Keep It Pithy (21 page)

(
photo credit 10.13
)

A lighter note on the continuing gun debate occurred on December 5, 2012, when a celebrity guest found himself caught in a controversy of his own making and came on my program to explain himself. As you’ll see, I was glad to help him out. I think you’ll be amused
.

During a Sunday night football game, NBC’s
BOB COSTAS
condemned what he called the gun culture in America. Some folks got angry because they felt the sportscaster was attacking the Second Amendment. He came to visit.…

       
O
’
REILLY
: So first up, how do you feel about the right to bear arms?

       
COSTAS
: Obviously, Americans have a right to bear arms. I’m not looking to repeal the Second Amendment. I haven’t immersed myself in the issue throughout my life. I’m aware of it, as many Americans are. I didn’t call for any specific prohibition on guns. I never used the
words “gun control.” I quoted from a column by Jason Whitlock, who was in Kansas City for a long time, now is on the Fox Sports website, in which he mentioned, I think credibly, a gun culture in this country. Now, it plays itself out in many ways, but it’s a mentality about and toward guns that almost always leads to tragedy rather than safety.

       
O
’
REILLY
: All right. And we’ll get to that in a moment. But I think I want to clear this gun control thing up, because that’s … that’s why you got in trouble, because some people felt—

       
COSTAS
: Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: And this is a very emotional issue—

       
COSTAS
: Of course it is.

       
O
’
REILLY
: And the second thing, Mr. Whitlock is really, really far out there.

       
COSTAS
: Well, I—I am not agreeing with—

[After some cross talk, we got back on track.]

       
COSTAS
: In any case, I was unaware of [Whitlock’s remarks comparing the NRA and the Ku Klux Klan]. And obviously, I would disagree with that 100 percent.

       
O
’
REILLY
: Not scolding you, just—

       
COSTAS
: I get it.

       
O
’
REILLY
: I’m not scolding, I was trying to—

       
COSTAS
: That’s a mild scolding compared to what I’ve—

       
O
’
REILLY
: Yes, I mean—okay.

       
COSTAS
: — received over the last seventy-two hours.

       
O
’
REILLY
: As long as you call a Christmas tree a Christmas tree, you’re okay here.

       
COSTAS
: Yes. Merry Christmas to you, too, Bill.

       
O
’
REILLY
: All right. There you go. So let’s advance the story a little bit. Gun control in America is an emotional issue because it is clear that the Founding Fathers gave the right to bear arms for two reasons.… Number one, because they felt that the government might devolve into tyranny, and the second thing was they knew that they had to settle this giant country and there weren’t going to be laws out in the West and people had to have guns to protect themselves from bears and—Native Americans that didn’t like them—

       
COSTAS
: Yes. Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: — coming on their property. So there’s a history here, all right? And most people don’t even understand that history. So Americans grow up with the right to protect themselves—against the government and against bad people. Then you enter into the modern age, where you have a debate about, well, what’s the government’s responsibility here, because these are lethal weapons? And that’s where you come in, right? So you’re saying that you want a more stringent program by the authorities to make it harder to get guns—

       
COSTAS
: It sounds like you’re saying I’m saying that.

       
O
’
REILLY
: You’re not saying that?

       
COSTAS
: If you were to ask me, I believe that there should be more comprehensive and effective controls on the sale of guns.

       
O
’
REILLY
: But what does that mean?

       
COSTAS
: Roughly 40 percent of the guns purchased in this country do not require a background check for purchase.

       
O
’
REILLY
: Okay. You want a background check, right?

       
COSTAS
: You have that. You’ve talked about stricter penalties, harsher penalties for criminals. There is that. There
ought to be training programs for those who purchase guns. I don’t see any reason why someone should be able to purchase military-style artillery and body armor and automatic weapons. Only the police or the military should have that—

       
O
’
REILLY
: All right, all of those are reasonable positions.

       
COSTAS
: And none of that impinges on someone’s Second Amendment rights or the right to protect their home and their family.

       
O
’
REILLY
: You know what? I agree with most of that—but here is where you made your mistake. Are you ready for your mistake, Costas?

       
COSTAS
: Yes, I’d like to hear it.

       
O
’
REILLY
: All right, you’re going to. Roll the tape.

              [
VIDEO CLIP
]

              
COSTAS
: It demonstrates itself in the Wild West/Dirty Harry mentality of people who actually believe that if a number of people were armed in the theater in Aurora, they would have been able to take down this nut job in body armor and military-style artillery, when, in fact, almost every policeman in the country would tell you that that would have only increased the tragedy and added to the carnage.

              [
END VIDEO CLIP
]

       
O
’
REILLY
: No, here’s the deal. You and I are in a theater.

       
COSTAS
: Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: Okay, in Colorado.

       
COSTAS
: Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: We’re watching the Batman movie.

       
COSTAS
: Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: The nut comes in through the back door—

       
COSTAS
: Yes.

       
O
’
REILLY
: — with his guns and he opens fire.

       
COSTAS
: And his body armor.

       
O
’
REILLY
: His body armor, whatever else he had, and he opens fire—

       
COSTAS
: And this gun that can fire off hundreds of rounds—

       
O
’
REILLY
: Right. And we’re saying to ourselves, gee, I really don’t want to get killed here. And you’re seeing other people go down. Answer my question now. It’s
very simple—as you know, I’m a simple man. Would you rather have the choice of ducking down on the floor or having a handgun on you to pull out and defend yourself against the man?

[The discussion goes back and forth for some time, with Costas evading my question. I try again.]

       
O
’
REILLY
: You’re evading my question. Bob Costas and Bill O’Reilly are in the theater.… Do you want to hit the floor and hope you don’t get shot or do you want to have a gun on that you could protect yourself with?

       
COSTAS
: I don’t want—I don’t want to have a gun on me—

       
O
’
REILLY
: Okay. I respect that. You don’t want a gun. I want one.

[We go around and around on the issue. Neither of us convinces the other. We part with respect.]

       
O
’
REILLY
: Thanks for coming in here, Costas. It’s good to see you, man.

       
COSTAS
: Merry Christmas.

       
O
’
REILLY
: Anytime you get in trouble, you come right here. We’ll get you out of it.

       
COSTAS
: Yes, I know you have security here.

       
O
’
REILLY
: Lots of it.

       
COSTAS
: Yes … They’re armed, I assume.

That was a lot of fun for me, and I hope for Costas, too. We talked about one of the most important and divisive subjects of our time, but with mutual respect. That’s the way it ought to be
.

I’ve been doing
The Factor
now for more than seventeen years
.

Can you believe it?

In that time I’ve changed a lot. I still get upset when people like Barney Frank lie to me on camera, but I’m more tolerant of harmless, dopey people and now pretty much just give you a wink
.

You know what I’m thinking, so I don’t have to say it
.

And one more thing: I’ve changed my opinion in some matters
.

And that leads us to the finale.…

ELEVEN

THE LAST WORD

(
As Usual, I’m Taking It
)

On February 7, 2013, I debated my pal Bob Beckel on the subject of President Obama’s drone program that targets terrorists, killing them from the sky on presidential order. At issue was how the liberal media responded to the president’s use of lethal force against suspected terrorists, as opposed to the way the left-leaning press discussed how President Bush allowed waterboarding
.

The point is clear: The liberal media, including many at NBC News, were hysterical over waterboarding but rather muted when it came to
criticizing
the drone strikes. The reason is clear: The national media love President Obama and loathed President Bush
.

In the body of the debate, I remarked that NBC News had said little or nothing about drones up until the congressional hearings that featured national security guy John Brennan. Beckel did not dispute that. We both understood that we were talking about the waterboarding-drone comparison
.

After the segment aired, the left-wing media went wild. A variety of loons pointed out that I had not mentioned that NBC News had broken the “drone memo” story, which reported that President Obama’s legal counsel had justified the policy. That was true: NBC was given the memo and aired it. It was also true that I did not mention that fact
.

The left-wing media howled that I should apologize
.

I refused
.

The reason is simple: We were not talking about reporting the drone situation. Beckel and I were talking exclusively about the analysis of waterboarding versus drones. On February 7, I pointed that out on
The Factor
,
told the left-wing media to stuff it, and went my merry way
.

Now, some might say that this is an example of O’Reilly never admitting to making a mistake. And they have a perfect right to see it that way. But I presented my case coherently and have the videotape to back it up. No apology or retraction was necessary
.

The truth that every fair-minded person should understand is that NBC News and other left-leaning media operations have been extremely hypercritical in their analysis of American antiterror activities in general. That is a fact
.