onegoodmove

how funny is it that dave dips his pencil into bill's water. zing!

Norm, I jumped right from the "Late Show" to OGM looking for this clip!

Can always count on you for the good stuff. Kudos.

What an exchange... Oh man --

This thing's already a classic!

Thanks for putting it up Norm. Gotta show this one to my friends.

haha, O'Reilly is fun

I wonder if people really take Bill O'Reilly seriously. I mean that man is so ... DOH!

Once again, Dave letterman hats off and of course the Norm to bring it to people like me who are outside US and don't have access to this programs.

Aaargh. It's em-eye-six (MI6), not em-one-six, you fuckhead. As in Military Intelligence (Section) 6.

That was quite the blowout.

Letterman deserves every American's thanks for his strong response to this nonsense.

I have often heard BO'r warn Americans to watch what we say. I know he is just parroting Bush, Cheney, and others, but we Americans still have freedom of speech technically. No one can see the future but we can see which way the wind is blowing.

I wonder how soon before the new wave of McCarthyism really gains momentum? I bet BO'r is thinking not soon enough. BO'r is dreaming right now of the hearings calling Letterman out for such disloyalty to the Bush nation, don'tcha know it.

Yay Letterman! : )

There is something about Bill O'Reilly that reminds me of Pat Robertson. Maybe its the showmanship, the conviction or sometimes fanaticism. They are both popular entertainers but its something more. Maybe my sleepy brain is just playing tricks on me. But oh no, I just googled them both and Billy had already commented on his website:

"It doesn't really bother me that my media cohorts feel I am the spawn of Pat Robertson."

I don't think it is just the Christmas fantasy of BO'r that had me thinking this. Most Americans would laugh at calling Robertson a journalist but how different really is O'Reilly. Anyway I figure someone will get a kick out of the "spawn of Robertson" quote from O'Reilly that I found on his own website.

There should be a warning before BO'r's shows that they are for entertainment purposes only.

I'm not a Bill O'Reilly fan, but i do think Letterman looked like "a pinhead" for not being able to debate O'Reilly and hiding behind the "im not smart enough to debate you" line. You can't say the guy is 60% crap when you can't back it up. I am only being objective. Letterman is clearly no John Stewart.

Yes, we heard you the first time, dave. You're not an O'Reilly fan. Got it.

Letterman is not about the debate. his show is entertainment. But I still think he schooled O'Reilly on some major issues, albeit very generalized. Why Bill is so anti-Cindy baffles me. Freedom fighters? What's wrong with that? They are freedom fighters. The insurgency is made up mostly of IRAQIS that want the US out of Iraq. We did the same thing in the 1770s. I feel bad for the Iraqis, but that doesn't mean that I support their violent means. They are between a rock and a hard place, and have no other way to further their own cause for freedom from the US. It's too bad that GWB took us down this road in the first place.

He talks about the gradual erosion of Christmas and what's going to happen if everyone acts like they don't care, but calling out Bush for lies and legal infractions is bad for the country. Brilliant. I wish Dave had pounced on that.

Did you catch BO'r's emphasizing "professional soldier" referring to Cindy Sheehan's son? That gave me chills. Once while discussing the war with a Republican and very good friend he told me that soldiers are compensated for the job just like any other profession and that death is something that comes with that job. The friend also told me that each person chooses to be a soldier and that there are risks to the profession. All that is common sense, but this discussion still troubles me. Being a soldier was considered just like any other job to him.

I believe that there exists a sacred trust between the people of a democracy and its soldiers when the government has abused its power. We sent soldiers into combat with inadequate armor, attempted numerous and substantial VA funding cuts, treated the national guard as regular military, lied to them about the reason for going to war, extended service to compensate for poor recruitment, called up retired service people, just to name a few issues. One 65+ year old man I met at the airport had been called up for his demolitions expertise training and had told the army that they must have made a mistake and was told the army doesn't make mistakes so he was leaving home. Unbelievable, I know...

There needs to be a Soldier's Bill of Rights. If we as Americans will call on soldiers to lay down their lives there better be a DAMN GOOD REASON! We failed our Vietnam vets when they came home. We failed the vets of the Gulf War - look at the data on suicides and the number that are on disability. Now we are failing soldiers all over again.

How inadequate are Democrats to not own this issue of protecting our troops?

Letterman sells himself short when he says he isn't capable of debating every point and misses a couple opportunities but he still owns the interview. Great clip.

Boy, do I miss Letterman!

My question is what is the other 40% of what O'Reilly says? Lies - "Let's stop talking about all of this lying" - maybe he would rather call if perfidy. Then 95% of "them thar "Mericans" wouldn't understand what it is.

I think I have mentioned before that I used to date a flight attendant whose roommate dated Bill O'Shithead (that was her name for him - not mine) and this was 18 years ago. He sure hasn't changed. He was a sensationalist reporter then and still is. It has been already proven that he has exaggerated the various Holiday/Christmas stories.

BTW: Fuck! yes! the men and women in Iraq are freedom fighters - no one likes to hear that but they are doing exactly what I would do if someone invaded my country. I would find any way I could to destroy my enemy. Would I be called an insurgent by (let's say Russia, if they were the invaders)? Damn right I would be.

What makes them different? Religion? Location? Culture? Language? Methodology of battle? If the US was fighting a standing Army there, would they be called insurgents?

The other consideration is that there is a lot of pay backs going on for 25 years of supression and torture. As has already been stated, you can't expect democracy to just blossom and flourish because you took out the despotic leader.

As I have said before, no matter how long it takes for the USofA to leave, Iraq will become a theocratic government and you will see a very bloody civil war - very bloody. Preventable - no. Deplorable - yes.

was the pencil in the cup intentional? huhlarious, but still rude

Freedom fighters? Are all of you dense? They don't fight for freedom (Like we did in the 1770's - to be free from a tyrant king)they fight for control. We are trying to establish a democracy, that is, citizens having a voice in their government. The insurgents don't give two squirts of piss to set up a democratic government.

As far as why we are there - we are there to set up a goverment that is non-western, non-Jewish, non-Christian, and sympathetic to the west to help curb some of the terrorist threat. Yes, it is a terrible uphill battle to install a westernized democracy (wow just think of the propaganda wars we'll have to wage against the al-jezeera tv network!). Sounds crude? imperialistic? tyranical? whatever negative adjective you want to put in there, but in the end it is strategically smart, and vital that we succeed at this. If it blows up in our face, so be it, but we have to try something. We overlook this crap in 1993 with the 1st World Trade Center bombing. We reaped our sown ignorance in 2001 when the towers came down. I think the time has come to be bold. God bless the soldiers (some of them my extended family members and close friends) brave enough to take on this endeavor.

As far as spreding democracy - give people the chance at somthing better that a porcelain pot to piss in and they might just take it. Get them modernized and able to build an economy where a dictator doesn't hog all the profits. Give them a shot at better health care. Let surrounding countries see that women can have rights too (and there's no need for vaginal mutilation).What's wrong with trying to spread our ideals on that?

I understand that bush lied to the american people, but that's basically because we can't come out in public and say exactly what we are doing there. That would make us look too mean. Geez, I guess it's hard being the only supper power left.

My $.02

M-one-6.. is that the UK equivalent of the C-one-A?

Mmmmm..."supper power."

i find this clip highly analogous with the one posted back in july '05 where john stewart interviewed rick santorum ...

santorum was very compelling in a well matched setting, and oreilly here was all over letterman. he got cheers and applause for crying out loud.

i think the setting is an all important issue in judging the value of an expressed opinion. if we're only going on oreillys unchallenged sensationalist broadcast then of course its easy to label him anything you want. but he made pertinent points to letterman and i thought had much the better of the interview in hostile territory...

"I have the feeling that 60% of what you say is crap" —David Letterman I love how you quote the above, but not the all important first half of the sentence, "I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO DEBATE YOU," or shortly after when Lettermen admits to never having watched the show, but having "read about it." I'm not an O'Reilly fanboy, but anyone who thinks Lettermen won that exchange is an idiot.

"I have the feeling that 60% of what you say is crap" —David Letterman I love how you quote the above, but not the all important first half of the sentence, "I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO DEBATE YOU," or shortly after when Lettermen admits to never having watched the show, but having "read about it." I'm not an O'Reilly fanboy, but anyone who thinks Lettermen won that exchange is an idiot.

Awwwwwkward...

""I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO DEBATE YOU," or shortly after when Lettermen admits to never having watched the show, but having "read about it.""

I'm fairly certain he was being sarcastic- Letterman knows that his show is mostly entertainment and he as most likely making a mockery of BillOroid.

for the first time in Lateshow history, Letterman takes a shower during the break.

No one seems to pounce on that thing about the school in Ridgeview, Wisconsin. Nobody changed the lyrics to the song, "Silent Night". "Cold in the Night" is part of a coherent Children's Musical written in 1988 called "The Little Trees Christmas Story". The words to some traditional songs are tailored, just as in any musical, to TELL THE TREE'S STORY. The Liberty Council, a group of rabid christian lawyers (eeww), and O'Reilly's goons pestered the poor school so much that now they are having the musical with the carols whose tunes the songs are sung to instead of the songs that are supposed to be sung, which will, I suppose, render the Musical incomprehensible.

F*ck, liberals don't do enough homework, conservatives do just enough homework to allow them to out-debate liberals. Letterman should have been better prepared. O'Reilly makes such egregious errors that it should be a breeze to snap his arguments in twain.

In terms of the "I'm not smart enough to debate you" comment, I think it is important to remember that this is an entertainment show built on segments between commercials. After around 11 minutes, it was time for a commercial, Dave was trying to cut the interview off. Then remember that Dave is known for his self-mockery. I think he clearly showed in the first half of the segment that he is smart enough to debate "The factor." I don't think you need to look any further than the exchange on Cindy Shehan. Finally, unlike John Stewart, Dave does not bring in guests to debate current issues, he brings in guests to talk about their most recent movie or book. When he does get involved in a political debate, he usually spends it cracking jokes the entire time. That is the format of the show. Here, he was forced to engage in the debate because Bill O'Reilly is a mouthpiece/moron. (I guess I may have lost my credibility with some people with that statement)

Letterman and O'Reilly are BOTH babbling boobs. But Dave is funnier and more human.

Well, Letterman achieved his purpose, and that's what matters. He didn't attempt to win the debate (which was supposed to be an interview?) but allowed for display the flaws in the Traditionalistic view of the present. Hence, our appraisal for Letterman. You don't always get what you want by winning. Sometimes you have to compromise in order to gain something, and at this session, that occured with positive result. What happened is that Letterman spoke out many issues the general public wanted to scream out at the conservatives and the government, all the while Keeping O'reiley calm.

To WSSIXER hmm...Insurgents don't give a crap to Democracy because they were able to live without them. the long history of having a biased dictator have let Insurgents unaware of the disadvantages of having a democracy. and also the biased view of the whole religious community, even banning the tv in the previous anti-'Western Influence' before fall of saddam, has led to the alienation of the philosophy and ideas of democracy. That does not automatically allow you to say they act how they are now, as there is a reason behind it that now all of us can see.

"What's wrong with trying to spread our ideals on that?

I understand that bush lied to the american people, but that's basically because we can't come out in public and say exactly what we are doing there. That would make us look too mean."

What's wrong is that the ideal is foreign to them, and with this method, we're just like attempting to teach 18 month old babies a new language with a gun pressing against its head. We need some time, more teachers, more talk shows that show the iraqis we're not there to take something from them, not some premature pulling out of troops or adding more troops.

The Who's Baba O'Reilly is now forever ruined for me.

Bill O clearly won that exchange, because Letterman's staff is too lazy to find out the real facts. For example, the Christmas issues taht Bill O was pointing out are NOT TRUE. The school thta changed silent night was performing a play that included that version - and included other traditional christmas songs. The story about probhitiion of red and green in the other school district is also NOT TRUE. If LEtterman's staff would have taken 30 minutes to search the net, such as media matters, they would have been able to get quotes from the actual players in these stories calling these stories fabrications.

The Who's Baba O'Reilly is now forever ruined for me.

Bill O clearly won that exchange, because Letterman's staff is too lazy to find out the real facts. For example, the Christmas issues taht Bill O was pointing out are NOT TRUE. The school thta changed silent night was performing a play that included that version - and included other traditional christmas songs. The story about probhitiion of red and green in the other school district is also NOT TRUE. If LEtterman's staff would have taken 30 minutes to search the net, such as media matters, they would have been able to get quotes from the actual players in these stories calling these stories fabrications.

Paul played Teenage Wasteland when Bill walked out.

What did that mean? Have I missed something there?

"Freedom Fighters" vs "Fighting for Control". It's just rhetoric meaning the same thing. People fighting for the freedom to control of their own land. Who one is fighting or how one is fighting does not change what one is fighting for. What exactly are the "insurgents" fighting for and against? From what I know they are fighting against what they see as an occupying force. I am less clear what form of self-government they would like to see instead of the democracy now forming, and I suspect they would like to see a return to a Sunni controlled state. Does that meaning they are NOT fighting for their own freedom? No it does not. Regarding the Americans in the 1770-80's rebelling against the British rule, this mainly benefitted the ruling American Aristocracy at the time, and certainly no one who was non-white or any indigenous peoples. They remained NON-free relative to the victors, and many of their decendants still have yet to fully savor this freedom 216 years later. Meanwhile, the hoped-for democracy in Iraq may come to be a Shiite dominated and non-secular "democracy", which may turn out to be a step "backward" for most Iraqis and leave them also less "free".

MikeC - you say that "professional soldier" bothers you. Why? That's exactly what they are! If you were able to poll them, 98% would be supportive of Bush and what he is trying to do in Iraq. They know that part of their job is the risk that they might die and they do it anyway.
I have watch Letterman for twenty years. I think he's great, but he showed his ass here. You all have no idea how much Sheehan and her protests affect the soldiers.... in a very negative way. She says that she's helping them and wants to bring them home. That's not what they want, they want to finish the fight, otherwise the soldiers that have died, like her son, will have died for nothing.
You might think that I'm a die hard Republican; I'm not. I come from a military family and I’m pretty sure that I have a much better idea where the soldiers and sailors are coming from than most of you.

Letterman needs to stick to humor and forget political debates. He used the typical emotional ploy of "have you lost a loved one in war?". Well, many of us have and we have not had Mrs. Sheehan's reaction. In fact, the left conveniently forgets that there is a father and there are siblings who DO NOT support her protest and politicizing of her son's death. Yes, she has the right to react any way she sees fit, but the rest of us have the right to comment on her protest as we see fit.

Freedom fighters? Hell yes.

I already feel like an insurgent in my own country.

How about a new rally cry, "Get the US out of Seattle" and New York, and SF, ...

Regarding Letterman's staff being unprepared to counter BOR's Anti-Xmas claims: Since he pulled a folded paper out of his pocket it appears that they might not have known he was going to quote these stories. You can't expect Letterman (via his staff) to have the counter-argument for every anecdotal trivia BOR might dredge up. Anecdotal evidence can be used very effectively by either side in a debate but unless there are statistics to back it up, anecdotes are nothing more than a rable-rousing tool, useful for people who are relying on the ill-informed public to get incensed and hopefully undermine your opponent.

Say what you want about Letterman not watching the show and not being able to back up his opinion, but at least he doesn't sink to Fox's Level of Name Calling and Accusations of Treason everytime someone disagrees with him.

And lets gain a little perspective here. David Letterman is an entertainer. Bill O'Reilly "claims" to be a journalist, I think maybe the way in which we judge and hold responsible people in the media should be different depending on what type of information they are "supposed to be" giving us. BOR tries to blur that line as much as possible. If he's satire, then call it satire, if its new he's reporting than it had better be FACTUAL.
I think Dave wanted BOR to back his stuff up.... Letterman has no responsibility to do that, he makes us laugh. And while BOR may make us laugh, its for very different reasons.

goddammit, teenage wasteland is not the name of the song, it's Baba O'Riley! get it?

Re: Sheehan. I think what is disgraceful is labelling Sheehan and others who protest Bush's failed Iraq policy, as un-patriotic, traitor, etc. which is what BOR is doing. Sheehan's negative effect on the troops is unfortunate since her attacks are aimed at their civilian leadership, for their ultimate benefit, and this negative effect is most likely due to neocon spinning like that from the Master Spin Doctor himself: BOR, from deep inside The Spin Zone.

Bill O'Reilly was a low rent Maury clone as a journalist when he did Hard Copy. The guy comes off as a Scumbag, he has the charm of a dentist who feels up your little sister in the chair when she's knocked out. I dont know why Republicans are so quick to defend this douche, because he's so transparent that I question people who follow his opinion.

I have to agree Dave is no Jon Stewart. I get he doesn't like O'Reilly, but if your going to have him on, load yourself up than saying something like "I think what you say is crap". What the hell was that? Why not go after obvious things, like him saying he wished Al Quada would blow up san Fransico?

Say what you want about Letterman not watching the show and not being able to back up his opinion, but at least he doesn't sink to Fox's Level of Name Calling and Accusations of Treason everytime someone disagrees with him.

And lets gain a little perspective here. David Letterman is an entertainer. Bill O'Reilly "claims" to be a journalist, I think maybe the way in which we judge and hold responsible people in the media should be different depending on what type of information they are "supposed to be" giving us. BOR tries to blur that line as much as possible. If he's satire, then call it satire, if its new he's reporting than it had better be FACTUAL.
I think Dave wanted BOR to back his stuff up.... Letterman has no responsibility to do that, he makes us laugh. And while BOR may make us laugh, its for very different reasons.

As usual, Bill O'Reilly kicks the shit out of the liberal left. Letterman is an idiot. Hell, even Letterman admits that he is not SMART enough to debate him. I'll agree with that. He's not smart enough to debate with a log.

I'm not sure what your smoking, but military support for Bush's plan has dropped significantly. Last year, according to a Zogby poll, it was mid 70's. Approval at this point is about 61%, according to the most recent poll (the most recent Zogby poll came out about a week ago). Military folk are generally more supportive of the president cause their asses are in his hands. The fact the they are dropping towards the 50% mark is huge. 98%? What crap.

I was in the military twice, and I think this president his policies are complete crap.

Yeah, and you know that Bill really can't call Dave out for being disloyal because more people watch Dave than watch Bill. Dave has more loyal fans and they know that Dave is a great interviewer. Best campaign interviews in '00 of both Bush and Gore were Dave. He is an absolute pro. It'd be crazy of Bill to call Dave out, especially when perhaps many of his viewers watch Dave too.

Dave has always been self-deprecating. It's also a calculated bone thrown to Middle America who appreciate the fact that he could have just said, "Bill, you're full of sh*t and I'm not talking to you any more on national TV" but obviously that wouldn't have played well. Also, Dave's a gentleman...unlike some people. Bill O'Reilly is a cowering, blustering chickenhawk. If he feels so strongly about the war, he should go fight.

O'Reilly mentioned that insurgents kill innocent civilians, however, he forgot to mention that US bombs killed more innocent men, women, and children than any insurgents ever have and ever will! I can't believe he worked for CBS and ABC; way to tell one side of the story!

I really don't like O'Reilly and I love Letterman, but this interview is just painful. It's very awkward so far (only 3 minutes or so in). I don't like it.

Odd..those who say O'Reilly won, did you even listen? Letterman made O'Reilly look like a silly caricature of a news person. He looked at him and said "Who cares?" He spoke for 90% of the people out there, no matter their beliefs. I have not talked to ONE SINGLE person who cares about the Christmas thing and I live in the Bible belt. People laugh at it..they think its a joke. And Letterman made it a joke. It doesn't matter if those stories are true or not..since when does 'red and green napkins' have anything to do with Jesus? By not engaging him too deeply, Letterman made O'Reilly look foolish.

Thanks, David, for saying what the rest of us always wanted to say to O'Reilly.

Letterman is a punk. He should be happy that Bill did his show, maybe it'll boost his shitty ratings. Letterman's blind faith for useless ignorance is too much to watch. Hey Letterman hates Leno too, he hates anyone that has more viewers. People who talk a big game and don't back it up with facts are just complete morons, zombies to the hyped media. Go Bill! His "objective" reporting is so different than average populous media that he affords the ratings.

Gee, I am sure Letterman is waiting with baited breath for his "Factor" cap, just like Bill should wait with baited breath the day Letterman watches his show.

Letterman finished it like a class act! I think it would have been fun for Dave to bring up O'Reilly's sex harrassment suit in October 2004 - to see how fast Bill would try and defend that one.

I held out hope that you would have this vid even before C&L did. You never disappoint, 1gm!

Gee, Letterman should wait with baited breath for his "Factor" cap, just like O'Reilly should wait with baited breath the day Letterman watches his show.

What really would have been a hoot is having Letterman bring up Bill's October 2004 sexual harrassment suit...like usual Letterman came off nothing short of a class act.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21855

bill o'reilly: 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 ...

This was after an appearance on the show in 2001 and he goes on to say that one must win over the audience and they were with him that night, etc.

with whatever side you agree with you will think won, i dont see how letterman won, sure he was more funny, but thats his job. He admitted himself that he had no facts and that he based his judgement on OReilly based on things he has read.

Without facts there can be no debate, it's just one guy talking and another guy saying "thats not true", without and qualifying statements. There can be no winner.

Thats just me, but i like to be objective so maybe my opinions dont count anymore.

RIP Logic.

with whatever side you agree with you will think won, i dont see how letterman won, sure he was more funny, but thats his job. He admitted himself that he had no facts and that he based his judgement on OReilly based on things he has read.

Without facts there can be no debate, it's just one guy talking and another guy saying "thats not true", without and qualifying statements. There can be no winner.

Thats just me, but i like to be objective so maybe my opinions dont count anymore.

RIP Logic.

What a doofus. Talk about getting facts wrong! It's M-"EYE"-SIX, NOT M-"ONE"-SIX.

Norm, you said it perfectly: You can't debate someone who has no respect for the truth. BTW, O'Reilly isn't a journalist; don't think he ever claimed to be. It's all about the money with him. Period.

The very fact Bill O’ has a very good PR staff that gets him on NBC’s The Today show where Kattie lobs pre-discussed questions at him and then he get air-time on CBS Letterman along with manufacturing pseudo-news about people who are supposedly anti-christian. It’s all a game, folks. And Bill is getting paid handsomely for all this attention.

The very fact we’re here blogging about him is indirectly like putting dollar bills in his g-string.

Damn, that was good of Letterman to put that neo-con asshole O'Reilly in his place. John Stewart didn't do it so I'm glad that Letterman did.

I'm sick of O'Reilly and the Bush Admin. always saying for us to watch what we say. This is a free country and unfortunately for Bush and his goons, Freedom of Speech was in the First Amendment, they can't change that. All I know is that the current administration is ushering in a new era of McCarthyism.

Damn, that was good of Letterman to put that neo-con asshole O'Reilly in his place. John Stewart didn't do it so I'm glad that Letterman did.

I'm sick of O'Reilly and the Bush Admin. always saying for us to watch what we say. This is a free country and unfortunately for Bush and his goons, Freedom of Speech was in the First Amendment, they can't change that. All I know is that the current administration is ushering in a new era of McCarthyism.

Wow...awsome.. You can't complain.We, here in Spain, don't have people like Letterman, Stewart or Leno

I wished...

Jeepers, discovering people like O'Reilly it's been a shock to me.

HEHEHE, good one, David!!! Greetings from Barcelona, Spain...keep the good work on onegoodmove ;-)

O'Reilly is # 1 in ratings; on the other hand, Letterman has sucked Leno's dick for 10 years so he should be careful with those '60% of what you say is crap' comments. There's a reason why some are #1 and some are #2 (or #3 some nights)

dave needs to stick to interviewing drew barrymore and madonna. thats why we fight for our freedom and the natural-born given freedom of others, so you you can watch TV, laugh and make your owns thoughts heard. any women sitting on her couch watching that Letterman show should wake up and see that WOMEN are now able to vote...and under the threat of being shot. thats excuse enough to fight and bring democracy to human beings around the world.

I wonder why Letterman didn't suggest this: If the Iraqis invaded America, would not O'Reilly be tempted to be a "freedom fighter" and kick the Iraqis out?

I wonder why Letterman didn't suggest this: If the Iraqis invaded America, would not O'Reilly be tempted to be a "freedom fighter" and kick the Iraqis out?

I wonder why Letterman didn't suggest this: If the Iraqis invaded America, would not O'Reilly be tempted to be a "freedom fighter" and kick the Iraqis out?

hooray for mr. letterman though i do believe 99.44% of what mr. o'reilly says is crap. once you get beyond hello and good evening, what else does this man actually have to say?

cll

hooray for mr. letterman though i do believe 99.44% of what mr. o'reilly says is crap. once you get beyond hello and good evening, what else does this man actually have to say?

cll

I think a majority of people on this blog have predisposed opinions that are really jading their opinions. I don't think anyone really won or lost last night. I think what it demonstrated two people with different beliefs. Letterman argued from an emotional standpoint and interjected some humor in it but really demonstrated how there has been created a "cultural" difference between the 2 sides. O'Reilly was acted like someone just as passionate about his belief but came across as the class room know it all that we don't like so therefore we don't believe. Both failed - O'Reilly had an opportunity just keep it light and have fun in an entertainment venue - he should have poked fun at himself - and Letterman failed because he demonstrated that he can't support his views as well as he should. They both should have kept it fun. My vote is they both lost.

Letterman's contempt for his guest was refreshingly obvious. O'Reilly is a national disgrace.

I think a majority of people on this blog have predisposed opinions that are really jading their opinions. I don't think anyone really won or lost last night. I think what it demonstrated two people with different beliefs. Letterman argued from an emotional standpoint and interjected some humor in it but really demonstrated how there has been created a "cultural" difference between the 2 sides. O'Reilly was acted like someone just as passionate about his belief but came across as the class room know it all that we don't like so therefore we don't believe. Both failed - O'Reilly had an opportunity just keep it light and have fun in an entertainment venue - he should have poked fun at himself - and Letterman failed because he demonstrated that he can't support his views as well as he should. They both should have kept it fun. My vote is they both lost.

Couple of facts:

• Sheehan didn't call the terrorist freedom fighters as OWrongly said she did.

• China, Germany, India and Russia didn't think Iraq was threat before Bush prematurely attackulated the country.

• 8 out of 10 times the people who support the Bush admin like OWrongly does leave out pertinant facts when it comes to their advocation of the Bush admin and their actions

Couple of facts:

• Sheehan didn't call the terrorist freedom fighters as OWrongly said she did.

• China, Germany, India and Russia didn't think Iraq was threat before Bush prematurely attackulated the country.

• 8 out of 10 times the people who support the Bush admin like OWrongly does leave out pertinant facts when it comes to their advocation of the Bush admin and their actions

I'm a Brit, and found it hysterically funny when O'Reilly referred to our foreign intellegence as M ONE six, as opposed to M I six. It's Military Intelligence dumbass. There's a contribution to his 60%...

jesus, will everyone stop posting twice? hit the button and then go and see if it shows up before you post again, you morons. o'reilly is a blow hard and dave handed him his ass.

Did I see a different interview? I thought Letterman came across as pretty silly throughout the interview simply relaying general sentiments to make people clap and pandering to the crowd. At no point did Letterman make any real statement ("I think you're making this up", "60% is crap") while O'reilly took clear and decisive stands throughout, AND backed them up. (whether you agree with them or not)

My favorite trick by Letterman was when Bill asked him how he thought the family members of living soldiers feel about the glorification of the insurgents and Letterman shoot back, "Why are we there in the first place?"...What?! This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a good question that O'reilly asked. It's a shift of gears to get the audience clapping and completely dodges the question poised by O'reilly.

Did I see a different interview? I thought Letterman came across as pretty silly throughout the interview simply relaying general sentiments to make people clap and pandering to the crowd. At no point did Letterman make any real statement ("I think you're making this up", "60% is crap") while O'reilly took clear and decisive stands throughout, AND backed them up. (whether you agree with them or not)

My favorite trick by Letterman was when Bill asked him how he thought the family members of living soldiers feel about the glorification of the insurgents and Letterman shoot back, "Why are we there in the first place?"...What?! This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a good question that O'reilly asked. It's a shift of gears to get the audience clapping and completely dodges the question poised by O'reilly.

I can't get this video to play, it sticks right at the pencil-dipping-- does anyone know if it's posted somewhere else?

Did I see a different interview? I thought Letterman came across as pretty silly throughout the interview simply relaying general sentiments to make people clap and pandering to the crowd. At no point did Letterman make any real statement ("I think you're making this up", "60% is crap") while O'reilly took clear and decisive stands throughout, AND backed them up. (whether you agree with them or not)

My favorite trick by Letterman was when Bill asked him how he thought the family members of living soldiers feel about the glorification of the insurgents and Letterman shoot back, "Why are we there in the first place?"...What?! This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a good question that O'reilly asked. It's a shift of gears to get the audience clapping and completely dodges the question poised by O'reilly.

Did I see a different interview? I thought Letterman came across as pretty silly throughout the interview simply relaying general sentiments to make people clap and pandering to the crowd. At no point did Letterman make any real statement ("I think you're making this up", "60% is crap") while O'reilly took clear and decisive stands throughout, AND backed them up. (whether you agree with them or not)

My favorite trick by Letterman was when Bill asked him how he thought the family members of living soldiers feel about the glorification of the insurgents and Letterman shoot back, "Why are we there in the first place?"...What?! This has absolutely NOTHING to do with a good question that O'reilly asked. It's a shift of gears to get the audience clapping and completely dodges the question poised by O'reilly.

I love how people trash others without quailifying their statements. 60% of what Bill O says is garbage? that may be true, but at least give some examples and cite your sources (I dare you to try to find unbiased sources - esp. on the internet). Correct him where he's wrong. Qualify and quantify (where applicable) your answers.

To LeftBanker: Please explain why he is a disgrace? Isn't he spouting off opinion like so many others on this board? Doesn't he have the right? Do please qualify your opinion.

YCHDaT: Did Sheehan call the insurgents anything but insurgents? Did we all get to see EVERY" interview clip she's ever done? Is he 100% incorrect in reporting that other countries' intelligence agencies did not have silimar intel? Did they have any? When was it reported? Where did you hear the info? CNN? Fox News? and 8 out of 10 times the people who support Bush... Yeah. please cite you 80% statistic.

There is crappy journalism all over the place and I doubt it'll get better. Sensationlized "yellow press" is how these channels stay in business. I would love to see a high circulation newspaper report only factual info and statistics from reliable research ie taking a true simple random sample to poll opinion or cite scientific or research based journals from various acadamia. Then maybe form an editorial from that. Not just make a story from whatever comes off the AP wire. I'd like to hear reports, not from just from our side, but cite stories from international publications as well. Face to face interviews with Iraqis from bahgdad and from more "rural" areas to see contrasting points of view. There a lot of crap being said out there, and crap is all it is. My $.02

god, you are all so fucking stupid. no wonder there's so many blowhard supporters here... 4 posts in a row and you still can't figure out how your hero Bill got his ass handed to him? Dave's contempt speaks volumes.

I love how people trash others without quailifying their statements. 60% of what Bill O says is garbage? that may be true, but at least give some examples and cite your sources (I dare you to try to find unbiased sources - esp. on the internet). Correct him where he's wrong. Qualify and quantify (where applicable) your answers.

To LeftBanker: Please explain why he is a disgrace? Isn't he spouting off opinion like so many others on this board? Doesn't he have the right? Do please qualify your opinion.

YCHDaT: Did Sheehan call the insurgents anything but insurgents? Did we all get to see EVERY" interview clip she's ever done? Is he 100% incorrect in reporting that other countries' intelligence agencies did not have silimar intel? Did they have any? When was it reported? Where did you hear the info? CNN? Fox News? and 8 out of 10 times the people who support Bush... Yeah. please cite you 80% statistic.

There is crappy journalism all over the place and I doubt it'll get better. Sensationlized "yellow press" is how these channels stay in business. I would love to see a high circulation newspaper report only factual info and statistics from reliable research ie taking a true simple random sample to poll opinion or cite scientific or research based journals from various acadamia. Then maybe form an editorial from that. Not just make a story from whatever comes off the AP wire. I'd like to hear reports, not from just from our side, but cite stories from international publications as well. Face to face interviews with Iraqis from bahgdad and from more "rural" areas to see contrasting points of view. There a lot of crap being said out there, and crap is all it is. My $.02

WSSIXER,

I hear the more times you post it the more valid it becomes.

Dave is not a journalist he's an entertainer. Bill on the other hand claims to be a journalist. Now shouldn't a journalist use facts to back up his statements if not then he's a propagandist.

Most people will take what they read or hear as facts while some will look into what's being claimed to validate the statements. What I've found is that O'Rielly is one of the worst offenders when it comes to smearing, distorting, and just saying whatever he feels like whether it's true or not to defend his opinion.

Debating, even though this was an interview not a debate, someone like O'Rielly is pointless. Look into his little song example and you'll find how much he twisted it to suite his needs. The same with the colors example he uses.

It was a funny interview that's all but I'm sure it will be spun into something bigger by O'Rielly. He's dedicating 2 hours to talking about it on his radio show. Was his ego hurt a little?

Okay, listen up.

I LIVE in Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Bill O'Reilly IS full of crap, as Letterman puts it.

Ridgeway High School is in (ready for a FACT, Mr. O'Reilly?), of all places, RIDGEWAY Wisconsin...about 10 miles east of Dodgeville.

Ridgeway's use of the chrismtas carol came from a christmas show they've been doing for some 18 years. Anyone in theatre can tell you that you have to buy RIGHTS to produce certain shows. This is a PUBLISHED script, not something "re-written" by locals hell-bent on destroying Christmas.

Also, O'Reilly fails to mention the NUMBEROUS PHYSICAL HARM and PROPERTY DESTRUCTION THREATS sent to Dodgeville High School and other schools by...ready, O'Reilly? GOD-LOVING CHRISTIANS!

Now ask yourselves: what does more harm to the image of Christ-loving people? The use of a script with good intentions? Or CHRISTIANS who physically threaten harm to others based on their "loving" principles?

I tell you honestly: people in this area were APALLED at the heinous acts of "Christians" acting on their "moral" faith and beliefs.

Dodgeville High School even issued a very intelligent memo trying to explain the situation and defuse the religious fanatics who threatened violence.

As a Dodgevill native, I am appalled, dismayed, and discouraged by Bill O'Reilly's wanton use of lies, deception, and impatience with fact-checking, all in the service of his own ego and morality-thumping. I only take satisfaction in knowing that the Man upstairs O'Reilly professes to defend will tweak O'Reilly's spiritual nose sharply for blatant disregard of fairness and truth.

Okay, listen up.

I LIVE in Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Bill O'Reilly IS full of crap, as Letterman puts it.

Ridgeway High School is in (ready for a FACT, Mr. O'Reilly?), of all places, RIDGEWAY Wisconsin...about 10 miles east of Dodgeville.

Ridgeway's use of the chrismtas carol came from a christmas show they've been doing for some 18 years. Anyone in theatre can tell you that you have to buy RIGHTS to produce certain shows. This is a PUBLISHED script, not something "re-written" by locals hell-bent on destroying Christmas.

Also, O'Reilly fails to mention the NUMBEROUS PHYSICAL HARM and PROPERTY DESTRUCTION THREATS sent to Dodgeville High School and other schools by...ready, O'Reilly? GOD-LOVING CHRISTIANS!

Now ask yourselves: what does more harm to the image of Christ-loving people? The use of a script with good intentions? Or CHRISTIANS who physically threaten harm to others based on their "loving" principles?

I tell you honestly: people in this area were APALLED at the heinous acts of "Christians" acting on their "moral" faith and beliefs.

Dodgeville High School even issued a very intelligent memo trying to explain the situation and defuse the religious fanatics who threatened violence.

As a Dodgevill native, I am appalled, dismayed, and discouraged by Bill O'Reilly's wanton use of lies, deception, and impatience with fact-checking, all in the service of his own ego and morality-thumping. I only take satisfaction in knowing that the Man upstairs O'Reilly professes to defend will tweak O'Reilly's spiritual nose sharply for blatant disregard of fairness and truth.

Funny how big-time journalist O'reily comes to the show fully prepared, (with his pocketful of lame and embarassing conspiracies that he is so certain are proof-positive of his paranoid rants), and gets totally shot down by a hip-shooting, apparently unprepared and painfully average tv host.

Thank you Bill, for offering up yourself as a live-TV cornerstone at the apex of US public opinion. What a welcome disservice you have done to your US-destructive cause. May you and your ilk rot in eternal hell for what you have already done to us all.

BORe isn't telling the rest of the story either, only the tidbits that support his culture rants

Re: the silent night---the song was adapted years ago to be a cohesive part of a holiday musical

Re; the library nativity scene--the nativity scene was put back in place a bit later--and it didn't take a lawsuit to get it there.

Re: the red and green napkins in Plano Texas. A parents association sent out a letter requesting white paper products for a winter party = snow = white. To be fair, the district and parents have a lawsuit happening over the whole christmas/holiday thing in the district that is ongoing for a year or so

I don't know how Dave could have disputed these cuz BORe pulled them out of his pocket.

True, staff could have done research re: the Factor examples that = 60% crap, but his show is about entertainment, not necessarily pulling out a list of examples to debate. Given the blow-hard quality of BORe that would have taken up waaayyy more segment time than allotted.

"I love how people trash others without quailifying their statements. 60% of what Bill O says is garbage? that may be true, but at least give some examples and cite your sources (I dare you to try to find unbiased sources - esp. on the internet)."

Go to mediamatters.org type in Bill O'Reilly in a search engine. Just in case you think it is biased they even record his TV show for viewing with each story.

You can listen to lovely things from Bill like... - Taxi workers in NY should be shot dead. - Saying that AQ are free to blow up San Franciso - Says French don't take a bath for 18 days. - Told his co-host to turn up in a bikini - Claimed Irish emigration was the same as African American enslavement.

But my personal favorite. Claiming that everyone is anti-christmas yet his site was selling "Holiday items". Only changed to christmas after another station reported it.

Then you can go to thesmokinggun.com and read the court documents concerning his harrassment case. You will never eat falafel again.

i noticed exactly the point o'reilly made...making it sound like cindy sheehan had equated us troops with terrorists but in such a devious way that if you were to play back his comment, he'd say "i never said that!"

i was also pissed by this disingenuous concern over how traditions like christmas are being compromised. if i were an american, i'd be much more concerned about how the constitution is being compromised and how the system of checks and balances is being compromised and how all the lies and cronyism are destroying people's faith in government. these are way more important than whether we say merry christmas or happy holidays.

the dislike dave had for him was palpable. it says something about the state of politics in the US that dave has gotten a lot more political in recent years. he's still done it with a wink, so you never really knew where he stood, till that exchange with o'reilly. you could tell how mad he was with the comment about sheehan.

finally, i dont really understand this american blindspot of being unable to put themselves in the other guy's shoes. why is so difficult to see that, yes, to the other guys, AMERICANS are the terrorists/bad guys. Americans are so blinded by their own propaganda that they are incabable of empathy. THEY are always the good guy, so the other guy must always be the bad guy. NO introspection, NEVER. it's unbelievable.

one more finally, i dont understand this logic that bush apologists now use, those who grudgingly admit that "mistakes were made" but that "we must now win" even if we're not winning for the reason we originally thought. if you perform heart surgery and mistakenly begin to remove the liver, to do you continue removing the liver and be damned with the fact you fucked up? or do you try to correct the problem before the patient dies? well, we know what americans do. full steam ahead!

So BOR thinks our "christmas traditions" are being eroded by Kmart or Sears or some other corporation. Well, when I grew up my "christmas traditions" were not created by kmart or sears...they became traditions because MY FAMILY made them traditions. Frankly, I could give a shit if corporations say happy holidays, merry christmas or eat shit! It's carrying on traditions at HOME that make Christmas "Christmas".

hey zak, you wonder about all of those things - I have the answer as to why there isn't more outrage - at the very least, 60% of americans are retards and incapable of forming and independant and intelligent thought, thats why. The readership of this site, and for that matter, the internet in general, does not represent the voting public. fer chrissake, there is a huge percentage of adult americans that can't even read and comprehend past a 4th grade level. it is a government of the powerful and intelligent, speaking to and being elected by the simple and easily manipulated. This will be the cause of the downfall of our beautiful democracy.

I see O'Reilly a bit like I see crackerjack ambulance chasing lawyers. They get one or two shreds of circumstantial evidence that support the point they're trying to prove for their client (in O'Reilly's case, the Bush administration), find some whackjob doctor who will provide professional testimony on the stand for a fistful of cash, and run with it.

There really is no way to debate a person like that and it's pointless to try to argue them point to point. They'll bog you down in the details they loosely tied together with the half-baked theory they're trying to support and call you "uninformed" if you disagree with the facts they provided to you via their vast army of haystack-picking minons. The best you can do is call them on it and move on.

I'd also like to point out that Letterman is an entertainer first, whereas O'Reilly is a political commentator first, so it makes sense that Letterman would take the route he did- he's there to entertain and not nitpick.

And Hurricane Spin hits level 5... oh noes.

dave sorta lost steam at the end... to really nail him, it would've liked to hear him bring up some of the specifics that bill asked for. there's plenty to choose from...

Ben, you're right. I was watching a show the other day about the fall of the Roman Empire. And it reminded me of what's going on now. It seems like there are always those in society who are able to view things as they really are and those who are deluded by rabid patriotism so much so that they can't see what's headed for them.

The US is in decay. Not because of Madonna or Jerry Springer, but because there are forces that are undermining the principles the US was created with. And unfortunately the overwhelming majority of Americans have been bred by their leaders to stay dumb. If Americans cared a little more about the lies Bush tells them and a little less about the lies the National Inquirer or People Magazine tells them, maybe things wouldnt be so bad.

In 100 or 200 years, historians will look back on this time and describe it as the point American's influence began to falter as China's began to rise. It has happened countless times over the last 10,000 years. It will happen again. Trouble is Americans, just like the Romans, Greeks, Muslims, Spanish and British before them, are too delusional to see it for themselves.

This is the very best video that you have posted in quite awhile. Letterman literally handed "falafel boy" his ass! I am going to make it a point to watch Letterman more often.

I think he did a real service for the anti-war movement.

Dave doesn't watch O'Reilly; well, neither do I but I feel like I'm informed about him even without his show. True, I don't watch the factor (no cable), but BO'R is a perfect example of a "news reporter" that's sensationalist enough to also be a topic of news. You can't escape some of the ludricrousness he spouts; TV, papers, blogs abound with quotes and clips from him (i.e. the recent "we won't do a thing [if al Qaeda attacks SF]" and his made-up war on xmas). He infiltrates without having to watch his show.

Dave did just what he should've; pointed out the hypocrisy and ridiculous nature of O'Reilly without a superior attitude.

MOMLY - The true title of The Who's "Teenage Wasteland" is Baba O'Riley. 'Nuff said.

I thought O'Reilly was surprisingly polite & level-headed in his delivery--the first time I've seen him as such. I was glad Letterman didn't try for jokes with every exchange, but he seemed ill-prepared and without a clear idea of why he had BO on there in the first place. Yes, his show's meant to be "just entertainment" as so many of you have said, but Dave did just bring O'Reilly on for an interview, not because Bill was hyping some new book or program. So I think the interview should have been conducted by Dave in a more neutral, well-thought-out manner.

Yes, we must avoid debate with people like O'Reilly. We just point out that it is biased and nonsense.

Good post.

A few things:
1)I actually do ponder the effect that Sheehan and her people are having on military morale; I can't imagine that her protesting wouldn't discourage at least some soldiers. That being said, I highly doubt that anything she can do will ever be as destructive the Presidential order that sent the soldiers there in the first place. More to the point, I'm sure that the American public will end up hurting the soldiers in the long term if they don't collectively ask about the case for the Iraq war and start demanding accountability from the people who have the power to send soldiers out to fight. As much as dissent may kill morale, unchecked and irresponsible leadership will kill (more) soldiers. 2)say, isn't giving AlQuada his blessing to destroy parts of a major American city...well, WORSE than Sheehan's message, in terms of morale-boosting, or anything else? Last I checked, no matter how misguided Sheehan's actions may be, she's trying to get people out of harm's way - O'Reilly is actively advocating death for people. Death for American citizens no less. I mean, hasn't he committed a hate crime against his own countrymen here? 3)(American) imperialism/self-preservation/pick-a-label: with respect to self-preservation, aren't there worse offenders out there? Rogue nations with actual confirmed payloads of weapons truly deadly to the US? Regarding furthering of self-interests: aren't there better ways of taking over a country than by sending underarmored and underprepared troops? If you're going to send people in to an utterly foreign nation, shouldn't you have a good plan first? And I'm not even talking about the cost in American life here (because quite frankly, it looks like it's a given that nobody in the US government cares about Iraqi life), I'm speaking about how much faster it would be for them to show massive profits off enterprise there if they were to establish conditions favorable to doing business there faster. 4)Letterman vs. O'Reilly - here's a question: wasn't this supposed to be an interview? On Letterman's show? Why the hell shouldn't he be pandering to his audience? They came to see him in action, not for debate. Huh. I should really listen to my own point here.

Yeah, we're gonna turn iraq into a democracy... That was the funniest thing said in that bullshit exchange.

So, we should support our professional soldiers, huh? By paying privates $26k/year to get their ass blown off?

We've spent over $250 billion and things are far from getting better: The number of insurgent attacks per day have gone from 61 to 100 in the last year.

Bottom line: This retarded war is ruining this country. How many more have to die? How many more have to grieve? How much more money do we have to waste? How many more lies are we supposed to swallow???

I'm actually glad to hear O'Reilly getting all gussied up over the obvious degredation of our core-values. It can only mean less time to spout about IMPORTANT things.

Let the baby have his bottle.

Smacked in the face by a flying falafel.

BOO-YAH!

Not to disparage anyone in the armed forces, they are there at the whim of corrupt politicians, but is it fair to say that from an Iraqi perspective, that American troops could be viewed as we view these "insurgents" (Iraqis)? I find it hard to believe that no women or children have died at the hands of American armaments....not that any of the armaments on this planet are likely American...since we produce more weapons than anyone else. Anyhow, O'Reilly is a douche.

I suspect zak is right that America is in decline. Mao considered and Osama's ilk consider us paper tigers so what does it really mean to be a super power. The powers that be think we can at the very least slow or overcome our real or perceived decline by war though. I think Americans are fighting 2 wars now - Oil War and Terror War - the sooner this is understood the better. Since people can't separate them, the waters are so muddied it is difficult to clearly understand what is happening. Bush's brain can't even keep the baddies separated, so how can an average American.

Why have war when you can have a cold war though. America sees China as a threat to its hegemony. Either way, this century is shaping up to be a frightening one. A scholar I was listening to who predicted the fall of the Soviet Union long in advance has predicted the fall of the US. I can't recall his name, the idea was so disturbing to me I didn't want to think about it but someone can track the person down I suppose by googling him, I don't want to right now.

Previous comments: 'professional soldiers' - of course soldiering is a profession and I stated that was common sense. One problem is that some people see them as wasted resources if they are not used. If we are going to treat soldiers as disposable then we better have a reality check. I am deeply concerned by those who view our soldiers with callous indifference to their suffering. The troops know dignity, honor and sacrifice. Please don't wish me or others to silence when I say I value their lives. No matter what the reasons they are injured, maimed, or die for they are still among the most honorable of us. The American people have a responsibilty to hold politicians feet to the fire if they misuse them. If they are misused it is not their fault and they share absolutely no taint of those who would lie to us about the war.

wssixer: You are woefully confused about the mideast and especially preWar Iraq. Also, the FBI knew about he first WTC bombing before it happened. Some not so crazy people think the same about 911. Your belief that we must do something, anything, even if it blows up in our face is nonsensical but courageous - I guess - not much to base a foreign policy on though.

About the BOR: Republicans and right wingers have a professional training program - I am not making this up - that states that it is better to make up false anecdotal stories to 'prove' a point rather than use facts BECAUSE anecdotes are always more powerful than facts. Some can call these falsehoods lies but that doesn't take away the power of the story. You can then attack those who call out the lies as misguided liberals or some such. Politicians have always lied but Republicans have mastered the practice it seems - impressive.

Wake up those who listen to Cheney/Bush, the repubs, BOR and Limbaugh. If you are right, then all we liberals are is noise. If we are right about any of the issues than you owe it to yourselves to think. Cognitive dissonance can be a good thing - embrace it.

Really, it seems like Letterman is just trying to be an entertainer. Bill O'Reilly is normally just a big flapping idiot, but that exchange clearly was not won by Letterman with comments like, "I'm not smart enough to debate you," or, "I don't watch your show, but I've read about it". Even statements like, "I think 60% of the stuff you say is crap" are just ad hominem, which just shows a weakness in one's argument.

Even in the comments here, whining about things like Bill O'Reilly saying "M16" - oh boo hoo, it isn't like the man is perfect (far from it). Bill O'Reilly may be mostly a sensationalist 'reporter', but that still doesn't make a charade like this one very meaningful in terms of real debate.

I did laugh my ass off, though, when O'Reilly drank out of that cup! Hahaha

"as many of you can see the road ahead is filled with danger it's not nuclear bombs we must fear but the human mind itself (or lack of it) on this planet it's time to go beyond the normal thing it's time to do the super thing it's time for devo"

-devo, 1981

I really appreciate the comments from those outside the US, for their perspective. Anyway, I thought I would say thanks.

I think this interview can be scored. If BOR was misrepresenting the facts in those cases I would give him a penalty. Letterman recognizing BS when he sees it counts as a valid block. Anyway, just for fun, maybe someone will work out the final score : ) Really, just for fun ; )

I hate all of you because all of you HATE AMERICA!!!

YOU are the reason America is in decline, you frikkin panzy-ass, weak-minded, self-centered, glutnous, selfish, lazy, spoiled, holier-than-thou pieces of shit. YOU are the reason America has turned into the toilet it has become. You.

YOU!!!!

Thanks Americahateseurope. You proved my point a thousand times over. You're never wrong. People just hate the US because they're "panzy-ass, weak minded, self-centered, blah blah blah" .. Yeah, that's it. Nothing to do with oil, nothing to do with going to war for lies, nothing to do with sanctioning torture, nothing to do with spying on your own citizens, nothing to do with destroying the environment, nothing to do with believing bullshit idiotic design instead of science, nothing to do with any of that. You're right and just like a lemming, you'll be right till you rush off that cliff right in front of you. See ya!

AMERICA.....EUROPE just points out stark reality that there really are two Americas. Not sure where that rage is headed. We are either going to unite or fall. This division is killing us.

I think everybody's missing the point. This was a very well constructed backscratching event. The ratings of both hosts will go up after this debate. Yes, the insurgents are terrorists but think about two other groups on the receiving end - the Iraqi people and the GIs (not gee ones) who are there just doing their duty. A lot of people have died in Iraq, including Mrs. Sheehan's son.

This site has been overrun by professional posters. This is part of the tactic. To spread SHIT in order to discourage reasonable opinion.

We are in a world of shit.

116 comments...thats gotta be a record

I want "60% of what you say is crap" as a ring tone for my phone! Someone do this please!!!!!!!

the one part he s