Bill O'Reilly: "I Don't Want To Go On A Lynching Party Against Michelle Obama Unless There's Evidence"

From Media Matters:

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."

Read the entire Media Matters post about the comment, made on Bill O'Reilly's radio show yesterday, here, or listen to the audio below:

Update: Portfolio.com's Jeff Bercovici reports that David Tabacoff, O'Reilly's executive producer, has defended the remark:

"What Bill said was an obvious repudiation of anyone attacking Michelle Obama," he said, according to Fox spokeswoman. "As he has said more than ten times, he is giving her the benefit of the doubt."

Comments

[DNVigerJr]

02:05 AM on 02/26/2008

Get a life! O'Reilly didn't suggest we lynch anybody, regardless of what they said, meant to say, or didn't say. Get Real! You are all just looking for an excuse to bring up something from our ugly past.

Here in Las Vegas, just a few days ago, a black kid shot and killed a white boy in a nice neighborhood. There was no connection, just a random act of hate and violence. Did all the white people riot, rob all the stores, burn the city down, and are they calling for lynching parties?

I would hope American, black America, white America, both, would be beyond race hatred, all be interested in mending things, showing love for one another, being color blind. That goes both ways. Black commentators calling for O'Reilly to be lynched is just as bad, and does absolutely no good.

O'Reilly was trying to get the caller not to quickly judge Michelle Obama until the facts are all in. He used the wrong words to get his point across. Have we not all been guilty of doing that? Have people misunderstood what we were trying to say because we didn't say it as effectively as we would have wished? What Imus said on the air was flat out bad news, fully bigoted and insulting to the nth degree, and there was no room for misinterpretation. For his remarks that were unmistakenly racial, "nappy headed", and using the vilest derogatory remark of calling young women "hoes" was unforgiveable. If one of those young atheletes was my daughter, I would have punched out his lights for it, and slept well, afterwards, in jail or not!

O'Reilly was not going in that direction, and I have heard repeatedly in business meetings about "witch hunts", "lynching" someone, and it wasn't about black people or witches. It had another connotation. I think what we were all mad about Michelle Obama's remarks at face value was her saying that until now she had no reason to be proud of America, and I find that totally insulting as an American! What about winning the cold war without firing a shot and freeing all those people behind the iron curtain who all lived lives of fear, retribution, firing squads no less scarey than what blacks must have felt in the deep South during horrible times when the clan ruled and hung people.

What about all the union soldiers who gave their lives to end slavery? What about all the soldiers who gave their lives and health and time to fight Hitler and Tojo who would have enslaved us, and considering what Hitler did to the Jews, he may have done the same to blacks, had we not won that war?

Blacks who can run for President, who have the freedoms that they enjoy in present day America live in the greatest and freest land in the world, or they would have returned to Africa or left for another Country when they had the chance. We are far from perfect, and always need to fight prejudice and bigotry whenever it raised its ugly head, but lets not act towards O'Reilly in a manner too reminiscent of the hatred that leads to bigotry! Let's hope Michelle Obama really meant to say that it is wonderful that Americans of all colors and heritages welcome her husband in such great numbers, and that a black man or woman can be president if elected by the people in these days. That there were times in America where such was not the case, but because this is such a wonderful Country, we have grown and embraced each other as brothers and sisters regardless of race or color, and hopefully some day, religion. Let's hope that is what she meant to say, just like let's hope O'Reilly never intended to imply that black women should be lynched if they don't tow the mark or say just what certain possible segments of Americans would have her say.

[ZydecoCaptain]

04:18 PM on 02/25/2008

Reading the whole comment, O'Liely's comment was just a stupid, stupid choice of words. Had he said, "I don't want to pillory her..." or "I'm not going to sully her reputation without knowing the facts" or something to that effect, it would have been OK. However, as I read the comment, O'Liely was not advocating lynching Ms. Obama... at least until not until all the facts were in.

[the964kid]

10:25 PM on 02/23/2008

Over the years O'Reily has made lots of racist comments and observations - I would have been more surprised if he had NOT reacted in a racist fashion. Look for many more of these kind of comments from him in the coming months!

[BGraham]

09:49 PM on 02/23/2008

Look, O'Reilly is scum, no doubt -- but since when is the word "lynching" synonymous with race? Blacks have also been shackled, chained, enslaved, hobbled, oppressed. . .are we going to make these words, when used by whites, racist, too?

It's just an absolutely ridiculous assertion in my opinion that O'Reilly said this to be racist. It seems more like those waiting to spring into attack found something they could use.

It just makes Obama supporters seem overreactive and well, stupid.

[JFyfe]

09:31 PM on 02/23/2008

Did you all see him on Jay Leno last night? I wonder why Jay had him on. They had a "polite" non debate about why Obama is winning. OReilly said it was because "the folks" like Obama and don't like Hillary. He then claimed not to "have a dog in this fight" and just to try to keep everyone honest in the presidential election. This was so disingenuous when you watch his program (as I do, in stunned fascination) and see his hatred couched in so many ways.

[Fathoms]

12:37 PM on 02/23/2008

You don't Bill? Well I do. I've heard the evidence and all I want to know is where to queue up to join the Bill O'Reilly lynching . . . party of 1. Lynching Bullshit-Bill couldn't happen a moment too soon.

[fcrooster]

10:50 AM on 02/23/2008

So what's preventing us from a grassroots effort to get this loser to genuinely apologize publicly then have his Fox News boss fire his ass? He obviously has not learned the lesson of President Bush's recent White House Black History Month speech about the use of the word "lynching;" nor did he learn anything from the Don Imus storm. This man is not only ignorant, he takes pride in his ignorance! And where is the FCC on this?

[justsaynotofascism]

05:46 AM on 02/22/2008

Thanks, Bobleblah1!


PLEASE EVERYONE, READ:

Police concerned about order to stop screening

DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

---continued at:
http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

[fact finder]

09:31 AM on 02/22/2008

just say no; Some ones head should roll for this.

[Collielady]

12:29 AM on 02/22/2008

There are many reasons to not always be proud of this country, rascism being one of the most obvious. Bill O'Reilly, by virtue of his race-filled comment, inadvertantly makes Michelle Obama's case.

Clearly, O'Reilly is a frightened man.

[transendentilist]

02:14 PM on 02/22/2008

Excellent point C. O'Rally is first and foremost, greedy. He seems to have little or no principles, and a thirst for controversy. In the media, controvercy equals ratings, and ratings equal money.
I have more respect for a hooker than I do O'rally. At least the hooker is honest.

[michaelsmolder]

01:47 PM on 02/24/2008

o'reilly is a LITTLE man. He's proven that.

[peachfuzz]

08:37 PM on 02/21/2008

FCC COMPLAINT FORM

https://esupport.fcc.gov/sform2000/formE!input.action

YOU MIGHT HAVE TO CUT/PASTE

[peachfuzz]

08:36 PM on 02/21/2008

FCC COMPLAINT FORM

https://esupport.fcc.gov/sform2000/formE!input.action

[JFyfe]

09:24 PM on 02/23/2008

Most people alive today know what lynching means in the American Black context.
Unless they are highly educated they are much less likely to know the origin of "rule of thumb". So lets get real.

[michaelsmolder]

01:51 PM on 02/24/2008

Peachfuzz.... I did complain to the FCC. I hope people don't complain to BillO... the smuck will just lay down and say they are all after me!

[AntiSocialite]

03:09 PM on 02/21/2008

Really people, I know BillO is a blowhard but cut him a little slack. "Lynching" like it or not is in our lexicon and I don't think that O'Reilly or anyone else should have to apologize for using it or any other colloquialism. When someone says "rule of thumb" they aren't automatically branded a misogynist even though that phrase came about based on the permissable size of stick to beat your wife with. I've heard this phrase used many, many times and no one even bats an eye, now all of the sudden it's used, ironically while defending Mrs. Obama, and it's disgusting and hate speech(which yes I feel should also be protected under the constitution). I'm sorry but last I checked this was America and we have free speech and he has every right to say what he wants. This is virtually identical to what happened to Schuster but at least, to Fox's credit, they probably won't suspend him and force him to apologize.

Peace

[Grulg]

06:49 PM on 02/21/2008

*Naw, Bill deserves to be nailed but good for this one. Let's go get that there stick yer talking about, hand it to Olbermann and get it over with. The guy's a racist at least as bad's Imus.

[fourex]

07:31 PM on 02/21/2008

Really people, I know BillO is a blowhard but cut him a little slack. "Lynching" like it or not is in our lexicon and I don't think that O'Reilly or anyone else should have to apologize ...

No it's not. And especially not when used as a threat against a black person. Your apology is nonsense and inflammatory.

[transendentilist]

02:23 PM on 02/22/2008

Someone made the same arguement about the word "pimping." The implication is quite clear. And how does it help our lexicon when words have dual meanings? I am all for slang, and even profanity, but redifining our lexicon with epithets is a dilution or perversion of that lexicon.

[Bocababs]

02:27 PM on 02/21/2008

This is all over the call-in radio shows today. My take? What is good for Don Imus, and more recently David Shuster, is good for Bill O'Reilly.

[standforpeace]

01:59 PM on 02/21/2008

I guess Michelle should be greatful. Because Black men and women have been lynched for far less than having the nerve to suggest that this country has been headed to a bad place for a long time.

When people like Bill who make their living with words, use a loaded term like "lynching party" it's no accidental slip of the tongue. When I think about the millions of Americans who worship this hatemonger, it makes me dare I say it, less than proud of my country.

[electress]

01:39 PM on 02/21/2008

Yes, I listened to Bush talk about Lynching,
but he will not pass the Hate Crime Bill that
adds sex gender and gender identity into the mix.