Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Unpublished letter to the editor.

On April 16, Eric Galdone wrote this letter to the Athens Banner-Herald: Imus firing just the start of stopping hate speech.

On April 19, Johney [sic] Friar wrote this response to Galdone's letter: No shortage of hate anywhere in politics.

When I read Mr. Friar's letter, I decided to write my own response. By this point, I am pretty sure that the Athens Banner-Herald isn't going to publish it, so I have included the text of the letter below.

"I want to invite any conservative to explain to me and the audience of the Athens Banner-Herald exactly how Eric Galdone (author of "Imus firing just the start of stopping hate speech") took the words of conservative pundits Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or Bill O'Reilly out of context in his April 17 letter.
Let's take a look at the specific context of the quote by Fox News host O'Reilly about San Francisco, for example. Here is what O'Reilly said: "And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you [San Francisco] up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead!" (Gives a whole new meaning to his self-granted title, "Culture Warrior", doesn't it?)
Now O'Reilly made this statement while criticizing a ballot measure passed by 60% of San Francisco voters urging the prohibition of on-campus military recruiting in their colleges and high schools. Whether you agree with the San Francisco voters or not is entirely beside the point. My question is this: Does the mere fact that you disagree with other American citizens give you the right to advocate their murder by our enemies abroad? Does O'Reilly have the right to invite terrorists into our country to kill our fellow men and women, just because he disagrees with the content of a ballot measure passed?
I think not. You can try to spin what O'Reilly said, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. This is what passes for conservative rhetoric, and I challenge anyone to defend it."

Let me add a few comments I didn't include in the letter above. A few nights ago, I watched part of an interview O'Reilly was conducting where he stated again and again that media figures should be given the benefit of the doubt. Of course, if you've ever seen The O'Reilly Factor, you'll know he's more than willing to extend this mythical benefit of the doubt only to right-wingers like himself.

But how can we extend the benefit of the doubt to people like O'Reilly when statements like his invitation to terrorists are made so clearly? There's not much room for nuance there, Bill-o.

Conservatives have a choice ahead of them. Either they start saying what they mean and meaning what they say, or they need to quit their jobs as serious social commentators and start doing comedy tours. You can't have your cake and eat it, too. We on left aren't going to accept "Just kidding!" as an excuse every time a conservative "slips up" and says what he really thinks. Personally, I hope conservatives get a lot more honest with their opinions, because when they start saying what they really think, they're only going to humiliate themselves and further divorce their crackpot ideology from mainstream opinion. Remember when O'Reilly made all those obscene phone calls to his female producer, asking questions about her masturbatory habits and the state of her virginity? I have to say, that was pretty damn honest of him. At least we (unfortunately) know what he's thinking about now.

Somehow the message broadcast by these pundits --- often without overt protest from us progressives --- is that conservatives can say whatever they want to, regardless of the veracity of the statement, but the moment progressives like Galdone start being aggressive, suddenly it's progressives who are just hateful and nasty and who degrade the civil discourse.

In response I'd like to ask a question. What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh saying Barack Obama was taught by Muslims for four years and me calling Rush a lying racist and a pill-popping hypocrite? Here's the answer. I can provide extensive documentation backing up each and every word present in that last, colorful phrase, while Rush's claims have been fully debunked here, here, and here. Clarifying the details of Obama's educational history doesn't quite have the punch "Barack went to Muslim school" does, but at least I'm telling the truth.

These people want us to give them the benefit of the doubt, but they have never once given us good reason to do so. When we rightfully call them liars, they say we're trying to "smear" them, and if we call the taste or veracity of what they've said into question, they respond by accusing us of taking their words out of context. But it isn't out of context. We're taking what was said in the greater context of the long, dirty history conservatism has in this country. They mean exactly what they say, unless conservatism is not, in fact, as hateful as first meets the eye, but instead only ambiguously content-free (it's not). Unlike the epithets and blatantly false stories dreamed up by Republican spin doctors, progressive attacks carry weight and have substance. That is why conservatives react so violently to criticism, and apologies are rare and patently fake when provided.

My point is: Never give a conservative the benefit of the doubt. As progressives, we've learned a lot in the past few decades. We're not just going to call conservatives names. We're not just going to chatter on the radio. Instead, we're going to tape and transcribe everything conservatives say. We're going to complain to their sponsors until they become an economic liability. And in the free market, when they become economic liabilities, they will be dropped from major networks.

Mr. Galdone made in his letter to the editor what I consider to be a very important point. We, the people, pay the sponsors responsible for allowing pundits like Limbaugh and O'Reilly to be broadcast. Consumer opinion and the ratings we provide these networks dictate the salaries of these people. And it is up to us to make sure that they never work again.

No comments: