« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Washington Post Goes Nuts Attacking Bill O’Reilly Book

If you want to see liberal jealousy and irrationality, consider this review on the very liberal washingtonpost.com. It concerns a book about the assassination of Abraham Lincoln called ‘Killing Lincoln’ by Fox News superstar Bill O’Reilly.

Called Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Lincoln’ book banned from Ford’s Theatre because of ‘mistakes’ by Steven Levingston, the review says that the theatre where Lincoln was killed is banning O’Reilly’s book from its gift shop because of factual errors. Wrote Levingston:

‘Some of the errors in “Killing Lincoln” are minor. According to Steers, the authors misidentified theater owner John Ford’s chief carpenter as James J. Clifford when his name actually was James J. Gifford. Emerson found that the book was wrong on the number of times the play “Our American Cousin” was performed at Ford’s Theatre before Lincoln saw it on the fateful night. In the O’Reilly-Dugard tale there were eight previous performances; in reality, there were seven.

The authors demonstrate their carelessness in an array of other slip-ups. The farm of Samuel Mudd, the doctor who was convicted of conspiring in the assassination, was 217 acres, according to Steers, not 500 acres as O’Reilly and Dugard write.’

So this is their criticism? Are you serious?

Yes, indeed… Because they must come up with something negative for two reasons: Because first they hate O’Reilly for being on Fox News and second they are rabidly jealous that O’Reilly’s book will sell hundreds of thousands more than the usual 25 copies that most of the Yale intellectuals write on the subject.

OK, so O’Reilly allegedly made a few minor ‘mistakes’. But as someone who does research on the internet every day, I know that you can come up with all sorts of different ‘facts’ for any inquiry, for instance about the number of previous performances of the play which is a highly obscure fact to start. You might come up with two sources that say 7 and two that say 8. Because often historical subjects are never cut and dried anyway. In fact who says Steers is right in the first place? Who will fact-check Steers?

And so what if a few figures are wrong? Nobody is perfect. These are minor discrepancies. This is such nitpicking that it is ridiculous.

OK, so let’s now look at one of the most treasured publications ever to the Democrat left, Profiles in Courage which was allegedly authored by the late president John F. Kennedy. It was Kennedy’s first-hand account of his own ‘heroism’ in the famous PT 109 incident in World War II.

Only problem is that the book is apparently a hoax on two levels. And you wonder what the Washington Post has done about it besides slobber all over this book for decades.

First of all Kennedy did not even write most of Profiles in Courage but he accepted the 1957 Pulitzer Prize for doing so. That was to inflate his image so that he could be elected president in 1960.

Reported outsidethebeltway.com, reflecting common knowledge about Kennedy staffer Theodore Sorenson:

Ted Sorenson has finally admitted that he had a large role in writing Profiles in Courage, for which John F. Kennedy won a Pulitzer Prize as a solo author.

According to a Wall Street Journal review, Sorensen says, for the first time, that he “did a first draft of most chapters,” “helped choose the words of many of its sentences” and likely “privately boasted or indirectly hinted that I had written much of the book.”

In other words, he wrote the book, Kennedy did some very late editing, and claimed it as his own work.

Sorensen also admits that in 1957 — just after the book won a Pulitzer Prize — that Kennedy “unexpectedly and generously offered, and I happily accepted, a sum” for Sorensen’s work on the book.

It was, quite literally, the least he could do.

Yes, indeed, our wonderful, flawless John F. Kennedy did not even write the book.

But so what! say the Kennedy sycophants. He was such a great president! And he was too busy at the time, when he was a US senator! This stuff happens all the time!

Baloney. Kennedy took the Pulitzer Prize for someone else’s work. This is fraud of the highest order. And just another in a long string of Kennedy shams.

But there is something even worse – that the whole story of PT 109 may be a hoax in the first place. And knowing the Kennedy history, this is probably true.

Oh, that could never be! say the Kennedy boot lickers. Not the Kennedys! They are such a great family!

Nonsense. It sure could be true if you saw a History Channel documentary that showed point by point how the whole story is counterfeit. A documentary shown once and then pulled off the air, by the way, no doubt after threats from the Kennedys and other Democrat party thugs. Here is the summary of the documentary from the History Channel website where it is still available on DVD:

Is the story of wartime heroism at the heart of the JFK myth more fabrication than fact?

The story has long been repeated as gospel: on August 2nd, 1943, when the PT Boat he commanded was struck and sunk by a Japanese destroyer, a young John Kennedy demonstrated extraordinary courage and dedication in saving the lives of 10 crewmembers. JFK’s rise to the presidency was sped along by his status as a wartime hero, but HISTORY UNDERCOVER® dares to ask whether that reputation was deserved.

JFK & PT-109: A HERO IN QUESTION reviews official documents and examines the testimony of surviving crew members and the naval officers who investigated the incident. What emerges is a markedly different version of what happened. Based on these sources and insight from experts like Nigel Hamilton, the author of JFK: Reckless Youth, and Paul B. Fay, Jr., the commander of PT 167, JFK & PT 109 suggests that the Kennedy family made a deliberate and successful attempt to bury the facts in order to protect the carefully-shaped image of their favorite son.

After nearly 60 years, another side of one of WWII’s best-known tales finally comes to light.

Of course the left will say that Kennedy was assassinated and therefore it is improper to bring up this squalid little lie to besmirch his character.

More nonsense. The Kennedys need to be exposed fact by fact. Because their entire mythology is one gigantic house of cards that already has fallen many, many times.

But boy, if Bill O’Reilly gets wrong one tiny detail like the number of previous performances of the play that Abraham Lincoln was watching on the night that he was assassinated, watch out!  That is real literary malpractice!

Oh, these Democrats. Lie, lie, lie… With the Washington Post – an alleged ‘newspaper’ – a willing accomplice every step of the way.

Please  visit  my blog at www.nikitas3.com for more conservative insights.

Get Alerts