Bill O’Reilly’s success proves he is one of the best at what he does. I have been an “O’Reilly Factor” watcher for many years, in general I have found him to be fair, intelligent and perspicacious (“word of the day”).

But nobody’s perfect. I disliked his daily Factor segment selling his “Killing” books, embarrassing self-promotion, and a viewers’ mail segment which always ended with further promotion of his books and entertainment events. That part of his show was unvarnished snake oil salesmanship, which in my view diminished his personal credibility and the status of his show.

That said, the accusations which have fallen upon Mr. O’Reilly concerning his alleged treatment of women seem downright hard to believe. Oh, I’m not saying that Bill is an angel. Far from it. By his own admission, he is a “fresh piece of humanity.” On the other hand, Bill has been a great promoter and supporter of his female guests and co-on-air talents. For one example, he was key in bringing up Megyn Kelly as an on-air show host. Then, we watched the ugly spectacle of her head quickly growing bigger than Bill’s. Even to the selling of her own and her hubby’s books on-air.

I believe the real story here is how easily a gang of women – and I don’t use that word loosely – bonded by raw ambition, greed and ideology joined together to destroy men – be it Roger Ailes, Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity —  men they first approached for their own career opportunities; who were given a chance; and who then for whatever reasons didn’t quite get the golden ring. Today, the Left’s PC ideology is the sledge hammer used for the demolishing. In the past, Hell had no fury like a woman scorned. But in today’s culture,  Hell hath no fury like an opportunistic woman and her lawyer.

Women claim O’Reilly and others at FOX “leered” at them, or made passes at them, or asked them out on dates, or up to their hotel room, or whatever else they can think of to squeeze him and FOX for cash. One begins to smell the fragrance of Gloria Allred here.

Have we in America come to the point where successful, wealthy men can be destroyed (not co-incidentally men hated by those on the Left) simply by claiming he might have flirted, perhaps aggressively, acted like a horn-dog, or even an old lech? Does it no longer take actual damages, such as we heard in the Bill Cosby case, to impel a gang of women to sue and make ugly accusations against these men, accusations which upon close examination basically amount to she said–he said cases? If a wealthy and well-known celebrity decides to take his lawyer’s advice and pay an accuser to keep her quiet, does this somehow prove guilt? Or does it merely serve to invite other women and their lawyers, looking for a quick buck, to join the gang.

Does it happen only to politically conservative men? Like O’Reilly and his boss, Roger Ailes? Of course not. It also happened, if you recall, to President Clinton. But the very same people wanting to depose Bill O’Reilly rushed to Clinton’s defense even though there was far stronger evidence of actual harm done to his accusers.

This sort of thing has always been “Plan B” for a certain type of ambitious woman whose boudoir mirrors reflect at least an average degree of attractiveness but not much character. This type is a predator. A cash stalker. She is not a cupcake. Let’s face it, if a woman is really traumatized by a professional man wearing a suit and tie walking past her desk and looking at her the wrong way, or making a suggestive remark to her or, heaven forfend, asking her to dinner, or whatever... well what in hell has happened to “I am woman, hear me roar?” The roaring has been replaced by whining for cash. It’s preposterous; that a modern woman has reached this stage of her life and has not yet learned to fend off unwanted attention. The turnip truck must be on a bumpy road, dropping young women all over the place.

No, don’t give me any of that politically correct baloney about vulnerable women. Women can be far more devious, even vicious, than men. Now add to that law schools pumping female lawyers out faster than ever; and at least some of those lawyers with poor character are looking for easy targets for law suits. Never mind that the alleged “victims” usually are, to borrow a phrase, dressed to kill: too-short skirts, gauche décolleté, overly coiffed and made-up...  is all this done to not attract attention? Is it any wonder then that some of the attention will be unwanted?

But is it really “unwanted?” 

I worked at large professional organizations in Manhattan and Los Angeles for many years. When promoted high in the chain of command, I was warned by corporate lawyers (many of whom were women) to be wary of this kind of entrapment. “Way back” in the 1980’s, it was strongly suggested that we keep our office doors open when meeting with individual women whom we supervised. Some of our offices had glass walls on the corridor sides. Several dumbbell male department heads were caught in the spider’s web. The crafty women who came up with stories of harassment were often paid off, leaving the company after signing non-disclosure agreements. A year’s or more salary made... just like that. Then on to trap the next sap. We married men are even more vulnerable to attack. I escaped more than my share of attempts. In our offices. On airplanes. In cars. In hotels we stayed at on business trips. Even during meetings with our clients! As soon as I got a sense of where the women were going with their whiles, I turned cold as ice. Vice-President Mike Pence knows what he speaks of when he says he bails out of one-on-one dinners or meetings with women. 

Dumb guys with big egos are often unaware when this is happening to them. Mr. O’Reilly is not dumb. But unfortunately, some men, no matter how smart, allow Delilahs to flattered them into trouble. Perhaps Bill is one of them. I have no way of knowing if the women’s claims are true or not. I wasn’t there, and unless youre one of the accusers, neither were you.

We have seen this movie before. The plot usually thickens as the facts are revealed. Political ends become one of the prime motives. What am I suggesting? The Left hates President Trump, and will do everything in its power to destroy his presidency. O’Reilly supported Trump. Ailes supported Trump, Hannity supported Trump. Destroy them and you hurt Trump. But O’Reilly won’t just go away. When he comes back, as he surely will, he will be coming after you; you who don’t care who gets hurt in your craven desire to cling to whatever waning relevance you may still have.



        Deeply personal insults to President Trump, such as the LA Times editorial board is currently publishing, may salve their wounds, but they don’t alter the obvious fact that liberal Democrats refuse to, or are unable to recognize the essential message of this past presidential election.
      The near hysterical hatred of President Trump by the liberal press may serve as whistling past the graveyard, but it doesn’t alter the fact that to the last man and woman they  refuse to accept the meaning of this past election.
       The conniving of Congressional Democrats, and not just a few Republicans, to thwart the President’s agenda – one notarized by millions of voters from virtually every party –  may satisfy their need to believe they are appearing holier-than-all to their constituents, but it doesn’t. They, too, refuse to acknowledge the essential message of this past election.
       By now, one might have thought the shock of the Democrat’s “sure winner” losing the election, and this after spending more than a billion dollars in more than a year’s worth of constant mocking, derision, denigration and taunting candidate Trump, his family and supporters, would have begun to subside. But it appears just the opposite has happened. A gang of millions have shook hands on a pact to bring down President Trump. Cut him no slack, no matter what. He’s a liar. He’s a Putin puppet. He’s a bully who hates women, blacks, immigrants and anyone who doesn’t like golf.
      Now what exactly is this message the gang refuses to acknowledge? To any of us who open our eyes and ears, the message is as clear as the Liberty Bell.
      The nation’s traditionalists and conservatives have been shouting into the wind for several decades at least, pleading with the Democratic Party to put the brakes on in its obsessive and relentless push to the political left; at least for awhile. But the pleas fell upon deaf ears. Why did the left rebuff every plea made by the other side? Not necessarily to change liberal philosophy, or their agenda... just to slow it down so America could assimilate and adjust to the changing political landscape. But the last eight years of leftward rush, of clearly leftist biased regulation and legal adjudication were enough to create the Trump movement. Passing enormously complicated laws like the ACA without critical review, ramming it through Congress in the middle of the night does not engender trust, especially with the kind of results Americans are seeing.
      As a result, Republicans now constitute the majority leadership, and as I have written in the past, every new president must spend a good portion of his term correcting the mistakes of his predecessor. Yet there seems to be a reluctance to listen to the very people who elected this new Republican Congress. When conservatives see this reaction to their vote, when they see the flat-out hatred of their President by a gang of millions, they can’t help believing that this hatred is also aimed at them.
      So Democrats and liberal press will go on pushing phony scandals, deriding those on the right, and double-down on their pact to impeach the President; they will continue to refuse to acknowledge the true reason why they do not have the reins for now at least. They should not at all be surprised. It’s how they have always governed. After all, in their superiority, they have no doubt that they are right about everything; that no one else could possibly have a solution to any of our problems. Republican’s ideas have been ignored. Then adding insult to injury, Democrats accuse the Republicans of having no solutions.
       Is that what The Constitution guarantees? That nature, in her infinite wisdom, endowed only Democrats with the ability to comprehend complex issues? That only those degreed with uber-liberal philosophy may lead? That the ability to reason and lead with sympathetic moral sentiment lies only within those who argue for leftist causes? That you, Democrats, and no one else, must be right, and in charge, all of the time?