Boortz Vs. O'Reilly

I just got done watching Neal Boortz take on Bill O’Reilly on the O’Reilly Factor and I was deeply disappointed by Neal.

O’Reilly is on a kick about the white only prom in Georgia. The event was deplorable for what it represented, but was it not, as represented by O’Reilly, a failure of the state. And even O’Reilly knows it, if you listen to his carefully chosen language he says as much.

O’Reilly wants the Governor of Georgia to come on to answer for this “prom that was organized in the school.” (Emphasis mine)

The fact that the prom was organized in the school does not mean that it was sanctioned by the school. And Boortz tried to point this out, though he butchered his attempts to do so.

The situation is really no different than if I met someone at Burger King to plan a crime. Burger King is not responsible for our behavior, so long as we don’t use their facilities to commit the crime. The students used the school to meet to plan the white only prom, but they went offsite to actually hold it.

The school administration can attempt to impede the planning, but they cannot violate the student’s freedom of association if they wish to hold the prom.

It’s not as if the organizers were non-students coming in to use the school to plan this. These were students of the school who are compelled by the state to attend everyday. School is the equivalent of the kids workplace and social meeting place rolled into one. Of course they’re going to use the school to plan something like this. School is their life.

O’Reilly wants the Governor of Georgia to come out and explain why he let something like this happen. O’Reilly wants an explanation of how something like this could be condoned by the state of Georgia. The Governor hasn’t commented on the situation, which is really getting Bill upset.

I saw the Governor’s press secretary on O’Reilly last night. She attempted to express the Governor’s displeasure with the prom. This of course set Bill into an apocalyptic spasm as he wanted the Governor to explain why he was supporting the segregatory function.

I will agree with O’Reilly that the Governor of Georgia should come out and personally condemn the white only prom in very definitive terms. But the Governor has nothing to apologize for. The State of Georgia did nothing wrong here. They compelled kids to go to school, they attempted to impede the planning of the function as best they could, and when it became obvious that it would happen anyways, they refused to allow it to be held on school grounds.

Now you can look back and with 20/20 hindsight say that they should have suspended some of the leaders of the planning of the prom. They should have done more to separate the students. But without knowing that the prom will take place, those all seem like extreme measures. Without the benefit of hindsight, I can completely understand the school wanting to keep the ringleaders actively involved in gaining an education. After all, that’s what they’re in school for.

The only people who can really be held as being irresponsible (other than the students) is the group that rented the dance hall to the white only prom. If they were at all aware of the nature of the function, they should have turned the students away. But even then, if the dance hall is private property, they cannot be compelled to refuse the white only prom. The only legitimate recourse is for the residents of the area to boycott the facility.

O’Reilly is on a witch-hunt and is bound and determined to make someone pay for this event that offended his sensibilities. He would do well to remember that not everything that is offensive is necessarily illegal. The white only prom was offensive, no doubt about it. It represents a failure of the students to understand or comprehend a section of America’s values. But, that, in and of itself, is not a crime.

It also doesn’t reflect on the current Governor of Georgia. This was a failure that was nearly eighteen years in the making. I hold the Governor responsible for not having condemned the act hard enough, but not for the act itself.