About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Responding to O'Reilly's attacks on Chen, Rep. Sestak points out that racist attacks did occur after 9-11

October 28, 2009 11:23 am ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Joining witch hunt, O'Reilly previews attack on "radical" Judge Edward Chen

Hannity joins witch hunt of Chen: "The revolving door of radicals coming into the Obama administration continues to spin"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by IRONY 101 (October 28, 2009 11:25 am ET)
      13  
      Racism does not exist in the world of FOX News...except, of course, when they're talking about how Barack Obama hates white people and white culture.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (October 28, 2009 11:44 am ET)
        7  
        Let's not forget the racism directed daily at pasty faced old falafel lovers at Fox.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (October 28, 2009 11:52 am ET)
          15  
          It sickens me to see the racism that poor Bill O'Reilly must endure every day. If he was dying of thirst I doubt if a black person would even give him a sip of their M-F'ing ice tea.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by soze169880 (October 28, 2009 12:04 pm ET)
            4  
            It is, however, very telling that he embraces the same rhetoric Irish immigrants were subjected to a century ago. I guess that's okay if you're what Mark Wahlberg would describe as a "lace curtain mother[hugger]".
            Report Abuse
    • Author by Conchobhar (October 28, 2009 11:57 am ET)
      7  
      Interesting: Sestak is talking values and reality, and BilldO counters with name-calling. He's got nothing but a loud mouth and a loofah (assuming he doesn't eat loofahs and wash & play with falafel.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (October 28, 2009 12:32 pm ET)
        6  
        Rest assured puppies will show up and insult us for bringing up race when the thread's clearly not about race... ;)
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Civic Racecar (October 28, 2009 3:21 pm ET)
        4  
        It's rather sad BillO completely refuses to accept a different point of view. It's also disconcerting that BillO has such hate for the ACLU when the organization is helping to protect his right to spew garbage and lies while on air. I honestly think his only argument his that "Chen is a radical leftist" which is entirely subjective and is not based on any facts.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fairliberal (October 28, 2009 10:40 pm ET)
            3
          Actually O'Reilly bases his comments about Chen on Chen's own words, he has played and showed a whole series of them. MMFA however omits that part. What O'Reilly had been speaking about to the 2 dems was the stupid comments made by Rep Grayson of Fl, something the 2 dems were reluctant to speak about. Grayson is an idiot, he fits right in with the new administration.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Civic Racecar (October 29, 2009 3:46 am ET)
            2  
            I heard his discussion with Crowley and Colmes. Chen's comments, which O'Reilly quoted were very reasonable in my mind. The "America the Beautiful," the "racism and nativism," and the "ethnic experience" comments were all very reasonable. It is disturbing when people don't get the ability to enjoy the benefits of America because there is some much unfairness. As to the racism and nativism, that happened to a greater extent than many want to admit. I personally saw a lot of people get yelled at and accused of terrorism, simply because they were of Middle Eastern descent. Lastly, the ethnic experience comment is absolutely normal and at least he has the courage to admit his bias.

            Everyone comes to the bench with bias, but no one wants to call it bias. Our own experiences shape who we are and affect our decision making. There is no difference between judges or anyone else. However, when conservative judges interpret the Constitution, everyone says that they are being true to the Constitution. It is quite the opposite for liberal judges. Both are interpreting the statutes and the Constitution and both come up with permissible interpretations, but only the liberal judge gets called an activist and is accused of "legislating from the bench." Can you tell me why that is?
            Report Abuse
    • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (October 28, 2009 12:06 pm ET)
      9  
      Has O'Reilly forgotten these three post 9/11 hate-crimes?

      Balbir Singh Sodhi was gunned down on Sept. 15, 2001 in Mesa, Arizona. The turban-wearing Sikh was killed outside his gas station. Sodhi's killer spent the hours before the murder in a bar, bragging of his intention to "kill the ragheads responsible for September 11." He has been convicted and sits on death row.

      Waqar Hasan of Dallas, Texas was also murdered on Sept. 15, 2001. The 46-year-old Pakistani, was shot to death in a convenience store he owned. Hasan was murdered by Mark Stroman, who was convicted of also murdering Vasudev Patel days later in nearby Mesquite, Texas.

      Stroman admitted to authorities to blinding a third victim, a Bangladeshi, in between the murders of Hasan and Patel. After his arrest Stroman bragged, "I did what every American wanted to do after Sept. 11th but didn't have the nerve."

      The Sodhi, Hasan and Patel cases are indisputable examples of having links to Sept. 11 related hate backlash.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ReasonAndResolve (October 28, 2009 12:27 pm ET)
      7  
      If I hear O'Reilly say "radical leftist" one more time...

      Really, Bill? Is that all you have?

      When you retire, Bill, maybe you can move next door to John McGrumpy and the two of you can spend all day chasing kids off yourlawn.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bsmart (October 28, 2009 1:16 pm ET)
      1 13
      I just want to say this was the worst interview ever. These congressman could not answer the question proposed. What does this say about Obama that he continues to surround himself with radicals? Is that a problem? This is what O'Reilly was asking, so maybe you can answer that. Does it bother you that Obama surrounds himself with radicals?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (October 28, 2009 1:26 pm ET)
        7  
        What bothers me more is this new definition of "radical" being pushed by right-wing professional liars.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Dmacalypse (October 28, 2009 1:55 pm ET)
        7  
        Yes please give us your definition of radicals. I'm sure it mirrors O'Reilly's
        Report Abuse
      • Author by marco21 (October 28, 2009 2:15 pm ET)
        5  
        Radical = not a right winger.



        Report Abuse
        • Author by Dmacalypse (October 28, 2009 2:19 pm ET)
          4  
          My sentiments exactly...
          Report Abuse
          • Author by christopher howard (October 28, 2009 2:24 pm ET)
            5  
            Obviously a very low bar set here for "worst interview ever."

            And, no, I'm not bothered if Obama has people in his administration whom the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck consider "radical."
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Tiredog (October 28, 2009 3:58 pm ET)
              2  
              [i][b]"And, no, I'm not bothered if Obama has people in his administration whom the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck consider "radical." "[/b]

              That should be considered a requirement...just to drive the reichwingers over the edge.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by grandpaMark (October 28, 2009 3:49 pm ET)
          1  
          I remember when the Dixie Chicks were vilified by Fox and their moronic minions....Natalie Maines said she wasn't proud of Bush being from Texas. Funny how Fox lovers have changed what they view as "radical",calling the president a liar,a Nazi,an illegal alien,a "boy"....any outrage from you Fox lovers? Of course not! Who's really out to destroy their enemies,regardless of the truth? Only Fox,rethugs and their enablers posting here
          Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (October 28, 2009 2:26 pm ET)
        4  
        Radical apparently has come to mean anyone who Fox and the hate talk radio crew disagree with on any given day.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by soze169880 (October 28, 2009 3:25 pm ET)
        5  
        Does it bother you that [talking point]? Americans need to stand up and [talking point]! What does this say about Obama that [talking point]?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Pioneer 6 (October 28, 2009 8:03 pm ET)
        1  
        The interview is really only as good as the person conducting it.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (October 28, 2009 10:52 pm ET)
          2
        Both of those congressmen showed their real expertise was dodge ball, they did all they could to avoid addressing the questions put to them. Of course that is not shown by MMFA. We can add Rep Grayson of Fl to the long list of nut jobs that Obama likes to surround himself with.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by tman418 (October 29, 2009 2:48 am ET)
          2  
          I would love it if he surrounded himself with Grayson, a man who tells it like it is.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (October 29, 2009 11:38 am ET)
          1  
          Oh please. You shoot yourself in the foot with that comment.
          Grayson, for better or worse, was elected to Congress by citizens in Florida.
          By your logic, Obama also surrounds himself with Republicans like Bachmann, McConnell,and Wilson.
          And don't even try to indict anyone for dodging a question. That tactic is ubiquitous among politicians. The practice is maddening for sure, but it is universal.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by aBeck in 10-O-C (October 29, 2009 12:18 pm ET)
        1  
        surround himself with radicals? Is that a problem? This is what O'Reilly was asking,


        We all communicate with ideas, and those ideas are comprised of words. So it is essential that the words have distinct meaning.

        Radical, as an adjective in this context, means favoring or making economic, political, or social changes of a sweeping or extreme nature.
        That means that there are radicals on both ends of political ideaology. Ron Paul and libertarians are radicals too. Is that a problem? Michelle Bachman is radical conservative.

        There can be no reasonable discussion with a Hannity or an O'Reilly about radicals because they don't recognize the true meaning of the word. You can have no reasonable discussion with anyone unless all parties adhere to that one principle.

        I have said before and I will say it again. The conservatives in this country have literally hijacked the American lexicon and twisted the conceptual meaning of everything to suit their own agenda. Therefore, I, as a liberal, am not a true American or a patriot. Liberals are traitors and real Americans are who Sarah Palin designates as such. Liberals are all idiots who just "make stuff up"
        And Fox News is America's news channel because it is "Fair and Balanced".

        Please tell me how anyone can have a dialogue in such a bizarro semantic landscape?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Sks1 (October 28, 2009 2:12 pm ET)
      4  
      why is it that anyone who disagrres with far right fringe they are labled a radical because they believe in what can be good in this country and voice their opinion?,,Oreilly likes to shout over anyone who disagrres with his narrowmindedness along with sean little ball of hate hanninty and that idiot beck
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (October 28, 2009 2:57 pm ET)
        3  
        To right-wing professional liars, any member of a minority that's appointed to a position of power by Obama is radical. Right-wing professional liars love lecturing minorities about the virtues of hard work and perseverance, but they don't like it one bit when those hard-working minorities are put in charge of things, which is why they are always demonized as "racists", "radicals", or "affirmative action appointees." Right-wing professional liars have dedicated themselves to preserving the "white power structure" which is critical to their "white culture."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by soze169880 (October 28, 2009 4:25 pm ET)
          1  
          Here's what I want to know... how can a man who takes Taylor Swift's side in ANYTHING, no matter how minor, be out to destroy white culture?
          Report Abuse