O'Reilly's Defense Of His "Angry Woman" Comment About Michelle Obama Falls Flat
January 13, 2012 2:37 am ET by Todd Gregory
On January 11, ABC's World News did a report on Michelle Obama's denial of accusations that she is an "angry black woman." As an example, ABC used a clip of Bill O'Reilly saying in 2008 that "there is some validity" to the statement that Michelle Obama "looks like an angry woman."
On the January 12 edition of his Fox News show, O'Reilly reacted indignantly: "For ABC News to paint me as critical of her is flat-out dishonest."
O'Reilly's defense of his comment focused mainly on the fact that the clip of him was from 2008, and that since then, he has been "generally favorable" to Michelle Obama:
O'REILLY: Well, that sounds kind of bad, does it not? But here's the context. That interview was done about three and a half years ago -- three and a half years ago, when the country was still getting to know Mrs. Obama, who did have some problems in the beginning. You'll remember the "proud of her country" remark. My interview back then was with Rebecca Johnson, who wrote a profile on Michelle Obama for Vogue magazine.
[...]
O'REILLY: As usual, I did my job. I asked the tough questions about Mrs. Obama because there was a perception -- and everybody knows it -- that she was not happy-go-lucky. In fact, she told CBS News she's tired of being labeled an angry black woman. That's what she said. On the Factor, Ms. Johnson was given plenty of time to set the record straight as she saw it. That's why we had her on.
Subsequently, since the Obamas have occupied the White House, I have been generally favorable to Michelle Obama.
O'Reilly then showed a series of clips of him saying nice things about the first lady.
Here's the problem: This defense doesn't make any sense. As O'Reilly said himself, "the country was still getting to know Mrs. Obama" in 2008. During that getting-to-know-you period, O'Reilly did indeed say that Michelle Obama "looks like an angry woman." In doing so, he obviously helped create a perception in his viewers' minds that she is "an angry woman."
O'Reilly may have said otherwise since then, but he can't honestly claim that he had no role in creating the "angry woman" image of Michelle Obama.
O'Reilly also dragged Media Matters into his complaint: "ABC News also did not tell its audience that it got the clip it used on me from the far-left website Media Matters, which is in business solely to smear non-liberal media people."
This doesn't make much sense, either. O'Reilly didn't dispute the authenticity of the clip or the context of what he said back in 2008. The clip is accurate, and where ABC got it from is irrelevant.
During a tease of this story at the top of the show, the graphic read "Taken Out of Context":
O'Reilly also made a form of this argument during a subsequent discussion with Fox News contributor Laura Ingraham:
O'REILLY: And here's what happened. I worked at ABC News, and here -- here's exactly what happened. They had some inexperienced correspondent -- I don't know even know who she is -- on it. But they had a producer. Producer was lazy. Producer looked at -- you know, Googled Michelle Obama. Bing, Media Matters comes up right away. He takes the thing right off. Doesn't do any contextual about it. When did it happen? Why did it happen? What was the --
INGRAHAM: Oh, that's so -- why are you surprised? Why are you surprised by this?
O'REILLY: No, I'm not, but I want the people to understand this is what happens all the time. So then ABC News on their World News broadcast reaches, what, 8 million people? OK, they throw my picture up there with the Fox News Channel underneath. And how are they supposed to know? How are these people supposed to know what the history of it is? They don't.
If O'Reilly is suggesting that ABC deceived its viewers by not telling them the clip was from 2008, he's wrong there, too. The image ABC that used with the audio of O'Reilly noted it was from "Sept 2008":
Full transcripts of O'Reilly's segments on the story are below.
From the tease at the top of the show:
O'REILLY: The O'Reilly Factor is on tonight.
MICHELLE OBAMA [video clip]: That's been an image that people have tried to paint of me, that I'm some angry black woman.
O'REILLY: ABC News, reporting on a new book about the Obamas, portrays me, your humble correspondent, as hostile to the first lady.
[begin video clip]
CECILIA VEGA (ABC News correspondent): The image of an angry Michelle Obama has long been fodder for critics.
O'REILLY [audio clip]: I have a lot of people who call me on the radio and say she looks angry. And I have to say there's some validity to that. She looks like angry woman.
[end video clip]
O'REILLY: And guess where they got that clip? The far-left website Media Matters. Did ABC News tell its audience? We will tell you.
From O'Reilly's "Talking Points Memo":
O'REILLY: The media race-baiting begins. That is the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo. As you may know, there's a new book out about the Obamas in which the first lady is discussed at length. ABC News reported on the book last night and used me, your humble correspondent, to represent pundits critical of Michelle Obama.
[begin video clip]
VEGA: A new book called The Obamas paints a portrait of a first lady, who, in the beginning, was frustrated and unhappy with life in the White House. The image of an angry Michelle Obama has long been fodder for critics.
O'REILLY [audio clip]: I have a lot of people who call me on the radio and say she looks angry. And I have to say there's some validity to that. She looks like angry woman.
[end video clip]
O'REILLY: Well, that sounds kind of bad, does it not? But here's the context. That interview was done about three and a half years ago -- three and a half years ago, when the country was still getting to know Mrs. Obama, who did have some problems in the beginning. You'll remember the "proud of her country" remark. My interview back then was with Rebecca Johnson, who wrote a profile on Michelle Obama for Vogue magazine.
[begin video clip]
JOHNSON: I found her lovely, actually. Very bright, very thoughtful, and, you know, an impressive person. Intelligent. She was great. I was impressed.
O'REILLY: Now, I have a lot of people who call me on the radio and say she looks angry. And I have to say there's some validity to that. She looks like an angry woman. Did you ask her about that?
JOHNSON: Don't they say that about you, too?
O'REILLY: Yeah, but I'm not running for -- I'm not going to be the first lady. I hope not, anyway.
[end video clip]
O'REILLY: As usual, I did my job. I asked the tough questions about Mrs. Obama because there was a perception -- and everybody knows it -- that she was not happy-go-lucky. In fact, she told CBS News she's tired of being labeled an angry black woman. That's what she said. On the Factor, Ms. Johnson was given plenty of time to set the record straight as she saw it. That's why we had her on.
Subsequently, since the Obamas have occupied the White House, I have been generally favorable to Michelle Obama.
O'REILLY [video clip]: The president and first lady were very gracious to me. This is the first time I've spoken to Michelle Obama, and I was impressed. She's charismatic, articulate, and beautiful.
O'REILLY [video clip]: Ms. Obama was participating in the healthy kids fair, and the hula hoop is good exercise for the midsection. For being hoop conscious, Michelle Obama is a patriot.
O'REILLY [video clip]: For trying to help American vets, the first lady is a patriot.
O'REILLY [video clip]: But don't you think that Michelle Obama speaking out about healthy food is -- I think it's noble. I think it's a good thing.
O'REILLY [video clip]: Then they brought her into the White House, Michelle Obama, and they basically placed her in a position where she's glamorous. And she is. She's like Jackie Kennedy.
O'REILLY [video clip]: I believe Michelle Obama is a good woman who wants the best for all Americans.
O'REILLY: But those statements did not fit into the narrative that ABC News wanted to present last night -- that of guys like me hammering Michelle Obama.
ABC News also did not tell its audience that it got the clip it used on me from the far-left website Media Matters, which is in business solely to smear non-liberal media people.
Now, we brought the situation to ABC's attention today, and they say from now on, they'll call people like me who are injected into their news coverage. And I think it's important. Because I'm simply not going to let -- I'm not going to let the presidential campaign degenerate into a race-baiting media propaganda exposition. All who participate in that, and there are plenty of them, are going to be called out on it.
From my vantage point, Michelle Obama has been a fine first lady, helping kids and articulating important issues like nutrition. For ABC News to paint me as critical of her is flat-out dishonest.
All of us have a lot riding on the presidential election this year. It's about America's future. So, let's cut the crap, shall we?
From O'Reilly's discussion with Ingraham:
O'REILLY: Now for the top story tonight, reaction. Joining us from Washington from the Ingraham Angle, Ms. Laura. You're not surprised at this, are you?
INGRAHAM: No, Bill. And, frankly, I'm shocked that you would be accused of saying anything critical of the first lady because, if you remember, the summer of 2010, rewind. When I was on for The Obama Diaries, with my book where I wrote, you know, these accounts of what Michelle's thought process was in the White House. I made the point that I thought the whole mom-in-chief thing was a big cover and a big ruse -- that yes, she's glamorous, of course she's smart, of course she's charismatic, all of that's a given, seems to be a great mom -- but that she was really aggressively pushing policy in the White House. Immigration reform, The New York Times now tells us. I was focused more on this child nutrition thing, which ended up being a big payoff to SEIU with the way it's being regulated in our schools. And you rose to the first lady's defense and you said, "Oh, now the garden is a problem, Ingraham." So if they should be coming after anyone, Bill, I'm happy to take the bullet for you.
O'REILLY: Well, that's right, but I'm the big dog, you see.
INGRAHAM: I'm a pretty big dog.
O'REILLY: And here's what happened. I worked at ABC News, and here -- here's exactly what happened. They had some inexperienced correspondent -- I don't know even know who she is -- on it. But they had a producer. Producer was lazy. Producer looked at -- you know, Googled Michelle Obama. Bing, Media Matters comes up right away. He takes the thing right off. Doesn't do any contextual about it. When did it happen? Why did it happen? What was the --
INGRAHAM: Oh, that's so -- why are you surprised? Why are you surprised by this?
O'REILLY: No, I'm not, but I want the people to understand this is what happens all the time. So then ABC News on their World News broadcast reaches, what, 8 million people? OK, they throw my picture up there with the Fox News Channel underneath. And how are they supposed to know? How are these people supposed to know what the history of it is? They don't.
INGRAHAM: Well, Bill -- Bill -- but here's what I -- here's my question, which I think is more interesting. with all due respect. Why do you think that there's no validity to this point that Michelle Obama is aggressively and somewhat effectively meddling in policy, even though she's an unelected official? That's what The New York Times book states on immigration reform and health care, that there was this big tension.
O'REILLY: I didn't read the book so I can't know -- I didn't read the book so I can't know that.
INGRAHAM: Well, yeah, but you're making this --
O'REILLY: Look, and that's a debatable issue. Look, she may be --
INGRAHAM: Yeah, but look, all I'm saying is I think -- I think you are a little more correct the first time you said what you said than you are in your kind of three and a half years later.
O'REILLY: I don't think she -- look, I don't think she's an angry black woman I don't. All right, I didn't know her --
INGRAHAM: No but nobody is talking about black. Who is talking about that?
O'REILLY: Three and a half years ago -- three and a half years ago nobody knew her. And she had made that comment that everybody went crazy, "the first time I'm proud of my country." So we're probing to find out who she is, and a I asked the question. But look, you raise an interesting point. It could be that Michelle Obama is the power behind the throne --
INGRAHAM: Yeah, it sounds like it.
O'REILLY: -- and that she's doing a lot of these things to put forth a political agenda. Absolutely that could be true. We're open to that discussion anytime. I'll give you the last word.
INGRAHAM: She has sharp elbows, Bill. She has sharp elbows, but she's also glamorous. The two can also, you know, can coexist at one time. She can be beautiful and a great mom, but she can also be a radical leftist who has a bit of an entitlement mentality, using the taxpayers' jet to go off a couple days early and not stay behind with her husband when a lot of people are struggling in this country. That doesn't look good to Americans who want to believe that the first lady and the president empathize with their plight. I think that's a legitimate discussion point, and I think that's, you know, that's a question.
O'REILLY: Here's the bottom line: You should have been on that report, not me.
INGRAHAM: Good. I -- no, the black thing has nothing to do with it. That's a game that they are playing, and that's an old game, and you called them out on it.
O'REILLY: All right. Laura Ingraham, everybody.
And Ingrahm is an ex-law clerk for Clarence Thomas and an ex speech writer for Ronald Reagan not a psychiatrist. I see nothing in her history that allows her to claim she's qualified to get into anyones head.
Not that lack of qualifications ever stopped these fascists from polluting the air with their garbage
Every human being, black and white, can get angry, but a blanket stereotypical characterzation directed at a black woman will never go unnoticed. [b]Just like the racist comments you made about leading a mob to "track down" Michelle Obama.
Well, no, Laura, actually you aren't. Dogs are males. There's another word for canine females.
Irrelevant. It's you in the clip Billo. Your words. Media Matters did not put those words in your mouth which they never do. They simply post audio video and transcripts of you always with the context intact.
Unlike Faux News who prefers to attack people with out of context soundbites.
The words I use here are important. Literally, a COUPLE times. Like, i can count it with one hand.
No orginization is perfect, obviously. no human is either. but basically, you have one human making more lies in a single day than media matters has ever misrepresented something.
No wonder they don't like MMFA. It does what they are supposed to, and humiliates them with the ease and volume of doing so. I mean heck, this site isnt even really journalism, and it still does more than the right wing journalists!
They won't ever dare to actually visit Media Matters to find out either. Even the trolls we get here don't actually read the articles and context.
Humble people usually dont brag about their humility Bill
They get ratings. They sell ads. They get to stay on TV.
This of course doesn't mean that they're right, or that they have a quality show. It just means, people watch them, and advertisers can make money off of promoting their wares on their shows.
Typical right wing propaganda machine tactics.
If MMFA was so blatantly and obviously "far left wing" why doesn't Fox cite some examples?
To prove MMFA is a "far-left website Media Matters, which is in business solely to smear non-liberal media people," would require research and follow-up, two things that FoxNoose knows they don't have to do, as long as they have their sheeple audience.
That's what drives folks like O'Reilly crazy. He may say they take things out of context, but they don't. They use their own words against them, which is what, in my opinion, makes this one of the better media commentary sites going.
Thats another reason they dont like us. Heh. And the best they can do is throw their weak obvious trolls at us, who we tend to take apart in minutes. Not their fault of course; they dont realize when they are sent here to bother us that we deal in facts, not rhetoric. It must be a totally alien way of thinking.
Overall though, compared to say, HuffPo, or Red State, or Freeperville, this place is pretty darn good.
It becomes apparent that they were put on this earth just to create as much frustration as possible. If they could just take one step back and read the gibberish they post they just might see what fools they actually look like.... but....
Reminds me also of the Reverend Wright fiasco they keep pumping to this day. Calling him anti American. Anti white guy. When nothing he says even comes close to what they claim.
But mention that sarah palin received..I dont know, a blessing or something against magic, and all of a sudden you hate america.
But, if we mentioned that, we were un-American and weren't giving Sarah a chance to you know, spread her facts around.
Most of that perception is a left-over from the Vietnam era, and many of those idiots that spit on returning soldiers have become chicken-hawk, lazy, brain-dead conservative sellouts.
He has no cachet with anybody, especially conservatives. He is trailer-park burgoo.
You seem to imply that Bill Clinton went to England specifically to avoid the draft (and technically, since he was never drafted, he was not a "draft dodger"). This is untrue. Clinton went to England because he was a Rhodes Scholar and was studying at Oxford.
Let's be careful with those facts, please.
Humble? This conceited blowhard doesn't know the meaning of the word.
Agreed, Pete. Take another quick look at that first screen shot. His smugness is about as subtle as a jackhammer.
And just because someone is not perceived as "happy-go-lucky", that doesn't make them "angry". And one of the biggest reasons for that depiction of her as not happy? The structure of her face, which makes her mouth look a little hard at times.
O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, and others have in fact contributed to the perception of Mrs. Obama as "angry."
I have heard more than one right winger state that Michelle "always looks angry". Really? I did a search on Google Images for "Michelle Obama" and found that the vast majority of photographs show the First Lady smiling, laughing, and even dancing. Just where is this "anger" I keep hearing about?
Angry people generally frown, raise their voices, or curse. I don't recall ever seeing the First Lady behave that way.
I always kind of fall back on this one example. I was driving home from DC to Western NC one Friday. Out in the wilds of TN there isn't much radio available, so I found myself listening to Limbaugh. He announced this speech he was going to play from Obama and how seething and angry, and how "chip on the shoulder" he sounded. Limbaugh played the segment of the speech he was talking about.
The speech was upbeat. Positive. Not an "angry" bit to be heard.
After he played it, he came right back with the old, "Ladies and Gentlemen, see what I mean about this man child who is President now and thinks that America owes him everything? See how angry he sounds?"
When, he doesn't sound angry. At all. Not even close actually.
I could just picture the Mega Dittoheads at home nodding along thinking, "You're RIGHT Rush! He IS angry. I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!!"
Last night, Hannity was playing several clips of President Obama talking about income inequality. Hannity was trying to prove that Obama is waging "class warfare".
The clips contained nothing "radical" or even controversial. They were simply clips in which Obama made the point that the wealthy should not have lower tax rates than working people. Common sense, right? Wrong. In Hannity's mind, Obama is "attacking freedom" and engaging in "class warfare"
But here is the most incredible thing. One of the clips Hannity played was Obama quoting RONALD REAGAN talking about how it is unfair for teachers and firefighters to have higher tax rates than millionaires. But that didn't faze Hannity. He still insisted that Obama was waging class warfare by quoting Ronald Reagan. LOL
Michelle Obama hasn't had any angry moments in public. O'Reilly has.