Bill O'Reilly is Mad as Hell....

Look forward to watching when I get home

He is a hammer, and he hit the nail on the head. There is no arguing those factual statistics.

I personally like O'Reilly. He has been very fair with Obama in the past; he sounded like an Obama fan for years.

He makes some good points, similar to those made by Charles Murray in "Coming Apart". Murray only examines white families in that book, but when you consider the negative outcomes associated with weaker family structures, and the abundance of weak family structures in the African American population...the results are hardly shocking.

He hit the nail on the head here: having kids you cannot adequately care for creates a cycle of poverty. White or black, it is difficult (sociologically speaking) to break out of the slums.

Upward mobility exists. If you keep a clean record, get decent grades, and go to a trade school, you can become middle class. The government and private charities spend vast sums of money on outreach programs. But a lot of these students basically fall off the track before they're even old enough to pursue such opportunities independently.

Anybody who is overly patriotic is an idiot in my opinion so OReilly is an idiot in my book. With that said, Obama is a fucktard too.

pacman007:

Anybody who is overly patriotic is an idiot in my opinion so OReilly is an idiot in my book. With that said, Obama is a fucktard too.

So where is the line? That is completely arbitrary.

Yeah and I'm sure you're smarter than both of them right pacman?

You guys are crazy if you believe half the shit OReilly says or believes. The guy is an irrational idiot. And Obama, I lost all faith in him after the NSA episode.

I don't think I'm smarter than them but I am smart enough to understand bullshit propaganda when I see it.

I don't particularly like this guy, but I couldn't agree with him more.

I grew up in poor area of Kentucky and Tennessee, and I think the problem there is largely the same as it is in poor black neighborhoods. It starts with poor family structure (read: 13 boys making their own rules) and really comes to a head because of drugs. I watched the Appalachians really change during my growing up years, prescription drugs and meth literally have changed the minds of any and everything living in the region. I imagine it's very similar in black neighborhoods.

I think the solution is largely what Bill is saying. First off, you catch someone selling drugs? Put them in prison for a minimum sentence of 20 years (or just fucking shoot them). These people destroy countless others around them, they're worse than a virus. Anyone who wants to bitch about a race angle (read: 100% of meth cookers are white, just like 100% of people selling crack in South Chicago are black) is obviously uninterested in improving the community. Second, like he said, stop fucking glorifying this shit. And that falls on the media and leadership. Obama should be truly ashamed that Jay Z was in the White House. Young black men should be looking up to Obama, not that worthless rapper.

Im not a big OReilly fan because his emotional appeal to people is what drives his ratings, not his fair presentation of the facts. That being said, he made some good points.

I'm not sure you can dismiss things like self-perpetuating cycles of poverty and our history as a country from the problem and place the blame solely on a deteriorating family model, drugs, and the entertainment industry. I think, unfortunately, all of these things are interconnected and its tough to find a single, easy cause that legislation can attack.

What I do agree with him on is that it will take smart, educated and articulate african americans to take a stand in their own communities, refuse to accept excuses, and work to improve the situation. No matter how well meaning a white or hispanic politician might be, it will take an inward movement to make a lasting, positive change. Anyone else will be seen as an outsider and received with distrust.

I watched it. Good points, but nothing will change.

The issue is people want liberty without responsibility. You cannot have one without the other. When you try you have Chiraq and Killadelphia.

I totally agree with Bill. It's all in family structure and base of society that's messed up when there is no father.

"How do you get rats off an island, hmm?"

I support legalizing pot and some other drugs, but we are never going to legalize hardcore drugs. All you will do is move kids up the food chain and have them sell harder drugs. Some might not do it at all, but when you have a broken home, no education and a dirt poor area you will sell drugs over working for $8 bucks an hour somewhere.

You cannot solve this problem without restricting individual freedom. Until we are ok with this the problem will continue.

TNA:

I support legalizing pot and some other drugs, but we are never going to legalize hardcore drugs. All you will do is move kids up the food chain and have them sell harder drugs. Some might not do it at all, but when you have a broken home, no education and a dirt poor area you will sell drugs over working for $8 bucks an hour somewhere.

You cannot solve this problem without restricting individual freedom. Until we are ok with this the problem will continue.

Why not support the legalization of all drugs? I thought you of all people would be on board with this.

Do I personally support it? Yes, of course. But I freely recognize the destructive nature some of these drugs will have. I can stomach it though and many people can't.

One could make an argument that the illegality of certain drugs force their concentration. I mean cocaine used to be added to coca cola. I'm sure it is more toxic now.

Guys, lets be honest. 70% of Americans don't even have a college degree. People read at a 6-7th grade level. How are we going to explain to these people the complexities of these things.

Anyone who thinks that Bill O'Reilly is a 'right-winged extremist' is absolutely clueless and lives in a bubble.

I am no fan of O'Reilly but all his points are valid. The lack of strong family units has destroyed the black community and I agree that is the cause of kids heading towards drugs,gangs, and violent crime. He is right when he says the black leaders won't make this the real issue to be handled. Although this is more of poor issue than a black one.

If you're under 60 years old and you watch Bill O'Reilly.....serious....please kill yourself.

Bill O'Reilly says exactly what Roger Ailes tells him to say. His pissed off, drunken, abusive Irishman approach and utter disregard for facts forces me to call into question anyone who values him beyond propogandist. If you find yourself thining he's some type of positive influence on the world, please seek professional help.

As far as drugs go

1) Turn the military loose on the producers/dealers. Everyone knows who they are and where they are. Fuck their lawyers, fuck their bankers, and fuck their rights. If America has declared war on drugs, the standard rules don't apply and they're open game. Declare a one month amnesty/forgiveness period, then just kill everyone who remains in the business.

2) Fund voluntary inpatient rehab and standard containment beyond the pathetic levels they are at. You'd be surprised how many people would benefit. While we're at it, audit doctors for overprescribing...a staggering amount of addiction is being created by the medical establishment.

3) Defund law enforcement in the drug sector commesurate with the gains produced by the above two points. Let's face it, the law and order thing only deals with shit after it's too late. Also, execution AND torture for dirty cops in the drug biz.

As far as Treyvon goes, here's what the government really thinks:

"ALL IS WELL CITIZEN, PAY NO ATTENTION TO A REAL CIVIL RIGHTS CASE, THE BRADLEY MANNING CASE. DO NOT INTERFERE IN THE AFFAIRS OF THOSE WHO RUN THINGS, WE KNOW BETTER THAN YOU. INSTEAD, FIXATE ON THIS SPECTACLE OF STREET VIOLENCE. NOW GET BACK TO WORK AND KNOW YOUR FUCKING ROLE YOU SERVILE SHEEP"

One of the most coherent speeches I've ever heard from O'Reilly. It hit the nail on the head for a lot of points (in a very narrow aspect).

I do think it is funny how he vilifies drug dealers for selling "poison", and demands longer jail sentence, when so many corporations are doing nearly the same thing (just sneakier).

@Esuric: What is the basis for your statement? I could probably give you more clips of him acting like a "right-wing extremist", than you can give me of him being a "rational centrist" (or however you characterize moderates).

We need to make IUDs and related female healthcare free/easily acceptable in this country. I am pro-small government, but this would actually be an investment in drastically reducing societal costs over the long haul - unlike starting another McWar on evil brown people.

UFOinsider:

If you're under 60 years old and you watch Bill O'Reilly.....serious....please kill yourself. Bill O'Reilly says exactly what Roger Ailes tells him to say. His pissed off, drunken, abusive Irishman approach and utter disregard for facts forces me to call into question anyone who values him beyond propogandist. If you find yourself thining he's some type of positive influence on the world, please seek professional help.

That's cool bro.

UFOinsider:

As far as drugs go 1) Turn the military loose on the producers/dealers. Everyone knows who they are and where they are. Fuck their lawyers, fuck their bankers, and fuck their rights. If America has declared war on drugs, the standard rules don't apply and they're open game. Declare a one month amnesty/forgiveness period, then just kill everyone who remains in the business.

This is the most idiotic, insane shit that I've heard in a pretty long time. It demonstrates complete ignorance of history and the philosophical foundations of our legal system, which is almost universally regarded as the most efficient legal system in human history (which is also why it's so widely emulated). It is a legal system designed to protect the common man from draconian lunatics such as yourself, who would arbitrarily put millions to death without trial and by decree. I just hope that you're not in a position of power because you're a pretty scary individual.

streetwannabe:

@Esuric: What is the basis for your statement? I could probably give you more clips of him acting like a "right-wing extremist", than you can give me of him being a "rational centrist" (or however you characterize moderates).

On social issues he's certainly conservative, and he always takes the neo-conservative position with regard to foreign policy, but when it comes to economic issues, he frequently sides with the left (something that's fairly common among neo-conservatives). He has called for increased financial regulation on multiple occasions, specifically in the commodities markets and blamed the recession primarily on wallstreet. Here's a debate between Stossel and O'Reilly on commodities markets:

(shows a fundamental misunderstanding of markets).

Edit: Here's a real right-winged extremist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7zwT3Fq_QU

streetwannabe:

Regardless, he is still easily classified as a "right-wing extremist" in my books. I honestly really never watch his show, but have seen many clips of him with Colbert and Stewart and a lot of the stuff he says is pretty out there.

Well this is what I mean by 'living in a bubble.' A lot of people allow left-winged comedians, like Stewart and Maher for example, to define the world for them, through their narrow lenses. If this is your only exposure to O'Reilly then yes, you're going to think he represents the far right wing of conservatism, but It's not consistent with the facts. Which is, again, my point.

Also, can you give me an example of some of the things he has said that's 'out there?'

@ ESURIC - Exactly what benefit has our legal system produced with the Zetas just over the border? Outside our borders, things kind of change, and I'm familiar with the ethics of this. I'm serious about the 'war on drugs', if it's a real war.....then run it like a real fucking war. If you're a combatant, you're fair game. If you're an American who goes to help the combatants, that's treason and you're fair game....drone bait or otherwise. There are shades of gray, but for the most part it's pretty simple.

A lot of these guys are ex special forces who burn people to death in 55 gallon drums, I don't think you understand how little fear they have of being extradited to do a few years in prison. All they're going to do is enjoy their vacation, lift weights, and network with USA distributors while they're in there. On our dime. If you think that US drug policy hasn't failed, you're not paying attention. If they're killed off on foreign soil during a war, it would probably have better long term results, and don't worry, the military has plenty of people willing to pull that trigger.

The US has, for decades, been comfortable ingoring prevention of a problem but spending a fortune on treatment of problems....how about just pony up the resources and solve them? In addition, drug rehab is severely neglected in this country and think about it: people aren't going to push for it until they have to. SO, take away the drugs, and then people will have to get clean. Locking them up for being addicted solves nothing except making the corrections officers unions rich. You know this, I know this, everyone knows this.

I fail to see how this viewpoint is repugnant. It's merely honest. A lot of life comes down to "pick a side", and killing a few third world warlord wannabes to protect regular folks seems like a pretty good idea. If you haven't seen up close and personal what this stuff does to people (and I'm not talking fucking weed, I'm talking hardcore heroine, crack, and meth addiction) then kindly put your big kid pants on and make an effort to get in touch with the real world. Cartels are pulling down billions of dollars a year basically spreading misery and are not protected by the constitution. Kill them all.

@UFOinsider

I completely agree with you that the 'war on drugs' has been a complete, unmitigated disaster. I just don't reach the conclusion that you have reached, namely that we should suspend the constitution, declare martial law and begin executing millions of people without trial. You have to understand the incentive structure that is in place. The producers and distributors of narcotics come from failed states, with dysfunctional economic and legal systems. This has naturally led to a torrential amount of poverty within this geographical region.

At the same time, this region is endowed with certain cash crops (drugs) for which their northern neighbor (wealthiest nation in the world) has an insatiable appetite for. The U.S. is the largest drug consumer in the world. For many individuals in Latin America, therefore, entering this industry is the only way to acquire actual wealth and to escape poverty. This means that the demand for narcotics will inevitably be satiated--there's just too much money in this industry and it's, again, the only lucrative option for hundreds of millions of people in the Latin world.

Now typically, this demand would be satiated by rational entrepreneurs, who are particularly good at economic calculation and coordination, but the extremely harsh legal penalties for participating in this industry will price these actors out. There's simply too much risk for them. So who's going to produce it? The answer is the most desperate, criminal elements of society (the Capone and Luciano types). Corporations are replaced by drug cartels precisely because of the severe legal penalties meant to prevent drug production, distribution and consumption.

My conclusion is therefore completely different from yours: Acknowledge that prohibition doesn't work and legalize drug consumption. Tax its production, distribution and sale and allow Latin American nations to produce it. Businessmen will replace the gangsters, the same way they did when alcohol prohibition came to an end, and it would be a real economic stimulus for improverished Latin American nations (would increase their incomes and yield higher levels of investment) and our own as well.

Legalize weed? Sure. Legalize shooms? Heall yeah. Legalize Coke? Legalize Meth? Do you have any idea what they do? No dude, not all drugs are created equally. Send in a S.E.A.L. team to whack the cartel folks in Guatemala and their cousin in Miami who's distributing the shit. The only solution is violence, you have to make an example out of them.

I don't think you understand, these people aren't afraid of prison and we can't legalize hardcore drugs. The other thing is this: even in areas with decriminlalized narcotic zones, like Amsterdam, still have very serious black market issues with drugs. Legalizing all drugs will not cause the criminal underworld to die and reduce addiction rates. Sorry, it's already been tried.

Other thing is this: aside from the crowd that dabbles in substances in college etc, the actual amount of people that cause the majority of problems is very small, not even millions. And as far as cash crops go....we have all the money in the world as a nation to buy drugs and fund a drug war, how about terminate the war and fund other cash crops instead? It's just a matter of will

And the very smug Chris Hayes' response

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/all-in-/52559880#52559880

m8:

My point is that the arrest rate of drug use between different races should be irrelevant to the argument. You're talking about an outcome from a symptom of the problem. Who cares who is getting arrested, the problem is the drug use. And BillO is saying that a stronger family with accountability and stronger community will help the problem. Once we start debating the differences in sentencing, arrest rates, etc, I think we begin to quickly lose focus on the actual point of the discussion. Will someone who gets arrested for drug use have a hard time getting a job? Maybe, but so does the person who fails an employer drug test. If you're serious about your future, don't be stupid with your drug use.

1. If you jay-walk, you get the death penalty.
2. Only black people are arrested for jay-walking, even though everyone does it.

You mean to tell me that the differential in arrest rates means nothing to you?

SirTradesaLot:

m8:

My point is that the arrest rate of drug use between different races should be irrelevant to the argument. You're talking about an outcome from a symptom of the problem. Who cares who is getting arrested, the problem is the drug use. And BillO is saying that a stronger family with accountability and stronger community will help the problem. Once we start debating the differences in sentencing, arrest rates, etc, I think we begin to quickly lose focus on the actual point of the discussion. Will someone who gets arrested for drug use have a hard time getting a job? Maybe, but so does the person who fails an employer drug test. If you're serious about your future, don't be stupid with your drug use.

Your point doesn't make sense. Take this example to the extreme:

1. If you jay-walk, you get the death penalty.
2. Only black people are arrested for jay-walking, even though everyone does it.

You mean to tell me that the differential in arrest rates means nothing to you?

The upside is that there are companies, like Denny's, that hire ex cons as a means to reintegrate. The downside, well, working at Denny's. So, based on this logic, Denny's runs American drug policy for its own benefit.

MikelAngelo:

And the very smug Chris Hayes' response

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/all-in-/52559880#52559880

Literally so weak.

This guy is a fucking numbskull. You're really throwing up marijuana use numbers to prove that blacks and whites use drugs the same amount? As if marijuana is the hard drug that's driving apart families. Protip: it's not. And even if you want to argue the real thesis of that argument is that blacks go to prison more for pot possession, you're not analyzing the numbers beyond a raw %? Fuck off.

And that crackbaby study is a joke. All of a sudden poverty in the womb is worse than crack in the womb because one study which solely tested the metric of IQ says so? Go fuck yourself. There's a lot more to a person than IQ over a period of time. you can be born addicted to drugs, pretty sure you can't be born addicted to foodstamps.