Obama on "The O'Reilly Factor"
Friday, September 12, 2008
Bill O’Reilly respects Barack Obama.
This statement gave the author a terrible shock as it appeared before me on the screen, but it’s the truth.
After watching all four parts of the interview O’Reilly recently conducted with Obama, it’s clear that something in the country is changing. When the far-right loudspeaker for Fox News gave the Democratic presidential nominee time to talk, respond, and even interrupt the host with his own points, I nearly hit the floor.
More impressive was Obama himself. In the presence of a host whose reputation is for conservative journalism – cast in shades of the Karl Rove era of politics – the Senator remained firm, at ease and as knowledgeable about critical issues as you could expect from someone running for president.
A point to criticize: I do not believe Al Qaeda and the Taliban are singularly “bent on attacking America”, as Obama responded to the opening question: I believe they feel a great injustice has befallen their way of life courtesy of Western countries such as the USA. But this absolutely does not excuse any violent action undertaken by them, just as harm against America ultimately doesn’t justify American aggression. Violence does not justify violence. Ever. But I wish Obama had at least alluded to this possibility, as it may (or may not) hold the key to a permanent reduction in what we accept as terrorism.
A point to praise: O’Reilly admits that Iraq was “the wrong battlefield,” and gives Obama credit for his disapproval of the war. If you were to dig into the archives, you would no doubt find hours and hours of O’Reilly cheerleading for the invasion of Iraq, much for the same reasons McCain now considers invading Iran. For O’Reilly to admit he was wrong is huge, and I mean huge. If his conservative audience were watching, I could only hope they were nodding their heads in agreement.
Secondarily, Obama admits he was wrong about the results of “the surge,” but is careful to stress that while violence has decreased, the underlying problems remain. Iraq is still not self-governing, and that mess will remain to be cleaned long after Bush has left office.
Best point made: Concerning the economy, there has long been a deafening chorus of folks who say, “Obama will tax us! He’ll take away all our money! Socialist!” The disagreement between parties concerning how to best engage our labor force has been one of the defining issues separating Democrats and Republicans, at least for the last 20 years. Republicans generally want corporations and the very wealthy to keep more of their money while taking more from the poor, and for the Democrats it’s the other way around. 
This argument should have been rendered invalid years ago, as it’s clear that allowing the wealthy to keep more of their money does not benefit the vast majority of Americans. For example, my paycheck gets to me at about $500, but after taxes it’s about $350. I cannot afford to have almost a third of my paycheck taken away if I’m to pay for rent, food, school, transportation, heating, etc. However, if my paycheck is $20,000, I can still easily live a very comfortable lifestyle and save (or invest) the remaining money with $14,000. This fundamental difference, that those who are poor deserve to keep more of what they earn, is at the heart of this economic rift.
O’Reilly tries to throw Obama on this point by saying “You want 50% of my success,” which is untrue. Obama responds by saying he wishes to revert to a Clinton-era tax policy, an eight-year span that saw our surplus balloon and real wages increase, which would tax the highest income bracket at 39%. He then says, “You can afford that, that’s point number one. In exchange, I’m cutting taxes for 95% of Americans.”
Throughout the interview the senator goes point for point with O’Reilly, calling out the host with a calm tone when he’s said something untrue or is becoming excited. O’Reilly, to his credit, interjects less often than has been seen in the past with guests he’s fundamentally disagreed with. The two often end up on the same sides of important issues, and Obama’s grace and logic turn what easily could have been a stomach-clenching experience into an incredible look into a man who thinks on his toes in a most inhospitable environment.
It’s not hard to imagine how Obama would handle an emergency, and it’s a wonder that people use his bafflingly fluid mind against him. We should want a man like this as commander-in-chief. His doesn’t just react with his gut: He acts with his brain.
O’Reilly looks less and less like the venomous right-wing megaphone he’s built himself into as the interview progresses, while still trying to maintain an assertive presence – after all, it is his show.
Ultimately, what we can take from this is that Obama genuinely wowed a man who once shoved and cursed at one of his bodyguards for “blocking the (camera) shot” of the Senator “on purpose” at a rally. For the Senator to even come into “the no-spin zone” was an act of political daring so precarious that it could have made a fool of him. Instead he walks away looking like a man who has his facts straight, knows his policies, is genuine and earnest with his love of country, and is fit and ready to be President of the United States.
What do you think? Watch the videos and leave your comments.
Comment
Commenting is closed for this article.
