I`m not sure I would actually label this a "smack down". After all, Letterman admited that he wasn`t smart enough to win a debate with O`riely (which I think even most german sheppards can win a debate against him).Overall, i think this is a good example of two people who don`t really know what they are talking about arguing different issues. O`Riely seems to be about objecting to people saying things that he objects to on his show, while Letterman is just praising Shenan (who while might have pure motives at first has quickly turned into a publicity whore with zero credibility).I am impressed that Letterman took such a political stance since most talkshow hosts try to avoid that sort of thing. Except for O`Riely that is, but he`s not so much a talk show host as a political bully (who I`m amazed that people even listen to anymore)
Great. I haven't laughed so hard since Cheney's "final throes" statement.What really had me doubled over was when O'Reilly said, "Our analysis is based on the best evidence we can get."Apparently, the razor-sharp fact checkers at "The Factor" have gotten a little behind in their work, since that "Silent Night" nonsense was thoroughly debunked two weeks ago.O'Reilly's either the worst baldfaced liar at Fox, meaning he outstrips even Hannity, or else he's completely delusional.
I can see your point, Joe, but I think that's why Letterman did it. He always wears the "dumb guy" label proudly, and he showed people that O'Lielly belonged in that category too.Debating him gets you nowhere, as other people have found out. Comparing his crusade to a call to put diapers on horses, well, that gets him laughed at like he deserves.
Good point, OM. I hadn:t actually thought of it that way, but I`m claim extra ignorance on this one since it`s been years (decades?) since I`ve watched Letterman and I`ve forgotten most of his schtick.One other thing that surprised me was the fickle nature of the audience. I figured once they ralleyed behind Dave, that O`Riely was dead to them, but they actually applauded a number of things he said even though i thought it was obvious pandering and rhetoric. Maybe someone fell asleep at the "applaus" sign.
One of my personal favorites in the interview:"O'REILLY: You're going to take things that you've read?"Wait...wait...isn't that where the whole premise of his argument about the Christmas "threat" came from anyway?Worse than that may be the opposite of that. God forbid we read and form an opinion! We should all just watch his show and get our opinions there!I sure have mine...
One of my personal favorites in the interview: "O'REILLY: You're going to take things that you've read?"That was definitely my favorite, too. Reminded me of the Bill Hicks routine where he's reading a book in a Waffle House and the waitress asks him not "what are you reading?" but instead "what are you reading for?""Well, well, it looks like we got us a reader...."
My personal favorite was the bit about the horse diapers. I don't much care for Mr. Letterman's show because I find him generally un-funny and otherwise irritating, but sometimes it's worth it for the zingers like that!
It was nice of Letterman to give O'Reilly the benefit of the doubt like that. No way in hell it's any less than 75%.
Post a Comment