Reliable Sources: Forget Tiller, Bill O'Reilly Is The REAL Victim Of Media Rhetoric
By Nicole Belle Sunday Jun 07, 2009 12:00pm
Oh poor, put-upon Bill O'Reilly. Those mean old "liberals" in the media are just itching to blame him for the assassination of Dr. George Tiller. Never mind that the only "liberal" cited is Olbermann, who flatly rejects the label and those who did actually call attention to the inciting rhetoric of O'Reilly in regards to Tiller were bloggers like C&L, who of course, were not invited by Howard Kurtz to give their point of view.
Kathleen Parker has the unenviable job of defending O'Reilly, though it's made easier by Kurtz's framing, which shows clearly where his sympathies lie:
KURTZ: Some liberal commentators couldn’t wait to accuse O’Reilly of inciting the violence that led to George Tiller’s murder. Fair or unfair?
PARKER: Irrelevant. I mean, yes, of course, it’s unfair. You can’t blame anyone for a crime except the person that commits the crime. Clearly, people on the far left are always looking for an excuse to attack Bill O’Reilly. And Keith Olbermann and O’Reilly tend to bounce off each other a good bit. So I’m not sure who this argument is really between.
Um, news flash to Parker, you absolutely CAN blame someone who incites violence, even if they don't actually commit the act. Ask Charlie Manson.
Parker's viewpoint is a little morally troubling, as she tries to play false equivalencies in the abortion debate and pooh-pooh the violent rhetoric as an "all's fair as each side tries to defend their stance":
KURTZ: What George Tiller was doing was legal, although many people did not like what he was doing, but I also want to mention he was shot in 1993 when there was no “O’Reilly Factor”, like there was no Fox News. Do you think, Kathleen, that the people pointing the fingers at O’Reilly with varying degrees of fervor are politicizing this tragedy?
PARKER: Well, of course they are. This is…this is the Topic du Jour anyway, because of Obama’s recent address to Notre Dame. It’s on everyone’s mind. And you know, any opportunity for the pro-choice people to make their case more strongly is going to be taken advantage of, and same…and vice versa. I mean, we’re always listening to the extremes on either side. They’re the squeakiest wheels, the loudest voices and they get the attention.
So denouncing organizations that foment violence like Operation Rescue is the equivalent of shooting women's health providers? Defending the rights of women to make a legal choice is an extreme position? Really? Ugh, the morality of the "Moral Majority" is enough to make you sick.
But here's where it gets funny. After denouncing the media for going after Bill O'Reilly, Parker actually agrees with all those liberal talking heads (seriously, someone point out to me where these multitudes of liberals are, I need to do some DVR programming) that this tragic event should illustrate how important it is not to broadcast such violent rhetoric:
PARKER: I would love for the outcome of this to be that O’Reilly—and all of these talking heads who become so completely over the top so many times—just to say look, this is a teaching moment. We’re not gonna do this anymore. We’re not …we’re gonna make our cases as strongly, we’re going to be passionate, but we’re going to tone down the rhetoric. I mean, wouldn’t that be a great result?
Well, yes, it would, Kathleen...and that's why we're saying that Bill O'Reilly should take responsibility for that kind of violent rhetoric. Is that so hard to understand?
PARKER: The media followed the fire, clearly. You know, wherever the heat is, that’s where—and I’m part of the media, I know how this works, I’ve done this for a long time—where the action is. But there is, I think, the media are always going to defend the pro-choice position. They’re less likely to portray sympathetically the pro-life position, that’s just a fact.
Damn, and just when I thought you were getting it, Kathleen. The media (which is neither monolithic nor particularly liberal-leaning) is not defending the pro-choice position, you nimrod. That's the law of the land, whether you like it or not. Violating laws--like murder and terrorist acts--and trying to disrespect civil rights of others is not a sympathetic position for anyone to advocate.
Login or Register to post comments.
This is the "man" who calls everyone terrorists, shouts down invited guests yelling shut up, sends out stalker "journalists" to people's homes, calls for the Coit Tower to be attacked complaining that we're saying he might want to tone it down some?
Why stop with Manson? Everyone knows it was the Beatles that incited Manson. Helter Skelter, baby.
influence of the Kinks.
wholly, exhaustively, totally, and completely it is:
Howie Kurtz and "putz!"
Indeed, one suspects that Howie's "putz" is "kurtz"...
apparently we cannot blame bin laden for the september 11 attacks because he is obviously not the one who flew the plane into the towers or pentagon. he is completely cleared of all wrong doing by this standard.
He disavowed AND claimed both, knowledge of the action. And there's never been any real evidence to tie him to it. Not every Saudi Muslim knows every other Saudi Muslim, and while he may have been the best 'fit', there is a lot of evidence that doesn't fit, and in typical prosecutorial action, it is dismissed, ignored, disavowed, hidden.
Remember, the same mofos that said "Yellow Cake!" and "Iraq did it" and "bin Laden is in Afghanistan" were ALL WRONG. Why would anyone choose to believe the bin Laden connection to 9/11, other than our lying govt says it's so?
i wasn't trying to start a 9/11 "who dun it?" discussion. i have serious doubts about the official story, but if you are trying to say that bin laden wasn't involved in some capacity then you are nuts.
but there is a lot of evidence that powers that be let it happen.
exactly. not scrambling jets to intercept the airplanes before they crashed is the big one. they knew well before the planes crashed that they had been hijacked. hell even the 9/11 commission report admits that. it takes minutes for a jet to be in the air and en route. they have airmen on standby for just such emergencies 24 hours a day. either it was incompetency or deliberate.
show me the proof the US govt cited when they claimed he was the 'mastermind'
I'm not starting a conspiracy theory here, this is fact I'm dealing in. There is no proof, and there was/is more than one Muslim with juice who had the power to marshal these kind of forces, besides bin Laden, including people imprisoned for the first WTC bombing.
You are more than welcome to call me names, I hardly give a shit, and it won't change the fact that no proof exists that bL was involved directly with the attacks.
Apparently your proof is tied up in calling me 'nuts.'
You need to read up a bit, I think, on the US intelligence community, the US govt and the media...I think you'll find most of the 'facts' regarding the lead up to 9/11 are pulled from multiple arses in multiple agencies and that the US media played along with the (illegal use of) propaganda by the US Govt on the American people.
i was in the army for four years, and i was stationed in afghanistan for 13 months. my job was as an intelligence analyst and because of my job and my security clearance i was given access to cia databases to collaborate intel we were getting on the ground. i was just as skeptical as you and I spent many weeks pouring through various reports and pieces of intel for anything to prove some sort of a cover up. you can believe whatever you want to, i could care less, but you are wrong.
There was quibbling back and forth on whether OBL was actively a terrorist planner, or a financier of terrorism.
We went from Wanted Dead or Alive, to not being particularly worried about him, according to boosh.
bin Laden wasn't in Afghanistan from '96 or so to 9/11?
I think I heard that excuse before regarding the o'really factor not being on the air the first time Dr. Tiller was shot.
When Marge Simpson was publically protesting the violence in the Itchy and Scratchy cartoon, she and the cartoon producer, Roger Meyer's Jr were invited onto Smartline. He said, "Before the show I did some resarch. Years ago there was this thing called the Crusades. It went on for years. And this was all before Itchy and Scratchy cartoons. So much for your argument."
Did not Bill O condemn rap music for all of society's ills? So, by his logic, a 3 minute song heard a few times by as many as 1-2 million listeners directly effects their behavior, BUT A BLOVIATING BLOW-HARD WHO TALKS TO 3+MILLION PEOPLE EVERY WEEKNIGHT and calls Dr. Tiller a "murderer" who has "blood on his hands" has no responsibility for a cold-blooded murder? Inconsistent, I believe.
and really got O'Reilly to face his hypocrisy (which, of course, would never happen), I'm sure he would end up saying something to the effect of, "Well, SO WHAT?!?!?! SO WHAT IF I HELPED GET A BABY-MURDERER KILLED!!! YOU WANT BABY MURDERS TO GET AWAY WITH IT?!?!"
And then he'd proceed to call you every name under the sun, and his head would explode shortly thereafter. Just like every other hate-ridden, hypocritical psychopath would the second they had to face the reality of their behavior.
But I agree with your general sentiment.
speeches if the spoken word is so benign?
when is it the media's responsibility to focus on wedge issues instead of the issues that are really important to our economy, invaasions of sovereign countries and health care? The main things they want to divert your attention to are abortion, guns and gays. they throw a few missingg blondes in now and then for variety.
n/c
Don't forget the nudie clubs and naughty spring break coeds that they can decry before showing us the same pixilated image over and over again.
I always look for the pink pixels.
....that is Rich...
Faux sort of "mocks" it's audience(Religious Right) that way and they don't even know they are being mocked.
The practice of such as Bill O. to run away like a scared rabbit from the meaning of their own words, to completely refuse to take responsibility for them, and the practice of others to defend their ilk is simply another demonstration of the intellectual cowardice and fundamental dishonesty of right wing discourse.
And since Dr. Tiller had been attacked in the past, shouldn't o'really have used such inflammatory commentary regarding abortion in general and the doctor in particular?
...to murder & Manson egging someone on to murder ?
He was in the same room?
...a distinction with a difference ?
*
...but he was at different times in a room with the killing actors - egging them to go out & murder for Charlie's version of the culture wars..
Billo came into the Roeder's "room" via the Tube.
Presumably these "on-screen personalities" justify their salaries by claiming that what they say affects listeners or viewers in a positive way. OK. Fair enough.
But effects can be negative as well as positive, right? So if you claim your words can have a positive effect, then you have to accept that they can equally have a negative effect. Can't have it both ways. (In the title I gave benefit of the doubt by blaming those trying to have it both ways for cognitive dissonance rather than hypocrisy.)
And if you wanted to create a negative, violent, potentially murderous effect, what better words could you find for the purpose than those uttered every day by O'Reilly and ilk?
BTW, Manson is an obvious case in point. And with his conviction the principle became established in law. But a much more sophisticated and morally ambiguous case might be that of Henry II and Thomas Becket. T.S. Eliot's terrific play on that case, Murder in the Cathedral, is still in the active repertory.
...and the catholic church with it's law was as bad as sharia law is depicted in today's west.
I don't believe there was much moral ambiguity in the 12th century. They were all SOBs.
BTW, the legendary, almost mythical "Meddlesom Priest" comment by Henry is analogous to an offhand comment reputedly made by LBJ regarding Pest Squirrels on the WH lawn. It's a good thing the Secret Service didn't hear Squires. The Squirrels were promptly dispatched even though LBJ later claimed that's not what he had intended and wondered where they went,,, until he was informed of their demise.
Or something like that.
I heard Hank was shocked when Becky was killed, and said something along the lines of, "I only wanted someone to take care of him, I didn't mean kill him."
Isn't that roughly what Kennedy said about the overthrow of Diem in '63?
I wouldn't be surprised. Some say that led the Vietnamese not to trust us, even in the South.
You can't hold the man responsible who yelled "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.
...it's my right to yell "Fire!"...as I saw a bum burning trash outside...
They'll see "freedom of speech" and the rhetoric will just keep on ratcheting up the scale until..who knows what happens?
I'm glad sites like C&L, MM and others are here documenting this stuff in this time. Something is gonna happen probably much bigger than Tiller and, when the perps are caught, you can bet they will list off those who encouraged them. I expect to here a litny of our favorites from wingnut central.
But if there IS NO fire, the inciter is culpable in injuries and damages. That was precisely Holmes' analogy...
"PARKER: Irrelevant. I mean, yes, of course, it’s unfair. You can’t blame anyone for a crime except the person that commits the crime."
Watch that theory go out the window the second a terrorist attack happens again in this country. It will be a 24/7 blitz from the right, rabidly blaming Obama.
Regardless of the level of responsibility O'Reilly holds for Tiller's murder (whether Roeder watched the O'Reilly factor all day and slept in a rubber O'Reilly mask, or didn't even know who O'Reilly was), her comment still shows the blatant ignorance that just pervades the right-wing when it comes to how our judicial system operates.
Why do people get charged for hiring hit-men to off their spouses, Kathleen? You gonna be at the next trial of someone who hired someone to kill their spouse, picketing what's clearly a massive miscarriage of justice in your eyes?
KATHLEEN: "..you can't blame anyone for a crime except the person who commits the crime."
That statement doesn't make any sense anyway. Who is the person/s who committed the crime? I think it would make more sense if she said: "You can't blame anyone except the person who pulled the trigger of the gun". Even then, she still would be wrong.
What an idiotic discussion. As far as I'm concerned, that jackass is directly responsible for Tiller's death. Kurtz, Parker, and Press sound just like the Catholic hieracrchy, shuffling around and relocating those priests that got too boinky . . . so they could boink some more. O'Reilly is a fucking liar, a fucking bully, and a fucking disgrace . . . and as long as people continue enabling that fresh, stinking pile of humanity, he'll become far more dangerous. This isn't rocket science. If you want to see true fascism, watch FOX
That clip of Bill Clinton nailed the GOP back in 1995 and nailed the GOP today.
.
PARKER: "Irrelevant. I mean, yes, of course, it’s unfair. You can’t blame anyone for a crime except the person that commits the crime."
You're correct. 9/11 was NOT Clinton's fault when it happened on Bush 43's watch and neither piloted the planes but one did NOT act in 2001 to thwart the attacks whereas the other left a security chief in place that was yelling that the kitchen was on fire...
.
.
Ahhh...
... The ubiquitous, "Other people".
Well, media, "Some people" excuse and defend a person's ability to bloviate and hype FEAR and LOATHING so that "other people" can go out and come up with solutions to their spoon fead fear.
.
ain't my fault someone did what I said needed to be done. I just got through talking to a friend of mine who is involved in a recall petition of their Mayor(Republican) and she and her fellow petitioners have been getting death threats. I recently viewed their last council meeting and the retoric from the right was atrocious. They had to tell one old ass white man to stop yelling and threatening people. Again that is their answer you disagree with me I might kill you. Name the last Liberal that went on a killing spree. this Liberal is more than capable if push comes to shove. I am a gun toting straight shooting Marine Corps trained Liberal who is more than capable of anything. I would still rather beat you at the ballot box because you wouldn't stand a chance in my field of fire. Civil discource is the only acceptable way.
...but hey, at least, I made myself RICH$$$$
The true nature of why these guys continue to rachet up the rhetoric. Appealing to the least in humanity, always seems to be a big hit!!
She's the hack columnist who wrote back in 2003 that Wesley Clark, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and Richard Gephardt should be "lined up and shot".
Who better to go on TV and say that Falafel O'Bill shouldn't be called out for inciting murder.
...pointing out this small arc in the hate machine's well calloused circle jerk.
I'm guessing that only about one viewer in a thousand will actually be incited to violence by the words of O'Liely on one of his shows. And only one in a million will be incited to actually murder anyone. Even so, if two million republicani are watching O'Liely every day, then that's about two of them per day that will.
... get-away drivers just as if they committing the robberies?
Gimme a break. O'Reilly is complicit.
In the past Bill O has claimed the power of his show has:
Tanked NBC's ratings.
Brought down the stock price of GE by over 50%
Led to a loss of billions to the french economy (according to no less than the Paris business review!)
Stopped Spain from investigating US war crimes
And on and on and on...
Those are all actions that require multiple people all acting in unison on a tangental cause/effect relationship. So why is it so far fetched to believe that Bill O could have 1 man go over the edge in a direct killing? Hmmm???
He knew people would make the connection too. And rightly so they did make the obvious connection for scrutiny at the very least. So we all agree that is the issue at hand. Now O'Liely will double down on the definition of twisted to deflect reality some more. I can only hope that a psychology class near each of us is studying this guy as it happens, because O'Liely is a real life example of basic human psychology at it's very worst.
and those who claim he lies apparently do so as well?
What a great post.
I loved the part where you give Ms. Parker the slap down in reminding everyone that the shrill and often dangerous rhetoric simply isn't on our side of the debate!
Reliable Source is Antonym for UnReliable and Bias toward the Right
I have had a problem with Howard Kurtz from quite sometime; he seem to be an apologist for The Al Qaeda Republican Party. If you have watched him during the primaries you would know that he has never been an Obama fan or provided balance coverage towards Democrats, he seems to find a way to slant his coverage in favor of the extremist as if he believes the viewers are incapable of seeing through his act. I used to watch this man but the only thing on CNN worth watching on Sunday's is Fareed after Fareed show is over so is my viewership of CNN.
The only reason to watch unreliable sources is to know just how dishonest Howard "BS" Kurtz is going to be this week on his biased show. It's hard to keep up with the lies conservatives put out weekly, I'm glad C&L documents them nicely in one site.
...of three people who get paid money to offer opinions that any reasonably well educated teenager could give. There are several minutes of what is essentially a vacuum in which Howie and Friends repeat the same pabulum over and over.
"Words do matter," everyone agrees, but somehow O'Reilly's words didn't matter. "Violent words can lead to violent actions," but O'Reilly's violent words -- the words of the most popular "news" program host on cable -- apparently don't "have consequences."
Bill O'Reilly -- one more victim in the Dr. Tiller murder.
Words Has Consequences:
“Charles Manson is in jail for exactly what Bill O'Reilly has done. Manson never committed a murder. He just suggested it to his followers.”
"You can’t blame anyone for a crime except the person that commits the crime."
Yeah! Charles Manson wasn't to blame, was he! Or Adolph Hitler! Or Osama bin Laden! Or... wait, they were to blame? Where am I? How do I get back into American mass media world?...
Manson was charged with murder and convicted of it. Why do people keep throwing out this ludiocrous example to refute Parker?
ummm... because Manson didn't commit the crime but was blamed for the crime?
Notice how lets just throw it out there Hate Mongers again FAIL to take accountability DUH! we the ignorant on the right refuse to take accountability. O'Rielly is a provocator to MURDER with his twisted Misinformation and LIES makes him partially responsible. Case and point man sets fires Firemen Die man is getting Death Penalty now why is this Hate Monger any different then the Arsonist, O'ZRielly should be HELD accountable if a Arsonist can be put to death for fire O'Rielly should be brought up on charges as a accomplist. Oh! and every time I frequent a business I shame them into changeing the channel I point out Faux Noise is a Hate station, I cover 48 states.
But if there IS NO fire, the inciter is culpable in injuries and damages. That was precisely Holmes' analogy...
Howie Kurtz and his wife Sheri Annis are PAID PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDISTS for the Corporate Right!!!
What do you need? Flash Cards?
Like this?
http://www.jokeitem.com/images/Rq012.jpg
KURTZ: What George Tiller was doing was legal, although many people did not like what he was doing, but I also want to mention he was shot in 1993 when there was no “O’Reilly Factor"
Any thoughts?
Why stop at Manson? Everybody knows Manson was incited by the Beatles. Helter Skelter is comin on down, brutha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rInMQWpGpYg
often ingored in these matters.
He was inciting the murder of tiller. He lied about everything. How can billo say he performed 60,000 abortions? Medical records are not open for the public. So how did he know this? The answer is he did not know, he made it up. He is a liar and I would like to see oliar reap what he has sewn.
republicanism is a mental illness!
They miss the bigger point. It isn't just Bill O'Reilly that's filling the air waves with hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric. It's across the board from right wing radio, and even right wing politicians. The idiot Inhoffe made a recent comment about Obama's speech in Egypt in which he said, "I don't know who's side he's on." Of course, that's relatively mild compared to some of the things right wingers have said about our president. The point is words do matter. It's bad enough when fringe groups are inciting violence, but when a supposed legitimate news organization is spewing this stuff, it's far more powerful. It's reckless and irresponsible. The Rawanda massacre was fomented by hate speech on the radio. As Frank Schaffer said, the kind of language being used by these right wing extremists, including O'Reilly, is the stuff that causes societies to become unhinged.
PARKER: Irrelevant. I mean, yes, of course, it’s unfair. You can’t blame anyone for a crime except the person that commits the crime.
Shocking and awing they are! NOW they want to hold a specific person personally responsible and accountable?
Didn't we blame/attack two nations to kill and kill more for crimes they did not commit? Or are they finally willing to say "it's the oil, stupid!"
Login or Register to post comments.