Diluting the outrage: Why O'Reilly's "lynching" comment was anything but accidental.

[blondeatlast]

First off--that word "unless" is the elephant in the room:

In a discussion of recent comments made by Michelle Obama, Bill O'Reilly took a call from a listener who stated that, according to "a friend who had knowledge of her," Obama " 'is a very angry,' her word was 'militant woman.' " O'Reilly later stated: "I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama UNLESS there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down." (all emphasis mine)

From HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/20/bill-oreilly-i-dont-w_n_87616.html

Unless??? With that one word, he "justified" lynching an African-American woman.

We all remember Imus's "nappy-headed ho's" comment and the lame--but widespread--attempts to excuse that, too. "He didn't mean it to harm/"They" use those words too/--I remember the use of the "N" word recently but can't remember the situation.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of how Rove, Luntz, Scaife, etc. do their dirty work should recognize that this is NOT an accident. These men are easily old enough to remember the televised reports of Civil Rights marches; I was a toddler and I remember dogs and hoses and riot gear. Imus and O'Reilly have a few years at least on me.

Sadly, I have to make this disclaimer--I am not advocating here for an Obama win; just observing. But with the possibility of an African-American winning the presidency, consider this: the stage is being set to dilute the power of those words in the media and public discourse. Is the opposition trying to make it okay--even socially acceptable and entertaining--to be openly racist?

I submit that they are. I believe that very little political discourse is accidental and the sources are decidedly biased.

[Redstone]

1. That asshole says NOTHING "by accident." There's not a spontaneous bone in his body.

It has nothing do do with Obama vs. Clinton. It has only to do with what he thinks will increase his ratings.

Redstone

[blondeatlast]

2. It's more than ratings. He's a tool--a very powerful tool. nt

[Redstone]

10. Indeed. And isn't it a pathetic commentary on the state of America, that such a buffoon

can actually be a "powerful tool?"

He's just about the most transparent panderer it's ever been my displeasure to encounter, but there are SO MANY people in this country who are SO STUPID that they actually form their "own opinons" (quotes intentional) based on his blather?

That's just revolting. But not surprising, given that every Wednesday when Mrs R and I go to lunch at the bar of the local Mexican restaurant, and I get to hear the bozo barflies parroting whatever they heard Rush Limpballs pontificate that morning, as if it were actually an original thought of their own...

Redstone

[devilgrrl]

3. The Obama - Osama gaffes aren't accidents either

mark my word

[blondeatlast]

5. Of course not. They are numbing us. nt

[margotb822]

4. He's sickening

His message is nothing but hate and intolerance.

I think someone should mention the 'shoving incident' as evidence that Bill-O is obviously unstable and unreasonable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. this didn't start today

it's been going on over the last seven years with a vengeance...

Yes "the south" is rising again. And I used quotation marks since this is not a geographic area but a way of thinking

[blondeatlast]

9. True. They've been laying the foundation for decades with the "politically correct"

meme.

It used to be standard public discourse to avoid offending someone--but they've made the offenders into victims now.

[Redstone]

11. "They've made the offenders into victims now."

Yes. Somehow, "they" have done exactly that.

Too bad that nobody in America (are you listening, Mr Olbermann?) is willing to track down specifically who the "they" are, and expose them for the slime that they are.

Redstone

[blondeatlast]

12. Have you ever read David Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine?"

He blows the lid off of how the RW media system works. Ever wonder how they seem to be using the same phrases all of a sudden on every Sunday chatter? He nails it.

[Redstone]

14. Haven't read it, but I will.

Redstone

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. It is A MUST READ

he did a wonderful job with that one, as well as the book that preceded that one

[pingzing58]

7. He should aplogize for using the word.

[blondeatlast]

8. Hell no. I'm sick of the hollow, public apologies.

He needs to meet face to face with Mrs. Obama with no cameras or microphones anywhere near and discuss it with her.

You do know what a lynching is, don't you? Good lord--no apologies. Careers should be ruined (as they once would have been) for the likes of this.

[KeepItReal]

21. That ain't apology material. His ass should be terminated. That wasn't a misspeak / misunderstanding

You don't play with that word. Any time it is used, it is used for a purpose. I don't care if it's Clarence Thomas or some Golf Channel talking head.

[bbgrunt]

13. write the fcc

email the fcc regarding "obscene, profane and indecent broadcasts"


You may send a complaint regarding this matter to [email protected]

[blondeatlast]

15. Will do--but it's far bigger than that. This is systemic and we need to staunch it. nt

[a kennedy]

25. Thanks for this address bbgrunt

I just sent my note. :patriot:

[defendandprotect]

16. O'Reilly's mouth is owned by GE/NBC . .. no one is hired by accident ---

they long financed Pat Buchanan on CROSSFIRE --- introducing the shouting matches and
sexist, racist and homophobic comment by Buchanan . . . with no one on the other side
to really counter him effectively.


It's a sick group of people . . .

[TheWraith]

20. Um, O'Reilly works for Fox, not NBC.

As a matter of fact, O'Reilly has a passionate hatred for NBC because they're the home of Keith Olbermann.

[Mugu]

26. I didn't realize that Fox owned any radio stations. n/t

[defendandprotect]

32. Sorry . .. same story ---

Fox is not better than NBC as far as honesty or selection of hosts ---
None of these people are hired by accident ---
they are there because they will do the bidding of these corporations.

GE/MSNBC with a long and atrocious list of hosts --- save KO --- which is kind of hard to
account for as far as their letting him off the leash?
My guess has always been that they wanted something to compete with Jon Steward at the 8 o'clock
time slot.

What I'm saying is all of the networks are now controlled by corporate-media ---
very right-wing --- including PBS largely polluted by it now.

These owners aren't about to have hosts hired who aren't going to tow the line ---
do what they say!

[Political Heretic]

17. KO's segment on it really drove the point home.

It's a total outrage.

:mad:

[blondeatlast]

18. I did--I hadn't realized how that "unless" word was so important until I did.

We are being numbed--thank goodness he had the courage to speak out.

[barbtries]

22. o'reilly is such a pig

in every respect. of course he meant it. apologies mean nothing. he should not be on the air.

[blondeatlast]

23. Kick. nt

[johnlal]

24. The word should be fresh in his memory

Just a few months ago, a sportscaster on the Golf Channel got suspended from her job for using the word "lynch" in connection with Tiger Woods. This should be fresh in any TV personality's memory. So, no. This was no accident. He did it on purpose.

[blondeatlast]

27. K. nt

[applegrove]

28. Maybe he is trying to take the heat out of the McCain affair scandal?

Would O'Reilly do such a thing? Yes. I cannot believe anyone wouuld use the lynching word on television without forethought.

[blondeatlast]

29. It came before the revelation of the NYT story, though. nt

[applegrove]

30. Okay...that takes care of that theory. LOL!

[blondeatlast]

31. No worries.

:hi: