O’Reilly names Petraeus his person of the year.
By on Dec 18th, 2007 at 11:06 am
O’Reilly names Petraeus his person of the year.
With debate over who will be Time’s “Person of the Year,” Fox News host Bill O’Reilly yesterday decided to preempt the announcement and name his own Person of the Year — Gen. David Petraeus. Watch it:
[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/oreillypersonyearpet.320.240.flv]
No word on whether O’Reilly is part of the Petraeus for President movement.
UPDATE: Last week, the National Review editorialized in favor of Petraeus for “man of the year” while Hugh Hewitt chimes in today in the general’s favor as well.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
75 Responses to “O’Reilly names Petraeus his person of the year.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Graham
Guantanamo
Hannity
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Liz Cheney
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bildo, you're your own person of the year...just ask you.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:09 amO'Racist is the anti-American vile scum of the year.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:09 amlosers stick together
December 18th, 2007 at 11:10 amHe's being so modest, the person who singlehandedly won the War Against Christmas is most deserving
December 18th, 2007 at 11:10 ampetraeus?
not jas hendler?
not chl?
not chuck napier?
get ready for the whining trolls!
December 18th, 2007 at 11:11 amI second the motion.
Petraeus has done a terrific job.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:11 ama guess on why he awarded this honor instead of backing up to the general and offering to give him a piggy back ride:
December 18th, 2007 at 11:11 amthe general, not our real non french general, but this one who clearly isn't, has offered billy a place in his cabinet or boudoir. same trick, different closet
Considering reich-wingers are NEVER right on any issue, it's safe to say that Betrayus is not the person of the year.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:12 amHOw can a person who failed at their job receive "person of the year"? The surge has not created political gains or political stability and the Iraqi security forces have not stepped up. Betrayus has failed, just like his boss, herr dubyah.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:13 amI second the motion.
Petraeus has done a terrific job.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:11 am
Is that why you are serving under his command in Iraq? Oh, you want others to fight your glorious wars.....
December 18th, 2007 at 11:13 amI love that it says "by a wide margin" - Did Bill'O do a tally of all one votes?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:14 amGet ready for another Right-wing maelstrom - - TIME'S Person Of The Year will be Al Gore.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:14 amNapier would be posting from Iraq, but objects to "don't ask, don't tell"
December 18th, 2007 at 11:15 amBill-O thinks the man who admitted that the Iraq War has done nothing to make the United States more secure is "person of the year"? Interesting.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:16 amPetreaus was instrumental in the loss of millions of dollars and countless weapons in Iraq. Millions just vanished under his control. Those weapons most likely have been used against our troops. Bill O' ignored this glaring defect in the Gen's achievments.
Will the likes of Charles James Napier, CHL and the others acknowledge that this Gen. was responsible for the loss of weapons and cash? Will they admit that both could and most likely was used against our troops?
The kneejerk, goosestep behind BO's BS is expected. Will these posters man up and acknowledge the failures of this Gen?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:17 amUnfortunately, I can't see the video on this computer. Did Bill-o happen to mention the criteria that must be met to get this award? Is this award an honor of some sort, given to the "greatest" person? Or is it like the TIME Person of the Year award -- given to the person who has impacted news events the most during the year?
If Bill is giving his award to Petraeus using the TIME's criteria, then he is basically saying that the surge in Iraq is the most important news story of the year -- "by a wide margin." Some might agree with him. One could make an equally compelling argument for Al Gore, if they believe that renewed discussion of global warming is the most important news story of the year.
It pretty much comes down to opinion, and I long ago decided that Bill-o's opinion is meaningless to me.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:18 amNapier would be posting from Iraq, but objects to “don’t ask, don’t tellâ€
Comment by Lefty Patriot
-------------------------------------------------
I do, in fact, object to the “don’t ask, don’t tell†policy. I believe that homosexuals should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces so long as the rules of conduct apply the same to everyone regardless of their sexual orientation.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:19 amI like the graphic; "Gen. Petraeus is the Factor person of the year - by a wide margin."
"By a wide margin"??? How many votes were cast? What, did Bildo poll all of the non-secular-progressive newspaper editors across the nation?
No. It's just Bildo. So Petraeus was the winner by a vote of 1-0. I guess that's wide, if you're Bildo.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:19 am"love that it says “by a wide margin†- Did Bill’O do a tally of all one votes?
Comment by Stupid Git "
The eligble voters are all the voices in Bill's head. It was a boisterous meeting, a lot of shouting and namecalling, as you can imagine, but in the end, democracy prevaled...
Seriously, isn't this a little like being Larry Craig's Man of the Year?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:19 amWaging a senseless and unnecessary war is worthy of "person of the year"? Apparently reich-wing standards are quite low.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:19 amI thought O'Reilly's Person of the Year would be himself. that's all he ever talks about.
At least he was honest a couple of weeks ago when he said:
December 18th, 2007 at 11:20 am
Waging a senseless and unnecessary war is worthy of “person of the year� Apparently reich-wing standards are quite low.
Comment by Dr. Matt
-----------------------------------------------
Or perhaps we don't see the war as "senseless and unnecessary".
December 18th, 2007 at 11:21 amComment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:19 am
chuck you've come out of the closet as it were. very brave of you.
but what of "huck" huckabee?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:21 amJust where are they going with this "person" of the year BS? The first out of the gate was alberto the judge and now general betrayus? If they cross the asile with the next choice the will probably go with "terrible ann" coulter.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:22 amComment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:19 am
"we"?
chuck, please remember to define your terms when responding. thank you.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:22 amOr perhaps we don’t see the war as “senseless and unnecessaryâ€.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:21 am
Speak for yourself. 75% of our country knows this is a senseless and unnecessary war. You reich-wingers are in the radical minority. Attacking a country that didn't and couldn't attack us is senseless and unnecessary among intellectual Americans.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:23 amBeing Biley's Clown of the Year should make Petraeus very happy. Or nauseus.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:23 amWE ALREADY HAVE A PRESIDENT BETRAYUS!
December 18th, 2007 at 11:24 amfrom an article in the Washington Post......"The United States has spent $19.2 billion trying to develop Iraqi security forces since 2003, the GAO said, including at least $2.8 billion to buy and deliver equipment. But the GAO said weapons distribution was haphazard and rushed and failed to follow established procedures, particularly from 2004 to 2005, when security training was led by Gen. David H. Petraeus, who now commands all U.S. forces in Iraq."
The General is responsible for this. And people will line up to stand behind Fox's person of the year. Disgusting.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amEveryone should go to http://www.BillOReilly.com and vote in his poll for Democratic nominee for President. Vote for John Edwards regardless of who you actually support. O'Reilly is virulently opposed to Edwards and it would drive him nuts if Edwards wins in his own poll.
This is a good opportunity to help drive BillO over the edge.
Brought to you by News Corpse, The Internet's Chronicle Of Media Decay.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amthis conflict in Iraq was never necessary. there is no evidence to support any immenent threat to us. No WMD's, no ties to AQ. None.
This was a selective Crusade.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:26 amSorry, Stupid Git -- I didn't see your post #11 before I made the same observation. Didn't mean to provide an echo.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:27 amnappie,
Seriously, why aren't you there. You support the war, right?
But only with your mouth and keyboarding fingers?
Why don't you put your ass on the line if you think the war is so vital.
You're not a chickenhawk, are you?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:29 amOr perhaps we don’t see the war as “senseless and unnecessaryâ€.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:21 am
Of course you don't; sociopaths never see what humans see.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:29 am*BREAKING* uh oh, Aruba is closing the Holloway case....no charges will be pressed. The fake outrage from the reich-wingers will be tremendous.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:30 am30, Mark, great idea!
I just cast my vote for Edwards, but I don't know if I could stand actually tuning in.
Come to think of it, if Bildo's head actually explodes, I will tune in!
December 18th, 2007 at 11:30 amMore on the Gen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/05/AR2007080501299.html
December 18th, 2007 at 11:30 am2007 the deadliest year for U.S. troops since the war began, the "surge" now over and troop levels are declining to pre-surge levels, no political reconciliation in Iraq despite being given "the breathing space" the surge was intended to provide, the U.S. backing Turkish military assaults inside Iraq that the Kurdish government (independent of the Baghdad parliament) opposes, no oil-sharing law, Iraqi policewomen forced to turn over their guns to male officers, a million Christians chased out of Iraq along with a million other refugees, and Muktada al-Sadr's militia still armed and lying low waiting for its time to renew the guerilla war. Heckuva job, Bushie and the "new strategy".
December 18th, 2007 at 11:32 amIraq invasion and occupation may be illegal and immoral, but how else can the you loot the treasury of USA. Successful beyond the wildest dreams of OBL. GOP mission accomplished. Billo is so proud.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:32 amOr perhaps we don’t see the war as “senseless and unnecessaryâ€.
Comment by Charles James Napier —
General Petraeus does. Or did you miss his sworn testimony before the Senate that the war in Iraq has done nothing to increase the security of this country?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:33 amThis is probably a good place to post a link to Michael J.Tottens updated report from Falujah: http://www.michaeltotten.com/
Here's a link to Michael Yons recent report from Iraq as well:http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/desires-of-the-human-heart-part-one.htm
December 18th, 2007 at 11:33 amVote for John Edwards regardless of who you actually support. O’Reilly is virulently opposed to Edwards and it would drive him nuts if Edwards wins in his own poll.
Done. Anything to thorn up Biley.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:34 amIraq cannot gain full sovereignty under Chapter 7 status when the UN Security Council issued Resolution 661 following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Al-Maliki said the lifting of Chapter 7 status will enable Iraq to "end the presence" of multinational forces by the end of 2008.
Resolution 661
Says Chapter 7 will be removed when Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbours
TURKEY IS STOPPING THIS HAPPENING - TURKEY IS WORKING FOR THE US TO STOP IRAQ GAINING FULL SOVEREIGNTY , WHICH MEANS IRAQ HAS TO RENEW THE UN MANDATE FOR FOREIGN TROOPS
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/12/2C4F103F-5B73-4926-827D-1A6701C35B26.html
December 18th, 2007 at 11:35 amappie, the surge is lost, no matter what rightard liars you selectively quote, nice of you to repost old news, though, instead of keeping up with Bushco's latest failures. thanks for 9/11, by the way.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:36 amChuckie Nap, where are the political gains, the political stability, and the Iraqi security? The surge failed. Fact.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:38 amoh really, O'Reilly? Betrayus is person of the year? the criteria must've been very low...
December 18th, 2007 at 11:39 amOh great, now with Bill OIQ the Falafel Pervert's endorsement I can't possibly support him. If the Falafel Pervert supports someone that just means it's wrong to support said person.
Bush/Cheney/Bill the Falafel Pervert
Hague Trials '09
Buck Fush
December 18th, 2007 at 11:39 amthe surge is working?
Iraq is peaceful?
GREAT!
Bring the troops home ASAP.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:43 amComment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:33 am
no chuck, that wasn't a good place to post it. sorry.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:44 amI read portions of your link Charles and I'm glad to hear the violence has diminished. Can you respond to Dr. Matt's questions on the political stability? Could you also add your thoughts on Sadr's cease fire and what it would mean if he decided to turn the Mahadi (?) army loose again?
Could you also respond to Gen' Petreaus' failure in securing 100,000's of weapons and millions of dollars that fueled the insurgency?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:45 amHey, I was just looking at "The Christmas Store at Billoreilly.com" and besides calling it the "Christmas Store" there is nothing there that mentions Jesus or Christmas at all! What gives? I wanted some "Christmas is Jesus' Birthday" t-shirts or something that proclaims what Christmas is really about. Why is Bill O'Reilly only offering secular merchandise? And why doesn't he put more information about Jesus and Mary and Joseph on his website or on his TV show?
December 18th, 2007 at 11:45 amCould you also respond to Gen’ Petreaus’ failure in securing 100,000’s of weapons and millions of dollars that fueled the insurgency?
Comment by hellinabucket — December 18, 2007 @ 11:45 am
might as well ask him to walk on water.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:46 amno chuck, that wasn’t a good place to post it. sorry.
Comment by joe cantwell — December 18, 2007 @ 11:44 am
I kinda wonder if the US is accomplishing some of this the good, old-fashioned GOOPer way - by buying off the militias and tribal leaders.
No way to tell, is there? Which makes me suspect nice big wads of cash prolly have sumpin' ta do wit parts of this.
Of course, those reports of beheaded women turning up would indicate things aren't as rosy as some like to pretend...
December 18th, 2007 at 11:50 amThe tragedy of Petraeus is that his approach didn't go in when we originally went in and would have been much more effective, but, rather now when it isn't much more than a tourniquet on a cancer.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:56 amI kinda wonder if the US is accomplishing some of this the good, old-fashioned GOOPer way - by buying off the militias and tribal leaders.
No way to tell, is there? Which makes me suspect nice big wads of cash prolly have sumpin’ ta do wit parts of this.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — December 18, 2007 @ 11:50 am
Excellent point, TRoS. The "loss" of eleven billion in cash ("Where'd it go? Oops! Looks like we misplaced it.") would make a lot more sense in that context.
Of course, those kind of gains tend to dissipate once the money runs out...
December 18th, 2007 at 12:05 pmI'm all for an honest discussion on the Gen.. If Mr. Napier is so willing to stand behind the man then he should have the backbone to defend his failures. Or at least acknowledge them.
So if you are still here Mr. Napier then Man up and address the missing weapons and money. Acknowledge this failure. If you can't/don't then you are a hollow mouthpiece for ignorance.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:06 pmThe Aruba story was designed to distract people during the most revenue generating shopping time of the year. It broke right before Thanksgiving when the Dow was tanking. Now most Christmas presents have been bought, and the money has been made. Aruba? Nevermind.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:18 pmIf you can’t/don’t then you are a hollow mouthpiece for ignorance.
Comment by hellinabucket — December 18, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Actually, that has a ring to it:
Charles James Napier, hollow mouthpiece for ignorance.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:32 pmFeel free to use it LIBERALLY.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:37 pmthis is ot but it is so fox, so brit hume!
from salon:
TUESDAY, DEC. 18, 2007 10:00 EST
Uh, Brit?
It's never good to be the last one to arrive at an outrage party. Actually, it can be downright embarrassing: Just ask Fox News anchor Brit Hume.
On Monday, in his "Political Grapevine" segment, Hume took up the cause of the latest conservative to be oppressed by unhinged liberals, Princeton student Francisco Nava. "Conservative students and faculty at Princeton University are questioning the absence of campus and community outrage -- following the beating of a student leading a morality movement at the school," Hume said. "The New York Sun reports Francisco Nava was attacked by two men last week and told to shut up. The beating came two days after Nava received death threats by e-mail.
"Nava -- who is a Mormon -- wrote in the student newspaper that a school campaign to distribute free condoms on campus was a 'tacit sponsorship of hookup sex.' Three other members of the morally conservative Anscombe Society also received the threats, along with a conservative professor."
But there was a good reason for the lack of outrage. Nava -- who had a history of faking threats, having done so while in high school -- made the whole thing up. By Monday afternoon (we put it at no later than 1:50 p.m. Eastern, based on the time stamps at blogs covering the story), hours before Hume went on the air at 6 p.m., the campus newspaper and the conservative New York Sun were reporting that Nava had confessed to local authorities that he had faked the attack and was responsible for sending the threats.
We caught the rebroadcast of Hume's program, which ran at 2 a.m. Eastern. The segment remained. Tuesday morning, Fox's Web site carried an update to the print version. "Here's a quick update on our Grapevine about The New York Sun story concerning the Princeton student who alleged he had been beaten -- after coming out against the school distribution of condoms," the update reads. "The Daily Princetonian says Francisco Nava has admitted he made up the story and fabricated e-mails threatening his life and those of other students and one professor.
"Nava reportedly confessed to police on Monday. He has been released with no charges so far. The school says its investigation is ongoing."
As of this post, however, Fox's Web site still listed the segment as its top video, with the description: "Questions at Princeton University about why more people aren't defending a student who was beaten."
― Alex Koppelman
(please share with all of our troll friends!)
December 18th, 2007 at 12:46 pmThe Factor has a Person of the Year?
Wow, what's next? Receiving the Montgomery Burns Award For Outstanding Achievement in The Field of Excellence?
December 18th, 2007 at 12:53 pm[O'Lielly to Petraeus]: David! You're my 'person of the year!"
[Petraeus to O'Lielly]: "Put that loofah down. Now. Now walk away sloooowwwwllllyyyy...."
Cheers,
December 18th, 2007 at 12:53 pmNever let the facts get in the way of a good story.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:58 pmNappy Chuck must have headed for the recruiting office to go find the missing weapons and money. Isn't that right Nappy?
December 18th, 2007 at 1:02 pmby a "wide margin" HAHAHA -
100 google plex times forever infinity times a billion!
the mouth speaks like a child.
wait...
December 18th, 2007 at 1:08 pmWhen Billo names me person of the year I'll just shoot myself. Less embarrassing.
December 18th, 2007 at 1:11 pmBig-frikkin'-whoop.
Billo's nothing more than a pimp for Rupert Murdoch and the Repukian Party.
December 18th, 2007 at 1:25 pm"By a wide margin" -- yeah -- of Fox bloviators; the marginal thinkers.
December 18th, 2007 at 2:31 pmMe, I'm waiting to see where Petraeus finishes in the nomination for the coveted Silver Sow Award.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:41 pmsecond place: Hitler
December 18th, 2007 at 5:52 pmthird : Rush limbaugh
fourth : Mickey Mouse
And Coffins draped with flags names Bill O'Reilly "Falafal of the Year!".
December 18th, 2007 at 6:20 pmGod.. LOL! Give the Falafel guy the gold this week.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:06 pmLiars of a feather flock together.
December 19th, 2007 at 3:15 amI second the motion.
Petraeus has done a terrific job.
Comment by Charles James Napier — December 18, 2007 @ 11:11 am
Is that why you are serving under his command in Iraq? Oh, you want others to fight your glorious wars…..
Comment by Blue Stater — December 18, 2007
Um... I served under Gen Petraeus and I, too, think he has done a terrific job. Iraq is much better in '07 than '03 or '05.
December 19th, 2007 at 6:09 amStubain: You must have been a good soldier. Look at how well the war has contributed to the security of America, in Gen P's own words (quoted above). But then, you as a soldier have done what I did in 1965 and 1969; I served to fight in an unwinnable war of insurgency against a culture very misunderstood by American military and politicians. You should be man of the year, (Time did that already) moreso than Gen P. You just followed orders, like me. If this sounds patronizing, its because that's what we must do to "support our troops" in Bushland.
December 19th, 2007 at 8:24 am