Bill O’Reilly’s “Killing Lincoln” Book Full Of Errors

How full of errors is O'Reilly's new book? It’s so full of errors that, Justin Elliott at Salon.com reported, a reviewer for the National Park Service’s bookstore at Ford’s Theatre has recommended it not be sold at the historic site “because of the lack of documentation and the factual errors within the publication.”

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/12/fords_t ... singleton/

Dang... I hate it when that happens... But considering the source, I guess "revisionist history" is the only history he knows.

“He furls his brow . . . .” furl – nautical term to compact, roll up; furrows – narrow grove, depression on any surface, i.e., furrows of a wrinkled face

This is wonderful. Bill should have known better, but demonstrated, in print, that he doesn't.

I particularly liked the two references to Lincoln in the Oval Office... which wasn't built until 1909.

Or is the Oval Office like Air Force One? ANY office the president is in becomes the Oval Office. rofllol

O'Reilly must not respect the discipline that is practiced by historians. Historical accuracy is not taken lightly. Politicians should avoid writing "off the cuff" histories if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

O'Reilly wanted to make an easy buck and it worked. His book is #2 on the bestseller's list.

Arlen wrote: O'Reilly must not respect the discipline that is practiced by historians. Historical accuracy is not taken lightly. Politicians should avoid writing "off the cuff" histories if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

O'Reilly is a politician? Commenters should avoid making "off the cuff" comments if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

Arlen wrote: O'Reilly must not respect the discipline that is practiced by historians. Historical accuracy is not taken lightly. Politicians should avoid writing "off the cuff" histories if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

O'Reilly is a politician? Commenters should avoid making "off the cuff" comments if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

It is my point of view that "politician" involves more than being employed in a public office. I include comentators, campaign managers, campaign functionaries, etc. Whenever O'Reilly's name is mentioned, one thinks, "politics!", which is the strongest argument that can be made for my point of view.

I was fully aware of the conventional interpretation whenever I called him a politician.

Arlen wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

Arlen wrote: O'Reilly must not respect the discipline that is practiced by historians. Historical accuracy is not taken lightly. Politicians should avoid writing "off the cuff" histories if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

O'Reilly is a politician? Commenters should avoid making "off the cuff" comments if they do not want to be viewed as a fool.

It is my point of view that "politician" involves more than being employed in a public office. I include comentators, campaign managers, campaign functionaries, etc. Whenever O'Reilly's name is mentioned, one thinks, "politics!", which is the strongest argument that can be made for my point of view.

I was fully aware of the conventional interpretation whenever I called him a politician.

Sorry... I wasn't fully aware of your interpretation when you used the word politician.

I can be a "butt" sometimes. Sorry.