts.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:28 pmNice to hear an idiot when he never read the books. The man was right Dumbledore's life story was in the last book. What JK Rowling did was allow children to grow to learn about Dumbledore for many years without judgement then find out he was gay. She did it in a may that made you think not judge. O'Reilly harasses woman and is a pervert. He is the worse example to children and adults. He is so stupid he sounds stupid. Now someone should ask O'Reilly to compare his book sales to JK Rowling let's see how that works. As we were all surprised at the out come of the last Harry Potter book, we also might be surprised to learn that Bill O'Reilly is gay. Never say never.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:28 pmIf o'stupid is acting this way about the fictional character of Dumbledor's sexuality, I wonder how he would feel about Anne Rice making Sleeping Beauty into a sex slave?
October 24th, 2007 at 1:30 pmO’Really must think everyone uses a loofa in their spare time…
Comment by ChrisSEA — October 24, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
If you know of a better way to exfoliate, I'd LOVE to hear it!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:31 pmI'm confused. O'Reilly is up in arms over a fictional character in a fictional book who happens to be gay? And all hell's going to break loose?
I'd much rather have my oldest daughter read about a fictional gay wizard, than be harassed by an older man who is masturbating with a vibrator while describing intimately what he'd do with a falafel in the shower.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:32 pmBut again, that's just em!
Bill should refer to Bush as a ‘Provocateur’ for his myriad appointments of inept, incompetent cronies.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:34 pm“I only got married as a taunt toward gay men
October 24th, 2007 at 1:35 pmbecause they couldn’t.â€
- candidate STEPHEN COLBERT on meet the press...
I wonder what Bill O thinks of all the gay references about Christmas:
God rest ye merry gentlemen, let nothing you dismay.... what do you think those men were doing to be merry?
An angel said to certain poor shepards in feilds where they lay..... men laying in the field, hmmmm.
Don we now our gay apparal .... hehehe.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:36 pmhttp://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/24/oreilly-dumbledore/#comment-4131112
October 24th, 2007 at 1:44 pmJesus loved his fellow man: Romans 13:10
Bill’s completely unhinged. I’m not sure he can see the line between fiction and reality anymore (if he ever could). Perhaps next week he’ll call for GWB to assign Jack Bauer and CTU to take down this terrorist cell called Hogwarts.
Comment by bluefish — October 24, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
I'm waiting for Billdo to call Jack Bauer a coward because he won't appear on the Factor. I'm sure O'Reilly has been instructing his producers to try to book an interview with Bauer for months.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:44 pm- candidate STEPHEN COLBERT on meet the press…
Comment by katy — October 24, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
And so far that's the only argument I've heard against gay marriage that makes any logical sense whatsoever.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:45 pmO'Reilly seems very concerned and afraid of the "homosexual agenda," a little TOO concerned and afraid if you ask me.
You know what they say about most homophobes.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:51 pmYou know what they say about most homophobes.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — October 24, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
Yeah
They're Republicans........
October 24th, 2007 at 1:52 pmHow can "all hell break loose" because a fictional character is gay? If loofa man would leave this revelation alone, there would be no "issue."
October 24th, 2007 at 1:53 pmLoofa man is putting the "Dumb" in Dumbledore. Fiction means not real, okay loofa man?
October 24th, 2007 at 1:56 pmI want to see this gay agenda... I want undercover footage from a meeting where gays are drawing up this agenda... come on, consternos, some of you can feign gaiety for the cause, right?
consternative paranoia!
October 24th, 2007 at 1:57 pmUmmm, Bill, as I remember, Dumbledore was killed in an earlier book, so justice has triumphed. Shouldn't you be giving J.K. Rowling credit for wiping this evil person off the earth? Or off the page anyway.
October 24th, 2007 at 1:58 pmDoes his audience watch his show because he is such a fool and they laugh? Or are they are sick as he is?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:00 pmRemember when George Wallace was vehemently and publicly anti-black? Who would listen to what someone like him says today? Bill O. and his vehemently anti-gay remarks will go the way of George Wallace. Keep talking, Bill. The more you talk, the closer you get to having your grave at 6 feet under. Right about now, I'd say Bill is at 5 feet, five inches. Almost there!
October 24th, 2007 at 2:03 pm.
So, it isn't about the Satanism, but instead about controlling genitals.
.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:09 pmThe more Billo speaks the more insignificant he becomes. Way to go Billybob.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:13 pmMakes no sense at all.
Comment by jdc — October 24, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Yep, this describes most of your posts very well.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:16 pmI don't get it jdc. You seem more than willing to accept the judgement of the men who wrote the New Testament that Jesus was the son of god, but you're not willing to accept the judgement of the woman who wrote the Potter series that one of her characters is gay. This "makes no sense at all." Can you explain?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:24 pmOh, come on. This is just the perfect idiot putting the perfect idiot words in the idiot follower´s mouths about the perfect idiocy.
Ignorance sells a lot.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:29 pmBill O isn't gay. But just a sexually insecure pervert in denial.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:45 pmThis reminds me of VP what's his name attacking the pregnant character on Murphy Brown. Folks, it's a fictional character. Why are we wasting our breath? Everyone must have known the rightwingnuts would have a field day....sheesh, let em bloviate. Intolerant pigs will be intolerant pigs, and this will go away in record time. Thick skins all around would be nice, but not counting on it....
October 24th, 2007 at 2:46 pmRowling would have been wiser to not speak on the private lives of the Hogwarts teachers. She has two more movies and a theme park in the works - no need to be a provocateur at this point.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:53 pmThe Gay Agenda (Monday through Friday only)
1. Get up.
2. Shower.
3. Get dressed.
4. Make coffee.
5. Go to work.
6. Have lunch.
7. Go home.
8. Eat dinner.
9. Watch tv with SO.
10. Go to bed.
Verrrrrrrry, verrrrrrrry sinister doings, indeed. *eyeroll*
I'm a'skeered.
October 24th, 2007 at 2:55 pmWonder what O'Falafel wants to do with that MAGIC WAND?
October 24th, 2007 at 2:56 pmOne can be indoctrinated into being gay!? Wow!
How come I didn't know that?
I better be careful from now on; who knows how many other ways there might be for luring me into the gay lifestyle...
/sarcasm off
October 24th, 2007 at 3:01 pmO'Reilley is just another closet gay coward who has tortured feelings about himself and his sexual orientation and feels it necessary to take it out on other people, especially gays who are out of the closet in order to let out his frustrations.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:16 pmI think Bill O'reilly suffers a permanent confundus charm!
October 24th, 2007 at 3:17 pmWhile admittedly, to be realistic, 10 to 20% of the muggles should be gay (and I assume this holds true to wizards), making it that one of the Hogwarts teachers should be gay.
Yet, I must admit that this adds nothing to the story and is a topic a little premature for the age group reading Harry Potter. (although I'm sure some would say that HP is in the adolescence where this topic would be likely to surface). In short, I wish this topic hadn't come up.
However, as it has come up, I am amazed how easy it is to out O'Reilley the felafel head. Rather than going into my own seemy past to imagine what wizards might be doing, I can easily think it easy to criticize HP for having the gay character being the one that manipulated HP though half-truths all througout the book. And O'Reilley's best is to ask what wizards may do in their off-time ?
October 24th, 2007 at 3:29 pm... good lord ...
October 24th, 2007 at 3:35 pmFor the record...Wallace was Democrat.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:42 pmFor the record…Wallace was Democrat.
Comment by bitblt — October 24, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
You're absolutely right, bitbit. Wallace was Democrat typical of Southern Democrats in those days -- racist and vehemently opposed to the civil rights movement that was championed by the national Democratic party.
When Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, he famnously said "There goes the South for a generation". Guess what? He was right. Richard Nixon exploited the rift in the Democratic Party, welcomed the racist Southern Democrats into the Republican Party and -voila! - the "Southern Strategy" was born.
And so was the modern Republican Party.
October 24th, 2007 at 3:47 pmFictional characters, and a British citizen.
Jezzus, Bill - get a job or something constructive will ya?
October 24th, 2007 at 3:56 pmVindication for Jerry Falwell's homophobia? From a fictional character?
I'd say vindication for his living in fantasy land.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:18 pmHowe, Richard (1994), “Homosexuality in America: Exposing the Myths,†American Family Association, [On-line], URL: http://www.afa.net/ homosexual_agenda/ homosexuality.pdf.
It’s twenty-four pages.
October 24th, 2007 at 4:56 pmAmerica's Best Christian, Ms. Betty Bowers, clearly set out the dreaded homosexual agenda several years ago.
Follow the link and read it for yourself!!
October 24th, 2007 at 4:57 pmWhat is it with the endless obsession with homosexuality. I really miss the eighties when all I fellow had to do was live in fear of the satanic cults and child molesting daycare workers
October 24th, 2007 at 5:39 pmComment by Don in Texas — October 24, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
I think gummitch pretty much summed it up with this gem...
"The Homosexual Agenda is much like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, only it describes the Gay Plot to Achieve World Domination. The difference is that the Moral Orels are too lazy to actually forge the document. Suffice it to say that the Secret Cabal of Homos intend for all straight men to be forced to give up their pickup trucks and listen to Judy Garland records."
October 24th, 2007 at 5:52 pmComment by gummitch — June 13, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
Uh, Don in Texas, I followed your link. Quote from the first paragraph:
"As every Christian knows, there is only one enemy that threatens our entire civilization"
So does that mean that Al Q is all homosexuals or that Al Q is a ruse ?
October 24th, 2007 at 6:15 pmIt's satire, folks -- S A T I R E.
And funny as hell.
October 24th, 2007 at 7:14 pmIt's on Miss Betty Bowers' ministry page,
Baptists Are Saving Homosexuals --
BASH.
Get it?
October 24th, 2007 at 7:16 pm(Nothing inherently wrong with Judy Garland records, either.)
October 24th, 2007 at 7:17 pmDon in Texas,
I have an extremely dry sense of humor sometimes which has often led folks to imagine that I didn't get the joke.
Now about this gay agenda, I must have missed the meeting. Does anyone have a copy ?
October 24th, 2007 at 9:26 pmOkay, people. Let's cut the Wallace comparisons right now. Yes, George Wallace was very racist. During his gubernatorial service in the 1980s, he apologized for his civil rights era words and deeds. (He was also one of the first white Democrats in the state to actively and openly seek Black support.)
October 24th, 2007 at 9:28 pmHis funeral was attended by both whites and blacks, alike. Even those who had suffered as a result of his 1960s words and deeds forgave him.
If someone asked JKR if Dumbledore had ever been in love and she answered yes, it's pretty obvious the next question would be 'who was he in love with?'. Instead of answering an interview question in a stupid way [answers to an interview question should never be just 'yes' or 'no', correct? They should be discussed and justified, even when answering something like 'yes, I am a girl'], she answered it intelligently, going through and explaining. 'He's gay, and yes, he had been in love with Grindelwald' makes much more sense and takes up less time than having to be prompted and nudged until she finally reveals the whole answer.
[And, now that the series is over, she can give us the whole answer, so what's the big deal?]
I don't think O'Reilly should've be allowed to discuss this until he'd read the book and can actually have an intelligent discussion about it. xD
October 25th, 2007 at 12:57 amWow, once again TP embellishes its report and ignores the sarcasm that was dripping in O'Reilly's voice about "the wizards in their spare time". As for what the author did....I hope any of you Liberal leftwingers can explain why she had to go and "out" him, after all the books are done and out? Why didnt she make him gay during the novels and movies? Whats the point?? Its like coming out and saying, now, that Rambo was gay. Or Emperor Palpatine was gay, which is why he never married. Gimme a break. This is all a PR stunt. O'Reilly is correct in stating she is a provocateur....of course she did this on purpose. Once again, why else would she announce this NOW??
October 25th, 2007 at 11:31 amSo maybe she did it to get attention. Maybe it was a PR stunt. So what? It's her characters, her story, she decides what is canon and what is not. Why are "pro-business" Republicans so concerned about her generating controversy to sell a few books?
Oh it's because she implied a character might be h-h-h-homosexual! OMG! SO SCARY! PERISH THE THOUGHT!
Personally, I think she was simply answering a question and providing backstory that didn't fit anywhere in the book as a response to a curious reader's question. The English (even the conservatives) aren't as uptight as O'Reilly and the repressed neocons.
Guess what? You don't like Dumbledore being gay, you can just choose not to read the book.
It may be about magic, but the book itself is not magical and will not cause your kids to catch the gay (like catching a flu).
October 25th, 2007 at 2:19 pmHmm, I'VE a CONDO IN KEY WEST AND a wife...
Does this ownership override my marriage and make ME GAY AS WELL????
PS- Just when I was convinced that this idiot could not enhance his stature as the biggest ass hat on television, something ALWAYS happens to disprove my thinking. Bravo, BillO...idiot...
October 25th, 2007 at 7:04 pm“I don’t want [gay] people intruding on a parade where little children are standing there, watching.†I find some other gay males against this point on gaymalecenter.com
October 28th, 2007 at 11:28 pm