Bill O’Reilly says he would join a lynching party against Michelle Obama if her comments about being proud of her country “for the first time” were true…..and he STILL has a job!!!!
by Larry Simons
February 23, 2008
I waited until the dust settled on this story before I commented on it. Most of all, as is the case for every time loofah-boy says something he should be fired for, I waited until he told a LIE to cover it up. Billo didn’t disappoint this time either.
On February 18, Michelle Obama, wife of presidential candidate Barack Obama (D-IL), made these comments, “What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something -- for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I've seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it's made me proud."
The very next day on his radio talk show, the Sultan of Spin himself, Bill O’ Reilly took a call from a listener (who called herself Maryanne) who said that Michelle Obama was an “angry woman” and that she was “speaking with her real voice for the first time”. She then told O’ Reilly that she had a ‘friend’ who had knowledge of Michelle Obama and this ‘friend’ said she (Obama) was a “militant woman”.
O’ Reilly told the caller he would like to get her information and find out who she is and ended the on-air discussion with her. Then Billo began talking about the spouses of the Democratic candidates (Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama) and how he has sympathy for them for having to endure all the criticism and attacks that come their way when they are defending their spouses on the campaign trail.
Then Billo said this, “That's wrong. And 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.”
UNLESS Billo? UNLESS? So, in other words, you are JUSTIFYING joining a lynching party for the wife of a presidential candidate if there is evidence that she really meant that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country?”
Listen to the clip:
Definition of “lynching”: “the practice in the 19th and 20th centuries of the humiliation and killing of people by mobs acting outside the law. These murders, most of them unpunished, often took the form of hanging and burning. To demonstrate a ritual of power, mobs sometimes tortured the victim.”
Let’s make this very very clear. On February 19, 2008, Bill O’ Reilly, on his national radio show, said that if he found evidence that Michelle Obama (the wife of a presidential candidate) really meant to say a negative thing about her country by saying, “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country”, then he would KILL her by joining a lynching party to either hang her, burn her or torture her.
And this bastard still has a job???
Am I over-reacting? Did O’Reilly NOT say that UNLESS he found evidence that Michelle Obama thinks America is bad then he would not join a lynching party to go after her? Does lynching NOT mean to join a mob to torture, burn or hang a victim until they are dead? What am I misinterpreting?
Then, to top it all off, this son of a bitch goes back on the radio two nights later (Feb 21) and attacks a caller who asks if O’Reilly should apologize for the comment he made.
CALLER: “Hey, Bill. Big fan. I have a question for you. Do you think you owe Michelle Obama an apology for that disrespectful lynching analogy?”
O'REILLY: “Of course not. I stuck up for the man -- the woman, I'm sorry. Just to point out that Bill in Boca Raton on the sheet says, "New York Times worried McCain will beat Obama." That's what Bill in Boca Raton wanted to talk about, according to what he told our screener. So then Bill from Boca Raton gets on the air and tries to say, do I owe Michelle Obama, who I stuck up for, obviously, everyone knows that, an apology. So Bill in Boca Raton Florida is a liar. He is a far-left loon. And this is what that crew does. Hey, Bill, and this is -- I'm looking out for you, man, you need to rethink your life. You are a dishonest person, you're a loon, and you really need to rethink your life, sir.”
Are you kidding me Billo? You stuck up for her? By saying you would KILL her UNLESS you found evidence that she wasn’t bad-mouthing America? Then he attacks a caller who simply asks him if he owes Mrs. Obama an apology? Just because he told the screener he would talk about something else? Are you freaking kidding me? Why would that make him attack a caller even if the caller DID lie to get on the air? It’s not like the screeners would have let him through if the caller had told them the REAL reason for his call!
If Billo really was sympathetic to Michelle Obama and he really WAS sticking up for her, why wouldn’t Billo tell the caller, “well, maybe it was the wrong word and if that offended anyone, I’m sorry”. But no, he didn’t say this, did he? Instead, he attacks a caller who even identified himself as a “big fan” and said he was a “far-left loon”. (To Billo, a “far-left loon” is anyone who listens to and quotes Billo’s EXACT words in its EXACT context and calls him out on it)
Here's the clip of the caller (mentioned above) (courtesy of Real Truth Films)
Then, later in the same segment Billo blatantly LIES and says this, “The word "lynching" was used because I said it quite clearly. I'm not going to go on some lynching party against Michelle Obama; that's ridiculous. You remember that Judge Clarence Thomas used the "high-tech lynching" when he was promoting his book, and I think that that was a very interesting way for Clarence Thomas to put it. Said, "I'm not going to participate in anything like that."
First of all, Billo did NOT say, “I'm not going to go on some lynching party against Michelle Obama.” (PERIOD). He said THIS-----the COMPLETE LINE (IN CONTEXT BY THE WAY): “"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.” UNLESS. UNLESS. The use of the word “UNLESS” means that he WILL go on a lynching party if he finds evidence to the contrary. THERE’S YOUR CONTEXT BILLO!
Then, he uses Clarence Thomas’ reference to the word “lynching” as a way to defend his use of the word. Clarence Thomas used the phrase “’high-tech’ lynching” to describe what was being done to HIM during his confirmation hearings (for the Supreme Court) in 1991 when he was accused of sexual harrassment by Anita Hill. Bill O’Reilly was using the term “lynching” by saying he would be PARTICIPATING IN the lynching.
So, not only does Billo FALSELY connect his use of the word with Clarence Thomas’ use of the word, but Billo never used the EXACT term “high-tech lynching” that Thomas used. In both cases Billo is lying and spinning to cover up for his despicable reference to “lynching”.
Also, Billo purposely leaves out the fact that Thomas was highly criticized for using that term in 1991. Of course, Billo’s faithful sheep have no interest in facts nor do they have the capacity to remember what Billo says from day to day, let alone remembering something that was said in 1991 that 99.9% of them didn’t even watch anyway.
The very same night on his TV show, “The O’Reilly Factor”, Billo said this in response to people who had been offended by his comments, “While talking to a radio caller, I said there should be no lynching in the case -- that comment off Clarence Thomas saying he was the victim of a high-tech lynching. He said that on 60 Minutes, you may remember. I'm sorry if my statement offended anybody. That, of course, was not the intention. Context is everything."
LIE. LIE. LIE. LIE. I counted 4 lies. Here they are:
1. “While talking to a radio caller, I said there should be no lynching in the case”----LIE. As already pointed out, he said there wouldn't be lynching UNLESS he found evidence……meaning: if he DID find evidence, yes, there WOULD be a lynching.
2. “that comment off Clarence Thomas saying he was the victim of a high-tech lynching”----LIE. Thomas said HE was the victim. O’Reilly said he would PARTICIPATE in the lynching. Two DIFFERENT things. One is being murdered, the other is the murderer.
3. “I'm sorry if my statement offended anybody.”----LIE. If Billo was sorry, why did he attack a caller that wanted him to apologize for it?
4. “That, of course, was not the intention. Context is everything.”----LIE. Of course it was the intention, because you’re a racist and you hate black people. You scream and cry, "they took me out of context, they took me out of context!", but the context incriminates you Billo! When you repeated what you said on several occasions, YOU left out things you said. Context is OBVIOUSLY not everything-----because even YOU didn’t quote your own context!
Here’s the clip:
Billo, the “context” bullshit is getting pretty damned old and tiring. If you cared so much about people NOT taking you out of context-----then don’t say anything EVER that would make someone even question what you meant! You’ve played the “context card” how many times now? 100? At least? By now, wouldn’t you be watching EVERY damned word you said?
The answer is---NO. You don’t care about what you say because it’s not enough that you are just racist. You have to be arrogant about it and admit it to the world---then when you’re called on it, you claim, “I’m taken out of context…..boo hoo….woe is me….I’m the victim!”
You’re a RACIST PIG that should be forced to stand in an unemployment line somewhere in Harlem. As you’re getting the shit beat out of you, let’s see how how many of them care about “context”.
The bottom line is, in this day and age, in the 21st century, if you mention the word “lynching” in reference to anyone but especially to the African-American community, given the history of this country, you should be IMMEDIATELY fired and forced to make an apology. Not just suspension, not just a fine------FIRED. PERIOD.
We are on the brink of having our first African-American president in this country’s history. This is progress. For a racist TV personality to not only say things like this but to also get away with it is a stab in the back to that progress. For Michelle Obama to keep quiet about this and not demand at least an apology shows the profoundness of her character.
We all know this piece of shit, O’Reilly, will never ever apologize. I don’t even want him to, because it would be fake. The racist remarks he has made in the past 6 months alone shows us all that his racism is so rooted inside him that an apology would be worthless.
I found this clip of radio host Mike Malloy talking about the “lynching” remark. It’s pretty great. If you don't recall, Bill O’Reilly did a segment on his show in November 2007 condemning Mike Malloy about comments he made concerning Press Secretary Dana Perino that O’Reilly viewed as threatening. In the O’Reilly clip, O’Reilly asks his guest if Malloy could be arrested by the FBI for making threatening remarks about a public official.
Now O’Reilly has made a threatening remark about a public official. Funny, I didn’t see Billo do a segment on himself demanding that HE be arrested.
Here is O’Reilly’s segment from Nov 2007 on Mike Malloy