Pinheads and Patriots

by Bill O'Reilly

  So despite all the trouble in 1971, I still believed the USA was a noble nation, but there was no doubt in my mind that things were screwed up in Southeast Asia.

  That was my point of view at age twenty-one as I sat in Dr. Carolyn Landau’s political science class. But the professor was not nearly as conflicted as I was about America. No, she knew we were an evil empire and was not shy in listing the grave sins our nation was committing, not only in Vietnam but also back home. Her class was one long anti-American screed. But I had to sit through it because I needed the credits to graduate.

  Dr. Landau, since departed, loathed your humble correspondent, perhaps because I showered daily, unlike some refugees from Woodstock. Certainly, she thought I was a Pinhead and awarded me a C in the class, my lowest collegiate grade. I’m not a whiner, so I swallowed the C. But then a funny thing happened on my way to Pinhead-or-Patriot status. I struck up a conversation with a classmate—a guy named Trent who had cut 90 percent of Landau’s lectures. In fact, Trent showed up for just three poli-sci classes the entire semester. Somehow he was MIA for the other seventeen. Despite that, the guy was awarded an A by Landau. Did I mention that Trent was African American?

  “You got an A?” I said to him.

  “Right on.”

  “But you never showed up.”

  “Don’t have to show up with Landau. Just have to be a brother.”

  “What?”

  “Everyone knows she has a thing for us.”

  Trent then laughed and walked away.

  That did it. I immediately put pen to paper. I had an outlet because I’d been writing a column for the student newspaper, the Circle, for three years. And so, on January 21, 1971, the no-spin zone officially began with the following article, which I am reprising the way it was originally written, bad grammar and all:

  ATTITUDES: OUTRAGEOUS

  By Bill O’Reilly

  Good morning, class, welcome to Political Science 203. My name is Dr. Landleft and all I have to say is, “Power to the people.”

  This semester’s work will be very interesting providing you have the right attitude. I know there is some talk around campus to the effect that I do not give an objective course. This talk was obviously started by some disturbed fascists and it definitely has racist overtones, as I’m sure you can all see.

  Well, to dispel all of my critics, I have decided to assign readings concerning both the Left and the Right. The first two books, which will be read by tomorrow, are the “Agony of the New Left,” by Fidel Castro and “Danger on the Right,” by Gore Vidal.

  Hey, I just thought of a joke. If Fidel Castro married Gore Vidal he’d be—Fidel Vidal!

  I just noticed that a few of the slower ones in the class did not laugh at that joke. Well, I have your names, you can be sure of that. Don’t misunderstand me, you are under no obligation to laugh at my jokes or say yes to everything I say. You are all free to dissent—no matter how misguided and immature that dissent may be. I like people to dissent. As you know, I’m a revolutionary myself. But keep in mind who has the power here.

  “The people, right, Dr. Landleft?”

  Er, yes. Who said that? Oh, the black lad, very good, very good. I bet you had a hard time growing up in the ghetto with the FBI always hounding your parents?

  “Not really, Doctor. My father is a detective.”

  Oh, well, you can be sure you’ll be treated equally in this class. In fact, you get an A.

  Well, class, let’s get back to the subject. What is it again? Oh, yes, Political Science. As you all know, Spiro and the CIA are all around us and closing in fast. Perhaps we might have to take to the streets.

  “Dr. Landleft, I have a question.”

  Oh, my God. Well, go ahead.

  “Why is it that communistic regimes always wind up as repressive states?”

  “That question is not relevant, it’s the kind of question that only a neo-Nazi would ask. Besides, it’s off-topic and we must always stay on-topic.”

  “Dr. Landleft, I think that question pertains to Political Science.”

  “I decide what pertains to the subject around here. My class is liberal but I must have some control, right? Of course, I’m right. Let me throw this out for discussion: We all know that here in racist Amerika, notice that I spell the country with a K instead of a C. Isn’t that right on? Anyway, what do you think can be done to overthrow the present government? Yes, that student.”

  “I don’t think we ought to overthrow the government, Dr. Landleft.”

  “Wrong! Someone else? Yes, the longhaired student wearing that ‘put the pigs in the pen’ button.”

  “Uh, I really didn’t hear your question, I wasn’t listening.”

  “Exactly. The whole class could take a lesson from that student.”

  Circle this news story! Here’s my first brush with political commentary.

  Circle Newspaper, Marist College Archives

  Well, my first venture into the world of contentious journalism was not exactly like the sharp-witted work of Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Mike Royko, but it sure did stir things up at Marist College and, unbeknownst to me at the time, launched my flamboyant career. Letters poured in to the Circle, and they were pretty much evenly divided over whether I was a Pinhead or Patriot. You know, it’s kind of eerie. What happened almost forty years ago is precisely what’s happening to me today. I learned the power of blunt commentary and reacted with bemusement as long as the criticism wasn’t personal. I didn’t know it at the time, but that rudimentary column about the nutty professor was the beginning of a beautiful friendship between me, opinionated journalism, and millions of Americans.

  Back then (as now), I didn’t worry too much about those who called me a Pinhead (mostly behind my back, since I am six-four). I liked the action that controversy brought, and I was able to whack Dr. Landau, who certainly deserved it.

  To this day, millions of people think that I am just awful because I say things they don’t like. For example, the actor George Clooney certainly thinks I’m a Pinhead. Back in 2001, I suggested that he and other Hollywood stars track the money they raised for the families of those killed on 9/11. You may remember that Clooney didn’t like some punk (me) demanding accountability from him and his swell friends, so he ran around taking my name in vain. I was much amused, and the controversy brought great ratings, a very important thing for any media Patriot, or Pinhead for that matter.

  After thinking about the situation for a while, I replied to Clooney’s angst with my usual eloquence. I called him a Pinhead. Let the playground rank-out session begin.

  Thank God (and I do), millions of other folks respect the fact that I speak my mind bluntly and honestly. After all, isn’t that what a Patriot does? Or am I wrong?

  CHAPTER 8

  Loathing Obama

  He’s a SOCIALIST!

  —The Greek Chorus

  IF YOU HATE any American President, you are a Pinhead. I simply cannot understand why people do that. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama—all these guys were and are loathed by millions of their fellow citizens. Here’s my question: WHY WASTE YOUR TIME?

  Hatred is the most powerful emotion, one that can lead to violence. It is far more intense than love and, left unchecked, can actually destroy the one who hates. If you can possibly avoid hating, please do that.

  But I am not Yoko Ono. I well understand evil, betrayal, and destruction. I’ve seen all of those things up close and personal. And do you know what? I’ve come to hate some of the evildoers. I seriously despise them and do whatever I legally and morally can to neutralize their activities. This genuine loathing for the merchants of destruction motivates me to take them on. So I’m able to use this kind of “hatred” in a positive way. Or so I tell myself.

  But hating Barack Obama or George W. Bush is a neurosis. These men do not deserve that. You can disagree with them all day long and vocalize your disenchantment to all who will listen. But really, hating these guys is something tha
t you should think about, because it could harm you.

  That being said, you may sincerely believe that your place in the age of Obama is not a good place. And if that’s the case, you have the right to dislike the President’s belief system and actions very, very much. Certainly, the President is trying to change the country by imposing his version of “social justice.” In this effort, some Americans will be helped and some will be harmed. If you are being harmed, it is only natural for you to frown on Mr. Obama. But there’s a long way between dislike and hate.

  As we discussed earlier in the Rush Limbaugh–Bill O’Reilly pages, some Americans sincerely believe that Barack Obama is a socialist who is trying to alter our free-market way of life. If you love the free market, as I do, you may hate that perceived action. That’s logical. But you should not hate the man. That’s irrational.

  BELOW-AVERAGE MARX ON THE SOCIALISM TEST

  Is the President truly a socialist? Not if you define socialism as government ownership of business and private property. Yes, the Obama administration is interfering in the marketplace by upping government oversight of the financial industry, as well as bailing out some car companies and banks with taxpayer money. But past administrations have also done this kind of stuff in times of economic emergency. Therefore, opining that Mr. Obama is on a par with, say, Karl Marx, is foolish. There’s a huge difference between the President and hard-core socialists who will seize your hat at the drop of it.

  But my pal Glenn Beck and some of my viewers observe it differently, believing that I am an incredible Pinhead for denying what they see as obvious. If it walks like a duck, they say. Okay, I get that Van Jones and Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner are Far Left guys. I get that the President did not object to the fiery anti-American nonsense of the Reverend Wright and the radical résumé of Bill Ayers. There is no question that Barack Obama does not see the fringe left as all that objectionable. That’s what can happen when you attend Harvard and work on the south side of Chicago. But, as I wrote in my newspaper column, socialism is defined as a system in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively.

  Yes, President Obama has intruded into the private sector in the areas of health and finance. As I mentioned, he also wants big-time federal oversight on the financial and energy industries. All of that is true. But I have produced this book, and Obama can’t intrude on that. He’ll tax the hell out of my profits, but these pages are not a “collective” effort. They belong to my publisher, Harper Collins, and to me.

  Until Barack Obama begins to insinuate himself into the livelihoods of American workers, he cannot accurately be described as a socialist. A quasi-socialist, maybe. A Pinhead about economic matters, probably.

  Nevertheless, my mailbag is on fire. Kathy from Georgia wrote: “Bill, why does the question of whether Obama is a socialist bother you so? Let me verify it. Yes, he’s a socialist. Does that make you feel better?”

  Not really, Kathy.

  John, who lives in Louisiana, opined: “O’Reilly, so you don’t think Obama is a socialist? Duh!”

  Indeed.

  Obviously, anti-Obama passions are currently running high in America, but here’s an interesting observation: the Obama angst almost exactly mirrors the anti-Bush madness. Different folks, same strokes. He (fill in Bush or Obama) is the devil. He’s a joke. He’s ruining the country! In both cases, I feel criticism was overdone.

  As I wrote this book, I was feeling fairly confident about my Obama analysis and believed I was putting forth a fair and balanced portrait of the President. Then, speaking in Illinois about Wall Street reform on April 28, 2010, Mr. Obama said this:

  We’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But part of the American way is you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing a good service.

  You’ve made enough money? Oy.

  See, once a President or other powerful politician starts telling folks they’ve made enough money, all hell breaks loose. The American dream is unlimited. If you want to be a billionaire, you can try. If you want to teach school for $80,000 a year, you can do that, too. It should be all up to you, not to President Obama.

  When he says stuff like that, the socialism flags come out. And that’s not irrational. Again, if it walks like a duck.

  Let me make one more attempt here to define what I think Barack Obama believes about currency and social justice. Based upon my time at Harvard and working with hundreds of liberals in the media industry, I see the President as a man committed to leveling the playing field. That means he is down with taking as much money as he can from affluent Americans, and giving said cash to those who do not have much. The President is a big income-redistribution guy. He’s a big social justice guy. He sincerely believes that federal power should be expanded to make life better for the have-nots by instituting a series of expensive government-funded entitlements. Therefore, he walks a tightrope. Wages and investment income are, after all, a form of private property. You earned it, it’s yours. But Barack Obama wants at least some of yours, and the Constitution gives Congress the right to tax us. So the question becomes, just how far will Mr. Obama eventually go to impose his view of social justice on the country? Already, ObamaCare is the biggest entitlement since the New Deal, and federal spending is at record levels. So to be fair, I can’t call Americans who believe Obama is a full-blown socialist Pinheads. Under his cool demeanor, he might have a big “S” on his chest just as Superman does. But I think not. As I’ve said before and will again, I think he is the most liberal President ever elected in this country, but he is not a stealth Hugo Chavez.

  As always, I could be wrong.

  CHAPTER 9

  All-Time Favorite P&Ps

  THIS IS MY FAVORITE CHAPTER in this book. I will be completely irresponsible in the upcoming pages, and by the way, there is no pattern to what’s contained in them. It’s stream of consciousness time. I will discuss dozens of famous and semi-famous people, assigning them Pinhead or Patriot status. Defying the ancient TV program Dragnet, no names will be changed to protect the innocent or guilty, as the case may be.

  Of course, this entire chapter is grossly unfair. My evaluations are completely subjective. Yes, I will use facts to back up my assertions, as I always do. But these facts have been selected to bolster my ultimate judgment on the individuals in question. I mean, I could have picked anyone for this chapter, but these names just came to me. In other words, I am not playing devil’s advocate here. I am designating blame and praise based upon my personal whim. I did not poll these people, or ask the opinions of others. Blame me for this entire fiasco.

  Let’s begin with a few Presidents. As you may have heard, I own an extensive research trove of primary source material concerning the nation’s chief executives. That means I possess some of their letters, manuscripts, and other personal items. It’s a fabulous hobby, and I have learned a tremendous amount by reading the personal thoughts and correspondence of these men, most of whom, but not all, were Patriots.

  Recently, Siena College, located in upstate New York, polled a group of historians about the best and worst Presidents. Franklin D. Roosevelt came out on top; Teddy Roosevelt was ranked second, followed by Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson. Andrew Johnson, the only President impeached aside from Bill Clinton, came in dead last. George W. Bush came in 39th out of 44 while Barack Obama was ranked 15th.

  The Obama positioning tells you all you need to know about this poll. It’s nonsense. President Obama is having major trouble, and outside of passing an unpopular health care law, our current leader has achieved little—even counting his Nobel Peace Prize. Nevertheless, he’s number 15! Come on. By any fair measure, this is stupid. Actually, it was unfair even to include Mr. Obama in the poll. Let the man at least finish his first term before evaluating him.

  So we know the poll sk
ews Left; that’s why FDR and Obama did well. In this book, however, we don’t skew any way but fairly, so let’s take a look at some Presidents to see which have been Pinheads and which have been Patriots.

  ABRAHAM LINCOLN

  Hands down, the best President ever. Compared to what he faced with Southern states seceding all over the place, most other Presidents’ terms were like Caribbean vacations. Only Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who had to deal with the Great Depression and then World War II, faced anything comparable to old Abe.

  And speaking of depression, Lincoln was afflicted with sometimes crippling “melancholia,” which is what they called acute depression back then. Plagued with frequent bouts of gloom and despair, he fought through them even while under incredible stress.

  Remember, the South was winning the Civil War right up until the battle of Gettysburg. Lincoln knew that hundreds of thousands of Americans were being killed and maimed in brutal warfare. Because of his determination to save the Union, he never wavered. His young son died, his wife was often unstable, and his generals let him down time after time. Yet Lincoln soldiered on and literally kept the United States from fracturing by employing sheer force of will. A great lesson for all Americans—never fold, fight to the end.

  Abraham Lincoln was compassionate, brave, and unselfish, and he loved his country intensely. There is no better example of a true Patriot than the man from Hodgen’s Mill, Kentucky.