O'Reilly Rages Against Joan Walsh Over Tiller Murder (VIDEO)

[Via Media Monitor Jon] Wow. Joan Walsh went on the O'Reilly Factor tonight having publicly vowed to be well-prepared to defend the reproductive rights of women and the legality of Dr. George Tiller's clinical practice, and truly doled out some major ownage without raising her voice or raising the temperature at all. It was an artful performance of talking headery, and what can I say? By the end of their two segments, O'Reilly is reduced to a gibbering, shout-faced wreck. If you need to know how far Walsh pummeled O'Reilly into pure insipidity, wait for the moment where he says to her: "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. You are misguided, you have blood on your hands because you portrayed this man as a hero."

Right. Bill O'Reilly would never condemn you for speaking your mind, if you don't count the whole YOU ARE VILE and YOU HAVE BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS condemnation part!

(UPDATE: Joan Walsh has a very amusing post up: "Why I Went On 'The O'Reilly Factor.'" Best riff: "It was a kaleidoscopic nightmare, a TV acid trip, and I don't do acid. It almost seems like O'Reilly does, but I don't think so. The man is driven by demons. God bless him and save him.")

[WATCH]

The whole exchange called to mind a passage of Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, IV.iii:

BRUTUS: You have done that you should be sorry for. There is no terror, Cassius, in your threats, For I am arm'd so strong in honesty That they pass by me as the idle wind, Which I respect not.

Joan Walsh: spoken like a Stoic!

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[t towntammy]

i believe that Bill oreilly and followers think it is ok that the abortion Dr was killed-even though he was doing it legally. As far as I know killing someone in his church is not legal.wow what Christians.Nothing that anyone from that group does is Christ-like-People on the way far right give me a headache w/ their hypocracy. Peace, Love and rock-n- roll

[Keith Swartz]

You are obviously banking on the majority of people who read this sight NOT HAVING WATCHED THIS INTERVIEW. This is the ONLY TIME O'Reily raised his voice ... that was because the woman (who acted as though she were drugged) would not answer his question. It was NOT rage it was FRUSTRATION. The only person with blood on his hands is Tiller who IS NO hero!

[englishinjapan]

i think you mustve watched a different video clip from the one i watched - he wouldnt let her get a word in edgeways. and she didnt act drugged up, she was merely calm and collected. it may seem drugged up to you, as righties only seem to be able to shout and scream these days, so calm and collected must be completely alien to you.

and youre right, maybe it was frustration - frustration that someone had the guts to go on fox and tell him stuff he doesnt want to hear.

[psatm]

Walsh did not act as if she were drugged, that's your own opinion. Most viewers seem to think that she held up very well against O'Reilly. She remained calm the whole time, what frustrated O'Reilly is that she didn't cave to his tactics and that she didn't give him the answer he wanted to hear.

If you don't think O'Reilly has some responsibility for what happened to Tiller, then you're just in denial. He's been raging against Tiller and others like him for a very long time, when what he should have been doing is raging against the law itself.

[Carol Gary]

The irony of the "Right to Life" idiots is that they are only concerned about fetuses. They don't think Dr. Tiller has a right to life, nor mothers who are facing death if their pregnanacy's go to term, nor for that matter do criminals on death row.

The ever present blind spot that would allow hate speech, and inciting others to commit murder, under the "blood on the hands argument," is just beyond the capacity of these religious, single issue zealots to comprehend. Bill is just a despicable man, who is a hateful fanatic. No reasoning with this intellectual baboon.

[FatBoysComedyClubs]

A true fox moment, already erased from their hard disk. Knowone at Fox will ever admit that
Bill lost to a girl!

[BoatLoath]

Why did Joan Walsh have to be asked three times whether she thought late term babies should be afforded any legal protections at all? Aborting a fetus in the first few months of life is harder to condemn morally, and ethically. It seems a little ambiguous to some whether it is a life yet. But aborting a baby weeks or days before birth is simply barbaric, and indefensible. Joan Walsh knows in her heart this is wrong, and even she had a hard time stating otherwise.

[theistus]

Because it is a trick question designed to put her on the defensive, to put her on trial, rather than have any serious discussion about the issues involved. It was a trap she refused to fall into, and rightly so. It's an old trick of demogoguery, rather trite and transparent.

As for whether it is harder to condemn morally, I would ask why? The fetus in these cases is not capable of life outside the mother, the line which the Supreme Ct drew previously (and one which I support based upon my own moral, religious, and ethical considerations). Such fetuses are still able to be aborted, just not by intact dilation and extraction (a medically safer procedure than what may be used now).

[BoatLoath]

It was the obvious question to ask, when the debate was concerning a physician who performs late term abortions. That means babies that might have been capable of life outside the mother. If you agree with drawing the line at that point, then you must agree with Bill that the doctor is contemptible.

[LadyLiberty1]

Trick question? Not at all! It was a very legitimate question and our Gal Joan could NOT answer it! Period! How can anyone defend this man? Moreover, the guy that shot Tiller is responsible for his own actions, cut out the nonsense about O'Reilly. What drivel!

[freeda82]

I could not agree more, Bill was 100% right, i was getting frustrated just listening to her. Unless the mother's life is in danger it is ABSOLUTELY considered murder to abort a fetus late term!

[t towntammy]

but they are obviously legal..

[Blissful]

I don't understand why the left doesn't stand up for this issue more. I know abortion is hard but late term abortion is not just evil women who decide at the last minute, y'know what nevermind kill my baby. These are not perfect Gerber babies that wingnuts portray. I know a women who found out in her eighth month that her baby had no brain and she had pregnancy induced diabetes, so should she have been forced to carry her baby to term with no hope for the baby and risk to her life? No. It is jerks like billo and his ilk that perpetuate the myth of the evil woman who must be controlled by reasonable man.

[sugarfree]

The aftermath
The next night we aired video of the confrontation and O'Reilly interviewed Mary Kay Culp, executive director of "Kansans For Life," a pro-life organization. Culp said her statistics showed that in every late-term abortion performed since 1998, not one was performed to save the life of the mother. Furthermore, Culp alleged that Tiller and another abortionist were the ones who were making the medical determination of "depression." "How does he terminate a fetus?" asked Bill.

"His preferred procedure is to find the baby's heart on the sonogram, inject with a poison, kill the baby and then put the mother into labor," explained Culp. The Factor obtained an official office letter signed by Dr. Tiller that seems to confirm this procedure.
"Then does what?" asked Bill.

By the time of the show that night, challenger Paul Morrison had defeated Phill Kline by 16 points, throwing the criminal investigation of Dr. George Tiller into uncertainty. But O'Reilly promised, "We're going to try to stop [Tiller]... we're not going to let up... believe me, we will stay on this story. This is horrendous."

Bill summarized in a heartfelt Friday, November 10th: "If we as a society allow an undefined mental health exception in late-term abortions, then babies can be killed for almost any reason... This is the kind of stuff that happened in Mao's China and Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union...

[sliznim]

So if I understand correctly, O'Reilly is still making the case that Dr. Tiller got what he deserved?? And he is saying "there is blood on your hands"?? What a hypocrite.

[everyman1973]

He never said that. His frustration was that she would not answer a simple question. We all know her answer but she didn't have the nerve to say what she believed. O'reilly asked her a reasonable question and she refused to respond. Nothing wrong with asking a tough question to a hypocrite who won't respond.

[BurtonOerney]

What did she mean when she told Bill, 'you'll be sorry?'

[BurtonOerney]

I like Bill O'Reilly. He seems like a pretty good guy.

[sugarfree]

Do your research, and you will see.

[sasse1]

Before you claim that he is a pretty good guy, I suggest you check him out.
He is often loud, rude and obnoxious.­..especial­ly to guests who don't agree with him.
The man is actually appalling and unbearable.

[samfan]

An unborn fetus cannot be granted legal rights, because those rights would infringe on the rights of the mother. Until the fetus is born, and takes a breath the mother is the primary patient. How hard is this to understand. My womb is my womb and my womb is not for rent.

[Tim Lara]

I like how Walsh stood her ground and didn't cave to the yelling and griping that O'Reilly threw. she could have easily lost it and blew up but she kept her cool and really tore into him, congratulations.

check out www.yovia.com/blogs/timlara for the liberal side and
www.yovia.com/blogs/vargoza for the republican side

[kurd55]

GREAT job, Ms. Walsh!

[Oonagh]

We are taught that words do not hurt but words to the crazies are fuel to the fire.

[mnieman101]

words and tone are everything.

[raw6464]

I tried to watch this video to the end but couldn't. O'Reilly should be sued by Tillers family for instigating and incite the pro life radicals to kill people. This is not the first time and is a tactic they do use and condone.

I believe in free speech but when you use "free speech" to incite the population when you do know there are some fringe screwballs who will take it as a call to arms and shoot people... you must be accountable for what you say... no different that yelling fire in a movie theater.

If I said or posted on the internet that I wish somebody will kill the president, I would have the FBI and SS knocking on my door. What gives these media scumbags the right to do essentially do the same thing and get a free pass?

[WireDolly]

Spot on.

[PalaceOfWisdom]

By that logic Martin Luther King was equivalent to Bill O'Reilly. Every time he planned a speech, it meant bigots would get angry and commit violent acts. Does that mean King shouldn't have spoken? As Jason Linkins points out, if a message has no merit it can simply be disregarded. O'Reilly's ramblings fit that description.

When you or Keith Olbermann try to use the act of one lunatic as justification to censor someone you don't agree with, you lower the liberal side to the level of the far right. Our side is supposed to be the champion of exchanging ideas through intellectual debate, not trying to force our opinion on all by stamping out dissent. And if doing so was possible, it would just give the "liberal media" claims validity they don't currently have. The best way to win a debate with an idiot is to let him speak.

[hunt49]

If you had made that statement about Malcolm X, you might be on steadier ground. But King's words are shot through with calls to moral higher ground, passive resistance, and peaceful approaches. There's a qualitative difference.

To liken O'Reilly's semi-literate rants to the highly erudite Dr. King is rather insulting. Billy has a lot more in common with the police officers in the civil-rights-era newsclips who are barely holding back the German Shepards -- he has some responsibility for what the dog does when he brings it to the protest.

But like you say, letting him speak and be seen for what he is might have the same effect as those newsclips did.

[theistus]

Logic fail.