lots of stuff to digest:
a collection of videos
and the most recent, O'Reilly on Letterman. This vid is on a liberal blog so forgive the lack of objective commentary written around it.
Printable View
lots of stuff to digest:
a collection of videos
and the most recent, O'Reilly on Letterman. This vid is on a liberal blog so forgive the lack of objective commentary written around it.
Is there a point to this other than making Bill look good?
Has O'Reilly published any sort of body count for the War on Christmas? Do we know how many civillians have died, versus how many soldiers? And has anyone done a public accounting for how much this War is costing us?
And BTW, good to see you back, G.
Actually, Letterman made O'really look like what he reilly is - a bafoon bought and paid for by the right-wing machine. It was a beautiful thing watching David turn O'Reilly's style on himself - he 'bout crapped his britches, he simply didnot know how to respond. So, he tried to out scream, then jest, then .... pulled down his pants. It was a beautiful thing. :balloon2:
too funny, never was much of a Letterman fan before.
You're joking right? Did you see his "solution" to gas price spikes post Katrina? Idiotic, yes- right wing, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by KafirChobee
He's just a largely clueless blowhard who makes a living trying to create outrage over the latests scandal or whatever. Then he brings in people to "interview", creates strawmen for them to defend and then shouts them down. Great entertainment all in all. ~D
Funny thing is, for the first few months after I discovered him I too actually enjoyed his show- not so much anymore. :wink:
Um, I'm a liberal.
And Letterman made O'Reilly look good. I disagree with a lot of O'Reillys opinions, but Letterman had a pretty lame argument about the whole Sheehan thing. Sheehan has every right to voice her opinion and grieve for her dead kid, but the lady says stuff that is downright garbage. As one of you say O Relly is bought and paid for by the right, its obvious that woman is bought and paid for by the left, and she does a much worse job than O Reilly ever could. That way she mugged for the cameras and grinned away as the police carried her away from the march was just shameful.
Maybe OReilly needs to lay off her a little and focus on other issues, but that was a stupid clip from a show I usually enjoy. I hate it when comedian talk shows pull this crap and snowball people they don't agree with and it gets real serious, instead of just jib jabs.
Letterman is a really bad show...
O-Reilly, a moron. Thats all I have to say. :coffeenews:
Well at least the applause signs lit up at the right time. Letterman: “You’re lying” etc. Hah! Entertainers are truly funny when they try to be serious. Devoid of substance they stick to emotion and personal attacks, just like some of the posters here.
I agree with you. That description fits O'Reilly to a T...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofball
X-man:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Please elaborate. I have never gotten that much of a negative from him.
It's not that I have nothing but hatred and venom for the guy- (probably sounded that way) I just don't have much use for him. He markets his shows on exposing the latest "outrage" that he can dig up and seems pretty incapable of intelligent debate. I'd say his show is more entertainment than news or anything else. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
On the various political issues, he seems to put a lot of thought and a fair deal of research into his positions/assessments -- not that I always agree with him.
He's reasonably conservative on foreign policy, though inclined a touch more toward isolationism than many. [e.g. he thought we should have passed on Iraq at the time, but feels we must make it a win almost regardless of cost in order to retain our leverage in foreign politics]
He's a centrist on morality issues, generally coming out strongly against racism and other forms of bigotry but evincing a clear preference for traditions and the old-school ways of doing things [e.g. anti gay bashing, not personally threatedned by gay marriage, but views gay marriage as an attack on traditional culture]
He's pretty mixed on the econ side. He wants to curb government spending and waste, and doesn't support many tax hikes, but is not a believer in killing government programs or removing the welfare safety net.
As to the parties, he seems to enjoy smashing at both sides whenever they are not "lookin' out for the folks" as he defines it (I've never been 100% sure who is or is not in that category).
He takes a combative style with his interviews, and I agree that that can be annoying if taken too far, but I do like his effort to minimize the "spin" of public officials. Since I listen to his radio show far more than the TV show, I see/hear less of his aggressive interviewing than would a TV viewer.
I saw it totally the other way around. Letterman had no answers just snide remarks . Either that or he would duck the question by asking a different one. Ive never seen Letterman look worse.Quote:
Actually, Letterman made O'really look like what he reilly is - a bafoon bought and paid for by the right-wing machine. It was a beautiful thing watching David turn O'Reilly's style on himself - he 'bout crapped his britches, he simply didnot know how to respond. So, he tried to out scream, then jest, then .... pulled down his pants. It was a beautiful thing
Seamus - I think you could call him a "populist," though admittedly a right-leaning one.
"The late-night program hosted by David Letterman is the toughest interview show on television. That's because Mr. Letterman is a smart guy who can spot a phony with telescopic accuracy and expects his guests to bring something to the table. If a guest begins to sink on this show, the bottom is a long way down." - Bill O'Reilly, Feb. 2001
https://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y1..._o27reilly.jpg
Letterman's just mad because Leno is a gazillion times better.
He's just taking it out on O'Reilly.
But according to Letterman, 60% of what O'Reilly says is crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
The Letterman-O'Reilly segment seemed more a draw to me, though Letterman's home field advantage gives the impression he did better. They both scored good points against the other. Eh, I'm not a big fan of either anyway.
Yeah, the audience clapped on cue when the applause lights lit up for Letterman, but it is HIS show after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi
That's called being polite, much like how my dear Southern Mother says, "That child is so ugly, Bless his heart" if she sees an ugly child.Quote:
Originally Posted by solypsist
Ok, I finally watched the Letterman clip and I'd say O'Reilly actually did ok there and Letterman indeed came off looking like a tool. :yes:
i was actually sort of impressed by o'reilly on letterman. search my posts. i've never said a kind word about billy boy
Politics aside I do love the "No Spin" factor. Every partisan tries to paint the best possible picture of their position (too many p's?) and therefore tends to use a lot of crap. I love it when he shuts some of his "bloviating(sp?)" guests down. Letterman did something similar with his (thank you Redleg) ad hominen(spell check is failing me today) attacks ("I think you're lying", "full of crap") without anything to back it up. I do think Letterman is an OK guy though.
My American Government teacher was watching it during my free period (:2thumbsup: by the way) and I just saw it. Letterman really didn't score too many valid points, and any he made were negated by the way he conducted the rest of the segment (blustering and changing topics to avoid O'Reilly's serious statements or questions).
I love this guy. He may be on the other side of the political bench, but the way he thinks and talks just cracks me up...:laugh4:
Demagouge, meet talk show host. Talk show host, meet demagogue. Not surprisingly, they have little common ground.
Having now watched the clip, yes, O'Reilly had many more points, whereas Letterman has nothing more than a general dismissal. That doesn't change the fact that O'Reilly is a demagogue, and Letterman is a comedian. I'd rather hang out with the comedian any day of the week. And it isn't surpising that the demagogue would have better talking points.
I'm deeply amused that O'Reilly is still flogging his dead horse called the "War on Christmas." You'd think he would have found a better source of perma-outrage by now.
So, do you only get on when you're little boy is asleep or something Lemurmia?...
Random thought...:laugh4:
David Letterman (after the liberal audience applauds for the first time for Bill Oreilly instead of Letterman):
"I'm not smart enough to debate you point for point, but I have the feeling that about 60% of what you say is crap."
This sounds like alot of liberal arguments to me. Which goes something like this:
"I can't make a logical argument in this debate, so I shall resort to conjecture, speculation, and assumptions. So there!"
What is really funny, is the blogger's comments:
Letterman 1 - O'Reilly 0
"I have the feeling that 60% of what you say is crap..." and with that Dave Letterman captured the essence of what is Bill O'Reilly. Earlier in the segment Bill O'Reilly said, "The Soldiers and Marines are noble they are not terrorists and when people call them that like Cindy Sheehan; called the insurgents freedom fighters we don't like that. " This quotation is a perfect example of O'Reilly's sophistry. Notice where he pauses, not after that, but rather after Cindy Sheehan, implying not only that does she view the insurgents as freedom fighters but that she views the troops as terrorists.
That's funny. I didn't get that impression. But it would be correct, since many liberals have openly called our own troops "terrorists".
"I have the feeling". Boy that's convincing.
Letterman got totally destroyed in this debate. And while it may have had light hearted elements, it was a debate.
Awesome. Thanks Soly.