Monday, January 09, 2006

Letterman vs. O'Reilly

One of my least favorite humans on earth Bill O'Reilly was on David Letterman last week. I think Letterman is incredible when he's not mailing it in, which is only some of the time unfortunately. But he was feely spry during this interview, calling a spade a spade.

Letterman to O'Reilly: "60% of what you say is crap" (long, 11 mins)


Anonymous said...

I saw the interview & wonder why everyone thinks Letterman was so clever with his comments. There was nothing he said that hasn't been said to O'Reilly or about the situation that hasn't been said before. He had nothing original, informed or educated to say to Mr. O'Reilly who is undoubtedly far more informed about any political issue than David Letterman. Letterman is a comedian & should stick to that. It's what he's good at. Otherwise it's simply his uninformed opinion which we've heard from any number of other people over the past couple of years. It struck me that there was so much applause for Letterman's comments (is his whole audience liberal?) but then I realized that it's HIS show & natuarally the applause signs probably went up whenever Dave had something supposedly interesting or clever to say so who knows how that audience really felt. Sorry, Dave, I don't think you pulled off any great debate with O'Reilly. You're simply not in his league intellectually.

Derek said...

I was impressed with Letterman because he is a comedian and he called out O'Lielly for his tirades. Letterman was right on with his comments about the fake "War on Christmas." Sure there are some misguided people out there who have taken political correctness too far. But they are isolated incidents that O'Reilly hypes and shouts about to call attention to himself (and to help Faux News cohort John Gibson sell his book).

As for the audience, just because you disagree with someone like Bill O'Reilly doesn't mean you're a liberal. And being a liberal is not a demonized thing, despite what O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest of the ilk that manipulate healthy public discourse would have us believe.