I think the outcry in the blogosphere about Barack Obama appearing (after a 700+ day boycott) on Fox News Sunday is one of the most stunning displays of self-indulgent foolishness since the Reverend Jeremiah Wright appeared at the National Press Club. Yes, I agree that a 100% boycott will marginalize FOX News and undermine their credibility, and eventually their audience. But they do carry the highest ratings in cable news and Obama’s opponent intends to take advantage of it.
Fox News confirmed that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) will make her first-ever appearance on “The O’Reilly Factor.” The interview will air in two parts over Wednesday’s and Thursday’s programs.
It will be conducted in South Bend, Ind., by host Bill O’Reilly. The Drudge Report had a banner headline proclaiming the news.
The entire FOX News enterprise is dishonest and corrupt, but Bill O’Reilly is the worst of the worst. This is a man that committed unforgivable acts of workplace sexual harassment, including calling a female employee at home and masturbating during their conversation.
If you can’t boycott Bill O’Reilly’s show, you really have no solidarity with victims of sexual harassment whatsoever. Or is all okay because O’Reilly paid an estimated 10 million dollars to erase his record as a predatory pervert?
In the long run, Democrats need to come together and show a united front against FOX News. But there can’t be a unilateral boycott by one candidate if another candidate is going to use the network’s highest rated and most disreputable show to reach out to voters.
Update [2008-4-29 16:22:7 by BooMan]: For clarity, because some people are missing my point…
I support a 100% boycott of FOX News, but only if all candidates abide by it. However, its absurd to throw a tantrum whenever Barack Obama doesn’t follow our assigned strategy.
Secondly, my beef with appearing on The O’Reilly Factor is separate and distinct from my beef with appearing on FOX News in general. No one who opposes sexual harassment should have anything to do with Bill O’Reilly. It doesn’t matter that his show is biased, that’s not the distinction I am making. What matters is that he is a creep of the highest order.
Ah, a voice of sanity in the progressive wilderness!
Thanks again, BooMan, You continue to remind me why you are one of my favorite commentators.
A-the-heck-men. This is utter foolishness. I know good people who watch Fox news out of ignorance, not malice. Should Obama not go before them? That’s so silly it’s almost beneath comment.
“I think the outcry in the blogosphere about Barack Obama appearing (after a 700+ day boycott) on Fox News Sunday is one of the most stunning displays of self-indulgent foolishness since the Reverend Jeremiah Wright appeared at the National Press Club.”
Oh yeah? I don’t think it’s foolish, anymore than I think your calling out Clinton for appearing on O’Reilly’s show is foolish. Both of their actions fall into the category of “fucking stupid”.
I think this post is a little incoherent. You’re saying the left-wing blogs are unjustified in hitting Obama for going on FOX News Sunday, but that it IS justified to go after Clinton for appearing on FOX’s O’Reilly Factor?
I am no clinton supporter, but I feel as though you are splitting the finest of hairs.
Splitting hairs?
O’Reilly is one of the most serious sexual harassers in the country. Chris Wallace stormed off the set in protest at how the other panelists we’re unfairly smearing Obama.
That’s splitting hairs?
yeah, i know about Wallace’s little “walking off the set” stunt. And I also know, from listening to right wing talk radio, that when Obama was the underdog all the righties loved him. Now that he’s ahead, it’s a full-court press from the guys you love to hate.
It seems “stormed off the set Wallace” has been replaced by the wallace we all know and loathe.
FOX is FOX. Splitting hairs between Bill O’Reilly and Chris Wallace is like splitting hairs between John Wayne Gacy and Ed Gein.
I mean come on, who in their right mind would lump Gein in with Gacey? I mean, yeah Gein made trophies and household items out of his victims, but at least he didn’t rape and kill children like Gacy did.Plus, he didn’t kill as many people.
Sorry man, I can’t get upset about Clintoon’s visit to O’Reilly when Oblahma’s paying visits to FOX Sunday. Wake me when there’s a real progressive running, OK?
see my update.
Thanks for the explanation. I mostly concur.
I don’t get what the fuss is about. O’Reilly’s employer, Murdoch, hosted a fundraiser for Hillary. Bill Clinton appeared on Limbaugh. Hillary sucked up to the root of all evil, Richard Scaife, and got his endorsement. Her appearance with OReilly is neither newsworthy nor surprising.
Again, Bill O’Reilly is predatory pervert. This is about more than FOX News or using right-wing media outlets. This is about legitimizing a super-creep.
But when she’s willing to have OReilly’s boss do a fundraiser for her, why would she not appear on his show? As I recall, OReilly’s perversions were on company time and company property and directed at company employees. Murdoch obviously supports his star’s behavior, and Clinton obviously already knew that.
aside from the sexual harrasment issue where he paid out $10 million big ones, Hillary likes to offer she’s for women’s rights.
but as always with the Clinton’s franchise of the low road to victory, Hillary justified accepting the invitation because O’Reilly has an audience of politically engaged people.
Steven D in another entry posted the video – “anything goes”
Is there a place on this planet where this couple can recover some principles?
huh?
You villify Clinton for going on O’Reilly after Obama went on Fox? But claim that Obama had to go on Fox because Clinton … did. I think. Huh?
I don’t see any real equivalence between Chris Wallace and Bill O’Reilly. It’s not a matter of breaking a boycott…Clinton has not boycotted FOX News. I wouldn’t say a thing if she went on Fox & Friends or did an interview with Brit Hume. Bill O’Reilly should not have a job. On any network.
This is not your most most coherent post.
The blogosphere that cares deeply about boycotting Fox is right to criticize Obama for going on Fox. If that’s what they care about it is right for them to write about it and criticize him. Where they go completely off the tracks is acting like MSM pundits who not only criticize but take the whole thing as a personal affront to themselves and making it all about themselves– but that’s another issue entirely.
The blogosphere should be truthful about the candidates they support and if they think they are wrong they should say so.
If you want to criticize Hillary for going on O’Reilly because he’s an alleged sexual harasser that’s your perogative. Of course this is criticizing the candidate that you oppose … strenuously. So it’s not really comparable to them criticizing their own candidate. But it’s still your perogative.
But it’s not your most coherent effort. And that’s partly because you are mixing up issues – Fox as a Republican Tool; O’Reilly as a sexual harasser; the blogosphere as concerned about things you don’t think should be a priority. I don’t see the equivalence of them criticizing Obama and you criticizing Hillary.
But carry on if it makes you happy.
Boycotting Fox is just a useless effort. I’m all in favor of boycotts that can work. But this one is just useless.
A large segment of our public gets their only news there. It would be a sin, in my mind, NOT to go on the air and try to breathe a little sense into that network.
I wouldn’t want to do a debate on Fox. And I’d pick the shows carefully. No O’Reilly or Hannity and (Mr. Invisible Colmes). But if the others guys are going to do it, you’d be a fool not to. We can’t afford to stand on principle when millions of obviously malleable minds are at stake, not to mention hundreds of thousands of lives if we can end the war by winning some of those people over.
I really don’t care at this point. We have an election where the RNC is trying to get an ad by the DNC pulled that uses only McCain’s own words, while a far more offensive and dishonest ad is being run in NC by the local GOP. We have a campaign where a highly watched television debate on ABC hardly touches the substance of any of the multiple number of issues relevant to most Americans so they can discuss the comments of Obama’s ex-pastor. We have emails circulating that claim Obama is a terrorist and a Muslim (or is it a terrorist Muslim?). We have a campaign where Bill Clinton goes on Rush Limbaugh and (at a different time) accuses Obama of being the one to play the race card. Hell, Obama even went on Fox News. At this point nothing that happens will shock me anymore.
Our politics are a disgrace, frankly.
I gotta visit TalkLeft and Left Coaster and Joan Walsh at Salon to find out why the O’Reilly two-parter is copacetic. Down the rabbit hole I go!
Be sure and report back when you re-emerge.
anyone have a hazmat suit?
LOL Bob in Pacifica!!
don’t forget taylor Swamp, ooooops i mean Marsh!
actually maybe her visit with Bill O will be a blessing in disguise for Obama….
Joan Walsh taylor CESSPOOL Marsh…two peas IN A POD
The REAGAN DEMOCRAT NEO CON Pod….both of them are as is their candidate Hillary Clinton(NeoCon-NY)
AHHH! You scared the hell outta me! I thought you meant Obama must be going on O’Reilly, which would then result in somebody like Stoller tearing out their own eyeballs.
You’re right. FOX sucks a big, fat one. But Hillary sucking up to Scaife, Limbaugh throwing primaries for her and all that is politics (except, of course, if it’s actually criminal, then it’s just Limbaugh). It really ain’t beanbag, is it? My preference would have been for him to stay away from FOX, but he didn’t ask me, so here we are. Since he did go on FOX though, Obama’s task, his obligation as a viable candidate is to get out there and get his message in front of as many people who vote as possible (no matter how deluded, misguided or thuggish they may be). If he can turn a few on the dark side, so much the better. The thing he betrayed most by going on FOX was arguably the self-importance of a lot of the popular kids in Blogopolis. We ought to ALL tell FOX to shove it, but that doesn’t work unless “ALL” is intact. So FOX is a player now. Fine. Great.
And now Hillary’s taking her shot, huh? There’s a little bit of difference between O’Reilly (which is FOX’s crown jewel of entertainment propaganda) and an interview with Chris Wallace (which is just bland, original flavor propaganda). I shudder to think of what she’ll say, but in the long run, Obama’s got to be able to take what she spews and throw it back in her face. He’s shown a little reluctance at times to do this, but I know he’s got it in him. I’m not too squeamish about that kind of campaign anymore. Let’s get this damn thing finished, already.
She won’t say so much. She’ll basically giggle and flirt, let her host know that they’re both in on the same joke. Before thanking him, she’ll reluctantly take a potshot at Obama and let you know how sorry she is to have to put him in his place. But that’s her duty. Smile.
I’d forgive her if she took him a gift…
of falafel.
It doesn’t seem to me like Democrats have that much to gain by walking into the lion’s, or in this case the fox’s, den. To that extent I support a Democratic boycott. However, I also can’t help but think that the Barack Obama who has said he would meet with the Iranians would be out of character to not meet with the Republicans.
In the end this is all just another distraction when we should be discussing the economy, education, healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan and all the other issues that are actually important, rather than the ones that only seem bigger than the rest because someone is waving them in front of our eyeballs.
Bread and Circuses man. We are the lowly plebs of Rome, and all we are entitled to is bread and circuses. Ok, maybe just the circuses. Our overlords are too cheap to spring for the bread.
That sounds about right to me.
O’ Reilly, Murdock, and Fox in general has no impact in my life. What they do is for its entertainment value only. I don’t care who appears on Fox – it’s for a laugh, a joke, whatever. I’m not interested in ratings. They care only about ratings not credible content. Sorry, I’m not interested in their news because it’s not.
I see no difference between BillO and anybody who works for Faux News. If you work for them, you’re evil. If you watch them, you’re ignorant.