No it doesn't. Few things are either all one way or another. His basic premise and the linchpin of that premise revolves around individuality and lack of using government to solve problems. He is 100% wrong about that. Now, that doesn't mean that we never did anything he says we did.
He offers very few examples in his article. Let's take WWII, and eample he did give. Government went to war, and rightly so. Government pointed to a specific reason, told the public it would be costly, and asked them to sacrific. Now, this has nothing to do with individuality. In fact, quite the opposite. It is a collective effort run largely by the government, and rightly so.
VN on the other hand had no honest reason for happening. It was largely based on a lie (Bay of Tokin) and in a flawed premise, domino theory. And did not have public support. Public support; not individual support.
Iraq went a step further, government invaded another country on a pretex and said it will cost us nothing. We'll lower taxes, use only volunteers, and you don't have to worry about it all.
None of those examples say a thing about our individuality. they only address the way government decided to address a certain problem. And remmeber, the WWII example follows this quote:
The foundation of America's growing power was a code of conduct based on honest labor and neighborly charity. We looked out for each other, but did not tolerate cowardice or narcissism. Judeo-Christian philosophy dominated the public square.
Read more:
Bill O'Reilly: America in Decline - Talking Points - The O'Reilly Factor - Fox News
WWII does not support that claim at all. It's a trick, a cheap one at that, that divertes attention away from his claim. He need to show something that dealt with work ethic, honest labor, Judea-Christian philosophy. He didn't. He spoke of hwo we handled a war. Not at all the same.
With VN he discusses us distrusting authority, but doesn't touch upon what authority did to lose trust. Seems to be suggesting that trust should be blind, and that those who lose it have no accountability for losing it. Again, a trick, a diversion that really doesn't address his premise.
In case you've forgotten, this is his premise:
The answer is the decline in self-reliance. If you understand history, you know that America was founded on the independent principles of honor and hard work.
Read more:
Bill O'Reilly: America in Decline - Talking Points - The O'Reilly Factor - Fox News
he has to show first, we're in decline, and that the reason is a lack of self reliance. That the US was indeed founded on honor and hard work, and that such is missing. He doesn't even address that at all. Again, he relies on tricks, trying to move his followers on the found feelings of a "good war' and the bad feelings they hold over the other 'bad" wars. All of which has nothing to do with his premise.
But to be honest, his article doesn't deserve this much of an answer. It is so weak and sloppy, of poorly reasoned and laid out, any reader should see the flaws right off. but then again, if you don't question, and always accept your affirmation, I suppose you could miss it.