One of these guys is very wrong, and neither one delivered any real context to their analyses. Each view is a kind of cartoony boardwalk caricature of the president, rather than an accurate portrayal of the real-life leader.
Gillian Flynn's Gone Girl extends its tenure atop the Digital Book World Ebook Best-Seller List for a second week running, as a film adaptation makes its way to theaters this Friday.
Criticizing the president during wartime is fine, as long as it's based on reality and facts. Hypocrisy, on the other hand, isn't fine. You either support the president, any president, in wartime or you don't. You can't have it both ways.
While I plan on reading O'Reilly's take in Killing Patton, I also expect to find the rehashing of older speculations in a "bold and fresh" O'Reilly-Dugard style. An approach that can once again land O'Reilly -- God bless -- with more books sold, but very little new truth revealed.
On one side of this discussion are those who are holding up the shooting of Michael Brown as an example of the racial inequality in this country and in the justice system in particular. On the other side of this discussion are those who see racism as a hoax to be disproved.
We've seen that when talking about sexual orientation or gender identity, emotions can run high, misconceptions can spread, and divisive politics can get in the way of doing what is best for students and families.
With a Democratic president, many talkers from 2004 now turn their attention, and their wrath, to Pennsylvania Avenue and use the deaths as a cudgel to bash the president as being impotent -- i.e. "He didn't prevent the deaths!" Of course neither did Bush, but the Fox rules of propaganda were different for him.
If you are white or Republican, you are likely to think the racial component of the shooting of Michael Brown is getting far too much attention. If you are black or a Democrat, you are likely to feel the opposite is true. This divide suggests we don't live in a post-racial America like many would have you believe.
Republicans should explain poverty using more words than "single mother" and "culture." The unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, a town with 75 percent African-American citizens and double the poverty rate of Missouri, is a testament to the economic segregation faced by black citizens.
If you look at Renaissance artworks that depict Jesus, you will not find any evidence of a Jew inside the Christianized Jesus -- even though the Gospels in the New Testament tell us that Jesus was Jewish to the core.
Bill O'Reilly disputed the two main points of my recent blog on The O'Reilly Factor broadcast: My affirmation of Jesus' lifelong dedication to Judaism (meaning he did not start a new religion) and the assertion that Renaissance art representations of Jesus omit his Jewish identity and thus falsify biblical history.
Try to locate even a hint of Jesus' Jewish identity and heritage in Renaissance paintings and you will find yourself on a fruitless quest. Some respondents bristled at what they perceived as the suggestion of a conspiracy to suppress Jesus Jewish identity. But the falsification of biblical history in artworks was not a conspiracy.
The political goal of making a different group become the enemy and "the other" is what every Hitler analogy should revolve around, not the vapid uses of quotes from Nazis that could apply to all politicians.
The reason it's "totally inappropriate" to look Muslim or speak Pastho (ironically, we've been in Afghanistan for over a decade helping people who speak Pashto) is because such sentiments pander to the prejudice and biases possessed by certain viewers of Fox, as well as certain Republican voters.
There is one thing we do know for certain: Anyone who tells you definitively that only one side or the other is to blame has absolutely no interest in fixing institutional inequality.
Fox's backlash to Sam's kiss is premised on the same stereotypes and stigma about gay sexuality that has motivated more vocal opponents of LGBT equality for decades.