|

Remember when Bill O’Reilly thought it was offensive to call the pope a “primate”?

The impending resignation of Pope Benedict XVI brings to mind an episode of six years ago in which Bill O’Reilly of Fox News spectacularly betrayed his ignorance of the English language.

O’Reilly got his undies in a bunch when some liberal somewhere referred to the pope as a “primate.” Bill-o thought the guy was likening the pontiff to an ape.

What a dummy!

The truth is that the pope is a primate in more ways than one. For starters, the word “primate” applies to a variety of mammals — including humans as well as apes.

But more to the point, “primate” also is defined as a bishop or some other high official in the Catholic Church.

Share:

28 Comments

  1. Wow, I keep wondering how Pat can keep posting his thoughts as something we should all believe! Please post the link so everyone can listen and decide for themselves.

  2. Big Dave: Maybe someone there at the home can teach you how to use Google. And if you asked your attendants for a dictionary, I’m sure they’d be glad to accommodate.

    If you find that I’ve been wrong about O’Reilly and the “primate” thing, let us know, will you?

  3. Now this is funny!

    If anyone one the right posts something with nothing to back it up, Pat wants the poster to show proof to back the claim up. But if Pat posts something without any proof we should learn to use Google.

    Maybe ‘ol Pat should follow is own advice! But I understand why liberals do things this way!

  4. Poor Big Dave. He says the post above is not to be believed, but he knows of no evidence to disprove it.

    So he just babbles on.

  5. I did find this Pat and all I get is liberals talking about it but again NO proof as to what Bill O’Reilly actually said on his program. And please NO edited versions to show your side as we all know how tape doctoring is done by lefties!

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×1356529#1356644

    Hahahaha

  6. This discussion brings to mind the famous Rush Limbaugh “farding” incident as well as any good liberals joyous use of the word teabagger.

  7. doc: Two things:

    1) Tea Party people themselves were the first to apply the “teabagger” term to their movement. They suddenly abandoned it — and denounced it as a leftist slur — only when they learned that it also has a sexual connotation. But then, lots of otherwise innocent terms also have sexual connotations.

    2) Thirty-seven months ago, I replied to one of your comments with this:

    Despite your bogus claim that “teabagger” is “CLEARLY a vulgar term,” the New Oxford American Dictionary named it a finalist for honors as the Word of the Year for 2009.

    New Oxford defines “teabagger” as “a person who protests President Obama’s tax policies and stimulus package, often through local demonstrations known as ‘Tea Party’ protests (in allusion to the Boston Tea Party of 1773.”

    So, get your mind of out of the gutter, you pervert, and read this:
    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/unfriend-named-new-oxford-american-dictionarys-2009-word-of-the-year-70201607.html

  8. Sure, because no one from the right has ever doctored a tape to make their side sound better…

    Also, if you want to see the interview that contained the reference discussed here…

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289573,00.html

    Minimally, there is a clear misuse of ther term “primate” as used by Jesse Watters, the interviewer from Fox News. Since O’Reilly wrote the piece using the interview, he is at least guilty of passing this misuse along to his audience.

  9. Drew: Thanks. I had found several other references to O’Reilly telecasting video of the Watters interview with the CEO of Jet Blue, but I refrained from posting them just to see how far Big Dave would take this thing.

  10. Good ole’ Pat, always defending his vulgar left wing buddies.

    The Pope/Primate comment was originally posted on the Daily Kos website and was likely meant as a double entendre rather than some ultra sophisticate simply using the lesser known definition of a word.

    It all makes me wonder what the meaning of the word “is” is?

  11. Luke Fredrickson

    I consider the Tea Party itself to be absolutely more vulgar than even the worst connotations of the term “teabagger”. Why?

    > Opposing comprehensive gun registration
    > Opposing same sex marriage rights
    > Opposing the separation of church and state
    > Opposing Medicare
    > Opposing immigration reform
    > Opposing universal healthcare
    > Opposing sex ed
    > Opposing abortion rights
    > Opposing fair taxation for millionaires

    Such vulgarity! Kids today should have to do this for saying the words Tea Party – http://sgbrowne.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ralphiesoap.jpg

  12. Good ole doc, always taking the side of the brainless wingnuts.

    The right-wing blogosphere has pedded countless thousands of exceedingly vulgar slurs against President Obama and his family, none of which has prompted doc to register even mild disapproval.

    But now doc wants us to know of his strong suspicion that some obscure lefty’s reference to the pope as a “primate” — which he is, in two ways — “was likely meant as a double entendre.”

  13. I have never spent 1 minute in the “right wing blogosphere”‘ Give me a example of an exceedingly vulgar slur and I will wholly and completely repudiate it.

  14. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/

    Where was the outrage? The disapproval?

  15. Yes thanks Drew as this is what I get from your link:
    This page can’t be displayed

    Then again with Pat:

    “Drew: Thanks. I had found several other references to O’Reilly telecasting video of the Watters interview with the CEO of Jet Blue, but I refrained from posting them just to see how far Big Dave would take this thing.”

    How far will I take this, not that far and why because I could care less about what liberals think on most things? I just point to how Pat does thinks, nothing more. But again thanks to Pat for showing how the media works.

    Then we get to Luke with this:

    “I consider the Tea Party itself to be absolutely more vulgar than even the worst connotations of the term “teabagger”. Why?

    > Opposing comprehensive gun registration
    > Opposing same sex marriage rights
    > Opposing the separation of church and state
    > Opposing Medicare
    > Opposing immigration reform
    > Opposing universal healthcare
    > Opposing sex ed
    > Opposing abortion rights
    > Opposing fair taxation for millionaires

    Such vulgarity! Kids today should have to do this for saying the words Tea Party –”

    Then links to a picture of what liberals would call “CHILD ABUSE” if it had been posted by a conservative.

    But Luke I wish you could get thinks right as you need to answer these questions:

    “> Opposing comprehensive gun registration” Why only for “LAW ABIDING CITIZENS” when it’s not them causing the problem?

    “> Opposing same sex marriage rights” But why can’t this pass during any vote in California? It is very liberal!

    “> Opposing the separation of church and state” I didn’t know Obama was conservative for making the Church do as he says”

    “> Opposing Medicare”
    “> Opposing universal healthcare” Seeing these are related, why is the cost going up as democrats said this was going to lower the costs? Oh, and now we have also been told there are “Death Panels” still wondering why Pat has not told his low information people about that? And the democrats were right on one thing, “we have to pass this bill to find out what’s in it”. Boy did Nancy Pelosi nail that one!

    “> Opposing immigration reform” Wow, nobody has ever explained how breaking the law allows you to receive a benefit. Or does the bank robber get a pass and get to keep the money that was stolen!

    “> Opposing sex ed” Don’t believe I have ever commented on that but this is one subject liberal educators have done a very good job at.

    “> Opposing abortion rights” Why do I have to pay for this when I had nothing to do with creating the condition? I do believe all rape victims should get whatever is needed.

    “> Opposing fair taxation for millionaires” Yes, they pay what around 70% of the taxes paid to the government. But Luke says that’s not enough they need to pay more!
    http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/04/in-pictures-how-much-the-top-earners-already-pay-in-taxes/

  16. Rant on, Big Dave. The men in the white coats won’t be here for a while.

  17. The Comedian

    I’m not sure why, but Pat reminds of me of this kid back when I was a youngster in grade school. He was the type who often sat alone at lunch, writing queer rants in a tattered journal. Whenever the opportunity arose he would call out others as “stupid” or “idiotic;” and he never missed an opportunity to bully a kid smaller than him. Without fail, he always backed down when challenged, returned to his journal, and grumbled about how stupid everyone else was. He was a sad kid. If Pat was 30 or so years younger I’d swear it was the kid from my youth. Maybe Pat needs a hug. It’s okay Pat, we’re all here for you.

  18. shawnnews

    Wilson– the outrage came from Hillary Clinton for one.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=death+of+a+president&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#itp=open4
    But no one really bothered to see the movie. It didn’t even make it’s budget back.
    You can look this stuff up too instead of pretending conservatives are big victims. Every once in a while some loon thinks it’s clever to post some Comment that says to pray for President Obama complete with a Bible verse where the psalmist wishes for the death of an enemy and his family. There really is little comparison to criticism of the Republicans to the seditious libel aimed at Democrats.

  19. The Comedian

    Ah yes. All the vile Republicans who wished for Glenn Beck to go blind, who rejoiced at Andrew Breitbart’s death. Probably those same Republicans that created the video game to assassinate the NRA honchos. Oh, and my personally favorite: that really right wing nut job Erik Loomis went on a violent rant against those leftist NRA bastards. Maybe those psalms are just metaphors shawn.

    Hey, can I get a copy of those prayers for President Obama accompanied by one of the curse psalms?

  20. “Rant on, Big Dave. The men in the white coats won’t be here for a while.”

    Wow, I guess the self taught are getting dumber all the time on the liberal side! What say you Mr. Cunningham or are you passing the buck again?

    Just one question Pat, you are paying for them right?

  21. The Comedian

    You really missed the point shawn. The fact is both sides are guilty of all sorts of vile remarks. I recall quite a lot of anti-Bush stuff too. So stop pretending “your side” is so much better.

  22. Anti-Bush sentiments were acceptable at the time due to his incompetence.

  23. The Comedian

    Oh, that’s true, Mr. Steve. I sometimes forget the liberals’ golden rule. Thanks for reminding me with your wit, tolerance, and humble hypocrisy.

  24. Yes our good buddy Steverino has stated it again, a liberal can say anything he or she wants about a republican but don’t let a republican say anything except good things about democrats or liberals get mad!

  25. Generally directed at one person who can’t make a link work, but applies to everyone in some way:

    It’s not that I expected this to change your mind, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but at least make it an informed opinion. The discussion here is ultimately about nothing (does it really matter in the grand scheme of things what Bill O’Reilly said 5 1/2 years ago?), but it does demonstrate the enormous difficulty that exists when trying to present information. People (whatever their political persuasion) who disagree with the information tend to immediatly lash out at those presenting the information without taking the time to actually evaluate the evidence to determine it’s truth. Instead of jumping on here to bash every person who posts something you disagree with, do a bit of research and try to determine if they are right or not. If they are right, accept the truth and move on. If they are wrong, come back with the evidence* that they are wrong, and a good discussion (instead of pointless rabble rousing) may ensue. I don’t mean to call only one person out about this, because we are all guilty of this to varied degrees. The important thing is what are we going to do about it?

    Everything stated above is just as true for the liberal, the conservative, the mooderate, and everyone else trying to do things just a little bit better every day.

    *By evidence, I mean something verifiable as true, not simply another person’s opinion that itself is not based on fact.

  26. Wow, can you believe this one from Drew:

    “Instead of jumping on here to bash every person who posts something you disagree with, do a bit of research and try to determine if they are right or not. If they are right, accept the truth and move on. If they are wrong, come back with the evidence* that they are wrong, and a good discussion (instead of pointless rabble rousing) may ensue.”

    No, Drew it’s your job to prove your points, it’s not up to someone else to look it up to see if you’re correct. I guess they don’t teach that in school these days! This is something I try to get Pat to do, since again it’s not my job to prove him right or wrong.

    Then this:
    “If they are wrong, come back with the evidence* that they are wrong, and a good discussion (instead of pointless rabble rousing) may ensue.”

    Drew does this also include “name calling”? Since Pat sure does like to do that!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>