Jon Stewart on the Bill O'Reilly Show

[clayinaustin]

Good stuff...

Part 1

MWb-Ygu1VcA

[clayinaustin]

Part 2 - Dennis Miller is in the middle of this clip, but they talk about Jon Stewart.

Good stuff! :cool:

bmbvZeqScO0

[2112]

I'll take Miller and even Stewart over O'Reilly. I even agree with many of O'Reilly's views but he just rubs me the wrong way.

I think Miller's Rants are incredible with all the nuanced references that most have no idea to which he refers.

.

[Tommy Gun]

I saw both interviews and agree it was pretty good stuff. I'd like to see more of these type of debates between opposing personalities. I thought O'Reilly tried too hard to get his shots in and Stewart tried too hard to be funny. One interesting thing is that both were relatively civil and weren't all that far apart in their opinions. I was surprised that the only positive Stewart could come up with regarding Obama was "engagement of the regulatory mechanism" (like getting lead paint out of Chinese made toys).

[Chris]

I really like Dennis Miller as well.

[Tommy Gun]

I really like Dennis Miller as well.

:iagree:

Too bad his show got canned.

[catastrophe]

I saw both interviews and agree it was pretty good stuff. I'd like to see more of these type of debates between opposing personalities. I thought O'Reilly tried too hard to get his shots in and Stewart tried too hard to be funny. One interesting thing is that both were relatively civil and weren't all that far apart in their opinions. I was surprised that the only positive Stewart could come up with regarding Obama was "engagement of the regulatory mechanism" (like getting lead paint out of Chinese made toys).

Or your banking system
or your healthcare system

[Uncle Dave]

I'll take Miller and even Stewart over O'Reilly. I even agree with many of O'Reilly's views but he just rubs me the wrong way.

I think Miller's Rants are incredible with all the nuanced references that most have no idea to which he refers.

.

I think of the trio I like Miller best and the other 2 are tied for me.

You said it - Miller is so fast its ridiculous.

I remember once he referred to his audience looking like "captain pike"- and 7 guys caught it.


UD

[2112]

Or your banking system
or your healthcare system

Oh Yeah, We need a pussified, parasitic socialized system :rolleyes:

.

[LaughingCat]

Apparently, there were plenty of edits to the Stewart/O'Reilly dialogue. Nothing tremendous. They are available on the FoxNews website feed, unedited.

Some sample text:

I know what this is. I come from Jersey—it's the same thing: "I'm not saying your mother's a whore. I'm just saying she has sex for money. With people." [F]ox News used to be all about, you don't criticize a president during wartime. It's unacceptable, it's treasonous, it gives aid and comfort to the enemy. All of a sudden, for some reason you can run out there and say, "Barack Obama is destroying the fabric of this country."


Another:

O'REILLY: Do you know any Tea Party people?
STEWART: Yes, I do.
O'REILLY: Really? Down in Greenwich Village there are Tea Party people?
STEWART: Down in Greenwich Village? Let me tell you something, Bill—I'll give you four blocks of Greenwich Village, and I'll put that up against four blocks around your house—
O'REILLY: Levittown?
STEWART: No, your house now.
O'REILLY: Oh, Levittown is where I was brought up.
STEWART: Well, you don't live there any more brother.

I thought the interview was good. The partisan politcal world built this up like a clash of the titans. They were hospitable.

I do like Dennis Miller the most. He very well could make up half the words he uses, but he delivers them in a way that says, "You do know what that means, right? and it sure was funny."

[DollaBill]

Stewart is dead-nuts-on with the fact that Fox has created a full fledged 7 day a week 24 hr a day panic machine

[jayboat]

Gawker rips it good... (http://gawker.com/5465299/im-not-saying-your-mothers-a-whore-how-fox-news-censored-jon-stewart-vs-bill-oreilly?skyline=true&s=i)

Read the whole thing. The Gawker staff deserves great credit for, as the saying goes, watching these idiots so we don’t have to, and for exploring Fox’s bad-faith chop job at length. Comments are well worth reading, too—including, I suppose, the Fox apologist who whines “The rife condescension in this thread is exactly why more people watch Fox than the Big Three. Obviously, the bulk of Fox’s viewers don’t really sweat the fact it’s a right-leaning outlet, just like the Big Three viewers don’t sweat the left-of-center bias. Fox’s viewers watch Fox because it’s the one place in the MSM they don’t get called stupid all day long.

[LaughingCat]

Stewart is dead-nuts-on with the fact that Fox has created a full fledged 7 day a week 24 hr a day panic machine


You make a strong point. In fact, it's why I have such a problem with neo-Cons, Cheney, Palin, et al. They need you to be afraid. But afraid of what? Some towelheads from third world countries? We are way too smart for this. But I'm afraid we have enough ignorant leaders getting airtime spreading this BS propaganda. Anyone who believes we should live in fear is a fool. And fools get parted with their money in short order.

[2112]

They need you to be afraid. But afraid of what?

How about increasing the size and scope of the Government astronomically, indebting ourselves and several following generations beyond compare?

Oh, Wait we can tax ourselves into oblivion like the welfare states of Europe where by happenstance most people don't have the freedoms or the lifestyles we enjoy now. Yeah that sounds great, we can all live in tiny little city apartments and have pissy little econocars if any car at all, but wait, big brother is there to take care of us, especially those who won't take care of themselves.

Oh, BTW the ultra rich land owning class in Europe seems to escaped the costs of supporting the huge welfare state, How does that work.:confused:

.

[LaughingCat]

How about increasing the size and scope of the Government astronomically, indebting ourselves and several following generations beyond compare?


Good question. It sure did suck when we waged the $1 trillion war of stupid choice in Iraq. I don't hear anyone belly-aching about the fact that when Obama got in office, he added the costs of the two wars to the annual budget, which accounts for a substantial amount of the deficit increase. Did anyone else realize that? Did anyone realize that all the years we fought the wars, they simply omitted the entire expense from our annual fiscal budget.

[LaughingCat]

And I can tell everyone why the Republicans got much more done with a smaller majhority that the Dems have now. They passed our earmark favors like breath mints. So much political bribe money was doled out, they got all their crap passed.

The Dems are in gridlock because they are not passing out giant earmarks. Well, let's be realistic, they are spending like crazy, but they are not bribing the opposition.

There's a Rep Senator right now blocking everything unless massive earmarks are given to his state. These people are not Conservatives!

I am far more fearful of religious zealots who want power and your money to spend than any yodeling towelhead that lights his pants on fire.

[2112]

I agree that the current republicans are not the answer and I was personally against going into Iraq. Doesn't make turning the USA into a giant welfare state a good idea. I also agree that we should not foot the world's security bill but Hell, Under the new Global Warming treaty, we will be footing the bill for all developing countries to "not use carbon".

Last but not least, As bad as the current republicans are, Who does the ultra rich wall streeters have as their favorite political target? Maybe those who will sell us down the road while bankrupting us with more welfare entitlements?

They are all corrupt.

.

[clayinaustin]

WOW! I just watched the entire un-cut interview. Stewart rocks! :D

[Ratickle]

Good question. It sure did suck when we waged the $1 trillion war of stupid choice in Iraq. I don't hear anyone belly-aching about the fact that when Obama got in office, he added the costs of the two wars to the annual budget, which accounts for a substantial amount of the deficit increase. Did anyone else realize that? Did anyone realize that all the years we fought the wars, they simply omitted the entire expense from our annual fiscal budget.

There is only one thing about that war which no one brings up. (And I was dead-set against it from before it started).

More of the money spent in that war has been spent creating war supply jobs in the US, and military jobs, than the stimulous package has created. Without it, we would be in a much worse state of affairs. Does anyone here recall the studies on the aftermath of the pullouts from Viet Nam, Korea, WWII, etc??????

If we lose all of those military jobs and supply line requirements, you can increase the unemployment in this country by an estimated 3% minimum overall are the current estimates I've read. Makes me think that is why Obama has been convinced to move more troops into Afganistan, where it is not as unpopular to do so, while trying to keep his rhetoric of pulling out of Iraq.

[Ratickle]

An Iraq recession?

One thing I get asked fairly often is whether the Iraq war is responsible for our economic difficulties. The answer (with slight qualifications) is no.

Just to be clear: I yield to nobody in my outrage over the way we were lied into a disastrous, unnecessary war. But economics isn’t a morality play, in which evil deeds are always punished and good deeds rewarded.

The fact is that war is, in general, expansionary for the economy, at least in the short run. World War II, remember, ended the Great Depression. The $10 billion or so we’re spending each month in Iraq mainly goes to US-produced goods and services, which means that the war is actually supporting demand. Yes, there would be infinitely better ways to spend the money. But at a time when a shortfall of demand is the problem, the Iraq war nonetheless acts as a sort of WPA, supporting employment directly and indirectly.

Paul Krugman

A well-known liberal Nobel Prize winner in Economics.

[LaughingCat]

I dislike the Democrats just as much as the fascist neo-Con traitors who spend all of our money. But just as Krugman mentioned above, proper government spending can stimulate the economy or at least keep your from a Great Depression. That is why I do support the additional deficits. but the money has to go to making jobs, not simply feeding spending accounts.

My problem stems from the need for a viable opposition party that works to make progress but fights against waste. The republicans are nothing more than obstructionist making invalid arguments. one invalid argument, the deficits. it is well known that the two wars cost well over 41 trillion so far. They were never included in Bush's budget numbers. i dont know how they kept that out, but they did. So adding the numbers back in drove the deficit way up. then the recession cause lower tax revenues driving the numbers up. And of course, the spending, which I believe was necessary, drove it up further.

But to make a simply argument like we should perpetuate wars to drive the economy is not a sustainable answer. Between waging the endless wars and cutting tax rates, we caused this problem. Think about it, if you run a manufacturing business and you basically buy your own goods and cut your prices (revenues) how long will you be in business? Maybe that's not the best analogy, but it was fiscal and economic solcialism more than fiscal conservatism. I still dont understand why anyone whose livelihood or business revenue stems from government contracts could call themselves true conservatives.

Back to the issue at hand. it scares me only that we are seeing the possible rising of the Tea baggers, because they will do nothing more than take votes from true fiscal conservatives trying to gain strength in the Republian party. So Palin and her ignornats are most likely to play Ross Perot spoilers in Obama's re-election. but if Obama getting re-elected means we keep the war-mongering, fear-spreading neo-Cons out of power, I'll take that will a cold beer.

With much love,

J

[Tommy Gun]

I did not know that the cost of the war was out of one budget and in another. Interesting point. However I recall both parties voting to go to war. At some point the real story surrounding the intelligence regarding WMD may come to light, but until it does anything else is pure speculation; thus IMO, to place the blame soley on Bush or the R's is misguided. I think blaming all the deficit spending on the R's is also misguided, yes Bush signed the bills, but as I pointed out in another thread the prescription/Medicare bill was only opposed by D's that wanted to spend MORE. The facts are that the D's perticipated in the spending under Bush. Both parties share plenty of blame for where we are.

Regarding your comment that The republicans are nothing more than obstructionist making invalid arguments. My take on this is that Obama keeps blaming the R's at every opportunity. As I just pointed out, I disagree with his assesment. Why would the R's try to work with a President that continues to do nothing but point fingers...IMO Obama should have stopped that rhetoic after the election. He didn't because they had the votes to do what they wanted, and ignored the R's for the sake of pushng a far left agenda...he is now going to have to deal with the consequences, and continuing to blame the R's will do nothing but continue the deadlock; all at our expense. Obama lied he about how he was going to govern, and he and the D's will pay dearly for that. They have violated what little trust they had left in the American people.

I share your concerns regarding the Tea Party becoming a third party; I'd rather they endorse fiscally conservative, constitutionalist candidates from both sides.

[Ratickle]

I'd rather they endorse fiscally conservative, constitutionalist candidates from both sides.

I'd rather we all did.....

[DollaBill]

I love how everyone was talking about how great the Palin speech was at that "tea party" (laughable). Sure, it better have been great for $100,000 for 20 min work that she didnt even write. Everyone is just kidding themselves. And how much did the promoter make at 595 ahead for the tickets? I keep saying it........ it's a business

[clayinaustin]

I keep saying it........ it's a business

Follow the money :rolleyes:

[2112]

I love how everyone was talking about how great the Palin speech was at that "tea party"

She doesn't have anything more than a high school freshman intellect. Hopefully she withers away. She hurts the fiscally conservative cause. :cuss:


it is well known that the two wars cost well over 41 trillion so far.

Not arguing against your points but this number is absolutely laughable. 41 trillion? come on now. :rolleyes: No matter how much you hate the war, all accounts I have read lead to 150-200 billion a year. Still too much.




A well-known liberal Nobel Prize winner in Economics.

And a card carrying Marxist. Be careful giving this piece of work too much credit. :ack2:

.

[LaughingCat]

She doesn't have anything more than a high school freshman intellect. Hopefully she withers away. She hurts the fiscally conservative cause. :cuss:



Not arguing against your points but this number is absolutely laughable. 41 trillion? come on now. :rolleyes: No matter how much you hate the war, all accounts I have read lead to 150-200 billion a year. Still too much.



And a card carrying Marxist. Be careful giving this piece of work too much credit. :ack2:

.

I thought I was the only smart one here. Ha.

It's a type-o. Didn't coordinate the shift button and 4 at the same time. It's $1 trillion.

[2112]

I thought I was the only smart one here. Ha.

It's a type-o. Didn't coordinate the shift button and 4 at the same time. It's $1 trillion.

:cheers2:

I am extremely (fiscally) conservative, fairly socially liberal. I agree with you on how the Religious right has corrupted what I used to call "my Party".

I am a Goldwater republican, if that still exists. I hate being punished for working hard.

BTW, We already have (from most accounts) 50-70 trillion in unfunded entitlement obligations. I fear what socialized health care will add to that.

Just buy the uninsured their own catastrophic policies, let insurance companies compete across state lines, quit making them cover crap like massage therapy and acupuncture, maybe some tort reform and limit them from denying legitimately covered procedures. That will solve 98% of the healthcare problems.

Tort reform for me could mean having a professional jury of physicians which would be true peers and loser pays legal fees in frivolous claims.

.

[clayinaustin]

:cheers2:

I am extremely (fiscally) conservative, fairly socially liberal. I agree with you on how the Religious right has corrupted what I used to call "my Party".

I am a Goldwater republican, if that still exists.

We call ourselves LIBERTARIANS (http://www.lp.org) :cool:

[2112]

We call ourselves LIBERTARIANS (http://www.lp.org) :cool:

You are correct, unfortunately we can't seem to present a viable candidate.

.