Bill O'Reilly made far-reaching headlines last week when interviewing executive producers of “The Bible,” a ten-hour TV mini-series, unabashedly making himself the deity’s own expert on the Bible. By declaring, “A lot of the Bible is allegorical,” O'Reilly was his pitiful self as he bashed and bullied the good-faith producers, and now to prove his own doctrine, interviewed guest Robert Jeffress, senior pastor of the 11,000 member First Baptist Church of Dallas Texas, who might buttress the new O'Reilly bible allegations, and help the master-shill sell his forthcoming “Killing Jesus” book to accompany the previous killing Lincoln and Kennedy books.

O'Reilly said to his hopefully fully uninformed foil, “Let’s begin at the beginning. Adam and Eve: Did they literally live in the garden of Eden and usurp the evolutionary process?” WOW, what a giant leap into fairy-tale land, destroying the straw man before it ever came into being itself.

O'Reilly began his argument by relying on the blanket assumption that humans are now often held to be responsible for global warming that itself has morphed into climate change, and Adam and Eve interrupted God’s plan of evolution by usurping the evolutionary process.

So, O'Reilly admits Adam and Eve interrupted God’s evolution plan, and now asks the questions, “Where did Adam and Eve then come from themselves?” and, “The place they were living, the Garden of Eden; they had to live somewhere and it had to be called something, so what is the straw man issue?” Adam and Eve were already living someplace referred to as “The Garden of Eden.”

Not to be presumptive, but how did the “Spin Stops Here” guy KNOW that God had an evolutionary plan for mankind? TV tithers say that God spoke to them, telling them to raise indeterminate amounts of cash for never audited reasons. O'Reilly is obviously into his own brand of Kool-Aid and right off the bat O'Reilly is Don Quixote fighting the proverbial windmills he perceives as who knows what.

“Evolution” means change, not the beginning of something from nothing as in creation of something that did not exist at all; but is a gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex, better, or higher form. Reproduction to date still relies on sexual reproduction at the command of God to “increase and multiply ” – something capable for Adam and Eve but not for the likes of Adam and Steve.

There is a philosophical argument holding that true evolution of mankind, once begun, would continue to infinity, leaving sexual interaction for procreation null and void. And so it came to be that there has never been pure human creationist evolution, nor will it ever come to that.

O'Reilly previously missed the correct catholic version on the doctrine of the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ, parsing words in an attempt to prove the church doctrine to be wrong, all the while proclaiming his catholicity. Catholic church doctrine is often disputed, even by catholics, who in turn cannot declare their own papal infallibility to be above that of the church itself. Now he says Adam and Eve “usurped” God’s plan for the evolutionary process, a notion nowhere to be found as it is absurd on its surface.

Egomaniac O'Reilly is the near master-agent provocateur who shills his own money-grubbing web-site and its assortment of gifts and goodies that only blind-follower lemmings and faux conservative groupies would be thrilled to showcase as a sign of their wisdom in choosing master political guru, chief competitor to the politically disgraced Karl Rove.

His signature program “The O'Reilly Factor” concludes with a sales pitch to buy a premium membership in his own site, billoreilly.com, for the yearly low low price of $49.95; not bad when he also gives a bonus FREE copy of ONE of his books with paid membership. Or buy any product and get a free “No Spin” mug as a bonus. Sounds like a spinoff of the ubiquitous “buy one (inferior product) and get one more (same inferior product) free. Just pay additional shipping and handling.”

The man exudes a prideful false humility who portrays himself as an independent conservative but uses his podium, not for self-deprecation but for self-augmentation and aggrandizement of the man who is the prima facie face of Fox News that is #1, no doubt due in most part for O'Reilly being the news/opinion leader of cable news media.

But the man is two-faced and in Obama’s case, did not make substantial waves when justified until now, after the 2012 election when Obama has no worry to be possibly hurt by exposition of his extremely radical political, social, and anti-Christian policies.

O'Reilly is a Monday-Morning Quarterback as he was when he was firmly FOR the G.W. Bush Iraq preemptive war, calling opponents “Traitors,” before the war, and then some time after the war went bad, flip-flopped to be adamantly against the Iraq War.

O'Reilly is no stranger to feuds he uses to enhance himself as indicated by the O'Reilly-Matt Drudge feud that took place about ten years ago in the early days of “The O'Reilly Factor.” These are O'Reilly hand-picked fights to switch emphasis from another target to O'Reilly’s take on said subject, thereby enhancing his own reputation.

O'Reilly on previous occasions authoritatively proclaimed to Dave Silverman that Christianity is a philosophy, and when confronted by clergy on another occasion declined further discussion of that issue. Typical loser attitude of taking the bat and ball home while losing the game.