Are there certain words that are beyond the pale when addressing the president of the United States? Possibly. Is one of those words hate, as in the question “Does it disturb you that so many people hate you?” If you’re House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), the answer is yes—but only when the president is Barack Obama or presumably some other member of your own party.
Reacting to Bill O’Reilly’s pre-Super Bowl interview with Obama, Pelosi bristled at the talk show host's impertinence in asking the above question.
The Hill quotes the former House speaker as telling Gayle King on the Oprah Radio Network:
Just seeing it again … I thought was a completely inappropriate question, of course beautifully handled by the president. To hear this used in the presence of the president of the United States—I think we all have to recognize that while we disagree with people, and may think that they are wrong, the word hate should never be used.
Pelosi was not quite so adamant when O’Reilly used the word hate in the presence of another president of the United States, George W. Bush (see video). O’Reilly ran this clip himself on his show on the FOX News Channel last night. Voices on the left are predictably screaming “foul!” this morning, claiming that there is a difference between the two questions, insisting that O‘Reilly was implying that all of America—not just the press—hates Obama. It’s a foolish, hair-splitting argument, but for those intent on making it, here’s added ammunition: George W. Bush was a former president when O’Reilly asked about being hated, while Obama is a sitting president. Wait for the sparks to start flying over that vital distinction.
The bottom line is that there are undoubtedly better questions to ask a president during the limited time afforded most interviewers. And despite Nancy Pelosi’s myopic view of Obama’s handling of the question, there are certainly better answers than the one he gave:
The people who dislike you don’t know you. The folks who hate you don’t know you; what they hate is whatever funhouse mirror image of you is out there.
It is remarkable after two of the most polarizing years of any presidency on record and a punishing repudiation at the polls last November that Obama still subscribes to the myth that those who fail to support his policies are misguided and reacting to a distorted image of him. It isn’t possible in the president’s world that some Americans simply don’t like what he has done to the country.
Related Article
Click Subscribe at the top of the page to have my articles sent directly to your e-mail inbox. Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.
Comments
So hating him because he was not born here, is a Muslim, is a socialist, are not "funhouse mirror distortions?" Bill didn't ask about people who don't support his policies, but about people who hate, and I think that his answer was appropriate. What would you say if asked the same question? Probably a similar response, not "Well they are not familiar with/don't support my political views." Using the word hate implies a personal reaction, not a business/political one.
The reaons you cite are not the ones most rational people who give for claiming disaffection ("hate" is too strong a word) with Obama's policies. He--and you--are missing the point.
I agree - hate is too strong a word and it trivializes the legitimate concerns that people have with this Administration. Some people do genuinely "hate" this President and those few are marginalizing those feeling something far less extreme.
The President answered the "hate" question appropriately. That was the question asked. The error is with the question. If O'Reilly wanted a legitimate answer that addressed valid disagreements, he should have asked a different question.
He asked George Bush the same question. What did she say about that? Ans: Nothing.
I haven't watched Fox News in ages but I did see the interview. Perhaps Obama feels that if people knew him up close and personal their emotional reactions wouldn't be so strong.
I think Obama believes in his heart he's doing the right thing even though he is going against the will of the people. It is the elitist notion that they know best what we need even if they have to shove it down our throats.
I wonder if anyone cared what Nancy Pelosi thought of the question to President Bush. Honestly (not sarcastically), is there a clip out there that shows Pelosi's response to the question asked by someone about President Bush?
Someone may have cared what Republican leadership thought and probably asked them. I would guess that they responded at the time in a similar fashion.
Voluntarily issuing a position statement on an interview would generally be unlikely from the opposite party.
I'm not sure the parallel is reasonable unless Pelosi was specifically asked about the Bush interview.
OReilley gave a stupid interview. Obama wouldn't interview with an intelligent conservative journalist.
You got one? Buckley's dead, Will is braindead and neocons ain't conserviative.
"It is remarkable after two of the most polarizing years of any presidency on record and a punishing repudiation at the polls last November that Obama still subscribes to the myth that those who fail to support his policies are misguided and reacting to a distorted image of him. It isn’t possible in the president’s world that some Americans simply don’t like what he has done to the country."
what's remarkable is that you conflate disagreement over policy with the "hate" spewed on a regular basis.
Doesn't matter. O'Reilly is an wuss. The only people who "hate" the POTUS are the ones who hate the fact that a smart, articulate black man was elevated to the White House. If they hate him it is because he is black. People are not stupid. And I'm calling you all on it. O'Reilly made himself look like the stupid, dumb, ignorant and retarded fool that he and his minions are.
Anonymous, someone could think that you hate white people and people who are not muslims.
Have you been in a coma over the past two years? your idiot president is a buffoon and has no clue on how to lead this country. The people have spoken in the November elections and they will speak again in 2012 when it is time to vote the Buffoon out of office.
Seems the hate is coming from you, Gump. You're the one had to trash Muslims when they weren't even mentioned.
the real Gump would be appalled at a scum-sucker like you using the name.
The difference when O'Reilly said it about Bush was that it was true. The majority of the WORLD despised Bush not just the racists in the U.S. that propose to hate Obama. And it has absolutely nothing to do with any of his policies. So stop the BS. Bush sent people's sons and daughters into a made up war just to revenge his Daddy. He said it. Kids died for no reason whatsoever. All Obama does is exist. Where's the crime? Oh! I forgot. He's not white.
Actually it has everything to do with his policies. Obama has actually increased troops in Afghan when he said he has a year staged withdrawal plan. Iraq is the same. So while he promised this he did not follow through. "All Obama does is exist" is a very flawed statement when he should be leading not just existing. When you are president you give up everything for the PEOPLE. You have no social life, no private life, no date nights. The world will not stop while your on your dates. You are there on the PEOPLES will not your own.
When you are a celebrity, or president, some people love you, some hate you. Some like you, some tolerate you and still others are just indifferent to the whole thing. An equally valid question O'Rielly might have asked is: are you uncomfortable with people loving you? But what does that have to do with policy or hardball journalism? O'Rielly summed it up himself, when he confessed himself that he is more interested in sensationalism than journalistic integrity, because that's where the money is.
What a bunch of simplistic foolishness. I didn't like Bush's policies and I don't like Obama's either but how dare you call me a racist. My son is half Greek and my present husband is part Native American. Obama is doing just as good a job keeping our kids at war and being killed as Bush did. Obama promised to get us out!
I think that point here is that there is no pleasing everyone. The Presidential office is meant to be a lightning rod, to absorb the attention of the people. You can love or hate a president all you want, meanwhile, the people in his cabinet and those surrounding are the 'brains' who actually run our country. We really just need to adopt our own form of constitutional monarchy so that Obama or Bush would be seen for what they are: figureheads. While the President certainly has a great degree of power, I believe the nature of our system gives the President very little latitude in his choices. Each new administration is boxed in by the mistakes of the last.
Amazing and typical right wingnut rewriting of history. 2 years of polarizaion instigated by the GOP policy of "No" following 8 years of GOP "we'll do as we please" polarization.
Actually, the GOP polarization came from obama, "I won, go screw yourselves." Which came on the heels of 4 years of despicable democrat "we'll do what we want" congressional control.
Serious disconnect from reality, huh, Paul?
Republican actions that led to that 2006 takeover by the Dems had nothing to do with it, huh???
wow ... if that's your real name ... I'm not speaking of nor denying the Repub miscalculations that caused the 2006 dem takeover. I' addressing the despicable way the dems "governed" after that takeover, leading to the financial collapse..
SERIOUS disconnect from reality if you're going to blame the Dems for the recession and ignore the role of the Bushies.
dude, put down the Kool-aid and drink some clear water.
How about the question, "Why hasn't anyone been imprisoned for their role in the financial meltdown of the globe?" Both men are avoiding real Q&A - it's political win/win.
Loved O'Reilly's spin on this. Here are the quotes:
Bill asked Obama: "Does it disturb you that so many people hate you?" and then when Obama translated to "dislike", Bill had to interject: "Hate you."
Bill mentioned in his segment that he also asked Bush this, in response to questions about whether anyone ever asked Bush this. He played an interview he had with Bush in which he asked: "The people in the press hated you, a lot of them, WHY, WHY?"
Apparently Bill thinks these two interactions were similar. Apparently the Bush interview happened AFTER Bush left the presidency-- note the past tense. Might we note any other difference in these two interactions for the pious pompous one?
As usual, "No pants Nance" hasn't a leg to stand on ... of course, she can still try the race card.
Well, no, actually. Saying "people hate you" and saying "the press hates you" are different. If I say your next door neighbors don't like you or I say nobody in your neighborhood likes you, I'm not really splitting hairs. It's an actual difference. When people don't recognize differences between what is said and what they wish were said, political argument becomes useless.
Most of the press kisses his backside. That's why FOX is so hated, they won't.
Oh, and I just noticed from another poster: if I say "does it bother you that so many people hate you" or if I say "why do so many people hate you" -- so assuming that the "people hate you part" was identical as you claim -- a yes/no question is a lot different from a why question.
I wonder if it bothers Pelosi that so many people hate her She's not black, not muslim, yet she is reviled by the majority of Americans but too blinded by her socialist agenda and ger god obama to realize it.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!