O'Reilly plays dumb, accuses guest of spinning, and dumps her - poof! Cuts both mic AND camera
Reported by Chrish - June 21, 2007 -
Bill O'Reilly's Top Story tonight 6/20/07 involved an interview with two guests, Code Pink's Medea Benjamin and Democratic consultant Robin Swanson. Well, until Ms. Swanson said something O'Reilly didn't agree with, so he dumped her.
With video.
The women were invited on to comment on audience reaction to Hillary Clinton, speaking at the Take Back America event in Washington DC. Clinton made comments that the US military has performed well and done their jobs, and it is the Iraqi government who has failed to make the tough decisions for their own people.
O'Reilly asked Swanson why the "far left" is disenchanted with Clinton, and when Swanson refused that framing and said Clinton is articulating a message that resonates with most Democrats, O'Reilly persisted. Swanson said that Clinton has placed herself in a position to explain a little too much and noted that John Edwards apologized for his initial support for the Iraq war, which has allowed him to move on. She was continuing to say that elections arew about the future, and O'Reilly overtalked and said (condescendingly) that she may want to think about that answer, because, he claimed, he didn't understand what she was saying. He kept repeating that and she tried to finish and clarify, but he instead turned to Benjamin. Swanson persisted and summarized "it's always easier to move on when you've apologized,a d elections are about the future" But O'Reilly still didn't get it. (His lack of experience with apologies may make the whole concept foreign to him.)
He got back to the original talking point, that the far-left despises, dislikes, Hillary Clinton - why?
Benjamin said "Well, we don't." It is the American people and not the "far left" that is disillusioned with Bush and his war, and pushing Hillary Clinton for the past two years has resulted in her changing her position on the war, and she is helping to look for a way out.
O'Reilly wanted to know why she was booed, when her position was the same as his (but he had it first!) and Benjamin corrected his misinterpretation of the booing. So, O'Reilly asked, now the left sympathizes with the Iraqi government? Benjamin replied that the American people want the war to end, and want to work with the Iraqi government to set a timeline, get the international community involved, and work out a peace process.
O'Reilly claimed that he learned something, (that the farleft criticized Clinton because she criticized the Iraqi government for not standing up) - oooh-kaaay.
He pretended to apologize to Swanson for being rude, even as he chastized her some more and said when he asks a simple question he doesn't want her to go off "on a tangent, that's not what we do here." (In other words, it's an interrogation and information is not the goal. Answer the entrapments or shut up.)
He asked her if she agreed that that's why the farleft is disenchanted with HRC? She replied that he is creating division where none exists, and that the real division is in the Republican party... Uh-oh. He held his head and overtalked, saying her point of view was absurd spin and complaining that she didn't answer his simple questions. When she replied that his questions were completely off the mark, he said "That's enough. Miss Swanson, we'll bid you adieu."
The camera went from a three-way split to O'Reilly only, and then to a two-way split with him and Benjamin.
He used the rest of the time to lament Swanson's refusal to answer his loaded question (OK, he lamented her "spin" in response to his "simple question, 'cuz he's a simple guy") and congratulate Ms. Benjamin for her answering.
O'Reilly's question was loaded, like "Why does the farright still support Bush even though he's a complete and abject failure? WHY?" (A question we'll never hear on FOX!) O'Reilly can claim he's fair and balanced for having on Democrats, but he can't handle opposing views and doesn't want his audience to hear them, so he overtalks, interrupts, and when all else fails, cuts the mic. Free speech, as long as he can control it.
