From Bill O'Reilly's personal site this afternoon. Read closely. Now he's REALLY gone too far with the personal attacks!
The boss lady braved a visit to Fox this afternoon to try and reason with Bill O'Reilly. She responded to a request for an interview, which he always tapes instead of conducting live (the better to slice and dice them in your favor afterward, so the criticism goes). Early reports: It was heated. We'll see how it turned out (or at least the O'Reilly version) tonight. Better yet: You can read about it on Joan's Salon blog, where she'll be filing about it shortly.
A bit of background: O'Reilly's angry about comments she made on "Hardball," and he took a preemptive shot at her last night; Salon was the first outlet to strongly criticize O'Reilly for his history of attacks against George Tiller after Tiller was murdered on May 31.
(Also: I am on record as advising against going on -- which shows you how much influence I wield -- but her Irish stock is heartier than mine, and she took the challenge.)
So tune in, if you can handle it. But might I suggest, afterward, staring long and hard at this? It may help.
Emily Holleman
Mignon Khargie
Scott Rosenberg
Thomas Rogers
Rebecca Traister
Ricardo
Salon.com
Comments
As for Joan, I've been a fan from the first time I saw her on MSNBC before the elections and that led me to OS. I've been growing as a person ever since.
What a douchebag.
thanks Kerry
He's right, he did advise against it, and he may have been right. High points? "You have blood on your hands!" Blogging now, will weigh in here later.
And of course, even though Kerry disagreed, he sent me awesome advice about how to handle.
I have no doubt she held her own but will keep the picture of the baby rabbits on my screen in case I need to look away at any point!
Go Joan!! Go Notre Dame!
just maybe they are grouchy, If-
they want a tuna on rye and
a pistachio ice creams cone,
I'll make a sandwich and cut
off the rye crust. I hope B'O'
Reilly didn't call Joan names.
Joan's not Marxist Nazi @OS.
Joan is tuff. O'Reilly's a Quack!
O'Reilly is dedicated to RUINS!
O' whining as a wind-up DUCK!
O'Reilly boss needs a SHRINK!
O'Reilly reads Mr. Cary Tennis?
Cary T. can help Fox's Loonies?
FOX's staff are wind-up-ducks!
Feed 'um caviar blini pancakes?
Joan Walsh? Sip camomile tea.
It's good for getting cozy? Bill?
Go Joan, turn him into an over tenderized rocky mountain oyster, deep fried.
(Going to keep those cute bunnies handy to lower my blood pressure.)
But I am grateful to Joan for being a person of reason. If supporting her means I have to watch O'Reilly then I suppose I can pour some wine a bit earlier tonight. If she can go on O'Reilly, of all people, then I have to wonder why their talking heads can't go on Olbermann or Maddow? In the meantime, Grenache or Zin?
Thank you Kerry for this update.
Did you shake her hand when she got back?
You need to think of these things.
I've programmed my TV as if Fox doesn't even exist.
Let's face it, I get upset when I even see a picture of that pinhead O'Reilly
Pfft. O'Reilly and his protégé Sean Hannity are nothing but close-minded, rude, ultra-right, blowhards.
Joan’s got the brass ones is all I can say. Hats off and good luck to her.
It is a little disconcerting.....
Should have had a glass of wine first.....
Judy Weismonger PhD
Pfffffft on Bill, I'll hold him down while Joan beats the bejesus out of him!!
:)
So mr. up yours o'reilly you and glen beck are wrong to dismiss oreilly's repsonsibility for the death of dr. tiller.
You did us proud Joan.
" SKUNK" ?
First off, while Hitler didn't drop the gas, he did order it done. O'Reilly didn't order Tiller killed. If fact every time that I heard him talk about the killing he spoke against it.
I have a question. Joan went after O'Reilly for his "hate speech". That's fine, that is her opinion that it's hate speech. However, you don't have to read posts here but for a couple of days to read lots of hate speech here and she does nothing to control it. Look at the things that were said about Palin for defending her daughter! If you really want hate speech look at what is said about Bush almost every day.
The question I have is how can she attack O'Reilly for his "hate speech" and allow it to go unchecked here?
I thought the interview went very poorly.
With due respect to Joan, O'Reilly did seem like a rabid lunatic - to those of us who are on the left and are able to see O'Reilly as a rabid lunatic. This tends not to be those who watch O'Reilly. He is someone who has to put his frame and context on everything on his show. He cannot allow for anything not to have his own brand of spin and with him in that level of control, it is extremely naive to assume that anything resembling "fair and balanced" will ever occur. This is the same person who cut the mike on the son of a 9/11 victim. Could anyone have expected a friendly O'Reilly to allow an exchange of ideas regarding this particular topic?
Not to mention, "I skimmed it" will always be used against Joan in order to portray her as someone who does not feel inclined to do research on a topic before making statements regarding it. I winced at that.
Yes, I feel like I'm kicking someone who is already down. I'm doing it in the hopes that something can be learned from this. I also have a suspicion that, outside of Salon, someone else is making these same statements - perhaps as a letter to Joan, even though that will never be admitted.
Somehow, it was decided to argue with someone who, on his show, has empowered himself to be judge, jury and executioner. This is not the equivalent of engaging in debate with some neutral 3rd party moderator who could make certain each side was able to speak his or her points. There is so much more I could say but will hold my tongue for now. I will end on that I appreciate the courage and dedication it took for Joan to debate O'Reilly - something he is not man enough to do on any left-leaning program. For the most part, I thought Joan did well - in that she seemed cool, calm and collected during the onslaught. She didn't present her side well because she was not allowed to. Though that was O'Reilly's doing, it doesn't alter the fact that Joan decided to do this on his terms.
Of course O'really carried on as usual in his narrow-minded, sanctimonious fashion. He can't debate issues without resorting to anger and offensive posturing when he finds himself on the defensive.
Using one of his own "words of the day" he behaved like a "Pecksniffian." But then, that's what the blowhard does best.
Well, tho, bottom line, it was going into the lion's den and any coherent statements were admirable... A brave folly.
I turned off after the Joan section - couldn't bear to hear from/about Palin and Glenn Beck as well.
It looks like some of these people are heading our way:
http://open.salon.com/blog/specialistdan/2009/06/12/joan_walsh_cant_face_the_fact_that_she_supports_murder
Although I have been here for more than 8 years, I have never seen this kind of behavior.
I read a few of the comments after your article and WOW! The sicko O'Reilly fans have obviously shown up in droves.
(And that photo on the "factor Flash" graphic... that would be... his son?)
Now I remember why I do not watch these shows. I find them to be neither entertaining nor newsworthy.
KP says, "but is there any way to compell them to fix the “typo” in the site name?" Maybe after he learns how to spell "compel." But to KL's credit he did fix the lead in to this article.
Of course O'Reilly edited nothing. Why should he have? Both sides expressed their points of view. At the end, it was a bit like a sandbox brawl with both claiming that the other had bloody hands. On this question, I believe only Walsh does, by sanctioning late-term abortions regardless of the legitimacy of the reasons therefor.
Interestingly, no one has mentioned the support O'Reilly received from the Johns Hopkins retiree who stated in no uncertain terms that upon reviewing the official records of Dr. Tiller's practice, it seemed to him that Tiller was not loathe to perform late-term abortions for superficial reasons. To borrow a phrase from liberals, even one is one too many.
Some doctor above claims that pregnancy shouldn't be a 9-month jail sentence. This of course completely misses the point of the problem with late-term abortions. A woman who is allowed herself to become pregnant, toyed with the situation for months, should not, absent compelling circumstances, which do not include inhibiting the mother's social calendar, be entitled to a procedure which treats a developed and emerging life as the victim of an enema.
The other thing that I've noticed is that nobody here has addressed the hate that is put forth every day here against people like Bush, Chaney, Palin, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Hannity just to name a few.
So when is Joan going to speak out about the hate speech here?
While I am against late term abortions, I was impressed with how Joan kept her cool. Bill's approach scored no points in the debate but then, for Bill and the network, this was probably more about ratings and viewership than honest discussion. Controversy is always good for the "news" business. Sensationalism sells.
There was an opportunity for counterpunching that Joan missed. Bill bloviated about the fecklessness of the pychiatrist who reviewed the work and determined some of the cases would not have been approved by him, and that some were even trivial. O'Reilly gives the impression that Dr. Tiller was working entirely on his own. Late-term abortions are reviewed by a panel, which determined Tiller was operating within the law. O'Reilly's doctor, accomplished as he may be, was not on that panel. Joan tried to make the point that these opinions came after the fact, but was shouted down. How about this: "Bill can you cite one case in which Dr. Tiller broke the law? Did he fail to report his actions? Did he attempt to deceive the authorities? When you accuse him of murder, which you do every time you refer to him as 'Killer Tiller,' you are lying and deceiving the public."
Forget defense. Attack, attack, attack. It looked like Joan showed up to a gunfight with a knife. The segment reminded me of the axiom about wrestling a pig: You both get muddy, but the pig enjoys it.
"It was like the human being versus the circus freak. Joan won. Flat out won. The Knoxville thing was brilliant. He had no comeback.
You did us proud Joan."
I have been posting to Joan's letters this week because I think she is very tuned into the single most important issue confronting America today:
The rising level of hate speech and hate crimes due to the undeniable influence on same by talk radio and Fox News.
I have come to the conclusion that it is time to bring this issue front and center, and keep up the heat until the understanding of the serious negative impact of this propaganda becomes mainstream knowledge.
I wrote on Joan's blog:
O'Reilly Has Given You Permission
O'Reilly said, "My constitutional rights say I can say what I say, you can say what you say, as vile as you say it, you can say it, and I would never condemn you for saying it."
Please, Joan, take him up on this? Give his a moniker that has "stickiness", will you? O'Reilly the Tiller Killer, O'Reilly the Racist, O'Reilly the Rightwing's Bully, O'Reilly the Right-Wing Nutjob, O'Reilly the Hater, O'Reilly the Inciter == pick anything and then write, write, write and say it over and over and over when you are on the air.
He is a right-wing bully -- a mouth-fighter with no teeth. He needs to be called out on his culpability in so many things, but especially Dr. Tiller's murder."
I am fully convinced that all rightwing haters need to be labeled as White Supremacists and Racists if and when the shoe fits, which of course it does for O'Reilly, Beck, Limbaugh, Bachman and so many others. With all the talent at Salon and Open Salon, we need to bring our forces to bear on this issue. The only way that Joan or any of the rest of us have "blood on our hands" is if we don't continue to fight these haters with the truth.
Go, Joan, keep up the good work. I am sorry you had to endure Bill O'Reilly, but your efforts need to be brought in front of the right in earnest. I am happy to support you in any and every way possible. Go fight the good fight!
LABEL him, call him what he is -- MAKE it stick. And, please do make him sorry, very very sorry...
Good for Joan, though, having the courage and confidence to use O'Reilly's vast forum to reach the one or two viewers who might still be open to reason. Makes me ashamed of my inability to debate right-wingers without becoming frustrated/furious.
http://www.reddit.com/tb/8s50o
Talk about projection; I can't think of a better way of describing your little sniping campaign on Open, GO. Here's to perseverance!
And that's the reason JW went on the program: she wanted to have a taste of a larger audience than she'll ever get palling around with Chris Matthews, et al.
I was very happy to see Joan in BillO's playhouse, I'm proud of her standing up for what she's written and say it directly to his digital face. She did very well indeed--projecting calm opposed to his vein popping indignation.
I remember when BillO was on Fresh Air with Terry Gross, and he got in a snippy snit at one of her questions, stood up and shouted "So! This is the way this is going to go huh?" and stomped out. Apparently, he just can't take it. Joan can go into the (faux) lion's den and take it, but BillO can't win an arm wrestling match with a 98 lb Terry Gross so he gathers up his eviscerated carcass and toddles home whining all the way.
Such is the hero of so many, inexplicably. I'm happy to have Joan as one of my heroes. I choose the way of affirmation instead of the way of negation.
For more on this interview check out my first ever OpenSalon blog entry. I hope losing my blog virginity wasn't in vain.
That's Tiller and Walsh for you: full of affirmation as the babies are slaughtered.
As for a "campaign" against OS, I wouldn't engage such an insignificant target. I drop by now and then to share what I write in more impressive venues and to provide a bit of "fair and balanced" counterpoint to the liberalism that dominates OS. And occasionally, I can't resist proofreading the text of those who should know better. Anyone we know?
But GordonO, I'm still scratching my head, trying to figure how Tiller and Joan could be as full of affirmation as the babies. And yes, Tiller was slaughtered. Whether or not the babies were slaughtered is a matter of personal belief, not punctuation. But what of Joan? Dear God, has she been slaughtered too?!
Oh, if only I knew someone who wrote for prestigious venues, yet had ample time to proofread other people's blogs.
I am in a phase where I have decided to call 'em as I see 'em. I am getting old, so I can get away with it, unless I am afraid of getting knived in the process...which is a distinct possibility where I live...
...I'll continue to look a the Happy Picture.
May I suggest including a Happy Picture in every post where controversial material is mentioned? It's good for the simple likes of me.
That's okay, GordonO. It reminds us all of the relative importance of form versus substance.