Juan Cole: The Cheapening of American Politics: Why Did Obama Reward O’Reilly With an Interview? [View all]

[eridani]

This really made me feel like vomiting. Wonder wny Obama won't go on Thom Hartmann and discuss the TPP?

http://www.nationofchange.org/cheapening-american-politics-why-did-obama-reward-o-reilly-interview-1391525633

Fox has conducted a serial propaganda campaign against Obama since the day he was sworn in. It has pushed phony stories, invented scandals where none existed, and allowed guests to compare Obama to Dick Nixon and speak of impeachment. None of the so-called scandals they have pushed have any substance, or are even easy to comprehend, much less gaining traction with the public.

But predictably, O’Reilly’s interview questions were all drawn from this fantasy parade of imaginary “scandals,” many of them flogged by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the nicest sociopath on the Hill. Basically, Obama allowed O’Reilly to put him on trial, with a series of 5 serious charges laid out against him, against which he was supposed to defend himself.

George Lakoff has been warning for years that liberals are letting conservatives frame the issues and dominate the public debate. Obama just did it again. Although he defended himself admirably from the trumped up charges, nevertheless, the interview consisted of broadcasting those charges to millions of people– an enormous audience. Why give Fox that boon? Why give it to a serial killer of the truth like O’Reilly?

It is because liberals believe that good public policy comes out of vigorous debate. But there is a difference between debating someone in good faith and indicting someone with false and libelous charges. Conservatives can always spike the debate by subverting it toward propaganda by basic dishonesty. That tactic should be punished, not rewarded. Obama rewarded it.