Here is my third appearance on the (Bill) O’Reilly Factor Show. I discussed the origins of some political words.
Also.. after you watch it, please email Bill and thank him for having me on. Here is his email: oreilly@foxnews.com
You must be logged in to post a comment.
In honor of Sarah Palin resigning today.. here is a video on Alaska. Please...
leonard on Alaska
muggins on Alaska muggins on HTML in Comments 101 leonard on Alaska leonard on Alaska leonard on Alaska leonard on Win a lunch date with HotForWords leonard on Win a lunch date with HotForWords
greatestpotential on Funny video about Twitter
beevee14 on Alaska
pennsyltucky9 on Alaska
Che Volay on Alaska beevee14 on Alaska beevee14 on Alaska greatestpotential on Alaska
pennsyltucky9 on River Sports -- Canoeing, Kayaking, Rafting (11)
Chemikal on YouTube's Most Popular Category (182) pennsyltucky9 on 'Pun my word (54)
Capman911 on YOUR BIG CHANCE TO STAR IN MEGA PRODUCTION PORNO MOVIE!!! (13)
greatestpotential on YT Music and Videos (203) greatestpotential on Cute Adorable Kitten Videos (1) pennsyltucky9 on Just Clichés - one per post (675)
leonard on History of English and other languages (4) greatestpotential on The Picture Game (695) greatestpotential on Word Game 2 (1238)
Uh, I just thought you did great…and I didn’t feel the need to know more about you until 3 more times on the same show…
Now you might have a hard time getting rid of me.
What does that tell you?
Marina talks to the bastard and I smite him. Its called a relationship.
Hi Marina – I have to agree with the comments below – you are too hot for Bill O’Rielly…hope to see you on the Colbert Report or perhaps the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
By the way – your pedagogic style is awesome!
Marina is a genius!
God Bless America! We attracrt women that are not only HOT but damn intelligent!
Marina, you are too hot for Bill O’Rielly! Cobert is off the wall, (but funny) Jon Stewart will make you happy, I promise.
Please go on the Colbert Report… It’s like the O Reilly but less pretentious, and a lot smarter
You are so.. pretty and genius
i love you 
The Bill O’Reilly factor, Kudo’s and great job u aced every word. Good with the rest of your career bye
Too bad he didn’t ask you about the origin of the word “maverick.” Now THAT might have been entertaining…
Fox is the right place for you to make 3 appearances since you are definitely a “Fox”. I am referring to the classy beautiful intelligent lady that you are. Foxy in that you can “out fox” the “O’Reilly”.
I think CNN should demand equal time.
I consider it very positive….:-)
Hello I LOVE the work you do on words origins. This is my first request, and I would like to know how we started using the term: okie dokie.
p.s. I watch EVERYONE of your youtube videos and love them all.
p.s. You’re beautiful
My dearest lady. I really loves your doing, your way to express what a word can mean. especially word i can not understand. I speak for all people who do not speak english very well..you are the perfect one..
and the most perfect one..really in my opinion..
“Why were you holding up three fingers…for four?”
Because she held three fingers up and the extended thumb, which is used as a counting finger in Eastern Europe (Germany as well)
1. Thumb
2. Thumb + Forfinger
3. Thumb, Forefinger + Middle
4. Thumb, Forefinger, Middle, Ring Finger.
This was already discussed here:
http://www.hotforwords.com/2008/06/12/funny-post-about-counting-with-your-fingers/
You’re smart
Avocado.
Just discovered your site. I think it’s great
Bill is some talker!
He certainly stole a couple of your lines, didn’t he?!
You were great. It seemed like it was live, even though it was recorded.
I e-mailed Bill in thanks.
Nice to see you again, by the way! *hugz*
Marina:
Liberal means free from consequence.
The US says “Spreading liberty. Liberate the country.”
“Liberty will ring in America.”
So now you have gays and promiscuous sex. People doing drugs. You got Liberty.
The world always did have gays, my friend.
Their oppression and persecution did not, and never will, alter that basic underlying fact.
Homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomenon. So, I assure you as a mathematical certainty, there are, on average, just as many gays wherever you live as anywhere else on this planet. Exactly the same ratio.
But in lands where it is oppressed, they just keep quiet about it – and are force to live a lie – for fear of alienation and persecution (and even death, in some places).
But, trust me, they are there amongst you, in exactly the same numbers as every other country on the planet. That’s just plain fact.
It’s innately biological. You can’t outlaw it from happening with “laws”.
All you can do with laws is choose to persecute an innocent for your ignorant superstitions, or choose to face reality.
You can choose evil to destroy a person’s life for no actual good reason but your irrational fear, or you can choose to do good to your fellow man and woman and accept them for how they are.
That is the only choice that’s available. That’s what it all boils down to.
Do you choose to be evil or do you choose to be good?
Choose wisely, my friend. Choose very wisely indeed.
I shall be blatant. In the lands you speak of where homosexuality is persecuted, the Middle East, it forms as a result of separation between the genders.
Places like the US however it forms as a result of fetishism. Males and females have a “been there seen that” attitude towards the opposite gender. I shall not say more about that.
Sex and sexuality should be a taboo subject, not something flaunted openly. That is the basic fact. No Gay Pride parades or any parades where sexuality is something to be proud of.
(This forum won’t allow replies more than two deep, so I’m adding this as a reply to your first comment, but I am actually addressing your second comment. Bloody technology, eh?)
You mean “blunt”, not “blatant” (pardon the semantical nitpick, but this is a forum about the use of words, after all).
Anyway, you are labouring under a common misapprehension – homosexuality is not a choice. It’s a natural state of being.
Homosexuality occurs throughout the Animal Kingdom. Gay animals consistently show homosexual behaviour.
If it were a choice, then you’d be implicitly crediting these animals with a capacity to make an intellectual “lifestyle choice” – a capacity that is not observable in any other regard.
How would you logically explain such observations otherwise?
Also, the Americans devised a scientific test – it was designed for use in the military, during conscription, in order to objectively test if someone who claimed to be gay was actually telling the truth and not just saying so to get out of military service (due to the active prohibition of homosexuals in the US military).
It is, simplistically, a lie detector for sexuality.
The way it works is that it actually monitors brainwave activity and then straight and gay pornography is shown to the subject.
There is no way to consciously fool this test because it is directly measuring your brainwaves. And the results of using it categorically demonstrate that it is not a choice. The subject’s brainwave activity corresponds exactly to their sexuality.
They are gay. They’re not just saying they are gay as if it’s a choice, they actually are on a measurable biological level. It’s right there and directly observable.
There are many statistical evidences that also back this up, including clear behavioural traits before puberty even kicks in – thus, it cannot logically be attributable to “fetishism” or “choice”. As it can be measured to manifest before active sexuality even happens.
And the correspondence of multiple different and independent measures of it being naturally occurring which have been complied, is itself a form of yet more proof, in the sense that the statistical likelihood of them all matching up like this by sheer coincidence is negligible.
Homosexuality is natural and biological.
But don’t take my word for it. Go examine the evidence – in both directions – for yourself and come to satisfy yourself that this is, indeed, true. That is the only way you’ll believe it, in the end.
And note my confidence that I am willing – encouraging, even – of you making that inquiry yourself. Because I know what the evidence is and I know that the only way you can conclude differently – if you’ve really looked into the subject deeply – is to ignore it in preference to taboo and mythology.
Which, bluntly, is the active suppression of the truth.
If you’re confident in what you say, then you should have no fear whatsoever in making that inquiry. If it is true, then the evidence can only prove you right, yes?
No empirical evidence can prove what is factually true to be false. Indeed, the only way to hide the truth, is to hide the truth.
To, as you’ve advocated, make the subject taboo. Not say anymore on the matter. Keep it hidden. Keep the truth secret.
But, if you’re right, then what is to fear from the truth?
Nothing. It should only prove you correct all along.
If this is a matter of faith to you, then isn’t avoiding the issue and not examining its truths a profound demonstration of a very tangible lack of faith?
You won’t test the truth because you don’t have faith that the answer will be the one that you wish.
But, again, I won’t labour the point. If you don’t see it for yourself, then you’ll never believe it whatever I say.
So, do you have the courage to put your faith to the test?
And, oh yes, it takes courage. Immense courage.
You might discover – as I did – that the faith you cleave to is wrong and that you’ve laboured under a misapprehension for all this time.
Because, you see, I’ve been there and done that. I am an apostate.
And life is much better – vastly better – out here on the outside. I don’t mean that merely hedonistically, but spiritually and intellectually and emotionally. I was a prisoner beforehand without even realising it – believing myself free, when I was, in fact, caged by irrational fear.
But, to finish, let me make one final argument.
Let’s suppose, purely for the sake of argument, that you are right. That it is merely a “fetishism”. Then what of it?
What is the consequence of tolerating others to their own private fetishes on your life personally?
None. None whatsoever.
It is not a “fetishism”. But were it such, you’ve not presented any decent argument whatsoever of any kind, why such a thing should be taboo and prohibited anyway.
So, really, what is your reasoning for that?
Blatant has the meaning of Obvious as in “Blatant liar”, an obvious liar.
I commented to illustrate what the meaning of libetry is. If you want liberty, you want freedom from consequence.
In America you cannot talk about anything without delving into the stupid and idiotic topic of sex. Americans seem to have brains in the pants. I bear witness that I said “So now you have gays and promiscuous sex.” So you can point to me and say “You started it.”
If you want to be free, you want to do what you want to do regardless of whether you are doing righteous and good things or wrongdoing. That is the real meaning of Free.
The real meaning on Liberty is the removal of consequences. “I want to walk in the streets wearing a Swastica shirt.” There will be many ready to sue you for hate or inciting hate. Why doesn’t the same rule hold for people cursing or wearing revealing outfits? Instead of inciting hate those that wear such clothing and cursing take humanity to the filthy part of human nature. There are better things to be doing than thinking about sex or wanting to curse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA&NR=1
Dear Marina,
I couldn’t believe what I saw. I thought you were an intelligent woman adressing people in an intelligent way, and I loved and admired you for this. And I thought your mission was to educate people and to make them think about words. These word explanations, however, are a clumsy piece of badly masked propaganda. No matter what your political views are – even if you are the capitalist, right-wing, republican-loving conservative you appeared to be in the show – you should still be a philologist in the first place, if that’s what you promise to be, and this means: someone who loves the study of words – not someone who loves to please an elderly TV moderator. I’m sorry to say this, but some of your explanations reminded me more of something Sarah Palin could have done than of your usual self. I’d like to have the other Marina back – clever, critical and funny!
mijj? o brother, where art thou?
WTF…talk about a partsian leaner…you need to chill out dude or I should say take it easy. He happens to have the number one rated show for about ten years on cable for your information. I suspect you are a lover of MSNBC which is fine if that is your cup of tea
. It is a free country and if she appeared on Obermann, you probably would be gushing with love and that makes you a hypocit 
So, try to not lose faith since she appears on the most popular cable show in the history of cable and continue to love her for what she does best and not what you interpret incorrectly. You may not like the comments but there are many things in life you do not like and you can add this to your long list 
I realise this is an old post but I’m just now discovering this site and happened upon your comment.
I have to admit that I too, like missphil, am somewhat dissapointed that Marina has appeared on Bill O’Reilly’s show, not just once but three times, though maybe not to the same degree. I do realise her appearance on the show is good exposure for her. The only problem I have is that I cannot stand the guy. Not because of his right-wing beliefs but rather because of the way he presents them. In my opinion, the man has no respect for anyone whose beliefs diverge too far from his. I am pretty confident that if you look it up you will not find one example of the word “guest” as being someone who is the target of disrespect. Mr. O’Reilly often manages to change the meaning of this word in the way that he treats his “guests”, usually by being condescending to them and not allowing them to express their opinions. Unless, of course, they carry the same agenda as him.
If his show truly is, as you claim, the most popular cable show in the history of cable, then I must say that it is testimony to the sad state of affairs in the US. But that is just my humble opinion.
Marina, where does the word “crissum” come from?