Discussion for article #228898
Why does Stewart bother with this clown? Are the ratings for their tete-a-tetes really all that good?
Hmmmmm…
I really don’t think Stewart does these interviews as some sort of ratings ploy. I do believe that Stewart is genuinely interested in having an open, honest discussion with those on the right like O’Reilly. I think Stewart is enough of a realist to know that he’s not going to change their minds, but I do think Stewart believes in the idea (or ideal) of civil, intellectually honest debate - even with the most vitriolic on the right. Just my take on it.
I enjoy Stewart vs. O’Really debates, but I don’t see this issue as something that’s going to go very far in this type of forum. White privilege exists and I’m pretty sure O’Reilly knows it, but his whole schtick is to perpetually keep the wool over his audience’s eyes. So you just end up with him constantly moving goal posts and positing totally false equivalencies. He’s just burning down the clock. And Stewart needs to go into this type of thing better armed. Imagine if Stewart cut the discussion short and just played the video two posts up, then asked to explain how his statements there fit the context of the current debate. O’Reilly is a dishonest propagandist - and should be treated as such.
That’s my take as well—I’m guessing it’s a genuine form of obsession with him to get one of these people, just once, to admit they’re being illogical and wrong. In general I don’t think you can get anywhere near Stewart’s level as a comedian without being fascinated with the ways people’s minds work.
This explains everyone on FOX News:
Upton Sinclair: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
You cannot engage in a battle of wits with a person who is as clearly unarmed as Bill-0 the KKKlown!
Agreed in general.
But anytime O’Reilly is out of his element he’s uncomfortable.
O’Reilly needs to be made uncomfortable-- whenever possible.
Stewart can’t just coldcock him.
He’d never again agree to appear.
At the least-- Stewart extracts a semblance of truth from an expert liar.
jw1
Jon…asking for something rational from Billo is an exercise in futility. Billo lives in his personal “Bill O’Reilly is boffo” reality bubble. Nothing will change that. Billo thinks the world revolves around him only. That he is the world expert on any subject you care to engage him on. He is one of the most arrogant, self centered narcissists on planet Earth. Luckily he is only a TV talking head and not in political elected office where he could do actual legislative damage.
No more Jim Crow. What a maroon.
William F. Buckley used to have civil debates with liberal intellectuals on his “Firing Line” program, and he even had an odd sort of friendship with Ira Glasser of the ACLU. I think it’s a healthy thing, on the whole.
Jon Stewart who I normally love was bested by Bill O’Reilly. Stewart gave the academically created politically correct argument. It would have been persuasive in 1964 not in 2014.
Your statement only proves that you are at least as dense as Mr. O’Reilly.
It’s really easy to show the hypocrisy of O’Reilly or anyone else who thinks there is no such thing as white privilege. Just ask this: Which would you rather be in America and why–black or white? Let’s say you had a choice. Which would you choose to be? I’m willing to bet such people would do anything not to answer this question.
BilliousO -----not ashamed to be the main FoxAsshole.
Jon Stewart is also trying to expose these pundits’ hypocrisy, which he (rightly) feels is too often left unchallenged by the actual news media. As a comedian, Jon Stewart has a degree of freedom to do this that the Chuck Todds and Bob Schieffers of the world (who need political folks to come on their show to have a show) may not have.
I think its best to leave the bloviating ass holes to their own network. There’s no value in letting them bloviate else where.
Except for the time he threatened to punch Gore Vidal in the teeth for calling him a “crypto-fascist.” Regardless, your point stands.