Truth be told, watching some on our side make an issue out of Common’s lyrics/poetry kinda depressed me.
It’s an argument lost before it can even begin. Artists frequently create characters in their work, most especially songwriters. Did Johnny Cash really shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die? Did Bruce Springsteen really go for a ride where ten innocent people died? Even Common’s call to “burn” Bush can be defended as metaphor. But the real reason this approach depressed me is because it was totally unnecessary.
Not as as a poet, not as a singer and not as a character, it’s just a naked fact that Michelle Obama’s White House guest defends convicted cop killers and opposes interracial relationships. Which brings me to my point…
Thank you, Bill O’Reilly:
—–Some, like O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, did bring up Common’s open opposition to interracial relationships and his craven support of two convicted cop killers. In other words, on top of the lyrics, there was also a discussion at FNC (and elsewhere) about the full context of this extremely divisive and sometimes repulsive “artist” the White House saw fit to stamp with their approval. But Comedy Central’s “New Murrow” only wanted to discuss Common within a safe-for-Obama context (the lyrics) and in the above video, Bill O’Reilly calls Stewart out for this act of “comedic” intellectual dishonesty.
Naturally, in their journ-o-listic quest to put the story to bed before the full truth gets out, the MSM grabbed hold of Stewart’s dishonest attack on Fox News, labeled it “epic,” pronounced it “ownage” (want to see how corrupt journ-o-lism works? Click this and this), and positioned it as the last word. But this story — and some of this is our fault for making lyrics an issue — still hasn’t been properly told. O’Reilly understands this and to his great credit has no intention of allowing Stewart, the MSM and the White House to wriggle off this hook so easily.
Moreover, Jon Stewart makes a big deal out of being a friend to first responders, and has, to his credit, frequently put his money where his mouth is in this regard. But slain police officers are also “first responders” and thus far (unless I missed it) Stewart has refused to address the justifiable outrage some police organizations have expressed towards a White House invitation extended to a man who vocally defends those who have, uhm, murdered “first responders.”
The other area Stewart and the MSM refuse to go near is that 2005 interview in which Common openly expressed his opposition to interracial relationships. No “artistic license” cover there, folks. If Stewart takes O’Reilly up on his offer to debate the matter further, I would love to hear The New Murrow’s defense of a White House inviting a man opposed to interrelationships over for an audience with the president. Maybe instead of a clown nose, Stewart has a time machine that can take him back to 1902.
Bottom line: good on Bill O’Reilly for finding the perfect way to keep this story alive and giving it another opportunity to be told properly. Hitting back at Jon Stewart with a debate challenge was the perfect choice. If the corrupt media and the White House want to live by the “Daily Show” narrative-sword, they can also die by it.