Huge Blowback from RP supporters about O'Rielly excluding RP in poll results

[JohnQPublic]

Maybe he and Rick Perry can do a talk show together and call it twiddle dee and twiddle dum (I'll let you decide who is dee and who is dum). They can talk about three things:

1. Politics
2. Culture
3. Umm..,,, I ..., Ummm. , well , Ummm...

[skidmark]

Glad to hear it. I am not sure if O'Reilly is just an ignorant fool or a clever traitor.

Zionist whore

[mightymanx]

I am still waiting for the "I'm just following orders" bit.

[gunDriller]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bill-O...06535016033311

don't see anywhere to post though.

[Cebu_4_2]

try this:

https://www.facebook.com/billoreilly...=wall&filter=1

[slvrbugjim]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bill-O...06535016033311

don't see anywhere to post though.

You are correct, if you read the first post in this thread to understand that Bill was getting so many posting videos and things on his wall that it looked like a Ron Paul site, so he deleted all the pro Ron Paul postings and made himself the only one that could post on the wall, but he is posting every couple of hours and you can respond to each of his postings, I think I have counted over 10 thousand responses to his postings alone today only and 98% were about Ron Paul. There are up to a thousand or more in each of his postings that he makes only himself the only one that can post on the Facebook wall.

now that is a shutdown for sure.

Also there are almost 800 negative or one star reviews of his latest book on Amazon, this happened pretty much yesterday through today. Go there and give your review of his latest book about the "greatest president of all time Abe Lincoln.

http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Lincol...owViewpoints=1

[gunDriller]

You are correct, if you read the first post in this thread to understand that Bill was getting so many posting videos and things on his wall that it looked like a Ron Paul site, so he deleted all the pro Ron Paul postings and made himself the only one that could post on the wall, but he is posting every couple of hours and you can respond to each of his postings, I think I have counted over 10 thousand responses to his postings alone today only and 98% were about Ron Paul. There are up to a thousand or more in each of his postings that he makes only himself the only one that can post on the Facebook wall.

now that is a shutdown for sure.

if we want media that tells the truth about Ron Paul & Zionism - we have to create it ourselves.

websites like G-S.us & the original GIM, for example.

[mightymanx]

You are correct, if you read the first post in this thread to understand that Bill was getting so many posting videos and things on his wall that it looked like a Ron Paul site, so he deleted all the pro Ron Paul postings and made himself the only one that could post on the wall, but he is posting every couple of hours and you can respond to each of his postings, I think I have counted over 10 thousand responses to his postings alone today only and 98% were about Ron Paul. There are up to a thousand or more in each of his postings that he makes only himself the only one that can post on the Facebook wall.

now that is a shutdown for sure.

Also there are almost 800 negative or one star reviews of his latest book on Amazon, this happened pretty much yesterday through today. Go there and give your review of his latest book about the "greatest president of all time Abe Lincoln.

http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Lincol...owViewpoints=1

Add one more to the list.

Please do not give this sockpuppet that is incapable of independent thought Do not waste your your hard earned money on this tool or his propaganda.
Hopefully now you will wake up to this pied piper before he leads you off the cliff.

[sunshine05]

I just got kicked off his FB page. I posted about Ron Paul, nothing disrespectful toward O'Reilly or anything. I went back and checked and my post is gone and I can't post there anymore.

[mightymanx]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entert...yFN_story.html

Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Lincoln’ book banned from Ford’s Theatre because of ‘mistakes’

• http://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/sit...icon-minus.pnghttp://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/sit.../icon-plus.pngText Size
• Print
• E-mail
• Reprints

By Steven Levingston, Saturday, November 12, 2:40 PM


Of all the places you’d expect to find Bill O’Reilly’s new history “Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination That Changed America Forever,” Ford’s Theatre — the site of the dreadful act — should rank right at the top. But you’d do better to search for the bestseller on Amazon because it has been banned from the theater’s store.
The crime? O’Reilly and his co-author Martin Dugard have displayed a serial disregard for historical fact.

805
Comments

• Weigh In
• Corrections?

(Henry Holt & Co.) - \"Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever\" by Bill O'Reilly & Martin Dugard.


More on this Story

• 'Killing Lincoln' banned from Ford's Theatre
• Read Ford's Theatre's historical review of the book
• Reviews: ‘Killing Lincoln’ and ‘Jack Kennedy’
• Stewart, O’Reilly talk more than Lincoln

View all Items in this Story

• O’Reilly-Perry: Instaclassic

For a purported history of the assassination — an “unsanitized and uncompromising ... no spin American story,” as the authors put it, “Killing Lincoln” is sloppy with the facts and slim on documentation, according to a study conducted by Rae Emerson, the deputy superintendent of Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site, which is a unit of the National Park Service.
Other Lincoln experts also have sounded off. In a review published in the November issue of “North & South — The Official Magazine of the Civil War Society,” historian Edward Steers Jr. cites many instances where the book strays from documented history, then asks, “If the authors made mistakes in names, places, and events, what else did they get wrong? How can the reader rely on anything that appears in ‘Killing Lincoln’”?
By taking on Lincoln, O’Reilly and Dugard have set themselves up for avid scrutiny. Few presidents, indeed few subjects, are as voluminously researched and fought over as Lincoln, and have as many amateur and professional specialists eager to display their startling command of minutiae. Steers notes that more than 16,000 books and articles have been written about Lincoln, with more than 125 volumes on the assassination. Oddly, he adds, only eight of the assassination books have been written by professional historians, leaving the field, in his view, to be trampled on by amateurs like Reilly and Dugard.
Eric Foner, a history professor at Columbia who has written about the Civil War, Lincoln and the South for 40 years and whose latest book, “The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery” was showered with awards -- the Pulitzer Prize, Bancroft Prize, and Lincoln Prize -- said he had not read the book in question. But he noted in an e-mail, “I would not be surprised if there were historical errors as [O’Reilly] is better known as a TV polemicist than as a scholar. Of course many people outside the academy have written about Lincoln and the assassination, but all sorts of unproven theories about it abound and one would hope that any writer would make use of all the relevant sources (and avoid historical errors) in writing about the subject.”
“Killing Lincoln” has no footnotes. An afterword on sources lists “books, websites, and other archived information” the authors consulted. But to Steers, the list is inadequate, leaving out important primary documents. “The authors have chosen to write a story based . . . [on] a few dozen secondary books that range from excellent to positively dreadful . . . [with] no vetting . . . treating them as equal,” Steers writes. Among the criteria that earn a book a place in the Ford’s Theatre store are that it is “historically accurate . . . has relevant citations [and uses] primary resources with documentation,” Emerson notes in her report.

http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/...elson-haha.jpg