Fox host Bill O'Reilly called columnist and author Roland S. Martin the "chief apologist" for Sen. Barack's embattled ex-pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, leading Martin to an animated response at his website.Speaking with former award-winning CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg, well-known for his scathing attacks on what he perceives as liberal bias in the media, O'Reilly described Martin as "a race guy" and sought Goldberg's opinion on the Wright fracas, which Fox has focused on heavily in recent weeks.
Said Goldberg of Martin, "We can see that [he] is a black man, but many white liberal journalists take the exact same position. ... The reason white liberals want to downplay this kind of stuff is because they want to say, 'Look at me, I'm one of the good white guys. I will ignore black racism, I will ignore stupid remarks by a black person ... because I want to show you my racial decency.'" He termed such behavior as "white liberal paternalism."
Goldberg continously referred to snippets of Wright's controversial sermons, saying matter-of-factly that Wright fingered "white people" as being the causes behind AIDS and drugs in blacks neighborhoods. In fact, Wright repetitively placed blame for these and other ills on the U.S. government.O'Reilly agreed with Goldberg, adding, "I think you're right, but I think there's a political component here as well. I think the Rev. Wright story came very close to bringing Barack Obama down."
In response to O'Reilly's remarks, Martin (who was not present to respond) wrote this post at his personal blog:
You tell your audience that I'm a Wright apologist, but you don't even bother to tell your audience what I even said on the issue. Dude, that's Journalism 101. You offer no facts, no analysis, just a weak opinion. You paraphrased me saying that I didn't think the issue is no big deal. WRONG. ...
If you want to tell your audience that I'm an apologist, do me the favor and say what I said, as opposed to show a photo of me and offer no facts whatsoever. ...
For someone who has done your show eight to 10 times, and who has actually defended you from the folks who think you are to the right of Hitler, I'm terribly disappointed that you [were] so weak with the facts. Had you worked under me at the three papers I've run, as well as website and radio station newsroom, you would have gotten verbally smacked down for such weak journalism...
