Why Bill O'Reilly Ought To Be Sodomized With a Microphone, Part 1647:
When Bill O'Reilly, Fox "news" commentator and a man who would know from being forcibly pulled away from a breast, sought to "analyze" the fourth anniversary of the Iraq war, he decided to do what he always does: use it as an opportunity not to mourn for the lost (which, let's face it, pro- or anti-war, is the only proper way to celebrate four years of this shit), but to attack the phantom fake liberal that he slaps blindly at every night.

First, he showed his stunning grasp of statistical analysis by noting, "According to a poll by The Times of London, 49 percent of the Iraqi people believe they are better off today than they were under Saddam; twenty-six percent say they are worse off. Another poll by USA Today and others puts the number at 43 percent, with 36 percent believing life was better under Saddam." Now, one might assume that those numbers are less than stellar. Not O'Reilly. He concludes from the results that "the polls indicate that the Iraqi people themselves, even after all they've been through, are glad the USA and Britain toppled Saddam." That's the kind of conclusion we expect from O'Reilly, the same type of logical thinking that makes a man at a bar think that because a woman brushes his arm reaching for a drink, she'll blow him in the men's room.

See, the problem is that the USA Today number of happy Iraqis is lower now than it was in November 2005, when 51% thought life was better after Saddam. And the level of happy divides pretty harshly along Sunni/Shiite lines. Still, 51% of all Iraqis do believe it's okay to attack Americans, so there's some unity there, some way for the Sunni and Shiite to join hands and sing, "Kumbaya" over a burning Black Hawk.

O'Reilly, after waving his scrotum-smelling finger in disappointment at the people of Iraq, gleefully replayed something from his radio show (Motto: "I only rip the heads off puppies on TV; I rape their corpses on the radio"). The saggy-faced bastard went after the head of the National Council of Churches, Bob Edgar, for daring to call the war "immoral." He barked at the Reverend, "You can't produce one person who's been tortured by the United States. You cannot produce one. And neither can NBC News and neither can..." Without allowing Edgar to answer, O'Reilly insisted again, "Give me one person tortured by the United States."

Smugly, O'Reilly concluded, "[T]he truth is that Guantanamo is not a torture chamber. The rights of Americans are firmly intact. And while there have been cases of criminal abuse like Abu Ghraib, the USA is waging a war on terror that is honorable."

One might be tempted to ask if it is possible to be that dense. One might be tempted to give O'Reilly the benefit of the doubt, and say, "Well, shit, maybe, just maybe, he might think that extraordinary renditioning is not technically Americans doing the torture." But fuck that.

The panty shield of fairness that O'Reilly hides behind is piss stained. But perhaps Bill O'Reilly is the right man for America now: just a thuggish bully with no regard for anything but the sticky feel of his own semen, ramming aside all semblance of reality in order to bludgeon us with his version of truth.

Four more years, motherfuckers, four more years.