Bill O’Reilly’s Feelings Toward God Aren’t Unique

He’s mad at God.

He wouldn’t be the first. He won’t be the last.

Former Fox News personality, Bill O’Reilly, is licking his wounds and laying blame. The problem is, he’s blaming everyone else, when in reality, he should be doing some deep, self-reflection, regarding how he fell so far to end up where he is now.

Said O’Reilly on Monday:

“You know, am I mad at God? Yeah, I’m mad at him,” O’Reilly said. “I wish I had more protection. I wish this stuff didn’t happen. I can’t explain it to you. Yeah, I’m mad at him.”

The remarks were made on his podcast, “No Spin News.”

Oddly named, considering he’s spinning the excuses and blame for his current troubles like mad.

O’Reilly and Fox News paid out tens of millions of dollars to settle sexual harassment claims.

One case netted a $32 million payout, all by itself.

You don’t settle on cases for that kind of money without some compelling evidence against you.

In total, there are six women who have received settlement payouts, due to accusations of sexual misconduct. Those are six women who were willing to come forward and go through the tedious, and sensitive process of telling their story, in order to get retribution for the treatment they received from O’Reilly.

Are they all lying? Were they in cahoots, in some grand plan, working with a left-leaning media to bring O’Reilly down from his high perch, atop the cable news network ratings?

It seems like a stretch, but it’s one O’Reilly wants us to believe.

He accuses the New York Times of attempting to hurt he and his family by reporting on the allegations.

“It’s horrible what I went through, horrible what my family went through,” O’Reilly said. “The pain it brings to my children is indescribable. Indescribable.”

I don’t doubt there’s pain, but according to past court records, the pain with O’Reilly’s family began before news of the settlements came to light.

I don’t know O’Reilly. I don’t know his story or how he conducts himself in social situations.

I also don’t know his walk with God. I can only assume he feels he has some sort of relationship with our heavenly Father, at least enough to say he’s mad at Him.

It’s a natural, flesh-borne reaction to blame God when something we’ve done blows up in our face.


He cares. Very much.

Every tear cried by those who belong to Him must pass through His hands, and He is not blind or calloused to our pain. However, growth must come before the healing.

Faith, growth, and healing are all made possible by a steady diet of God’s Word, not by wallowing in self-pity.

“He who conceals his transgressions will not prosper, But whoever confesses and turns away from his sins will find compassion and mercy.” – Proverbs 28:13 AMP

Mr. O’Reilly is feeding his bitterness, rather than his faith.

Do you want to heal your family and your reputation, Mr. O’Reilly?

Then stop blaming God.

These public outcries will not help you. The accusations are out there. The money has been paid.

And God is still God.

Where you go next is up to you. You can dig your hole of despair deeper, or you can give it to God and let Him do a work in you.

What you can’t do is blame Him for actions that were your own.

Mark Cuban Would Run as a Republican for President

In an interview with Fox News’ OBJECTified host and TMZ publisher Harvey Levin that aired last night, billionaire investor and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban said he may run as a Republican against President Donald Trump in 2020.

Levin asked him if he’d run as a Democrat or a Republican, to which he answered “Republican.” He also noted that he is “fiercely independent.”

“Probably Republican,” he said. “Because I think there’s a place for somebody who is socially a centrist, but I’m very fiscally conservative, but I think there’s better ways now to make governments smaller.”

“Again using technology, government as a service can have a dramatic impact on how we live our lives,” he added. “If you don’t understand technology and you don’t understand the impact it has on jobs that technology is having and will continue to have, then you’re gonna run into some severe roadblocks.”

Cuban has been highly critical of President Trump. They have regular back-and-forth spats on Twitter. Earlier this year, Cuban told CNN to view President Trump’s tenure as “political chemotherapy.”

In the past, Cuban has taken both conservative positions and not-so conservative positions.

In 2014-2015, he communicated his discontent with net neutrality laws. In contrast, last fall he said paying higher taxes is the most patriotic thing a wealth person could do. Hmmmm. Conservatives will wonder how he will reconcile these contrasting issues if he touts fiscal conservatism.

Speaking of technology, Cuban has signed on to an interesting venture: the Mercury Protocol. Here’s more about it:

Modern communication is outdated. Centralized communication platforms built on private servers are only as secure as their weakest defense, user privacy is habitually violated as service providers sell behavioral data to advertisers, and content is restricted to a single platform.

The solution is the Mercury Protocol, an open-source project for communication platforms to utilize decentralized blockchain technology at minimal cost. Any communication platforms that integrate the Mercury Protocol will be able to exchange messages and content, increase user privacy through pseudonymity, leverage tokens to encourage user participation, and provide stronger network security than any private system that has a single point of failure.


This actually looks really interesting and forward-thinking.

Cuban is also noteworthy for his involvement with Shark Tank, which is a highly addictive show if you’ve watched it. Cuban and his fellow “sharks” are at times ruthless to aspiring entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, they help launch people to success.

It’ll be interesting to see if Mark Cuban is testing the waters or simply teasing the American public with this exclamation to run for president. Time will tell.


When You’ve Lost Republicans On Fox News, You’ve Lost Middle America

President Trump’s comments about the Charlottesville riot have drawn condemnation from all quarters of the country. The true extent of the political damage to the president is not fully known at this point, but Fox News host Shepard Smith offered a clue. According to Smith, Fox News, a channel normally friendly to Trump and Republicans, could not find a single Republican to defend Trump’s statements on the air.

“Our booking team — and they’re good — reached out to Republicans of all stripes across the country today,” Smith said on his show Wednesday. “Let’s be honest, Republicans don’t often really mind coming on Fox News Channel. We couldn’t get anyone to come and defend him here because we thought, in balance, someone should do that.”

“We worked very hard at it throughout the day, and we were unsuccessful,” Smith continued.

Throughout his short political career, the president has never had trouble finding Republicans to defend him. On issues from his connections to Russia to the Access Hollywood tape, there were always people willing to go on record to back Donald Trump and excuse his behavior.

While few, if any, Republicans are defending Trump, several are now condemning him by name. On Wednesday, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said in a statement, “Through his statements yesterday, President Trump took a step backward by again suggesting there is moral equivalency between the white supremacist neo-Nazis and KKK members who attended the Charlottesville rally and people like Ms. Heyer. I, along with many others, do not endorse this moral equivalency.”

“Many Republicans do not agree with and will fight back against the idea that the Party of Lincoln has a welcome mat out for the David Dukes of the world,” Graham continued.

In a tweet, John McCain (R-Ariz.) said, “There’s no moral equivalency between racists & Americans standing up to defy hate& bigotry. The President of the United States should say so.”

Marco Rubio (R-Fl.) launched a series of tweets in which he said that the white supremacist organizers of the Unite The Right rally in Charlottesville are “100% to blame for a number of reasons.”

“Mr. President,” Rubio tweeted, “you can’t allow White Supremacists to share only part of blame. They support idea which cost nation & world so much pain.”

The list of other Republicans breaking with Trump on the issue is growing. CNN reports that it now includes Corey Gardner (R-Col.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) and John Kasich (R-Ohio).

While Republicans have largely stood by the president since his nomination, Trump’s behavior is increasingly becoming a liability to Republicans who must face voters themselves. This is especially true when Trump veers into the emotionally charged world of race.

One of the few things that unites almost all Americans is a hatred for racism and Nazis. With his statement that there were “very fine people on both sides,” Trump has put his administration and the Republican Party firmly on the wrong side of the issue.

The proof is the lack of Republicans willing to back the president on Charlottesville. When Republicans won’t go on Fox News to defend President Trump, he is in serious trouble.

Kat Timpf Fights Water With Fire

Fox News host and National Review Online contributor Kat Timpf has spent a lot of time chronicling the insanity of political correctness, particularly on college campuses.  Yesterday, however, some of that left-wing nuttery came at her in a very personal way when she was attacked by a total stranger at a campaign event:






Sadly, yes.  There’s a certain segment of political “activists” who not only assault people at random, they see themselves as entirely justified in doing so.  That’s because, in their twisted view, people like Kat–indeed, anyone who doesn’t think the same as they do and has the chutzpah to speak up about their opinions–are the enemy, and deserving of punishment.  Sometimes that means getting doused with water.  Other times, it’s getting your head bashed in with a bike lock.  Either way, conscience or empathy doesn’t fit into the equation because the assailant really believes you have it coming.  And what’s really scary is how many people actually think this way.

But how did we get here?

Well, let’s see.  Maybe it has something to do with the left wing in this country screaming about how the president conspired with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary Clinton.  Or how the Republican plan to repeal and replace Obamacare will kill millions of people.  Or how those who stand against abortion really just want to keep women down, and those with deeply-held religious beliefs are just using them as an excuse to hate on the LQBTQ community.  Those same Saul Alinsky tactics of personalizing the political and ascribing the worst motives to the opposition have taken their toll–and with social media cranking up the crazy every minute of every day, is it any wonder that people can so easily demonize those who think differently?

Then there’s the Jackass factor, wherein dingbats with no accomplishments To speak of seek their own fifteen minutes of fame by doing something stupid (bonus points if it involves a celebrity of some kind) and then catching it on camera.  This desire to become a viral sensation is what led a couple of Antifa morons to attack Andrew Bolt, an conservative Australian writer and TV personality.  Unfortunately for them, it didn’t quite work out as the goons had hoped:

I generally eschew the term “butthurt,” but in this case I’ll make an exception.

Alas, not all of us are Andrew Bolt–and most of us, when sucker punched, are stunned that a fellow human being could do such a thing.  You can sense that in how Kat Timpf recounts her own experience:  too shocked to react in the moment, then incensed at being so helpless.  That’s what makes violence so insidious.  Choosing to rise above it, however, takes guts and determination–the same kind that Kat is showing here.  Sure, the gutless weevil with the water bottle may have stopped her from speaking that night, but if he thinks he’s going to shut her up, he has another thing coming.

New Survey Shows How the Media Provokes Our Fears and Shapes Our Politics

It’s no secret that the world is not a friendly place, and life, in general, gives up ample opportunity to stress.

A new survey by claims that what Americans worry about most can be determined, based on what news network they watch regularly.

More specifically, the survey compared the top 10 concerns of Americans – everything ranging from violent crime to financial collapse – between Fox News and MSNBC.

There was not a single concern that the viewership of these two networks had in common, rank-wise.

Of the top 10 things Fox News viewers worried about on a daily basis, the ratings fell this way:

1. Someone breaking into their house
2. The nation becoming fragmented
3. Identity theft
4. Society breaking down
5. The U.S. government
6. Not having access to healthcare
7. Cybercrime
8. Being the victim of a violent crime
9. Economic or financial collapse
10. Terrorism

For viewers of MSNBC, their concerns looked like this:

1. The nation becoming fragmented
2. The U.S. government
3. Someone breaking into their house
4. Not having access to healthcare
5. Society breaking down
6. Identity theft
7. Gun violence
8. Economic or financial collapse
9. Cybercrime
10. Being the victim of a violent crime

Also touched on in the survey was the notion of Fox viewers versus MSNBC viewers, in regards to violence or threats against Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

For Fox News viewers, 41 percent have said violence and threats against Christians is on the rise, as opposed to 17 percent of MSNBC viewers who felt the same. Another 30 percent of Fox News viewers felt conditions for Christians were holding steady, while 41 percent of MSNBC viewers felt that way.

Thirty-two percent of Fox News viewers feel violence against Jews is on the rise, compared to 40 percent of MSNBC viewers.

There is near total agreement between Fox News viewers and MSNBC viewers, with 19 percent of Fox fans and 18 percent of MSNBC watchers believing violence against Jews is on the decline.

And as for Muslims, over half of Fox News viewers (51%) feel violence against Muslims is on the rise. For MSNBC viewers, it is a whopping 72 percent!

Twenty-seven percent of Fox News viewers believe the trend is holding steady, while 17 percent of MSNBC viewers believe the same.

The survey also went on to compare opinions between Breitbart readers and Reddit readers, as well as comparing the trustworthiness of news outlets (newspaper, TV news, blogs, etc…), as considered by Republicans versus Democrats.

I can say this about the survey: Since Donald Trump began his war against American media, it appears that Republicans have a much dimmer view of news media than their Democrat counterparts.

There were 1,000 respondents to the survey, making it a small sampling, but still yielding some interesting insight into how the media is shaping what viewers care about.

CNN: Conservative News Network?

Time Werner’s CNN hasn’t exactly had a great past few weeks. Kathy Griffin did them no favors, they have to fire Reza Aslan for badmouthing the President, then they utterly failed at the testimony prediction game with Mr. James Comey and now they’ve had to retract a story about Anthony Scaramucci: (New York Post)

The retracted story was based on a single, anonymous source who claimed the Senate Intelligence Committee was probing ties between the Trump administration and a Russian government-owned investment fund. The story, posted on on Thursday, also claimed the Treasury Department was believed to be investigating Scaramucci over a purported Jan. 16 meeting with the fund’s director general.In an Editor’s Note posted late Friday, CNN said the story had been deleted for not meeting “editorial standards,” with the network later revealing a “breakdown” in pre-publication vetting that typically involves “fact-checkers, journalism standards experts and lawyers.”

Not only did management at CNN retract the story, they issued an apology and then sacked the three journalist involved: (NYP)

The specter of a $100 million libel suit scared CNN into retracting a poorly reported story that slimed an ally of President Trump’s — and forcing out the staffers responsible for it, The Post has learned. CNN immediately caved after Scaramucci, a financier and frequent network guest, cried foul and threatened to take legal action, sources said Tuesday. Sources also said the three journalists responsible for the retracted story — reporter Tom Frank, editor Eric Lichtblau and Lex Harris, who headed the CNN Investigates unit — were urged to resign. “They called them in and said they’d pay out their contracts, but they should leave immediately,” one source said. Scaramucci got an unusual public apology but still hired a top Manhattan lawyer to put further pressure on CNN and “look after his interests in this matter,” one source said.

But was the threat of a huge lawsuit the driving reason for the public apology and very public firings? Or is there another more personal reason? (NYP)

Zucker was afraid of facing a high-profile suit from Scaramucci while the US Justice Department weighs the proposed $85.4 billion media merger. At last week’s Cannes Lions festival in France — where Zucker boasted that viewers “trusted CNN even more than ever”— rumors were rife that he’d be out of a job if the AT&T deal goes through. “It’s not just Jeff Zucker, all Time Warner executives are anxious about if they will survive the merger. One thing’s for sure, there will be a re-organization,” one top executive told The Post.

Time Werner has enabled CNN’s clumsy, prevaricating attempts to unseat the President because of ratings and the belief they are providing what their viewers want. Jeff Zucker long ago traded intellectual honesty for cheap shots and tabloid yellow journalism. They allowed CNN to fall into this trap because they live in the same echo chamber; but, the new management evidently won’t appreciate the constant attacks on the President Trump: (NYP)

“What is interesting is that the AT&T execs who will decide who goes and who stays are AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson and AT&T Entertainment Group CEO John Stankey — who have a very good relationship with the current administration.” (emphasis added)

Maybe this time next year, we’ll see Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity dominating prime time for CNN. Sure is a strange world we live in: Fox News no longer “fair and balanced” and CNN no longer Clinton News Network.


Eric Bolling Considering A Senate Run

Longtime Fox News employee Eric Bolling says he is mulling a run for Senate at some point in the future.

In a Monday telephone interview with Politico, Bolling expressed interest in running against a sitting Republican senator in a Southern state. However, Bolling did not specify which senator he’d like to primary or when he’d even want to run.

Any run for office would have to wait. The television host recently signed a new three-year contract with Fox in early June. He is currently a co-host of the channel’s 5pm program, “The Fox News Specialists.” Bolling has been with the right-leaning outlet for ten years and considers himself a Fox loyalist. Before co-hosting his current show, Bolling was an inaugural member of the popular program, “The Five.” Amid the shakeup of Bill O’Reilly’s departure, “The Five” moved to 9pm, but Bolling stayed on at 5pm to host his new show. He was a CNBC analyst and commodities trader before joining Fox a decade ago.

Bolling says he has been a Trump supporter since “day one.” He even outlined his support for the Republican president in his new book titled “The Swamp: Washington’s Murky Pool of Corruption and Cronyism and How Trump Can Drain It.”

The President has taken notice of the 54-year-old host. Bolling was considered for a top White House position within the Department of Commerce during the transition period. Trump even granted an interview to Bolling for his first episode of “Fox Specialists.” The two have spoken numerous times since the inauguration.

Despite not yet making any sort of serious steps toward a run for office, Bolling wants to give it a try once he closes the book on his media career. It is assumed he would keep his staunchly pro-Trump views while stumping on the trail. He believes many Republican contenders for office run as conservatives – only to serve as moderates.

He sees himself as someone who would stick true to his words.



Brad Thor Brings the Hammer Down on Radical Islam

Never one to mince words–or court controversy, for that matter–Brad Thor appeared on Martha MacCallum’s Fox News show yesterday to talk terrorism, particularly the seeming inability of law enforcement to go after “known wolves” before they can carry out attacks.

Brad Thor said the bar is set too high for law enforcement to properly prosecute terror suspects.

Thor, a former member of DHS’s Analytic Red Cell Unit, said anyone associated with terrorists or radical Islam should be able to be charged.

Martha MacCallum reported that the London terror suspects’ imam reported them to police, but the lead was not properly followed up on.

Thor said part of the problem was that prosecutorial “bar.”

“We have zero tolerance when it comes to child pornography. Why don’t we have zero tolerance when it comes to radical Islamic ideology?” he asked.

Thor’s language here isn’t likely to win him too many friends with the CAIR crowd, but that’s part-and-parcel of the bestselling author’s reptertoire.  His 2008 book The Last Patriot featured a “lost revelation” of the prophet Mohammed that changes the entire face of Islam, and threatens the power of radical Islamists worldwide.  Because of that, Glenn Beck–who has Thor on his shows as a regular guest–once said, “You will read it and think Brad Thor is a dead man.”  Fortunately, he never had to go into hiding like Salman Rushdie did after he published The Satanic Verses–though I wouldn’t be surprised if some ayatollah still had a fatwa out on him.

In the wake of the latest terror, I’ve also wondered how the hell a man who literally appeared in a YouTube video called “The Jihadis Next Door” was still on the streets of London where he was free to mow down innocent pedestrians in a rented van.  Perhaps this would be more understandable if this was an isolated case of someone slipping through the cracks–but it seems as if almost all of the attacks we’ve seen lately have been carried out by individuals who were known to authorities ahead of time.  Ever wonder how the cops were able to roll up the network that supported the London Bridge terrorists within hours of the attack?  It’s because they had they names and addresses of those people already.

And yet, and yet. . .law enforcement took no proactive measures against people who presented a clear and present danger.  How does that happen?  Is there something in British law that prevents the police from making a move before there’s an actual attack?  Or is it just a paralyzing fear of being branded Islamophobic that keeps them looking the other way until it’s too late?  Whatever the cause, one thing is for sure– the system, as Brad Thor points out here, is a spectacular failure.