By Brad Friedman from Richfield, Utah…
In what may be one of his most ironic public statements to date, far-Right Fox “News” commentator Bill O’Reilly charged last night that Dallas Mavericks owner and media mogul Mark Cuban’s “arrogance is horrifying.”
He then went on to call the billionaire blogger Cuban “anti-American” and noted, approvingly, that “during WWII President Roosevelt might have incarcerated” him and “General Patton would have slapped the tar out of him.”
Why? Because Cuban’s cable television network, HDNet, is distributing Brian DePalma’s new film Redacted, apparently.
That, and Cuban laughed at O’Reilly last Friday, along with thousands in the crowd, at the keynote address we reported on from the BlogWorld & New Media Expo in Las Vegas.
After Cuban, the billionaire entrepreneur, had earlier noted in his address that while he might feel O’Reilly was “a moron,” for the various attacks the news commentator had unleashed upon him, he had thought better than to blog that point, noting that the written word hangs around forever on the Internet.
When The BRAD BLOG, who was present at the speech, later asked him during the Q&A if he felt O’Reilly’s attacks have been a “net plus or minus” in regard to Redacted, the amused Cuban said that he was “very grateful” to O’Reilly, who he called his “new best friend” for all the attention he’d brought to the otherwise small film release.
We covered the brouhaha late Friday.
Last night on The O’Reilly Factor, the Fox “News” host shot back, promising still more publicity for the film, by calling for the public to show up outside theaters showing Redacted with signs reading “Support the Troops.” O’Reilly claimed that he will personally be at theaters holding up such signs, charging that “Mark Cuban has a grudge against his country” and that he is somehow “putting our troops in danger.”
At the end of the segment, O’Reilly promised that he would “have more information about what we’re going to do and when we’re going to do it…coming up.”
His “Talking Points Memo” tirade (video below) charges that “subsequently the effort became extremely difficult,” after opposition to the Iraq War was brought by “the far-left.” He then went on to include a quick, out of context video clip from Cuban’s BlogWorld address. He did not show the part in which Cuban said he was “very grateful” to O’Reilly, or that he considered him his “new best friend.”
Here’s O’Reilly’s “outraged” comments from last night’s The O’Reilly Factor on Fox “News,” along with a discussion with a Republican and a “Democratic” analyst which follows. (Thanks to Alan Breslauer for the video!)…
UPDATE: Cuban blogs on the ridiculous O’Reilly situation, in a piece which begins “I’ve grown to love Bill OReilly. Seriously. If there is anyone who can publicize a political movie, it’s Bill and I truly appreciate that about him.”
I didn’t watch the video and I find O’Reilly so repugnant that it is difficult for me to listen to him in any context. He is a walking poster boy for the Psychiatric DSM-IV criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder:
Some things to ponder:
Is this “paragon” of truthtelling know this movie is based on real events? I am aware and know the original story well (google Mahmudiyah and Abeer Qasim Hamza) and besides the name changing, the movie is pretty much consistent with the real events. If he was doing his job he would have reported the story instead of bitching about a movie.
To top that, the movie shows bad soldiers, yes. But also good soldiers. Very good ones. That is precisely why the real story (and the movie version of events shows this), eventually got out. It also shows good AND band Iraqis. If anything this blowhard coud’ve done one of his usual spin jobs and give props to the whistleblower.
If the movie has flaws they lie in their acting. But as far as what is portrayed, the movie is a valuable info tool and a critique. If anything it tells you that you have to piece the truth out of bits and pieces that are out there. But you have to do your homework.
As to the controversy over the final montage (covered by some commenters in your previous Redacted/Cuban post) i saw this at a screening last night in Toronto and according to the producers, who were there, the sequence stays but it is “redacted” (against DePalma’s wishes). I don’t think it takes away from it at all for what it is worth. As for another critique people make about being “duped” by a couple of inserted shots in said sequence, the two shots are easy and obvious to spot. And after all you sat through a 1.5 hr “mockumentary” – so how re you being deceived again? Guess this people think the Blair Witch Project is an actual documentary too.
One last thing: notice how in that video you posted O’Reilly mentions that he would never sit through a movie “that depicts the rape and murder of …” and then he says when talking to the panelists “this is the most vile…”. So he has seen it? He hasn’t?
I saw it. The movie has some flaws (some wooden acting basically) but they don’t lie in truth distortion or pseudo propaganda.
Deal with it warmongers.
Thanks bradblog for your coverage and providing this forum.
-G.
G – Thanks for your thoughts. They are much appreciated.
If ya see Ole billo walk’n funny for a while it’s cause
Keith Olbermann tanned his hide butt good this evening . . .
Anybody can make whatever video they want. I could sit in front of a camera spewing off stuff that was fact or lie, mail it to Al Jazeera, and if they wanted to broadcast it they could.
Mark Cuban can distribute this to whoever wants it and they can show it. It’s a MOVIE, and people can draw their own conclusions from it. If people see this movie and hate America afterward, they most certainly hated America before they watched it as well.
As a die-hard fan of the Dallas Mavericks, I am personally disapointed that Cuban associates himself with this stuff. I don’t agree with the movie, but it is definitely his right to be involved with it.