Dan Rather Calls Bill Clinton “An Honest Man” on The O'Reilly Factor
Dan Rather on Bill Clinton: “I think he’s an honest man….I think at core he’s an honest person….I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things.”
Last week, in a taped interview aired on the Fox News Channel’s The O’Reilly Factor, host Bill O’Reilly pressed CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather about former President Bill Clinton’s honesty. Here’s the exchange:
O’Reilly: “I want to ask you flat out, do you think President Clinton’s an honest man?”
Rather: “Yes, I think he’s an honest man.”
O’Reilly: “Do you, really?”
Rather: “I do.”
O’Reilly: “Even though he lied to Jim Lehrer’s face about the Lewinsky case?”
Rather: “Who among us has not lied about something?”
O’Reilly: “Well, I didn’t lie to anybody’s face on national television. I don’t think you have, have you?”
Rather: “I don’t think I ever have. I hope I never have. But, look, it’s one thing—”
O’Reilly, jumping in: “How can you say he’s an honest guy then?”
Rather: “Well, because I think he is. I think at core he’s an honest person. I know that you have a different view. I know that you consider it sort of astonishing anybody would say so, but I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things.”
O’Reilly: “Really?!?”
Rather: “Yeah, I do.”
O’Reilly: “See, I can’t. I want my government to be honest across-the-board. I don’t want people lying.”
This explains much. “I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things.” I guess it all depends on what “honest” means.
The interview with Rather consumed the second half of the one-hour show. O’Reilly also quizzed Rather about the contrast in the number of CBS stories in the summer of 1999 on George W. Bush’s drug use versus the near-blackout of Juanita Broaddrick’s rape charge against Bill Clinton. Rather indicated he has a policy that when a story involves what he called “somebody's private sex life,” he prefers not to run any of it. For a refresher on that contrast, refer to Brent Baker's Washington Times op-ed piece, Bush Talks, Clinton Walks.
(This report courtesy of the Media Research Center.)
by Chad Groening
(AgapePress) – Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) recently introduced an amendment that would force public schools that receive federal funds to give the Boy Scouts of America equal access to school facilities — or risk a cut-off of those funds. According to a Scouts spokesman, all they want is to be treated like everyone else.
Helms has asked the Congressional Research Service to examine how many school districts have taken hostile action against the Boy Scouts because of their leadership guidelines that exclude homosexuals. In addition, the North Carolina Republican condemned public school districts that forbid the Scouts from using their facilities for Scout meetings — but at the same time allowed pro-homosexual groups access to those facilities.
Boy Scouts spokesman Greg Shields says his organization does not want special treatment.
“The question of access is a concern,” Shields says. “I think our position is we just ask to be treated like everybody else.”
Shields says the Boy Scouts recently won a court case in Broward County, Florida, defending their right to access public school facilities.
“The federal court found in our favor and said that if a school board allows a private organization access to school grounds, the Boy Scouts have to be treated the same way. The law is on our side,” he says.
Meanwhile, a pro-Scouts petition is under way on the Internet supporting Helms' amendment and encouraging senators to pass it. Grassfire.net, which is conducting the online petition, states that its goal is to “rally tens of thousands of concerned citizens” to support the Scouts, and to send a strong message to “politically correct” forces that attacks on the Boy Scouts organization must stop. At press time, nearly 300,000 people had electronically “signed” the petition.
