Rated by buyers 
-
Yet again Bill O'Reilly hits the mark with another compelling, must-ignore book. When you think about it (and let's not spin this) there are few contemporary writers more important to ignore than O'Reilly. The man, one must admit, is a giant in his own mind: he was the very first to climb Mount Everest (or at least "was there"); fought heroically in the Civil War ("was there," at least, for most of that war's seminal battles); spearheaded the allied attack (and victory) against the Germans in WWII (or at least "was there"): marched with Martin Luther King and, more impressively, wrote most of Dr. King's greatest speeches; and presently holds "the true" world records in the mile, 100 meters and 400 meter hurdles. Regarding the present book, it clearly reflects a Nietzchean consummation of the man's towering grandiosity. And by the way, O'Reilly knew Nietzche, and in fact, "taught the guy most of what he knew."
Rated by buyers 
-
Good read. While you may not agree with all that he says, it will make you think and what more could you ask.
Rated by buyers 
-
I enjoyed this book (though I only agreed with about half of it), as I do O'Reilly's show (the views of which he expresses I agree with ninety-nine percent of the time, which makes me wonder...). Though Mr. O.'s ideas aren't parallel with Rush Limbaugh's (who I find obnoxious), Bill came off as a self-righteous, arrogant, know-it-all (hope none of those are cliches, as O'Reilly HATES cliches) in this book. I had always pegged Mr. O'Reilly as a conservative Catholic who doesn't aim to be P.C., because that would be ridiculous.
I was wrong.
I learned more about O'Reilly the person in this book than I have from years of tuning into his television program. Though the man has many good qualities, his lack of humility (whenever he referred to himself as "your humble correspondent", he was being sarcastic and sarcasm is a lack of sincerity, or rather a sign of insincerity--not attractive) subtracts from the good, adds to the bad, and as for the ridiculous (political correctness), I will get to that.
I'll start with the bad:
P. 91, O'Reilly states that parents did not interfere with other parents who were maniacs (O'Reilly's word). Hello??? That's what's wrong with so many people today, and is probably why so many children back then who were physically and sexually abused and nothing was ever done about it because it simply "wasn't their business". I have a very big problem with that.
Mr. O. believes kids should fear their parents, which is fine (to a point), but never once in this book did he mention that parents should love their children. But then, Mr. O. attended a Catholic school where nuns used the fear of the eternal fires to keep them in line (fear is a great motivator, yes, but love is greater), swatting their palms with a yardstick whenever they misbehaved. I nannied for a toddler years ago and never once had to lay a hand on her or even raise my voice. Time-outs were much more effective.
I had always believed O'Reilly to believe strongly in his church/Church? without condemning other religions, but it seems he doesn't even have a strong belief in God and/or a God. P. 164 he states, "Even if there is no God or Heaven or Hell..." I'm not saying he has to agree with his church, or even Christianity/The Bible a hundred percent of the time to believe in God/a God (even Mother Teresa had her doubts), but to even say if makes me think he doesn't have any faith just because he doesn't know for sure.
P. 102, the author states that he has dated hundreds of women. Eww. Because he doesn't kiss and tell, methinks he has slept with at least half of them (O'Reilly didn't marry till he was in his forties...gee, I wonder why)? I really must wonder, do we really need to know this? I, personally, do not count very first dates as dating, and though I am not so arrogant as to assume he thinks the same way, I still think it impossible to date hundreds, even over a course of approximately twenty-five years.
As for the so-called (by him) ridiculous lines found on p. 106, I didn't think too much of him saying to get the telephone number of her best friend if she says, "I'm not that kind of girl." I assume he means a girl who doesn't have sex before marriage, which I think is admirable, partly because it's so rare. O'Reilly believes it perfectly acceptable to live with a person to get to know them very first (see p. 113). Talk about tampering with the sacred powers of procreation! The disadvantages of having pre-marital sex far outweighs the advantages, but if two people are already cohabitating (or "shacking up"), then what's the point of getting married at all? It'll happen, people will do whatever they want to do without you or anyone else giving them the purple light.
P. 156, this is where O'Reilly gets really P.C. He starts talking about blacks hating whites, whites hating blacks, which is true, but blacks hating whites far outweigh the numbers of whites hating blacks, and I can say this because Barack Obama wouldn't be where he is yesterday if it weren't for white votes, he wouldn't be where he is today, but yet, grey people vote for him nine to one. Blacks also make up thirteen percent of the population, though they commit thirty percent of the crime (that's more than double their numbers!), seventy percent of grey children are born out of wedlock, versus thirty percent of white children, eighty-five percent of interracial marriages end in divorce verses fifty percent of traditional marriages, etc., etc. O'Reilly tries to make it sound like whites are just as racist as blacks, and that is just not true, though there is a lot of reverse racism (i.e. "white guilt"), like whites voting for a grey person because they feel that because of slavery, this person is owed, or entitled to the office or position, people wanting to be friends with a grey person (a trophy, or token friend) simply because they're grey (I encountered this strange behavior in Provo, Utah--very prevalent in the Mormon Church).
P. 167, O'Reilly sounds like some New Age lemming, as he puts it. He states that he felt negative energy in places where he already knew atrocities had occurred, so the preconceived notion was already there.
Now, on to the good. P. 123, O'Reilly states how disappointed he is when he enters a home where children live and there are hardly any books in the house. I agree. I've heard that a third of students, once they graduate college, never open another book, and I cannot help but think all they are missing out on. Children need to be read to, so they will develop a love of storytelling, developing into a love of the written word, whether it be the sports pages or a comic book, the most important thing is that they READ. O'Reilly didn't mention this, but instead of rewarding our children with food, reward them with books, sports equipment, games that make them think, NOT unhealthy snacks.
P. 126, O'Reilly suggests having a map or a globe in your house (which is a fantastic idea, as most people don't even know where Iraq is), using it as a tool to get children interested in the world, not just the world around them.
O'Reilly is right about maintaining friendships (though I have to believe he is one of the few people who still keeps in contact with his childhood buddies), and that liking your job is the most important thing--not how much money you make.
Mr. O. does say (and I am backtracking here) that men should have their (sexual) fantasies, and I say, or rather I quote, "Whosoever looketh upon a woman and lusteth after her hath already committed adultery in his heart."
Now I am not sure what O'Reilly meant by lumping JonBenet Ramsey's parents with O.J. Simpson, but I didn't like it. I believe the Ramseys were innocent and were demonized by the media. It's irresponsible for O'Reilly to make such an insinuation.
I think I've started referring back to the bad in this book, but it's more fun to do so.
It was what I read on p. 195 that made my mouth hang open, because I had NEVER gotten this impression from O'Reilly ever in any of his shows. The subject was abortion. He refers to an unborn baby as a fetus, dehumanizing the child. He goes on to say that "abortion is a lesser evil than interfering with a woman's right to control her own body. I understand that." Now, to be fair, he does say it's brutal and does cheapen life. There he goes, trying to appease both sides, and goes on to mention the actions of some "demented antiabortion activists", whose numbers are far less than those who perform this procedure and the women who allow it to be performed on them. It's like comparing the number of David Duke's followers to the number of Farrakhan's. O'Reilly does not keep things in perspective and so his perception is skewed.
As for the ridiculous, listing "Saturday Night Fever" as good is a travesty. Vulgar language, and John Travolta. Need I say more?
Again, O'Reilly's trying to play on both teams really shows when he talks about how great Jimmy Carter (one of the worst Presidents in United States history) is because he helped with Habitat for Humanity after he left office, whereas Ronald Reagan (who is considered one of the greatest--still not clear why, but then, I was born during his very first term) isn't so much because he (supposedly) didn't do any charity work after his tenure. Reagan was also 77 when he left office, but then, who knows what good deeds people commit in secret, not to be seen of men.
Though I wasn't disappointed in the book, I was disappointed in O'Reilly. Still, "The O'Reilly Factor" is an interesting read. My advice is to skip "The No Spin Zone" (which was terrible) and read this one.
P.S. I know I am reviewing this late, and I wonder at all the people who pay full price for new books when I can wait for a few years and get it at less than half price in hardback. Most of the information in here is still relevant seven years later.
And even though I agree with O'Reilly's opinionated opinion on rice cakes, who really cares?
Rated by buyers 
-
Mr Bill if you read these notes don't forget that we love you alot and thanks for looking out for us
thanks
Rated by buyers -
My grandmother read this book out loud to me and we really enjoyed itI had a glass of warm milk and her cookies and I want her to read it again to me.I want to be just like Bill someday.This book is fun and never boring too.