UPS To Stop Advertising on O'Reilly Factor!

How did she "attack" this foundation, which I agree is a good and worthwhile one which simply had someone who made a poor choice for keynote speaker? Why do you say she's "ignorant and cruel"? I agree with you about myLot and the extra cash we can earn here to put to such good use and I applaud you for your donation. I can't say I agree about O'Reilly doing a "wonderful thing" out of the goodness of his heart. It's great if his appearance did help raise more money but I doubt he did it selfishly, he just doesn't strike me that way...lol! Annie

"How did she "attack" this foundation, which I agree is a good and worthwhile one which simply had someone who made a poor choice for keynote speaker? Why do you say she's "ignorant and cruel"?" She attacked them by encouraging people to PROTEST outside their convention. It's the first time in my life I've ever seen people protest a foundation that helps rape victims. She and others hated Bill O'Reilly so much that they chose to attack a foundation for rape victims. It was DISGUSTING. She's cruel for doing that and she's ignorant because, when questioned, she was clearly incapable of explaining what Bill said that was "pro-rape". When Waters asked her about what the Mel Gibson aspect was she was completely clueless even though that was the lead in to the whole monologue. She did what bloggers do, she took a few words out of context and framed them to mislead people. "I can't say I agree about O'Reilly doing a "wonderful thing" out of the goodness of his heart." With all the good he's done for them, Wounded Warriors, 9-11 widows, Habitat for Humanity, and various other wonderful charities, I think it's very disingenuous for you to assume NONE of it is out of the goodness of his heart. In the thread I posted earlier about the veteran billed for his war injury I commended Sen. Sherrod Brown, a democrat. I didn't make any ridiculous accusations that he did it selfishly just because I disagree with him on political issues. Sometimes I think you need to get over the Republicans versus Democrats bit and just acknowledge that helping raise money for a good charity is a good thing and protesting a foundation for rape victims because you don't like one of their fundraisers is despicable.

"It's great if his appearance did help raise more money but I doubt he did it selfishly, he just doesn't strike me that way...lol!" again, I know you don't like him, but he does far more for charity than you realize. What ever his political leanings are or what ever you percive them to be, he is a human being and has done an awful lot of humanitarian work and legal activism.

While rape victims are NEVER to blame for being raped, victims do need to exercise personal responsibility to avoid being victims. Rapists, and criminals in general, are lazy and will often reach for the lowest hanging fruit so to speak. A small, drunk girl wandering around New York alone at night is much more likely to be raped than a sober girl, with 5 friends, walking down the same street. It's not the drunk girl's fault she got raped, but her actions made her a more appealing target. If you tell a jeweler that he was a target for a criminal because he had no security system, no bars on the windows, and left his door open after dark, he's going to nod and immediately work to avoid being a victim. Rape victims, by nature of the crime perpetrated, are much more defensive and rather than take into consideration the value of similar advice, will instead lash out at the person giving that advice. As a result, bloggers like this Terkel chick called Bill O'Reilly "pro-rape". That is NOT an exaggeration. As you said, it is more than a little conspicuous that her blog has been removed while she plays the victim.

Sorry, X, I meant to thank you for your kind welcome back! Regarding Amanda Terkel's blog that started this whole thing, you can find it below, it's actually very brief and I don't see how she was attacking this foundation at all! http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/01/oreilly-rape-speak/ Terkel was far from the only one to question the logic of having Bill-O as the keynote speaker for this event given his distasteful comments about the late Jennifer Moore. Really, that's all she did was write that O'Reilly would be speaking and then repeat what he had said on his show following Moore's rape and murder. Annie

ALl I'm trying to do is figure out what was wrong with Bill's comments. it boiled down to get drunk, bad things happen. like someone who was killed in a dui accident, would we not use this as a lesson to impart the importance of not drinking and driving to our children? I know you can't stand him, but you have to admit, his words were pretty much right on and not at all inapropriate.

What bothers me is the things O'Reilly said about at least two rape victims. He said one woman asked to be attacked because she was wearing revealing clothing. I don't understand how that organization chose him, of all people, to speak there.

"He said one woman asked to be attacked because she was wearing revealing clothing." He didn't say that at all. Why is it so hard for you to make a point without lying?

Oh of course not, but she had all the right in the world to attack an organization that helps rape victims and encourage people to boycott them. If you think what she did was ok, I can only assume you really don't care about all the rape victims helped by this organization.