Why Christmas Matters To Bill O’Reilly

In his Talking Points Memo this week, Bill O’Reilly endeavored to describe a matter that must be very dear and personal for him: Why Christmas Matters.

Uncle SantaSo with an earnestness that befit the occasion, he began by talking about his TV ratings and why his viewers, who are insufficiently alarmed by the War on Christmas, are wrong:

“While our ratings have been very high this month, some viewers have written to me complaining we’re over-covering the Christmas controversies. They say the subject really isn’t that important. Well, they’re wrong.”

Apparently O’Reilly has gotten over his suspicion that the Nielsen ratings were conspiring against him. Last October he unleashed a paranoid rant directed at Nielsen that included an absurd threat:

“The bottom line on this is there may be some big-time cheating going on in the ratings system, and we hope the feds will investigate.”

Of course, the Feds have nothing to do with private market research firms, so let’s get back to the importance of Christmas. O’Reilly proceeds to explain how Christmas was made officially into a holiday in 1870 as a measure to unite a nation that had been bitterly torn by civil war. Surprisingly, he actually got the basics facts about this right. However, he thoroughly mangled the interpretation saying…

“…President Grant realized that Christmas was one of the few things that Americans had in common, that just about everybody back then respected the holidays.”

Actually, there were significant differences at the time, with some Christian denominations discounting the December feast as a remnant of Paganism. But more to the point, Grant was not seeking to sanctify a date that everyone respected. He was merely trying to find one that a majority would tolerate. He previously rejected Easter as being too overtly religious, and the Fourth of July for having too close an association with a Yankee victory. So the Christmas holiday was not a commemoration of a shared faith in God – it was a calculated, political compromise.

That doesn’t stop O’Reilly and his ilk from glorifying the occasion and disparaging those who truly seek unity and inclusiveness. He says that the “extremely vicious” secular progressives are out to diminish religion. On the other hand, O’Reilly considers himself a stalwart defender of faith. As evidence he offers up a sales pitch for his book “Culture Warrior,” and claims to be prevailing over what sounds like a nocturnal, Zombie army:

“…we are up against some very bad people. Thanks to you, we destroy them every night.”

Despite destroying them every night he also claims that they “have made huge gains.” An interesting and absurd contradiction. What then is O’Reilly fighting for? He has previously hailed Christmas as a celebration of holy consumerism:

“Every company in America should be on its knees thanking Jesus for being born. Without Christmas, most American businesses would be far less profitable.”

Now that’s a sentiment that just oozes with the season’s warmth, joy, and humanity. But what more can you expect from a man that considers himself proof of the existence of God:

“Next time you meet an atheist, tell him or her that you know [me]. Then, while the non-believer is digesting all that, ask him or her if they still don’t believe there’s a God!”

And just a couple of days ago, O’Reilly was promoting his new book, “A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity,” on the Christian Broadcasting Network, where he was asked if he considers himself “someone who has a personal relationship with Jesus?”

“I don’t look at it that way. My whole theology is based upon what I believe I’m here to do on earth. I believe I was given talent. I don’t believe it just happened because a meteorite crashed into the world and all of this is just luck. I believe I’m here for a reason, that I was blessed with talent.”

So O’Reilly’s whole theology is based on himself and his alleged talent. And that’s the Culture Warrior who is promising to save Christmas and the rightful place of religion in American society. That’s the self-centered, ego-maniacal demagogue who is intent on convincing us that…

“There’s a struggle going on to redefine America. And in 2009, that struggle will become even more intense.”

Yes, that’s the expression of Yuletide spirit that unites all people. O’Reilly, in this rant, has revealed himself for what he is – a narcissistic, self-promoter who thrives on division and an imagined sense of superiority. He is an opportunistic provocateur who cannot exist without conflict. He must nourish hostility to survive.

And that’s Why Christmas Matters to Bill O’Reilly.

Fox Greetings: May Your What Be What?

The corporate headquarters for the War On Christmas is sending out their seasoned greetings, but the message may be getting somewhat muddled.

First of all, the wishes being conveyed are not for Christmas at all, but for some vague, unspecified “holiday.” And the graphic treatment of the message makes clear that what Fox is really wishing for is a season of conservative ideology and partisanship.

That’s the spirit!

There are more examples of the Fox holiday spirit at Jossip, where they received cards that exploit the joy of this season to make nasty comments about their competitors.

As the say at News Corp: “Tis the season to be assholes.”

Somebody Alert Bill O’Reilly And Fox Security

From The White House:

MRS. BUSH: Barney and Beazley, I’m so proud that you all wanted to become National Park Junior Rangers. Our national parks are so important. And in fact, the lawn where you play is part of our national parks.

President Bush and I wish everyone a very happy holiday.

What? No Merry Christmas? Is this evidence that The First Lady is offering aid and comfort to the Secular-Progressive enemies in the War on Christmas? Has the President cut and run? Have the terrorists won?

No need to fear – T-Warrior is here. Have no doubt that before you can slide down the MoonBat-pole, Bill O’Reilly will step forward and denounce this insult to America’s favorite religion: Christmasism. Never mind that only a couple of days ago O’Reilly declared victory in the War on Christmas, crediting himself with the glory he feels he so richly deserves. We have already seen those “Mission Accomplished” banners that didn’t really mean that any mission had been accomplished. So now, as always, the goal is to stay the course. Because surrender to the far-left, gay, flag-burning, pot smokers who murdered our savior, is not an option.

The Central Front In The War On Christmas

The War on Christmas is the latest fabrication from the theo-con hack factory. Its premise is that a cabal of secularists are conspiring to deprive America of its Christmas celebration. But despite the protestations that this is a matter of faith by Christian Ayatollahs like Jerry Falwell (who has initiated a Christmas Friend or Foe campaign), it was Bill O’Reilly who revealed that this is really a matter of profit not Prophet.

War on Christmas, Abu Santa

On his TV program, O’Reilly said:

“Every company in America should be on its knees thanking Jesus for being born. Without Christmas, most American businesses would be far less profitable.”

There you have it. Christ died on the cross for your net receipts and a favorable business environment. That’s a far cry from the guy who threw the moneychangers out of the temple.

The fact is that demagogues like O’Reilly, Falwell, Sean Hannity, John Gibson (whose book The War on Christmas, was released just in time for holiday shopping), and others, are using this manufactured controversy in much the same way that retailers use Christmas. It’s a way to exploit popular culture to increase exposure and profits. But what happened to trusting the market? If these hypocrites truly believed in the free market they purport to worship, then why don’t they let the market decide if campaigns extolling Happy Holidays have appeal to consumers. Not only are they unable to practice the economic values they espouse, they take it much farther by actually integrating Christmas into the economy.

The argument going around is that the economy would suffer devastating losses were there no Christmas. The moronically simplistic justification for that position is that, since people buy things during the Christmas season, if there were not one, they would not buy things. However, it seems unlikely that the money now spent on gifts would get sucked into some fiscal black hole absent this seasonal excuse to consume. Without Christmas, people would still spend their money on themselves and their families. They may put it into retirement or college funds, in which case it would still eventually be spent and circulate through the economy. And even if they just kept it in the bank, the increased personal savings rate would prime economic growth. Where’s the loss?

It should be noted that the exploitation of Christmas as a political cudgel is nothing new. In 1959 the John Birch Society issued a pamphlet titled “There Goes Christmas?!” that warned:

“One of the techniques now being applied by the Reds to weaken the pillar of religion in our country is the drive to take Christ out of Christmas — to denude the event of its religious meaning.”

And Henry Ford’s 1921 tract “The International Jew,” stated:

“The whole record of the Jewish opposition to Christmas, Easter and other Christian festivals, and their opposition to certain patriotic songs, shows the venom and directness of [their] attack…And it has become pretty general. Last Christmas most people had a hard time finding Christmas cards that indicated in any way that Christmas commemorated Someone’s Birth…Now, all this begins with the designers of the cards.”

Here I must make a confession. I am the designer of the cards, and Jewish to boot. I am an artist with a small business wherein I market my artwork on cards, magnets coasters, etc. In fact, the image attached to this article is available at my website, Crass Commerce, along with many more works of fine art, humor, and politics. And need I remind you that they make wonderful Christmas presents.

I can’t say that I’m serving the interests of a secular cabal, but at least I’m contributing to the cornucopia of consumption that O’Reilly, et al, must certainly regard as sacrosanct.