Here's a sucker bet: A hundred bucks says it takes Bill O'Reilly all of a minute or so into his show tonight to condemn the murder of Dr. George Tiller.
By now you probably know that yesterday during a church service in Kansas which he was attending with his wife, George Tiller, a controversial provider of late-term abortions, was shot dead. The man who police say killed him is, needless to say, a walking cliché: He's a 51-year-old fundamentalist Christian named Scott Roeder who hails from an unremarkable suburb of Kansas City and who boasts a supposedly vivid history of mental illness. In other words, he's exactly the kind of person you'd expect to walk into a church and gun down an abortion doctor in front of his wife and a crowd of stunned parishoners -- a guy who was such a human time bomb that he probably had C-4 hardwired into his fucking DNA.
Roeder's now in police custody, and one would hope they're going to throw the proverbial book at him -- or possibly use it to hit him repeatedly in the head until his brains are coming out of his ears. He killed a man in what was unequivocally an act of political and religious terrorism, and as such he deserves to suffer the full brunt of whatever harsh punishment our legal system decides to dole out to him.
But while Scott Roeder shouldn't be allowed to escape the blame for an act that, at face value, was committed solely by him -- the reality is that there's plenty of fault to go around on this.
Sure, Roeder pulled the trigger, but there were a hell of a lot of people standing behind him, indirectly encouraging him to do it.
People like Bill O'Reilly.
For years now, Dr. George Tiller has been one of O'Reilly's favorite cultural boogeymen -- providing a regular target for the talking head's pompous, self-righteous venom. O'Reilly glibly called him "Tiller the Baby Killer"; he painted him (wrongly) as a Mengele-like monster, gleefully murdering babies right up to the moment of their births, all for a few grand a pop; he accused Tiller of having blood on his hands and warned that a "judgment day" was likely coming. Bill O'Reilly, and the unscrupulous, unethical assholes like him, laid the groundwork and set the wheels in motion that led to yesterday's almost inevitable violent conclusion.
But tonight, make no mistake, O'Reilly's going to put on his best reputable journalist and decent human being face and aloofly insist that he had nothing to do with Tiller's murder. That he never once advocated the shooting of someone he claimed over and over again was a one-man-holocaust -- a guy who went around killing kids with impunity thanks to the protection of a justice system corrupted by elitist liberal pussies. O'Reilly's going to deflect blame away from himself -- to wash his hands of the whole ugly tragedy.
He shouldn't be allowed to, though. Not for a second.
For years, groups like Operation Rescue have been permitted to terrorize abortion providers and, worse, their patients. They've never fully been taken to task for inciting and justifying criminal behavior through hateful rhetoric -- for creating wrath-of-God nightmares like Eric Rudolph and Paul Hill. They've been allowed to get away with being complicit in violence against people who, like it or not, are innocent citizens in the eyes of the law. It's always been sickening that the motto of some within the "pro-life" movement seems to be, "Life begins at conception -- and ends in cold blood at the moment of our choosing." But it's even more sickening that this kind of barbarism, while decried by most of the civilized world, is still held up as a merely extreme opinion within a legitimate political debate.
Operation Rescue and the religious right in general have helped to foment the special brand of righteous outrage that would make the most whack-job among their ranks kill or wound in the name of God -- but they've always needed media coverage to push their agenda.
O'Reilly actually is the media. He has a forum that reaches millions of people, including an undeniably substantial number of highly-strung white guys nursing persecution fantasies. They're people just looking for a way to physically fight back against the encroaching secular liberal darkness that they've been warned about (by none other than O'Reilly himself), and all it takes is a little push from the face on the TV to motivate them to action. I've said this before, but it bears repeating over and over again: If you know that even a small part of your audience is susceptible to suggestions of violence -- that it can be easily moved to take the law into its own hands at the behest of the right kind of rhetoric -- then engaging in that kind of rhetoric without considering the potential consequences is like shouting fire in a crowded theater. It's the textbook definition of incitement. Likewise, to deny that there can be an equal and opposite reaction to your actions is intellectually dishonest -- which is a fancy way of saying that you're entirely full of shit if you try to pretend that you can spend years accusing someone of being a murderer among us, then blithely evade accountability when some psychopath takes what he feels is the logical step to correct this injustice.
Put yet another way: I think Bill O'Reilly's not just an arrogant windbag -- I think he and his rotten ilk are fast becoming an outright danger, that they're putting lives in jeopardy.
So does that mean someone should kill him?
Don't answer that.
Related:
DXM: Revolutionary Goad/4.7.09
The Huffington Post: "How I (and Other 'Pro-Life' Leaders) Contributed to Dr. Tiller's Murder/6.1.09
Monday, June 01, 2009
Bill Kill
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
Seriously? While you make a few valid points, I think blaming Bill O'Reilly is a bit of a stretch. Actually, it is a huge stretch. This nutbag was just that - a nutbag. If it wasn't Tiller, he would've channeled his rage elsewhere, and killed somebody eventually. Sadly, there are crazies out there who misinterpret the Bible, develop God-complexes, and kill in his name. That doesn't mean that the fault then lies on the shoulder of every pro-lifer, or every Christian, or even every media personality who happens to have a point of view that you don't like. That's like saying all Muslims should be punished for 9/11. According to your logic then, if I listened to Marilyn Manson for a week, I'll kill someone too? Extremists exist in every group. Killers roam the earth, and there is nothing we can really do about it. Silencing the Bill O'Reillys of the world wouldn't make a damn difference in whether someone is a violent sociopath or not. You're way off-base.
I believe the point you are trying to make is that the Bill O'Reillys give the crazies a "hero" and the go-ahead to pull the trigger. Again, a crazy will find that go-ahead anywhere. Infringing on someone's first amendment rights, again, because you, Chez, do not agree ...I guess I don't see what this would accomplish.
PS - By the way, I am a pro-choice moderate who is just long tired of the double standard put forth by the very liberal media. The Democratic party has lost a lot of credibility in my eyes due to this.
in the midst of this heinous, hideous fucking tragedy, thank you for that awesome headline.
don't know how or why, but it's perfect.
"elitist liberal pussies"
Are these the same ones who work or worked at CNN?
Jealous you couldn't get into Fox much?
I feel your pain and I love your post.
But don't turn into them. You weaken your argument when you ask if Bill O should be shot. The answer is clearly no. But somewhere out there, there is a murderous tree hugging commie waiting for a signal.
I love the Anonymous Coward's comparison of Bill O to Marilyn Manson.
I would also like to hear more about your thoughts on limits of free speech or at least how media should know where to draw the line.
Great blog, keep up the good work.
Hey Anonymous! Take a look around you. The mass media in this country is OWNED by corporate Republicans. You aren't getting "liberalism." Odds are you've never encountered a genuine voice of the American left. What you're getting is watered-down, gentled conservatism, but since it's not Rush Limp-balls, you think it must be liberalism. Jeebus, how did you ever find this website?
'Anonymous,' that's an incredible comment aimed at a straw man. As much as Chez would love to serve O'Reilly a big cup of STFU, he wouldn't because censorship is wrong. That's what make us different from conservatives (and self-described "moderates" who complain about the "liberal media").
Anon @ 7:52
He may have freaked out. He may have killed someone else.
Too true.
But O'Reilly and his ilk of screeching jackanapes definitely pointed him at Stiller. They even gave him that catchy name ("Stiller the Killer") to make him a compelling target.
Or are you denying what video tape has shown O'Reilly and Beck and the rest of those fuckwads doing?
I'm not for a minute suggesting that we "censor" them. Only that we do our duty and call bullshit bullshit. I think that is exactly what Chez was doing with this post.
He's telling you that you got shit on your shoe, and if you ain't careful, you're gonna track it in.
That's a good thing.
Anon 8:26 --
You're joking right? If you were really that dumb you wouldn't have been able to turn on your computer tonight.
Jeff --
I'm obviously joking about violence against O'Reilly. This site is, more than anything else, all about the rude humor.
I'm not a coward you condescending pricks, I'm actually a friend of Jayne who has been reading this blog for years. I just don't comment often and can never seem to remember my damn password.
I do get liberalism, I was (and therefore, voted) democrat two times before this last election. I was even raised by two liberals. Just because I changed my mind and have an opinion that differs from yours doesn't mean it's wrong. A-holes.
Anyhoo. Chez, I agree with you on some points - O'Reilly was an asshole, and did make this guy into somewhat of a target. His buddy Waters practically stalked this poor guy. And they made him out to be a butcher - misleading the uneducated out there about the realities of late-term abortions. That said, I'm tired of seeing these mass generalizations on all these blog sites - ripping everyone from Christians to Republicans to Bill O'Reilly. As if they put the gun in this guy's hands. I just don't see it.
This murderer was not a "Christian" or a "Republican" - he was a violent sociopath!! He represented none other than his sick, damaged self. He didn't kill because of O'Reilly anymore than Klebold and Harris killed because of Marilyn Manson.
Oh, and PS Chez, I really enjoyed reading the Frog Prince post again. It made me teary and reminded me how much I love that book. I hope you and Jayne are both hanging in there.
-Christie G.
You can't preach the virtues of diversity, then put limitations on what that is.
Just something to think about.
anyone who thinks that incessant hate propaganda doesn't lead to violence is a fucking idiot with no clue about human history.
please read "humanity: a moral history of the 20th century" by jonathan glover.
"the twentieth century marked a triumph of resentment over rationality". the 21st isn't looking any better.
Christie --
First of all, thanks for reading and for the kind words.
My point about O'Reilly isn't that he should be thrown in jail for directly causing this lunatic to kill Tiller. It's more like this: We've reached an unprecedented place in the history of media saturation where the ethics that used to be held so dear by broadcasters -- I'm talking about the unspoken guidelines of responsibility that everyone naturally adhered to -- no longer apply. You can now say anything about anyone, true or false (or allow a group to make false or incendiary claims), and no one holds you accountable. Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, O'Reilly, Nancy Grace -- these people have zero scruples when it comes to taking into account the power of what they say. Watching O'Reilly defiantly whine last night about how Fox News is the victim in this tragedy, when it's that very network that's pushed journalistic responsibility right off the table since the election of Barack Obama by spewing some of the most dangerous rhetoric imaginable, was insulting and offensive.
You have to understand that what you say to an audience matters, and not only does O'Reilly not care what the possible consequences of his verbal attacks are -- that arrogant prick actually has the nerve to be cavalier about it. Years ago, somebody would've yanked his ass off the air for saying the kind of horseshit he does; these days they give him a big paycheck and the rest of civilized society just has to accept that it's a free-for-all on the airwaves and in print. If you've got an opinion, no matter how ridiculous, incendiary or unproven, somebody will be happy to put it out there.
There's no accountability. And while O'Reilly can't be charged with anything (and shouldn't), he should absolutely be shamed (if such a thing is possible).
And by the way -- Marilyn Manson, just as a point of fact, had nothing to do with the Columbine murders. As in, the entire Manson-Harris-Klebold link was a media perpetuated rumor. However, the the link between video games, music, and violence -- while absolutely valid in some cases -- is different from this in one very important way: Music and games are generally artistic statements and don't masquerade as news. The link between someone who gets immersed in Grand Theft Auto 4 and shoots somebody and, say, somebody who's told by Fox News 24/7 that America is becoming a socialist state and it's time for revolution against the oppressive terrorist-loving god-haters who are coming to kick in your door and take your guns away -- they're two very different scenarios. The people who created GTA4 didn't set out to incite the masses; the latter group is doing just that -- and it's not taking into account what can happen when you rile them up a little too much.
I think it's really inaccurate to not hold specific websites and media outlets at least a little bit accountable. We're at a point where people have so many choices they only listen to like minded people. If you're an avid whatever there are websites and podcasts and news shows devoted entirely to your choice topic. Your world becomes smaller because you're choosing not to avail yourself of dissenting opinions.
And if you listen to the same thing long enough it becomes part of your core beliefs.
Roeder frequented sites like Operation Rescue that gave him very specific information where Tiller was, what he was doing, and who he was doing it with on a daily basis. He believed in Operation Rescue's dogma. We assume he liked O'Reilly because he's like minded. It hasn't come to light yet who else he went to, but to be told "he's evil, he's a killer, someone should kill him--hey here's where you can find him!" by the people you believe know what's going on means that eventually (if you're steeped far enough in that reality) you're going to do what they tell you.
It's always scary when someone's unhinged enough to kill someone for their beliefs. As much as I'd love to blame O'Reilly, I'm of the mind that a vast majority of the crazy people who kill people would do so in the absence of the outside stimuli that are easily blamed. Your mind's got to be ready to cross that line before you start looking for a target.
Is it dangerous and disgusting that there are people advocating murder of individuals in a public forum? Absolutely, but I don't know how you stop it without taking away First Amendment rights for everyone.
That said, I hate to sound like Ann Coulter but I read this study the other day about conservatism and cognitive ability...
Chez, you know what I'm about to write: You're wrong. I think you rushed to the keyboard too fast on this one. I'll never forget when a similar man who lost his way gunned down an Abortion Doctor in the early 1990s. When Rush had his TV show, he told the cameraman to zoom in close to his beautiful face to tell liberals like you that this is not how the Pro-Life movement thinks. I wish I could put that clip on YouTube because it's that powerful -- more powerful than Delores' cherry pie on a hot August Mississippi afternoon.
Chez, that was another man who lost his way. I'm just as sad as you are over this. We're talking about celebrating a culture of life -- not planned killing like this.
Oh BW. Rush does NOT have a beautiful face - unless you're a chubby chaser. Is that what you are Bill? A closeted chubby chaser? - explains a lot.
You know, I'm one who believes Bill O'Reilly should be held somewhat accountable. He's a hate monger, a ridiculous backwards thinking retard. His idiotic ramblings are broadcast widely for any mentally off person to tune in and absorb, then act upon.
And church is a scary place to be some days. We attend daily/weekly mass, and there's two men in particular who are severely disturbed. They disrupt the quiet often yelling and panicked, they change pews constantly, shoving people aside and generally just making a huge scene every week. Honestly? I feel like a shit, but they scare the hell out of me. One of them made sexual remarks to my face about my then 9 yr old daughter. It's enough to make me want to stay home and watch mass on tv, rather than be a sitting duck inside the church. The worst part of it is no one does anything to help these individuals. Even after reporting the remarks, even after talking to the priests. They consult local authorities and are told the parish is a public place and we have to be tolerant - that if there is an attack, then we can have them removed.
Right.
Despite all this, however - the ramblings of a lunatic, the watery safety of being in a place of worship - I'm most appalled that this doctor, whoever his crimes, was gunned down in the presence of his wife. And the problem I'm having with all this centers more on the fact that the shooter is mentally ill and can hardly be held accountable for his actions. I wish he could. I wish that rotten motherfucker would burn in hell. But I have a big problem with blaming someone who is ill, for society's ills, when we (shitheads like O'Reilly) obviously drove him to commit murder, however indirectly.
I still think that:
A: Journalism died looooong before O'Reilly sat his conservative butt in Fox's biased chair
B: You can put a target on anyones head but it doesn't mean you get a free shot to throw darts at it.
Don't you remember "kick me" signs in elementary school? Just because someone put a kick me sign on his back doesn't give anyone free reign to kick him.
Is O'Reilly fucking obnoxious and hateful and worthless, yes, so why are we wasting our lives, our anger, our breath, our energy to blame him for all of the conservative ills of the world? There are millions of people to blame for the bigotry, the insensitive bullshit that plays on Fox every night.
The only person to blame for the killing of this man is the one who held the gun to his head.
People know right from wrong, and if they don't they need to be dealt with. O'Reilly does what he does because he gets a sick check from Fox every week- or every other, I'm not sure of the pay schedule there.
Blame him all you want but people need to take responsibility for their actions, conservative, liberal, Christian, Lutheran, Muslim, Jewish, black, white, Asian, African, etc.
This is kind of like the "video games are to blame for kids shooting up school" theory.
It seems to me that one of the best ways for O'Reilly to absolve himself of any complicity in Tiller's murder is to admit that he peddles in fiction and right-wing fantasy – that he doesn't believe or mean a single word he says. That's the difference, as I see it, between O'Reilly saying TIller had "blood on his hands" or "executes babies" and any supposed connection between Marilyn Manson and Columbine or kids killing themselves because they listened to a Black Sabbath album or two nutjobs going on a killing spree after watching "Natural Born Killers." The latter three are works of the imagination, and are clearly not trafficking in the real world. If a disturbed individual's violence is triggered by listening to music or watching a film, I have a hard time blaming the artist for how his or her work is perceived and interpreted by someone with problems.
O'Reilly, on the other hand, positions himself as a truth-teller. It's the "no spin zone," right? So when he tells his loyal viewers, "Dr. George Tiller destroys fetuses for just about any reason, right up until the birth date," that's the God's honest truth, isn't it? And if you believe fanatically in the pro-life movement, and you trust O'Reilly to bring you truth and accuracy, then this Tiller guy is a murderer, an executioner, and he's got to go.
Of course Tiller's murderer had a screw loose, and of course he's the one truly culpable party here. But surely even O'Reilly's defenders can see the difference in the two scenarios. We don't listen to albums (or least most of us don't) to learn about the world. We don't watch a movie to get "the news." Any meaning we derive from an artistic work is one WE construct based on how we perceive it. O'Reilly's fans (as well as Glenn Beck's and Rush Limbaugh's) trust him to give them the truth, and if he says Tiller's a murderer, well, he must be. If O'Reilly doesn't want to take responsibility for his words, then he has to tell his viewers, nightly, that what they're about to see is strictly a work of entertainment, and they shouldn't take him seriously. At all.
As long as he continues to pass himself off as a credible newsman peddling truth to the masses, he has to consider what effect that "truth" will have on his more unstable fans.
Roberto,
I agree - and that is my biggest problem. The fact that he put it out there that this man was butchering babies when they are viable outside the womb is unforgivable. Was it true? Yes, Tiller performed late-term abortions. Was Bill O'Reilly clear about the realities of late-term abortions? No. And to the uneducated, passionate masses - you are apt to incite somebody to take matters into their own hands. The uneducated don't realize that no one hangs out for 7 months and then decides to have an abortion. But you guys know that.
But again, these are churchgoing folk - they know right from wrong. They know those commandments. If someone is going to step over the edge and kill someone, if he doesn't find the push from Bill O'Reilly, he'll find it somewhere else.
Chez - I agree with your response on some level, (especially about our media saturation) but what to do about it? How do you monitor each 'journalist' every night to make sure they're staying on the safe side, you know?
Christie G.
O'Reilly is no more responsible for the death of Dr. Tiller than the video game DOOM was responsible for the Columbine shootings.
This is not an act of terrorism. Terrorism requires an organization, that sponsors the act, that buys the man the weapons and trains him to be a killer.
This is a random psycho, and yes, he was influenced by people you don't like.
The only answer to this kind of thing is the same answer to the VA tech shootings: destigmatize mental illness. Make mental health care have parity. Make getting care something a person can talk about in public as casually as getting a mole biopsied. Make sure that people who are mentally ill don't have to hide in shame from your supreme, arrogant judgment.
Tell me Chad, when some left-wing psycho shoots O'Reilly because of you and Olbermann going off on him claiming *he* is a murderer for being little more than a fact averse "shock jock" running an entertainment show, will we get to blame *you* for it?
Where exactly does the buck stop?
Dear Anonymous-
Rush, like all humans are beautiful. I celebrate life, thank you very much. But, you can keep throwing your mean-spirited insults at me because I'm a man of faith which keeps me strong. When Jesus pulled me out of my 150, he said, "You're beautiful." Then he rambled a bunch of nonsense in Spanish. The point is, I lead a Christ-centered existence which means that people like me and President Bush are on a crusade to promote good over evil in the world. This is a bunch of drivel we're talking about with the O'Reilly fella. Mr. O'Reilly speaks from his heart and then cleanses it with a loofa sponge. Hopefully a young intern is helping with that cleansing. The point here is, we are talking about the sanctity of life itself so trying to blame Mr. O'Reilly is a waste of time.
God Bless you and may Sweet Baby Jesus find his way into your heart.
-Bill Orvis White
Sorry, "Ross" -- but you're way off base with the Doom vs. O'Reilly argument (see above comment).
And you seem awfully concerned with mental illness.
"Ross", others-
You missed a great point by Chez earlier. Doom, GTA, etc., are not representing themselves as NEWS and the TRUTH. Bill O, Glenn Beck ARE. Bill O said on his show just last night that he "reports honesty". Two nights ago, I saw someone insinuate that he goes after people personally, and he got enraged at the accusation, saying, " We don't do that stuff here." (By the way, one way to tell he's out of material and is along for the propaganda ride is his use of "stuff" to describe everything... ie "Nazi stuff", etc).
The simple fact that we are seeking out news sources on the web shows that we may be taking something for granted. We know that the network/cable/mainstream news isn't necessarily the truth. There is all kinds of spin and manipulation going on that affects the news we see on air, even down to our little local news stations.
There are, in fact, people across the country, that DO NOT KNOW THIS. Especially, the older generation. I have to explain the news (and props on ballots, etc.) to my mom, and she sometimes doesn't believe me that the ballots and news would mislead her. Seriously!! People take what they see on the news channels as un-spun FACT, because that's the way it used to be. Or, thats the way that everyone thought it was before was had so much access to real information. And it's that fact that makes what Fox news does even more dangerous. It swings both ways, but MSNBC and the left are not peddling fear the way that the right does.
All this semantic banter about how much responsibility O'Reilly and the conservative screechers hold, and about whether or not various shooters were unhinged and would have killed someone anyway TOTALLY miss the point.
YES, the were unhinged and dangerous already. If they weren't, they wouldn't have shot people. That is an undeniable truth.
The POINT is that various conservative commentators pointed their illogical rage in a specific direction. They had insane rage. It was going to blow up and hurt someone eventually. But by continually vilifying individuals for doing their jobs, the conservative commentators point these psychos at their targets.
I mean, if a pin has been pulled on a grenade on a crowded bus, it is going to explode. The question is, do you kick it toward the exit, or kick it under the seats of passengers?
And Chez, you are dead on with the idea that while we can not and should not censor these idjits (because then, like German neo-Nazi groups, they have a legitimate gripe about their rights being violated), it is our responsibility to publicly shame them for their actions, and to shine the light of truth, logic and reason into the dirty corners of their self-created world.
It's now looking more and more like Op Rescue was actively working with this asshole, building him up and pointing him in the proper direction.
My initial reaction to this controversy was to err on this side of the First Amendment. Like most others here in the comments, and elsewhere, my reaction was that despite the nauseating and inciteful nature of the rhetoric of o’reilly and his ilk, they should be free to say it unfettered in any legal way.
But I’ve come to believe I was being way too lenient. O’Reilly specifically targeted a single individual. He said Dr. Tiller was a baby killer. Babies do not exist within the womb. This is a clear case of defamation of character.
I hope Dr. Tiller’s family nails O’Reilly to the wall with this, and has the strength to see it through court without any backroom settlements.
You know, this reminds me of the famous reaction to the radio drama "The War of the Worlds" on October 30, 1938.
The difference is, that we have more than one medium to get our facts. The difference is that it is far easier to be well educated on political matters, no matter which side of the spectrum; yet the more fanatical followers of someone like Bill actively choose to ignore reason and the information at their disposal and cling to fear.
To paraphrase V for Vendetta, "I know why you did it. You were afraid? Who wouldn't be; war, terror, disease. There were a million problems to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you and in your panic you turned to Bill O' Reily. He promised you an enemy, he gave you a cause to fight for. And instead of seeking a solution to your problems, you distracted yourself with bloodshed, all because a talking head told you to..."
Post a Comment