Scarlett O Bush »
By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:
(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.
(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.
(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.
(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.
(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.
(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:
(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.
(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.
(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.
(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.
(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.
(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.
(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.
Disclaimer:
--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.
--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.
--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.
--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.
Read and Post at your own risk.
May 31st, 2007 at 9:50 am
I already said this at your own blog, but I think it’s more a cheap shot than a lie by the DNC.
McCain just sits there quietly with a neutral expression. He was waiting, I’d guess, for the crazy man to say something a little less inflammatory. So he can agree with the crazy man and thus appeal to the crazy man’s fans. Because one thing he learned from 2000 is, he’s got to appeal to the crazy man’s fans if he want to get nominated.
I suppose it’s sad. But I can’t dredge up the least amount of sympathy for McCain, since he let the crazy man’s rant go unchallenged.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:07 am
I couldn’t agree more, George Sorwell. I kept waiting for the other McCain, the American hero, who speaks up when pissants like OR get out of line, but unfortunately, he was nowhere to be found.
All the same, the DNC did misrepresent his position a bit. But that’s what political opponents DO before a key election.
McCain needed to make sure his position was crystal clear, instead of leaving the situation vague, thereby pandering to OR’s audience.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:49 am
I think McCain said he agreed with a cap. The white male Christian power structure O’Reilly’s worried about turned into a pillar of salt long ago.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:59 am
I agree with Holly. McCain said I agree with you in response to the LAST statement. Just because I say “I agree with you” in a conversation that doesn’t mean that it’s retroactively foisted on all the OTHER things you said before.
Kritter, I think the DNC did more than “misrepresent his position a bit” I think this is way overboard just a teensy bit this side of out and out lying. It’s highly dishonest and does indeed echo the kinds of slime tactics often used by people just like O’Reilly himself. It’s no more excusable when the DNC does it than when the RNC does it, disgusting either way.
You can attack McCain in a million HONEST ways, I don’t see why you need to bother to do it in such a transparent dishonest way.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:33 am
But when someone at a party tells a racist joke, should you just stand there until they say something else that you can agree with?
I just think he lacked the courage or integrity to disagree with Bill’o. That may be just what he needs to win over the GOP base, but it makes him look like a sellout to Indies and Dems.
May 31st, 2007 at 11:38 am
Look at how this is playing out.
It’s all about McCain.
No one even seems to expect O’Reilly to behave differently. So O’Reilly will, I’d imagine, remain a primetime fixture long enough to subject every serious Republican Presidential candidate his brand of craziness.
Even I’m calling “craziness”–when it’s really just garden variety bigotry. Isn’t it? “They” want to break down the white male power structure–indeed!
And the built-in excuse is that McCain’s just pandering to the base!
May 31st, 2007 at 11:56 am
Well you do expect it from Bill’o, but its hard to believe that someone who might be POTUS is just going to let that kind of remark sail by him. If a leader doesn’t stand up to blatant bigotry, how do we know that they aren’t tacitly condoning it???
May 31st, 2007 at 2:31 pm
The DNC should have said “McCain sits silently while O’Reilly argues for maintaining white, Christian, male power structure.” That would have been accurate and damaging to a political opponent. Instead, they twisted a later comment inappropriately, and so now the discussion will be about the DNC’s behavior instead of O’Reilly and McCain’s.
I unfortunately have sat there silently at a party when someone told a racist or homophobic joke, and it was a failing on my part. I’m only now, in my 30s, getting the strength to speak. I call it growing up and I wish it hadn’t taken me so long to do. I would hope that McCain, being much further along than myself in age and hoping to lead the world, would be further along in speaking up as well.
By the way, kudos to O’Reilly for just out and out stating what he really wants finally. It’s nice not having to pretend.
May 31st, 2007 at 2:40 pm
A further thought. One of the issues here is the increasingly blurry line between entertainment, political commentary, and news. If a candidate goes on a comedy show, and the comedian says something outrageous in order to amuse, you often give the candidate a pass exactly because it’s a comedy show. You wouldn’t give them such a pass when they appear on McNeil Lehrer or, much more, a governmental meeting. So what kind of show is O’Reilly or Imus or Frankton? They are sorta news shows, sorta political commentators, and sorta entertainers. It’s not always clear what the proper behavior is on such shows or to what standards the show should be held. If Imus is just a guy shooting the breeze, talking about whatever’s on his mind, you let a lot more go than if he is a man who hosts the Vice-President and Senators when they want to get their political message out.
May 31st, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Gotta protect the oddly silent GOP guy eh Michael? Where was his condemnation for what O’Reilly said huh?
Nope time to attack the DNC for using it Fox News style on the kind of scum that would go on Bill O’s show. And frankly I think McCain deserved it being used this way since he didn’t make any fuss about the comment BillO made. Yep a bit on the nasty side to do it, but when I see you make a fuss when it’s been done in reverse like it has more times than any of us can count I’ll correct my comment here.
Untill then you are playuing at it from one direction, so I’ll be the counter balance.
May 31st, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Wasn’t McCain on the field before the start of the college post-season game broadcast on television? What did he do? Simply walk by and shake hands with everyone, then stand aside, saying and doing nothing. He was there simply to appear on television.
Is this possibly another example of McCain doing next to nothing (maybe he doesn’t know what to do!) and he is on that show simply to be seen and broadcast?
Hillary Clinton and her “listening tour” had more substance than that!
May 31st, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Pacatrue said:
—————————
The DNC should have said “McCain sits silently while O’Reilly argues for maintaining white, Christian, male power structure.â€
——————-
Absolutely right.
This being politics, however, how much of such gentlemanly behavior can anyone truly expect?
I foresee endless scorekeeping.
The D’s did this and the R’s did that.
Unfortunately, the party hacks don’t see much return for intelligent language. The public rewards negative advertising.
With every passing year, I appreciate more the dictum that politics is a dirty business. The voters help make it so by not demanding better.
May 31st, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Pacatrue, you are right on the money. That would have been very embarrassing for him, yet stayed closer to the truth. Not sure why they felt they had to twist it.
Its along the same lines as his trip to Falwell’s Liberty University. I’m sure he was holding his nose, but its pandering to OR’s white, Christian, male audience (isn’t this just white supremacy) that he knows he needs to win the nomination.
If he’s identified with the immigration bill (and he is as much as Bush) it will hurt him with the GOP faithful worse than his stand on Iraq which they still support. The r-wing base has been ginned up by am radio and shows like OR’s Factor for months and they are furious. No matter what the bill really says, the base sees it as amnesty- plain and simple and the end of life in the US as we know it.
May 31st, 2007 at 10:19 pm
It is amnesty, and I didn’t need, and don’t care for BillO’s take on whats obvious since he’s a scumbag about everything else.
June 1st, 2007 at 7:51 am
I’m waiting for McCain to join Billo on one of those witch hunts by his team attacking a judge or politician for their stance on some issue. Billo is saving the Easter Bunny, Baby Jesus statues and children, McClown must wipe the stains from his nose asnd mouth for a couple of votes in SC.