In his new book, Richard Dawkins debunks the myth that Bill O’Reilly ISN’T a huge asshole. (BANG! BIG BANG!)
Quote pulled from the comments section:
“Richard Dawkins is a freak’n saint for going out again and again in defense of logic and science!”
I’m not sure that commenter is fully familiar with the idea of “saints.”
Honestly, the only thing that O’Reilley could do to surprise me at this point is not be terrible. Like, he could eat a puppy sandwich on air, and all anyone would do is shrug and say “What were you expecting? He’s terrible.” But if he had a courteous debate with someone, where he let his opponent finish a thought before beginning his own argument or counterargument, I would faint. That would be a sign of the coming apocalypse.
The hardest part for me is wondering who I would hate to have an argument with more.
Good thing they aren’t related, or else this would be quite the Family Feud!
On another note, I always get Richard Dawkins confused with Richard Dawson.
Q: If you could have an argument with any person, dead or alive, who would it be?
A: Bill O’Reilly. Dead.
(And on that note, if you guys aren’t watching Suburgatory, then you need to watch Suburgatory, you guys! It is seriously very good, and also where I stole/modified this joke from!)
They’re both dicks, I just happen to agree with one of those dicks more.
“Just Like Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin.” *Picture of Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin*
Uh. Thanks for that visual? Good work graphics dept.?
I jumped a little in my seat when Bill O’Reilly screamed “A-Ha!” at Dawkins. Regardless of the debate at hand, that “A-Ha!” seemed inappropriately loud for the point he thought he was revealing.
I like how O’Reilly doesn’t even put that much effort into stating his positions. He knows the gesture is enough, however lazy he appears while making it. It makes him kind of admirable, as in, “Wow, that guy truly does not give a shit about anything.”
In fairness, Richard Dawkins is also an asshole.
You must be logged in to post a comment.