You don’t really look to Bill O’Reilly for coherence, intelligence or even the most basic grasp of reality. But if you’re like me, you do occasionally fantasize that there are limits to his craziness, or at least to the things that he’ll say out loud. But check out what he says in this interview with John McCain. (The interesting part picks up with around 1:10 left.)
Now, the header over at the DNC site reaches a bit: “McCain Agrees We Need a Cap To Maintain “White, Christian, Male Power Structure.” [UPDATE: THE DNC has since changed the headline – it now reads in a way that I think is far more in line with the real story here.] I can’t read McCain as agreeing with the “white, Christian, male power structure” line. He’s agreeing to the idea that immigration has to be capped. Throughout this interview O’Reilly is trying to lure him into saying something inflammatory – there’s a repeated attempt to put words in his mouth – but time and again McCain chooses to answer the question on his own terms. The way he responds frequently makes it sound like they’re splicing Qs and As together out of context almost.
Now, McCain may sympathize with the idea in his heart of hearts, and nothing I’m saying here should be taken as an endorsement of McCain’s stances on immigration, but I don’t think he’s guilty of this particular charge.
However, how does a presidential candidate not call O’Reilly out? He sits meekly by and lets that vile spew surround him and he says … nothing?!
This is a case where the sin of omission is just about as bad as the sin of commission would have been. And we ought to all be appalled – anyone who was harboring the slightest idea that McCain might be viable needs to put the idea to rest right now.
And O’Reilly… He seems to have just openly advocated a racist, sexist government that discriminates on the basis of religion. Aside from the fact that he avoids using nasty racist epithets like “nappy-headed hos,” in what way is this open assault on the Constitution any less egregious than what Don Imus said?