Senior Hillary Adviser On Whether She'll Take On O'Reilly: "That's Not The Plan"
So why did Hillary agree to go on The O'Reilly Factor and will she be taking on O'Reilly in some way, as Obama was criticized for not doing during his interview with Fox's Chris Wallace?
I just posed these questions to Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson. He would only say:
"We've had a standing offer from them for a while -- Hillary obviously doesn't agree with Bill O'Reilly on many issues, but he has a large audience of politically engaged people."
They may be politically engaged, but are they persuadable in any way? Some 2004 polling suggested that Fox viewers supported Bush over Kerry by 88%-7% and gave Bush more votes than conservatives, white evangelicals, gun owners, and supporters of the Iraq War.
Meanwhile, a senior adviser to Hillary, asked whether she'd be taking on O'Reilly in some fashion, said, on condition of anonymity:
"That's not the plan."
Late Update: MoveOn, a major Obama supporter that hit the Illinois Senator over his Fox appearance and has led the charge against Fox, emails over this response, complete with hyperlink:
"With no plan to call out Fox's Republican agenda, Senator Clinton's appearance on 'The O'Reilly Factor' does nothing more than legitimize a network that will then use that credibility to smear Democrats and progressive ideas in 2008. She's pandering to a small audience that is not persuadable."
Darlin you really do not get it do you?
Of course she won't be taking on O'Liely - they'll both be taking on Obama.
Care to make a bet?
April 29, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can I get in on that action? I'd be floored if they spent less than 20% of the "interview" talking about Wright. Who, again, is not Obama, in case there's still confusion between the two men.
April 29, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know all us black folk look the same to them. Why just the other day some asked if I was Oprah.
April 29, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you're getting better press on Fox than MSNBC, maybe your target audience isn't the Democratic party.
April 29, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let us not forget that she has the loving support of both Richard Mellon Scaife and Rupert Murdoch.
If she still had a soul I'd say she sold it to whatever satan it is rightwing f***tards worship these days.
April 29, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now now. According to Hillary, her sitdown with, and subsequent endorsement by, Richard Mellon Scaife just demonstrates how she can pull people together.
And she said it with a straight face, no less.
April 29, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
David Geffen had it right, “Everybody in politics lies, but [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it’s troubling.”
April 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
deathbed conversion I think she said. But it was her campaign's deathbed she was referring to.
April 29, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not. It's the Democratic voters in Indiana and North Carolina.
April 29, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or maybe prissy Keith Olbermann is in love with Barack Obama and hates Hillary Clinton.
April 29, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll make a bet. What are the terms? To be clear, I'm not saying she won't criticize Obama at all - she is competing against him for the nomination, let's not forget.
I think the interview, at least for her part, will be more about her strengths and Democratic strengths, than about Obama's weaknesses.
You in?
April 29, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The repudiation of Wright today was an act of desperation and a very big deal. In Philadelphia, Obama declared he could no more reject Wright than he could reject the black community. And now he's done it. If you don't think Wright has a considerable and vocal following in the black community, you may be surprised at what happens next.
April 29, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy G. writes:
Billy, to the contrary: I believe Wright's 3-day media blitz, followed by today's repudiation of him by Obama, was/is a 2-step dance carefully orchestrated by Obama's campaign.
It's actually quite clever: they saw that the Wright issue was not going away and its effects were visible in the polls. So, the campaign sent the reverend out - to make a few more outrageous statements, thus giving Obama the perfect excuse to repudiate him, while claiming to the black community that Wright's "big mouth" left them no choice.
I'm sure Wright was all too happy to take the fall for Obama while appearing to go out fighting, and the issue is off the table for the Fall campaign. Not bad!
April 29, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wasn't an act of desperation, you nard. Wright tried to bring race back into the discussion and Obama essentially told the country that he wouldn't be a part of it.
April 29, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, I just love how this is such a meta-blogger circle-jerk concern. I wonder what Stoller, Kos, and Ben Smith think. Only then will we know whether going on Fox is a good idea. Perhaps there should be a chart describing which Fox shows are appropriate to go on, and how much outrage needs to be expressed on each show to pass the liberal blogger litmus test. Or am I missing the point? Is this still about getting the scoop about what the tone of the interview is going to be as opposed to the content of the interview itself?
April 29, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It appears that the netroots campaign to "delegitimize" Fox is failing miserably. Maybe they should call in Mark Penn to strategize, I hear he is available.
April 29, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
We all need . . . an Outrage-O-Meter! we need that to accurately measure who registers the most outrage while being a guest on Fox. Whoever does wins the Outrage Registered While Being a Guest on Fox metric!
April 29, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
What difference does it make. Obama just split with the black community over Wright.
April 29, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's funny.
April 29, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you read that Toni Morrison article I gave you?
April 29, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Paraphrasing South Park, Toni Morrison isn't queen of Black America.
But it's bull to think he's going to lose them, and here's why: He gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, squared their differences. Then that guy turns around and stabs him in the back.
People are sympathetic to him dissociating with his pastor now. He was betrayed first, so this is no betrayal, no inconsistency.
April 29, 2008 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You quote Toni Morrison like she has credibility. She's the moron who said that Bill Clinton was the "first black president", thereby ensuring her status as Queen HN for the Clinton's.
April 29, 2008 11:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you're the black avatar that never read what she really said in the New Yorker. But, apparently, Obama didn't either. He thought it was about shooting hoops and dancing. So go read Morrison -- who, by the way, has endorsed Obama -- and come back and tell me what you object to in her statement about Bill Clinton. If you want to argue, argue. If you're going to rant, rant. But try to throw a fact in now and then.
April 30, 2008 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
O RLY!!!???
Careful, Billy, your nose will grow if you keep this up.
Evidence of your claim, please? The "Black Community?" C'mon. Getting tired?
You crack me up.
April 29, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry about Billy. He's simultaneously post-racial and in tune with the entirety of the now-fractured black community.
April 30, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
:)
April 29, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
April 29, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
99.99% chance that it was Wolfson. After all, that's the senior advisor who Greg was on the phone with.
April 29, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some folks owe Greg an apology.
April 29, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
so you admit Hillary going on O'reilly is a bad idea?
April 29, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, she will nail it as usual.
Greg was correct when he posted about Obama taking Fox on but did not.
You should apologize to Greg if you attacked him for that post.
April 29, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
if by "nail it" you mean tag-team with O'reilly to demonize Obama...
yes.
Should make you proud to be a Democrat.
April 29, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
What makes you think gottalife is a democrat?
April 29, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
He definitely not, which is why he should be ignored
April 29, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
He admits he gets his news from Fox. What Democrat gets their news from Fox?
April 29, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
getalife, they're going to loofah each others' backs. She's going on O'Reilly so he can make her look good.
April 29, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, they do. And all Hillary has to do now is keep her mouth shut, smile a lot, say she can't speak for Senator Obama, and let the black community take care of Obama.
April 29, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait...do really you think Obama's speech today has lost him so much black support that we'd support the race-baiting candidate? If so, you should probably get out and actually talk to some black people. Hell, even one as long as s/he's not a HN like most of the Clinton supporters.
April 29, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know one thing for sure. You don't represent the black community. Let's see what happens over the next couple of days.
April 29, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
What will happen over the next few days is Obama will lose a percentage of the African-American vote. That will not matter. Even if he loses all of the remaining states, he'll still have more pledged delegates than she does.
April 29, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never said I did, nor do I pretend to. I do know that I speak to a far larger variety of black people on a daily basis than you ever will. I also know that since you are NOT black, there's a lot about black people you will never know no matter how often you listen to Morrison, Cosby or Juan Williams.
April 29, 2008 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only evidence I see of your blackness is an avatar. You don't know who I am or who I talk to. This is cyberspace. What you get is what you read. Why not show us all how black you are by quoting the parts of Morrison you disagree with and telling us why you disagree with them? What she was saying about Clinton is exactly what some people are trying to do to Obama right now. Were you even aware of the fact that she has endorsed Obama?
http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/clinton/morrison.html
There is the link. Here is the "first black President" part.
"African-American men seemed to understand it right away. Years ago, in the middle of the Whitewater investigation, one heard the first murmurs: white skin notwithstanding, this is our first black President. Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children's lifetime. After all, Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald's-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas. And when virtually all the African-American Clinton appointees began, one by one, to disappear, when the President's body, his privacy, his unpoliced sexuality became the focus of the persecution, when he was metaphorically seized and bodysearched, who could gainsay these black men who knew whereof they spoke? The message was clear 'No matter how smart you are, how hard you work, how much coin you earn for us, we will put you in your place or put you out of the place you have somehow, albeit with our permission, achieved. You will be fired from your job, sent away in disgrace, and--who knows?--maybe sentenced and jailed to boot. In short, unless you do as we say (i.e., assimilate at once), your expletives belong to us.'"
So, you tell me. Is she wrong?
April 30, 2008 8:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm waiting. Funny how the smartass remarks dry up in the face of a little info and a serious question.
April 30, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary wins every remaining state 55 to 45 AND they seat Florida and Michigan, she still won't have as many delegates as Obama. You are on drugs.
April 29, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you mean...
clap, clap, point, point, nod, nod?
Rinse, repeat.
April 29, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most brilliant phrase in marketing! I've always wondered who coined it.
April 30, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Clinton happens disagrees with anything that O'Reilly says during her interview, I'm expecting another wounded post from Greg about how he was lied to by a Clinton aide that is linked to by another wounded blogger and then relinked back by Greg again.
April 29, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am with Billlysumday, the blogosphere or whatever its called is spinning itself into irrelevancy these days. I pay pretty close attention to this stuff and I find the concern over who goes on Fox news and when pretty uninteresting. I doubt most people even notice or care.
April 29, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
O I'm so glad to not be a voice crying in the wilderness over this.
I'm terribly disappointed in the alternative media. It's done a terrible job of reporting on this election.
April 29, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I tend to agree, although there's been some good stuff mixed in with the paranoid rantings and astroturf campaigning by ... well, the usual suspects.
April 29, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
the MoveOn folks called: "She's pandering to a small audience that is not persuadable."
I wonder how she will address the fallen Rev. Wright.
Since day one she has been consistent.
Remember shucking and jiving!
April 29, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is this obsession with "taking on"? O'Reilly will ask his questions and offer his opinions. If he says something wrong or obnoxious, you challenge it. If he asks questions that allow you plenty of room to answer and articulate your message, you just take that opportunity and do your best to get your message out.
April 29, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel it's best to leave the taking on of O'Reilly to Olbermann.
April 29, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is no surprising. The "fighter" only fights Democrats, not Republicans.
April 29, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course.
At this point, it seems Hillary is just a pro-choice McCain!
(I can't keep straight if Hillary was for the war before she was against it, or if McCain was against the war before he was for it)
April 29, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never forget that McCain and Hillary were against each other before they were for each other.
April 29, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary gets better press on Fox than on MSNBC whose anchors are all in a homoerotic thrall with Obama. I mean Chris Mathews says he gets a thrill running up his pantlegs whenever Barack speaks. Olbermann kisses a picture of Obama's ass every morning to get him started.
April 29, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary gets better coverage on Fox because the rightwing f***tards desperately want her to be the nominee.
April 29, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
And of course, Greg, you framed those questions so that you had a "gotcha" ... right? I mean, come on. Why ask that question if it wasn't a snide swipe at the "unnamed" Obama surrogate who said that he would "take on" Fox? Really, Greg, sometimes I am struck with the sheer banality and uselessness of some of these posts. This is news why???? You've already posted that she'll be on BO's show - do we need to know that, well, Hillary's campaign didn't make the mistake that Obama's campaign did? Jeesh, come on.
April 29, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
hmmm -- guess MoveOn disagrees with you as to the intent and news value of this post
April 29, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
More like many of us disagree with MoveOn as to the news value of a candidate being interviewed on a news show.
April 29, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
But O'Reilly factor is not a "news" show, it is a biased, intolerant hateful talking head show.
April 29, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quite frankly, no, I don't think MoveOn's e-mail is newsworthy, either. I would have complained had you even posted that. It's a made-up controversy (yet another one to distract us from the pressing issues facing this country).
April 29, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely...there's a global food crisis and it's affecting local stores here in Los Angeles. It's definitely affecting my food bill. But let's talking about Clinton interviewing with a serial sexual harrasser. That's totally gonna get gas in my tank and lower food costs. I can't wait for more breathless Hillary conference call posts from Sargent. They're so relevant to my life.
April 29, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, you snarky little shit! How about finally admitting what your real agenda is here. You could give a rat's ass about Billary or Obama - your job is to simply stir the soup with your half baked insinuations and cutting and pasting of campaign tripe. The only dog you have in the hunt is competition for eyeballs. You're whoring yourself for click-throughs.
But I'll still read you - ya' snarkalicious little shit you!>/b>
April 29, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, it's another one of your famously irritating posts. 122 comments so far, and only 4 recommendations.
April 29, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
They may be politically engaged, but are they persuadable in any way? Some 2004 polling suggested that Fox viewers supported Bush over Kerry by 88%-7% ...
OK, so 7% of actual Kerry voters watch Fox, and that probably means there is another 7% or so who voted for Bush in the end, but were reachable. In an election that stands to be close, that is far too large an audience of potential Democratic voters to simply be ignored and written off. Candidates have to go where the voters are, and in a close election they will be fighting tooth-and-nail for relatively small pockets of undecided voters, including the small pocket of Fox viewers who might vote Democratic.
April 29, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
don't become a statistician.
7% of FOX VIEWERS voted for Kerry. Probably less than 1% of Kerry voters watch FOX.
I have no idea what will happen on Bill'O, but if Hillary gets an "assist" and snipes at Obama on that show, it will be indefensible.
Obama went to FOX to reach an audience and said nothing bad about Hillary.
I expect dems to stick together on this.
April 29, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm counting on it. You think they're going to have a serious chat on the issues? They're going to tag team. Betcha.
April 29, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know what MoveOn or Greg's problem with going on Fox or any other media outlet. 1) It's free exposure; 2) it shuts them up about being afraid to appear; 3) it's a chance to make fools of them in their own houses. Don't really see a down side.
The best way to answer a critic is face to face. If you can't go into the lion's den, you should stay home.
April 29, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Many folks have tuned to Fox News to escape the Obama hacks like Jack Cafferty and Keith Olberman.
This obvious bias has backfired.
Fox News has actually become fair and balanced because w's term is ending and they know a Dem will win.
April 29, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
ha-ha!
Liar, liar, Sniper Fire!
You don't watch Fox much do you, gotalife.
They hate the Clintons more than they hate Obama.
It's McCain all the way for them.
April 29, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure I do.
They treat her fairly.
April 29, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
....
Wow. With friends like Fox, who needs enemies?
April 29, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
For once I am convinced you are telling the truth - I have no doubt you get a lot of your news from Fox News.
And they treat Hillary nicely because they want her to win.
April 29, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still wearing the helmet?
I sure hope that Faux News uses this as an opportunity to make some bucks and get a major sponsor specifically for this event. I might recommend Masingale. All those douche bags in one spot at one time could really increase sales!
April 29, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Fox fan getalife shows its true colors.
April 29, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
MoveOn should probably wait until after Hillary's appearance on Fox to issue a negative review.
April 29, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I agree with that.
I didn't think Obama should go on Fox news. I don't think any Democrat should go on fox news. That said whoever wins the Democratic nomination will be running for President of the United States, not President of the Left Wing Blogoshpere.
So yes, I can see why both Hillary and Obama might want to go on Fox, I don't agree, but I see the rational.
April 29, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is saying she will go on O'Reilly's show to reach out to all Americans, she is not promising to confront Fox like Obama did and of course then chickened out of.
More importantly-
Boy did Reverend Wright call it correctly the other day. He indicated that Barack is the kind of guy who will say politically what needs to be said regardless of what he believes. Well, Barack proved him right. Two months ago he had never heard Wright say anything objectionable in 20 years. Now, apparently, in the last eight weeks, aliens have taken over the body and mind of Wright and he is saying things he has never said before.
April 29, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama did what he had to do: he got rid of the Wright baggage.
I sat watching the coverage with some co-workers, and we all agreed: Wright looked like a complete idiot, and no intelligent person is going to link Obama with Wright. It's obvious Wright is trying to sabotage the campaign, or as one person said it, "He stabbed Obama in the back."
We'll see if Hillary can use O'Reilly to get a win in North Carolina.
I doubt it.
April 29, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you actually think Fox is more 'fair and balanced' than MSNBC, then congratulations. You're not a Democrat.
April 29, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has ability to handle Bill-O. Barry-O hasn't the guts to handle Bill O'Reilly and appear on his show. Bill-O and Hill will act like adults and it will be an interesting hour.
FOX is free media with the highest number of viewers (greater than CNN, MSNBC & HLN combined) at 8PM and shows that Hillary can stand up to FOX as well as flip the bird to the leftists KOS, Arianna Huffington, MSNBC (Tweety, Olbermann, etc.).
April 29, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
April 29, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
it's sad. Really sad to see a Democrat who supports the ACLU agreeing with this racist GOP hack.
I guess that's the directing Hillary's campaign is headed.
April 29, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are full of shit.
CNN alone beats cable Fox in ratings
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/01/cnn-beats-fox-news-in-key-demographic/
(assuming you're talking about Fox cable, and not the standard Simpsons/Family Guy/Superbowl Fox).
April 29, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you read? Guess not.
"FOX is free media with the highest number of viewers (greater than CNN, MSNBC & HLN combined) at 8PM"
Here's a link to Friday's ratings, see 8 PM:
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_friday_apr_25_83524.asp#more
April 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
wow, that sucks.
My bad. I guess people are stupider than I thought.
April 29, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
But how many of their viewers are going to vote for Hillary over McCain?
April 29, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Finally gotalife has found her soulmate!
April 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
A match made in Hell.
April 29, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yours is the first ass I ever saw marginal player kick. Some of us are beginning to see a pattern emerge. Maybe Obamanauts should spend more time reading history, current events. Grab a fact or two now and then. Rely less on attaboys from the echo chamber. Just saying.
April 30, 2008 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Marginal Player writes:
I agree. Look, Faux News may be evil, but they're no fools. They realize that, having anchored their fortunes to the GOP and Dubya, they are at risk of going down with the sinking ship.
Indeed, in the last few months their ratings vis-a-vis CNN and MSNBC have been on the decline. I also think that, despite their all out support for McCain, Fox believes he's gonna lose.
Add to that the fact that News Corp. (Fox owner) is based in NYC, owns two major newspapers and is bidding for #3, etc. Why would Murdoch piss off a heavyweight NY senator who, if not elected President or VP, may next year be Senate majority leader, chair an important Senate committee or be nominated to the Supreme Court? I mean, whatever happens, Hillary is not gonna shrivel and wilt away.
Right now, Fox needs Obama and Clinton as much as they need Fox. (And the latter part - because the Dems are less than 50 percent of the voters, so we can't win with our votes alone.) That's why Fox has been pursuing both candidates.
As to O'Liely, I believe he'll be on his best behavior towards Hillary: deferential, respectful, warm and non-confrontational. (He may bash her later - in commentary or Q&A, but not to her face.) Obama's name will come up, of course, but Hillary's goal is to make this about her, and to hopefully lower her negatives.
Bottom line: I say, if O'Liely has not been neutered by Murdoch already, he's on the hospital bed as we speak - being snipped and sedated, or - my personal preference - he'll be castrated by Hill' tomorrow night, on live TV.
April 29, 2008 11:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would prefer to see a full fledged debate with olbermann. Clinton showed what an ignoramus Olbermann is and I would like to see her further explore and expose the ignorant jock.
April 29, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah!
If she's a fighter, why not confront MSNBC, which liberals actually watch, instead of playing tag-team with O'Reilly to demonize Obama.
April 29, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe she wants to increase the turnout of the "Operation Chaos" crowd.
April 29, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
SCMadden writes:
That's an easy one: because the next primaries are in Indiana and North Carolina, where most Dems and independents are more likely to watch FNC than MSNBC. (To remind you, Hillary already won the primaries in NY and Calif.)
Next question?
April 29, 2008 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
IF HRC appears on Fox news, I have no problem with that, in general, although personally I would not have made the same decision. However, O'Reilly's show is altogether different. He spews hate, he never has a "discussion" without badgering anyone who disagrees with him. Futile waste of time, and in this I agree with moveon.org, it is wrong. Gives Bill O. legitimacy when he is just a bully.
April 29, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe she's reaching out to that very important Fox-viewer demographic...the ones that will never ever vote for her.
This is a publicity stunt out of campaign desperate for publicity.
April 29, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
April 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just know Greg is STEAMED over this act of betrayal! Can't wait for tomorrow's follow-up!
April 29, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
They saw Obama on FOX and decided they needed a similar, "kill 'em with kindness" moment. Plus, she will be seen as defending Obama on Wright, Flag Pins, Muslim rumors, etc., while still being able to keep it as a part of the discussion....(place pinky finger at corner of mouth and laugh maniacally, muwahhahahaha!)
April 29, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course she's not going to take him on. They're going to have a mutual circle jerk. The Republicans aren't attacking Hillary--they're attacking Obama. They want Hillary to get the nomination, not Obama. Bill Kristol praised her on Sunday. O'Reilly will kiss her ass too.
April 29, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy Kristol spent an entire column in Monday's NY Times praising her.
He even quotes a poster from hotair who's defending Hillary!
I thought that was a new low for Bill. Factually incorrect on multiple occasions, and now, quoting an anonymous commenter to bolster his argument that Hillary should be defended.
He's should be a cartoon character. But in today's political world, he's a prominent NY Times columnist. Up is down, black is white, and Fox is Fair and Balanced.
April 29, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
O my god - now I know I can't vote for her.
I loathe Bill Kristol. I really deeply loathe him.
April 29, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
She doesn't need your vote. She just got half the black community back.
April 29, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Half the black community. Awesome. Just enough to get her ass kicked in the general election.
You really are a fucking moron. She can't win. All she can do now is help McCain get elected. Grow a fucking brain, ya twit.
April 29, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
ROFLMAO
Billy speaks for the African Americans - thank you billy. I know they appreciate it.
April 29, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're wrong here.
April 29, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course he's wrong, but it's still funny to read every time he's posted it. On another blog, he was a great source of amusement to us actual black people.
April 30, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
You mean your actual black avatars? I've noticed you flog that "we actual black people" theme a lot. It's the quality of your ideas I'm interested in. Do you really think Jeremiah Wright has no support in the black community in this argument?
April 30, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
As an ACTUAL Black American, I can ensure you that Obama's break with Rev. Wright doesn't do anything to harm my support for Obama.
You see, black people don't have a hive-mind or anything like that. We have individual thoughts and dreams and motives.
The fact that you think that we're all so easily swayed by Wright, Morrison, or even Obama shows that you think much more highly of yourself than you do anyone else.
Do all old people think alike? If so, are old women going to vote McCain?
Do all women think alike? If so, are college age women going to vote overwhelmingly for Hillary?
(answer to both questions above is no, btw)
We (at least this part of we) are overwhelmingly supporting Obama because we view him as a vastly more credible Democratic candidate to Hillary. With Obama at the top of the ticket, I can guarantee that the Democratic party gets 20+ votes from my family. With Hillary at the top of the ticket, I can guarantee that McCain nets 3 or 4 votes from my family (I married into a Republican family, what can I say).
That, more than anything else, is my primary reason for supporting Obama. I SEE every day what kind of poisonous reaction Hillary brings out in people I know well and love dearly. These same people are so disillusioned by McCain that at least 1/2 of them will vote for Obama.
The Supreme Court, American Foreign Policy and two disastrous wars are FAR TOO FARKING IMPORTANT for us to blow it now.
Hillary supporters won't admit it, but she's going to bring out EVERY single Republican with little evidence that she can excite an equal number of Democrats to win her the election. While Obama may not bring out any more Dems, he placates enough Republicans (again, from my own anecdotal evidence, so deny my observations away at your pleasure) that he has a realistic chance of winning.
I don't see Hillary winning. Ever. Not now, not 2012. Republicans HATE her. They're not saying anything now, to get her into position to destroy. William Kristol is pumping her up because he likes her and her policies??? Doubtful. Could it be that they've spent the last 4 years preparing to battle her and don't want those millions spent on research and pre-printed bumper stickers to go to waste, maybe?
My mother-in-law is a member of the Fallbrook Republican Women's Club of California... and a full 1/4 of them are (and have) voted for Obama because they like his message and they have read Audacity of Hope for their book club.
It is so distressing to see that people don't understand this.
We can't get ANY health care reform if the GOP wins.
We can't get ANYONE out of Iraq if the GOP wins.
We can't get ANY aspect of our economy fixed if the GOP wins.
And here we are tearing each other apart strengthening McCain and weakening both of our candidates.
We're going to have no one to blame but ourselves. Well, ourselves and Marginal Player.
April 30, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
God with your brilliant insights re: the African-American community you should be on BET so you tell Black people how it really is.
April 30, 2008 2:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Clinton supporters are really showing an outpouring of irrational exuberance. Did Taylor Marsh post something about how Obama is finished?
April 29, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you know? Not losing PA is a big, big, win for Hillary!
April 29, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I flock to posts about Fox news and O'Reilly, because they are such recognizable brands. Love em or hate em, you know?
You cant win the election without a strategy for Fix news. Boycotting them does nothing but give them ammunition to fire on you, as they did to Obama. Wallace's countdown clock was foolish and juvenile, but it worked, because he was painting Obama in a negative light for "welching' on an agreement.
Hillary going on O'Reilly is a way, as others have said, to make an ally out of the right wing slime machine, especially its masters on Fox. O'Reilly is a tool for her to beat down Obama, as others have said above, and Fox can be her ally.
April 29, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any desire I had to vote for HRC has vanished. Bill O'Reilly is an ignorant, hateful, despicable, bullying baffoon. There's NO reason for any Democrat to go on his "entertainment" show. Validating him in any way, shape or form is just inexcusable. I have no idea why she's doing this. It certainly looks more like a pandering stunt than anything else. I don't want to see a future President performing stunts. If she's the nominee I will reluctantly vote for her. Let's hope she's not the nominee.
April 29, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on.
No one has done more for Bill O'Reilly than Barack Obama.
April 29, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see. Greg Sargent leads the "progressive" liberal blogger outrage circle jerks by quoting an anonymous staffer and then trumpets a Clinton operative saying that Hillary isn't going to "take on" O'Reilly?
I don't have much respect for the Clinton spinners, but even I don't think Wolfson is stupid enough to ignore what their faithful TPM mouthpiece has set as a "failed" standard and avoid it entirely.
April 29, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
You said it so much better than I did upthread - thanks for that! ;)
April 29, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's got balls. Even the Obamabots would have to admit that.
And regarding Fox News, would Obama have been driven to this punking of Rev. Wright if Fox News hadn't done what media is supposed to do, which is to investigate and provide information to the public? As a matter of fact, that's probably why Obama is suddenly claiming he doesn't know that Wright guy, i.e. because otherwise Bill-o and Hillary would have roasted his little tushie over it.
April 29, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh, Fox is doing Democrats FAVORS!
Thanks for explaining that to me.
Too bad those "favors" resulted in Bush being elected twice, and the war in Iraq, and no action stemming climate change in 8 years.
April 29, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
SCMadden writes:
Well, I hate to rub it in, but the first time, in 2000, it wasn't Fox, as much as our fellow "lefties" who'd voted for Nader - because Gore wasn't progressive enough and because they felt that Clinton had to be punished.
Come to think of it, they still want to punish a Clinton ..., so nothing's changed.
April 29, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
A 64 dollar question...Will more of Bill-O's "base" tune out or Hillarys "base" tune in...
April 29, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You should have written:
...as Obama was criticized by me and other blogosphere drama queens for not doing during his interview with Fox's Chris Wallace
April 29, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very well put, Fabooj ... well done!
April 29, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary: "Rush Republicans I need your support in IN and NC so it will look like I won the male white vote and all the media will spin it for a week even though we all know it is a fairytale because you won't vote for me in November." The Clintons kissed up to the right-wing before TX/Ohio, and in Pennsylvania, now here she is again begging for operation chaos. "Pleeeeeeeeez say my disastrous campaign, Rush, and I promise you riots on the streets of Denver!"
April 29, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correction: "Pleeeeeeeeez save my disastrous campaign, Rush, and I promise you riots on the streets of Denver!"
April 29, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is the real story...Obama with most States, most votes, and the most important the most pledge delegates...He has been hit from all sides and who is winning? OBAMA he said from day one they will throw everything to avoid change. He was right on day one and right today and Yes We Can…
April 29, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, he doesn't have the most votes, and 9 contests are still waiting for their say. The most important metric is not pledged delegates, but total delegates. Obama's currently in the lead there, but until this race is over, declaration of victory is premature.
April 29, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Once again, Obama leads by over 200K votes, even if you include FL (which is generous) and exclude IA, NV, WA, and ME (which is absurd).
April 29, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you add up *every* state that has voted, including Michigan, Hillary's ahead by 11k votes or so. 9 more contests to go, the ultimate winner of the popular vote is far from decided,
April 29, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh don't confuse him with "facts" and "reality"...he'll probably start drooling.
April 30, 2008 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
At least when Obama went on Fox he wasn't courting right wing voters to commit operation chaos. The Republicans are scared of Obama winning because he has a grassroots system that the they know McCain can't win against.
April 29, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Debra:
Relax, Debra. That's right - he can't win. McCain, that is. He can't! McCain is Bob Dole #2, a sacrificial lamb, too old and not particularly well liked by the wingnuts.
The Repugs know he's gonna lose, which is why his fundraising sucks. (Indeed, when was the last time you heard of a wealthy Repug who couldn't raise election money?)
Sure, the GOP will put up a perfunctory fight, but their hearts are not in it. I think they know all too well how high is the pile of manure - financial and political - that the Bush administration is leaving behind.
The GOP would rather have us, Dems, shovel through it and clean up after them - a thankless job to say the least, while they sit on the sidelines and criticize us for raising taxes, "ruining" the economy, "cutting and running" from Iraq, imposing new regulations (e.g. to fight global warming), etc.
Sadly, the Repugs can always count on the average American's short memory and even shorter attention span, so they'll be baaaack - as soon as the federal coffers are replenished and there is money to give away to their super-rich friends, or to start another war.
April 29, 2008 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Clinton is The Ultimate Concern Troll who's only allegiance is to herself, Democratic Pary be damned.
She doesn't have to do anything on Bill-O's show
.
She just has to sit there, maintain a straight face, feign concern that Bill's trying to get her to do anything other than what she'll claim she's there for (ahem), while pretending to be a Democrat.
We all know, as she does, what O'Reilly m.o. is.
Her appearance on his show gives him a tacit permission slip to sully Obama with all the usual "eclectablity doubts" and innuendo Team Clinton repeats on an hourly basis via their own backchannel "concerns" to Super Delegates, while she plays the concerned straight man.
April 29, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no way she is taking on orude.This is going to be a scripted billary show.The slimey republicans need this to look real good because she is there only chance to get in the white house.Its free tv time. The slimey parasite is working the msm perfectly. If she loses two next week shes done. This is desperation in its final stages.
April 29, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loses two? All of a sudden it's a real possibility for her to win two!
April 29, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You honestly believe she has a chance in hell in winning in NC?
O I thought you were smarter than that, I surely did.
what a disappointment.
April 29, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to disappoint. A window is open in NC. A chance is a chance, that's all. Before yesterday, she had no chance in NC. We'll see. It depends on how much of the Obama GOTV effort in NC is driven by black churches and where their ministers come down on the Obama v Wright argument. They don't have to vote for Hillary. They just have to get disgusted and stay home. I don't expect you to agree, but you deserve to know where I'm coming from.
April 30, 2008 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well since my Bubba post disappeared this morning, here's my chance to resurrect it: Yes, some Democrats watch Fox News!
I would guess the various events of this week plus Hillary going on Fox will not help Obama. He has about 3-4 days to change the story or he won't have enough time to swing it back. How much damage it'll be, I don't know, but don't expect Bubba to be a good sport about it.
April 30, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow I am so glad I do not ahve cable or satellite and have never had the opportunity to watch Bill O'Reilly.
Not Related
Bob O'Reilly
April 29, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Short for "Baba O'Riley".
April 30, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
is that got a life.i think its get a life.
April 29, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, all of us who are NOT going to vote for Hillary under any circumstances will be watching Keith. I began my boycott of O'Reilly eons ago.
April 29, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Rev. Wright ordeal is done...now back to the facts...The media diagnoses every demo....the old...young...rich....poor...educated....uneducated.... bowlers, bluecollar, beer drinkers.....And somehow ALWAYS finds a way to give the advantage to Clinton. But it's time for the media to finally raise the most incredible point in the whole campaign. HILLARY HAS LOST THE SUPPORT OF AN ENTIRE RACE OF PEOPLE !!!!!!!! Do you know how incredibly sad this fact is ? Hillary Clinton (who's husband was so loved as to have been called The First Black President) has alienated the black people of America to such a degree that there is no way blacks will support her EVER. This has nothing to do with Obama !!!! Keep in mind folks....Hillary started this campaign with 82% of the black support. But as blacks learned more about her (Goldwater Girl....Against Civil Rights Act 1964...etc.) combined with her LBJ statements and Bill's minimizing of Obama (fairy tale...Jesse won S.Carolina too...etc) blacks were shocked...then incredibly offended beyond recovery. WE FEEL DECEIVED !!!! We hope that our friends of all races understand how we as blacks feel. This is the main story that needs to get out to ALL superdelegates. People across America are contacting the DNC 202-863-8000 to let them (and superdelegates) know that Hillary ABSOLUTELY KILLED HER ELECTABILTY. The truth is the truth !
Greg Jones
Visit: www.Blacks4Barack.org
(A Multi-Racial Organization...Dedicated To Truth)
April 29, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course she's not going to "take on" Faux News, they are her biggest cheerleader for Christ's sake.
April 29, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's distancing of himself from Rev. Wright only today is a total political move to try to capture a larger percentage of the white blue-collar vote. It's disingenuous at best and will not advance his cause (of securing the white blue-collar vote). He had 20 years to leave Rev. Wright and until this very moment chose not to. Let's not forget: Obama is the 'sound judgement' candidate. I and millions of others question what he considers his sound judgment. Is it his sound judgment to take his two young impressionable daughters to hear a preacher that rants and raves about how white people created HIV/AIDS to enact genocide on minority populations? Was it his sound judgment to do business and continue to do business with Tony Rezko? Was it his sound judgment to have not given another speech against the war in Iraq since 2002 or to not introduce any major piece of legislation against the war? How many votes has he missed on Congress? He's a one-term Senator who's missed most of his one-term campaigning for an office that just two years ago he himself said he wasn't qualified for due to his lack of experience. What exactly are his accomplishments? What exactly does he base his sound judgment on?
Obama is proving to be a politician just like all other politicians. As far as I'm concerned he's not what I've been waiting for by any measure.
April 29, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re: Obama Enrages Nutroots [Kevin D. Williamson]
Now Drudge reports that Hillary is planning to break the Fox boycott. The Kossacks are going to go helter-skelter, giving themselves blisters on their fingers as they type out their fury. They'll be so mad that they won't even open the bedroom door when mom calls them down for dinner.
http://media.nationalreview.com/
"They'll be so mad that they won't even open the bedroom door when mom calls them down for dinner." Funny and TRUE!
April 29, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's one thing to refuse to allow Fox to conduct a democratic party primary debate, but it's another to shun them during a general election.
And like it or not, the general election campaign has begun. Therefore, neither candidate can continue to boycott Fox without Fox's viewers taking it personally. Like it or not, Fox's viewers identify with Fox. They have the right to choose who to watch, and some watch Fox by choice. There are no votes in ignoring them, nor in telling them they're fools and dupes.
The candidate has to go and meet the voters where they are, not where the candidate thinks they should be.
April 29, 2008 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think they're actually fighting it out south of the Mason-Dixon line for the Bubba vote. Everyones thought North Carolina was out of play for so long they quit asking "what if".
April 30, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Erm.. here, lemme fix that for you:
There we go. No need to thank me.
April 30, 2008 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
In my best Fox bobble head voice:
Some say Bill O'Reilly is a misogynistic bigot who was taken to court for sexual harassment but commands a credible voter base for the first female presidential candidate.
Some say Hillary will do anything for a shot at the presidency.
Some say this sounds like a perfect match.
Tune in to FOX tonight for all the hot action!!!! [wakka wakka wakka boing boing-boing]
April 30, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You people need to step away from the KOOL AID jug. I'll take ALL your bets Bill will treat her fairly and with respect, but he sure won't take no crap, not like that Bill 'I tanked for Rev Wright' Moyers!!(PBS)I bet you all LUUUUVED that interview.
Hillary has WAY too much class to resort slamming Obama on the Wright thing.. she has said her peice and if asked I'm sure she will repeat her sentiment of "I wouldn't have stayed in that church" where's the BASHING in that
Get a life people Bill o'reilly is not SATAN no matter what you think
April 30, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
HERE HERE
April 30, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Americablog links to this. I know, it's off topic just a little, but it's hilarious...Onlooker.
It's Hillary vs. the coffee machine
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/its-hillary-vs-coffee-machine.html
May 1, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink