Is there a new cable battle brewing between Fox News's Bill O'Reilly and Comedy Central's Jon Stewart?
Such appeared to be the case last week when Stewart on Wednesday's "Daily Show" harshly criticized O'Reilly and FNC for suddenly coming out in support of protesters, and O'Reilly struck back on Thursday's "Factor."
Who's right?
We report, you decide (videos embedded below the fold, Stewart first followed by O'Reilly with a full transcript):
BILL O'REILLY: "Personal story" segment tonight, I like Jon Stewart. He's a clever guy, usually not mean-spirited, and puts on an entertaining program. But last night, Stewart went off the rails deriding FOX News
for its coverage of the health care controversy. So I, your humble correspondent, feel it necessary this evening to set Mr. Stewart straight.Let's begin with the set up. Stewart told his viewers that FOX News has become liberal, because we defend legitimate protesters on the health care front. Stewart then he ran a clip of "The Factor".
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: When we cover the town hall meetings, we don't describe the protesters as loons.
STEWART: Of course you don't describe the protestors are loons. What kind of monster would describe honest Americans voicing their political opinions that way?
O'REILLY: Surveys show many protesters are simply loons.
STEWART: To be fair, those were protesters he disagrees with.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: To be fair? Ha. Once again, Jon Stewart took the loon clip out of context. Here's what I really said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: There are the anti Bush protesters here in New York City. While most of these people have been peaceful, more than 1,000 have been arrested. And surveys show many protesters are simply loons, calling for the destruction of the American system, calling for retreat in the face of terrorism.
Here's a bulletin for you Bush haters. These protestors are not helping John Kerry.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: And we were talking about the arrested protesters. Quite a different tone than what Steward played.
But to be fair, John, you're a satirist. You know? You have the license to distort. But everybody should know what you're doing and why. 45 percent of "The Daily Show" audience is liberal, according to a Pew research study, the biggest liberal percentage on TV in that study.
So in order to retain his viewers, Stewart has to play to them like he does here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEWART: I'll tell you, if there's one thing that really chaps my ass about liberals is this.
SEAN HANNITY: Liberals do make themselves out to be victims.
STEWART: Oh, poor us, everyone is against us. I'm a liberal . Everyone makes fun of us. And in this regard, FOX News is on the extreme left.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nobody gets beat up worse in the mainstream media than a woman conservative or an African-American conservative.
GRETCHEN CARLSON: In this PC society, Christians are the easy targets.
STEWART: Dial 911. Somebody call an wambulance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: But here's what Gretchen Carlson really said in the discussion about media attacks on Christians during Holy Week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRETCHEN CARLSON: Christians are the easy target.
O'REILLY: They're the easy target, absolutely.
CARLSON: They're not going to do it to Muslims, and they're not going to do it to Jews. As they shouldn't, but they shouldn't do it to Christians either.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: They shouldn't do it to Christians either. They shouldn't do it to anybody. Absolutely true. Perhaps even Jon Stewart would agree as he did when I said this on his program last November.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: I like Barack Obama. I think he is a brilliant guy and ran the best campaign I've ever seen anyone run. Okay? And I've made that quite clear. But.
STEWART: You're not an ideologue. I will say that.
O'REILLY: Now, and I have a cheap shot at the ever, but I don't know what he's going to do. Well, that's what you get paid to do.
STEWART: I get paid to cheap shot people.
O'REILLY: Isn't that a great job?
STEWART: It's not a bad job.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'REILLY: And he does it very well. But is it an honest job, Jon? We now do know how Barack is governing. And some of us are very worried about that, but not Jon Stewart. No. He continues to dance down the liberal yellow brick road, mocking folks who might call far left orthodoxy and actually protest a liberal president's policy.
Again I like Stewart. But some young people actually believe he's presenting an accurate picture of the country on his program. And that is frightening.
By the way, Jon Stewart's welcome on "The Factor" any time.
So, who won this round?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Shame on Bill...
August 22, 2009 - 13:51 ET by SpokerShame on Bill! He never should have let facts and accuracy get in the way of perfectly biased political fiction.
Before I can answer that
August 22, 2009 - 13:52 ET by d1carterBefore I can answer that last question, I have to ask a question. Was Stewart's clown nose on or was his clown nose off? It is very difficult to see these days.
good call back!
August 22, 2009 - 18:13 ET by JnobleI forwarded that clown nose article to someone awhile back to better explain why I don't like Jon Stewart than I can.
I'm expecting next Monday that Jon starts his show off with a prissy rebuttle to O'Reilly's segment. He's such a little pussy...he talks crap about people all week long, often taking them totally out of context for a cheap laugh and then when someone slaps him back he gets all defensive and angry. I CAN'T STAND people like him. Same for Letterman. He's thin skinned too.
I agree with your opinion on those two. I also can't...
August 24, 2009 - 16:52 ET by jawebster1stand Geraldo Rivera so I bet you can't stand him either. Another guy I can't stand is that little professor Mark Lamont Hill. (The goofy looking black guy who shows up on O'Reilly's show all the time.) I can barely tolerate Juan Williams, but Hill is far worse. Any others we can add to the list? Jim Webster
Professor???
August 24, 2009 - 16:55 ET by BlondeWhat is he a professor of? Because I'd deem him professor of stupidity.
Add to list? Bob Beckell.
I hope he fails, too.
Other dial turners are Al Sharpton and Jesse...
August 24, 2009 - 17:24 ET by jawebster1Jackson, though I admit I haven't seen Jackson show up on Fox for awhile. It goes without saying Olbermann, Maddow and Schultz belong on the list. Believe it or not, years ago I used to watch Chris Matthews, but when he filled in for Rush on the radio and signed off by saying he didn't agree with anything Rush said, I said to myself, if he doesn't agree with Rush why should I listen to him? And I haven't, ever since. Jim Webster
You can't win an argument
August 22, 2009 - 14:05 ET by Chris NormanYou can't win an argument by seriously arguing with facts with someone who will just mock you some more. Why even bother?
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris...that's kind of how
August 22, 2009 - 14:39 ET by bigtimerChris...that's kind of how I saw it as well.
I saw the segment...I'm going to myself, why give Jon the attention?
I wished at times a heck of a lot of these jokers on the left of us would not be given the attention they obviously crave...and need to survive.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt, It's a litle like
August 22, 2009 - 15:36 ET by Chris Normanbt,
It's a litle like socking one of those old punching clowns we had when we were kids. You know, the kind that would pop back up immediately?
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris... LOL...excellent
August 22, 2009 - 16:42 ET by bigtimerChris...
LOL...excellent analogy...I remember them well...I think they were my brothers....hehee
Seriously, I do remember those other clowns too. ;-)
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
'Why even bother?'
August 22, 2009 - 15:43 ET by JDWYou are right, these people will not meet face to face on talk shows let alone radio. It is always lib to lib. Reid and Pelosi remain in seclusion.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Jobs, jobs, jobs ... Spending, spending, spending
Neither Stewart nor O'Reilly Won
August 22, 2009 - 14:09 ET by FeynmanFanStewart didn't win because he distorted the truth to make a point. O'Reilly didn't win because you can't win a debate with a Liberal using facts. Facts don't matter to Liberals. It's their point of view that matters and nothing else.
O'Reilly should know better than to ever expect someone like Stewart can be trusted to deal with facts. And after getting stabbed in the back by his other Liberal buddy Al Sharpton, you'd think O'Reilly would pick a better class of people to hang around with. I mean, it's good to be open to both sides of the debate and all that, but at some point you've got to stop setting yourself up for them.
Stewart is the embodiment of
August 22, 2009 - 14:23 ET by mattmStewart is the embodiment of everything wrong with the libtard media: lie, distort, demonize and mock. O'Reilly is not my favorite guy, but at least he keeps things in context - which is the opposite of what libs do.
Jon Stewart wants to have it both ways
August 22, 2009 - 14:33 ET by lsudolemiteYou can tell he so desperately wants to be taken seriously as a political commentator, yet every time someone publicly calls him on his BS, he retreats and hides behind his "hey, it's just a comedy show, you're not supposed to take it seriously" excuse.
Well people need to start taking another look at Stewart, because sadly a lot of people actually get their news from the Daily Show. My labmates love him and think he's so intelligent and want him to do a debate. I tell them Stewart will never do an actual debate, because that would mean separating himself from his gang of writers, his telemprompters, and sympathetic audience and leave him out there on his own. Oh wait, I just described Obama whenever he goes off-the-cuff, so on second thought maybe he could pull it off.
you don't have to tell me
August 22, 2009 - 18:19 ET by JnobleI spent last week on vacation with a lib friend of mine, who's a great person to be with except when it comes to politics. I must have heard at least 10 times during the week "On the Daily Show last night, it was so funny, they said....(insert whatever FOX show or conservative they mocked with an edited clip)"
I just kept quiet and rolled my eyes. I learned you can't debate with people like him...he'll just get louder and more snarky.
I found it ironic that someone who thinks everything on Fox News is total BS would eat up and swallow everything a former D-List comedian says from reading off a teleprompter on a Comedy Central show.
we really need to start speaking up
August 23, 2009 - 14:18 ET by TruthMongerbut you don't need to debate with people like this - if you know you're stuff - just ask them any questions you honestly have - as if you really want them to set you straight - it doesn't take long before they lead themselves into stunned silence - and it's all done very easily and politely with your calm and honest questions...
just remember to always keep it questions - i think this helps because it puts you on offense as they have to explain their retarded opinions...
for example i've done this with health care:
why does government need to be involved? (it's better) how? better than what? (business....) what's wrong with business? (business is evil capitalism and all about corrupt and greedy profit) then why not a non-profit? or coop? (ummm...well...) it's the same average decent citizens doing all of the day to day work isn't it? (well, yes...) so how can they run it any better via the government...?
at this point here's what they can't dance around:
it can't be run any better - and likely it will be run even worse - but the government can get more $ than an NP, coop, or biz...
so i ask "how? why is that?"
at this point they've about run out of their well-indoctrinated chain of "noble" explanations for your line of questions...sadly deflated by their realization of their own disgraceful ignorance...
eventually truth always outlasts any alternate brain-washing...
O'Reilly is a racist!
August 22, 2009 - 14:35 ET by jefflebowskiWell, that's what my liberal friend told me!
Angry White Dude
www.angrywhitedude.c...
If Stewart was really a
August 22, 2009 - 15:04 ET by Radical1979If Stewart was really a comedian and not trying to push a liberal agenda, he's include MSNBC in his schtick. That network if full of possible material, but he never touches it because it wouldn't forward his agenda.
I worry to because a lot of people get their news from Stewart. Like Oliver Stone, he uses just enough truth to hide the lies.
Rad... I agree...it's all
August 22, 2009 - 15:09 ET by bigtimerRad...
I agree...it's all agenda.
Speaking of the people who get their news from Stewert...same people problably take The Onion seriously too. ;-)
Just trying to be light-hearted today.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
You must not watch the show.
August 22, 2009 - 19:48 ET by balboaYou must not watch the show. He makes fun of MSNBC all the time.
Thanks Bal
August 22, 2009 - 22:37 ET by BosTarusI was about to say the same thing... he only pops up on this site when he says something particularly irksome about Fox news, but on a daily basis, he makes fun of all the news networks. The show is more about making fun of the ridiculousness of the news media as a whole-not specifically Fox news. Though Fox obviously pops up alot, its definitely not 22 straight minutes of Fox bashing each night. Watch it once and you'll see.
Exactly
August 23, 2009 - 07:45 ET by stoppitsStewart skewers the MSM frequently. He's pointed out their ridiculous fawning over Obama (such as his saying MSNBC thinks Obama is a God) on numerous occasions. He's taken jabs at Obama for several things one being his flip-flopping on policy and his pandering to whoever he's talking to at the time.
As far as O'Reilly's response back to Stewart, I think it was weak. In his original comment, O'Reilly didn't say the arrested protesters are loons. The word arrested wasn't even in the same sentence as his loons reference. He said many protesters are loons and it looked more like this loon remark was referring to those who are calling for the destruction of the American system. Also, just because someone gets arrested when protesting, it doesn't necessarily mean they are loons (with anti-abortion protesters being one such example that I think O'Reilly would agree with).
His response regarding what Gretchen Carlson said didn't quite cut it either. Carlson did also mention Muslims and Jews in her original comment but it still didn't change Carlson's basic point that Christians are being victimized by liberals. Anyone who watches F&F knows Carlson is involved in numerous segments that point out the liberal bias against Christians. I've never heard her do a segment based solely on bias against Muslims.
I'm more in the camp of why bother. O'Reilly can do these responses back to Stewart but it doesn't make him look any better. It gives Stewart more material to work with as basically O'Reilly is just setting himself up. But if O'Reilly insists on responding back to Stewart, he needs to come up with a better rebuttal than this one as it wasn't very good at all.
So Stewart calls O'Reilly a liar and it's why bother.
August 23, 2009 - 09:45 ET by JWFWe have 2 juxtaposing groups of protesters -
The protesters at town hall meetings whom we would be hard pressed to point to one arrest-
Versus the protesters at the 2004 Republican convention at which many were arrested for vandalism, arson, & assault -
The people at the town halls - not loons. The anarchists at the Republican Convention in 2004 - anarchists & loons.
Am I a liar? Should I have bothered? Does responding not make me look any better? Did I give you more material to work with? Did I set myself up?
By the way, O'Reilly was referring to the arrested protesters. Sentences are part of paragraphs which are part of articles, books. The entire point of this article was that Stewart was taking isolated sentences from O'Reilly out of context. Much as you were doing here.
The word arrested wasn't even in the same sentence...
Carlson did also mention Muslims and Jews in her original comment...
So you are saying that we can't get the meaning from an entire conversation? We have to get everything in one sentence. The next sentence has to be about a completely different topic? One sentence cannot clarify or add to the preceding sentence?
See, I can do it too. Isolate single parts of your speech and make it look like you were conveying something different.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
That's right, why bother going after a comedian
August 23, 2009 - 16:42 ET by stoppitsIt's what comedians do and O'Reilly took the bait when it was dangled out there.
I listened to and read the entirety of it before I made my original post and it does not look to me that O'Reilly was talking about just the arrested protesters like he is now saying he was. I think he's coming back and picking out just one part of what he said hoping that it's enough to prove Stewart wrong. I think O'Reilly failed with it. Just because Carlson mentioned Muslims and Jews does not negate that she was saying that Christians are the victims of liberal attacks which Stewart was able to use.
O'Reilly did a poor job of rebutting Stewart's presentation and he gave Stewart's hypocrisy piece on Fox more attention than it deserves. Sorry but I don't think O'Reilly did himself any favors here. That's my opinion. If you don't agree, so be it.
What was funny? Stewart made O'Reilly look like a liar & an ass.
August 23, 2009 - 19:15 ET by JWFStewart hides behind the comedy label. Another poster has linked to the clown article. Why are you giving him more cover while he reloads his gun?
Let's break it down because apperently I failed to make my point. The elements.
1. The Protests.
a. The town hall protests - See my posted article above. These are people that are rightly scared about a coming massive government program. Little or no arrests. These people are correct.
b. The protests at the 2004 Republican Convention. These people are protesting a single man, George W. Bush. A man most of the country supported by voting him back in a few months later. Some 1000 to 2000 people were arrested. See my posted article above. These people are incorrect.
2. Bill O'Reilly's statements.
a. BOR said the town hall protesters were not loons. This is correct.
b. BOR said the 2004 Republican Convention protesters were loons (in 2004). This is correct.
3. Jon Stewart's video bit with comments.
a. JS directly juxtaposed BOR's 2004 statement (protesters were loons) with his 2009 statement (protesters are not loons) making him look like a liar and an ass.
b. JS commented implied the protesters at the 2004 RNC were honest Americans voicing their opinion. This is a lie. This was said in 2009 when we now know the protesters were using the Iraq war as an excuse to hurt George W. Bush. If the war was wrong then, what has magically made all the arguments against it correct 5 years later? Where are those protesters now?
c JS comments "You are against war. You are against killing. Fine. Keep it civil." Again, adding weight to the argument the protesters in 2004 were somehow correct. This is a lie. The protesters at the 2004 RNC cared little about the war and lots about hating GWB.
Now to your arguments -
It's what comedians do and O'Reilly took the bait when it was dangled out there. - So comedians are untouchable. I am a comedian. I am funny. Ask people here. Stoppits looks like poo and smells like pee. Ha Ha Ha. I is funny. You can't touch this. Ha. I did it again with the reference to the MC Hammer song. Ha. You can't complain. I is teh funnies!
I listened to and read the entirety of it before I made my original post and it does not look to me that O'Reilly was talking about just the arrested protesters like he is now saying he was. - Oh you listened did you? Wow, everyone, stoppits listened and read. Someone call the Washington Post. Not about you little buddy. Whether BOR was talking about the arrested protesters or unarrested protesters is immaterial. He was right. They were all loons.
I think he's coming back and picking out just one part of what he said hoping that it's enough to prove Stewart wrong. - Ya think did ya? Wow, listening, reading, and thinking. This is our special day now isn't it? I sent an email to Bill asking if he got what he hoped for.
I think O'Reilly failed with it. - Dang. You thunked twice today. A new record. Ha! I is funny! I is untouchable!
O'Reilly did a poor job of rebutting Stewart's presentation - Did ya thunk that too? Everything related to BOR was truthful and correct while everything related to JS turns out to be a lie and untruthful. Yet BOR did a poor job rebutting as though it was just a matter of opinion.
Lastly - Let me get this straight. You have been here 3 years, you finally pop in with a statement, and this is your great stand? That Jon Stewart can make up anything he wants and get away with it because he is teh funny? So BOR needs to keep his big fat trap shut because anything he says is not enough of a rebuttal for teh stoppits.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
There's no need for you to break anything down
August 23, 2009 - 19:41 ET by stoppitsI disagree with you. I'm not the only here who thinks why bother with Stewart and that O'Reilly is giving him attention he doesn't deserve. It's a shame that you can't deal with my opposing opinion without resorting to childish snark.
Not allowed.
August 23, 2009 - 20:35 ET by JWFI is funny so I get to use childish snark just like Jonny. No retort for you!
JWF
August 23, 2009 - 20:54 ET by MrShy"It's a shame that you can't deal with my opposing opinion without resorting to childish snark."
Conversely, as you are demonstrating ( :p ), it's a shame that NY progressive, left-wing liberal Jon Stewart and his NY progressive, left-wing liberal writers can't deal with opposing opinions without resorting to childish snark, each and every night for 1/2 hour on cable TV.
LOL!
August 24, 2009 - 05:56 ET by stoppitsGood to see you finally get it! Stewart does indeed resort to some childish snark because that's his schtick as a comedian. That's what he does and, if he's lucky, someone will pick up on what he's said so that he gets further attention. And because that's what Stewart does, I don't think O'Reilly should be giving him more attention.
Stewart's schtick
August 24, 2009 - 06:16 ET by AgnosticThis is why his schtick becomes relevant: http://www.huffingto...
To paraphrase Barkley, I don't believe comedians should be news anchors. I believe journalist should be news anchors.... but Stewart wins because the so-called professionals have abdicated their roles as journalist to embrace activism on behalf of the favored political party.
I know that Stewart did not ask to be saddled with the weight of being responsible for shaping the minds of the people purportedly seeking knowledge but nonetheless it is still a burden he must bear. If he were not compensated very well for such a burden I would feel a bit of pity but they don’t pay people so well just to read scripts and cue cards they are also compensated for the lifestyle changes and the expectations society places on their influence.
A person may be won over with logic and reason but the masses must be bought with spectacle and platitudes. - 2008 Elections
Agreed, and Stewart is very
August 24, 2009 - 06:26 ET by motherbeltAgreed, and Stewart is very happy to straddle the line, sliding back and forth between real news and comedy, as it suits his purposes. I've commented on this tendency of his in numerous other threads.
He uses "It's a fake news show!" as an excuse to say any number of outrageous and hateful things about people. Then on other occasions he wants to be taken seriously.
And the Huffington Post article is exactly right. Far too many young people use him as their main source of news. The same ones who think Oliver Stone's "FJK" was a documentary.
I don't really think that imposes on him a responsibility to be more accurate, however. If it did, it wouldn't be the comedy show that it is. The fault for the fact that so many people believe he speaks the truth is not his, but elsewhere; maybe in our education system that doesn't teach kids to discern between fact and satire.
Steward
August 24, 2009 - 07:09 ET by well99Does comedy?You could of fooled me.I think a bowl of oatmeal is funnier.He is like the class clown in grade school.Except there was better talent then.That and they didnt act so childish.I think he would lose if their was a show called Are You Funnier Than A Fifth Grader.
motherbelt,
August 24, 2009 - 08:01 ET by AgnosticI agree that it isn't Stewart's responsiblility to change his 'comedy' regardless of the bias content. What do expect is for him to be consistant in his claim that is always comedy and to admit that he prefers lampooning the right and Republicans because of his own political beliefs. To do otherwise when so many rely on you as an authority figure, warranted or not, is irresponsible and as I said he is compensated well to handle such meager responsibilities. Besides, its not like any of his bosses are going to care if he comes out as a liberal - big suprise!
A person may be won over with logic and reason but the masses must be bought with spectacle and platitudes. - 2008 Elections
stoppits
August 23, 2009 - 20:49 ET by MrShyYes, JWF is being quite colorful with you, but you "stepped in it", as it were.
First off, that you are separating one sentence from another in O'Reilly's full 2004 remark as some way of proving that there's no seamless context in a complete remark -- because they were separate sentences? -- well, is an argument that's funny enough on it's own.
But guess what, stoppits? Jon & Co. not only removed the first sentence, they removed a large chunk of that second sentence -- every part of which really mattered:
While most of these people have been peaceful, [comma] more than 1,000 have been arrested and..."
before cutting into "surveys show...", like that was the beginning of the sentence.
NB transcribed it as a 3-sentence statement, with sentence two ending at "arrested", and a third sentence starting with "And", which I think is wrong. I also watched the video several times myself and carefully transcribed what he said and how he said it, which to me was:
There are the anti-Bush protesters here in New York City. [end sentence 1] While most of these people have been peaceful, [comma] more than 1,000 have been arrested and surveys show many protesters are simply loons, calling for the destruction of the American system, calling for retreat in the face of terrorism. [end sentence 2]
But even with the 2 or 3 sentences debate aside, Jon & Co. deliberately removed the word "and", (or "And") which indicates that indeed this is a continuation of a full, contextual statement and sentiment.
There's simply no defending Jon Stewart here at all. They overtly edited and spun what O'Reilly said.
Oh, and, what's hilarious is the two clips Jon played. One of people standing in a town hall meeting, all collectively responding with questions, with some perhaps shouting over others, followed by what looks like REAL LOONS AND ANARCHISTS rioting against police.
I swear, arguing with liberals and/or FOX/O'Reilly haters is like being in a Twilight Zone episode that never ends.
Nailed it MrShy.
August 23, 2009 - 21:11 ET by JWFNailed it real good.
I'm quite aware that Stewart removed
August 24, 2009 - 16:37 ET by stoppitsa part of the comment. I have not denied that or defended it. And it could very well be that NB shouldn't have broken it up into 3 sentences.
While O'Reilly's might have played all of his comment, it is interesting that even he separated out his own sentences by putting forth that his the loon description was only directed at the "arrested protesters" part of his comment. I differ from O'Reilly in that I think the "many protesters who were calling for", etc. is just as much a part of his loon description as the "arrested protesters" part (if not more, in my opinion, because of its placement within his comment).
→ Stoppits
August 24, 2009 - 16:51 ET by Cool ArrowWhy did you arrest protesters? Are you a Law enforcement Officer? I'll cut and paste your exact words to prove that's what you said.
Of course I'm just making a joke here.
We will Barry you! - Russian prophecy
Also, since no one seems to have noticed
August 24, 2009 - 17:10 ET by BosTarusO'Reilly also edited Jon Stewart's clip... he cut out like 3 or 4 more examples that Jon used, and only rebutted the two. In fact, he cut it to look like they never existed, rather than using the traditional 2-4 frame dip to wipe to indicate that the piece was edited (which the daily show uses regularly) So, at best, O'Reilly's rebuttal was incomplete... and he was guilty of virtually the same crime he's accusing Jon Stewart.
Steward
August 22, 2009 - 15:21 ET by well99Is a hypocrite and always has been.He isnt funny actually he is pretty stupid and boring.He is to comedy what Wayne Grezsky is to football.Just another Obama girl.
Stewart is a prime example of media bias.
August 22, 2009 - 15:45 ET by JWF...some young people actually believe he's presenting an accurate picture of the country on his program. And that is frightening.
We can attest to that. There are far too many people coming here and posting Stewart's heavily edited highly partsan hack videos as some kind of proof. Proof that argument X has some validity. Look at the video I linked. It will open your eyes and show you. Look. Look. Look. Learn. Learn. Learn.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Hey idiot you misspelled
August 22, 2009 - 17:04 ET by 24enakMost young people whom watch his show on a daily basis know when he is joking and when he is serious.
The point of the segment was to show how thing have changed since Obama was elected. He has done this to all three cable networks, MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News.
Here is Jon Stewart making fun of CNN and their catchphrases (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-august-18-2009/cnn-s-just-sayin-).
Here is Jon Stewart making fun of MSNBC for their ridiculous live coverage of Obama and Biden getting a burger. ( http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-6-2009/where-s-the-chief-)
Here is Jon Stewart making fun of Liberals and Conservatives playing the blame game on which side is to blame for the old guy who shot up the Holocaust museum. ( http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-16-2009/blame)
If the only videos you see of Stewart are on this site then you don't know better, he makes fun of both sides, is he "liberal" yeah but that doesn't mean he doesn't make fun of and ridicule both parties.
By the way you misspelled partsan (partisan, I think that is what you meant, idiot) You are such a moron for making a spelling mistake, you should be ashamed.
You should look at the videos I linked. It will open your eyes and show you (though it won't show you how to spell, idiot). Look. Look. Look. Learn. Learn. Learn (how to spell, idiot).
24 would it be possible for
August 22, 2009 - 17:09 ET by Radical197924 would it be possible for you to be a little more polite?
Just sayin...
Rad... You know you are
August 22, 2009 - 17:14 ET by bigtimerRad...
You know you are asking for the impossible.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
BT I'm an optimist, I have
August 22, 2009 - 17:16 ET by Radical1979BT I'm an optimist, I have to try.
I am too. I just know
August 22, 2009 - 17:18 ET by bigtimerI am too.
I just know when it's an impossibility.
Well, heck Rad, I may be wrong in this instance...ya just never know. ;-)
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
I'm just giving JWF a taste
August 22, 2009 - 17:24 ET by 24enakI'm just giving JWF a taste of his own medicine. He has called me a idiot numerous times when I made a spelling mistake. He is the only person I have or will call out on their spelling, because he calls me out.
Minor spelling mistakes aren't a big deal as long as you know what the person is trying to say and so I have never called others on their spelling mistakes, but JWF has been all over me for my minor spelling mistakes so I am going to berate him for his.
I have been nothing but polite and respectful on this site, though if someone is disrespectful or not polite to me then I am more than happy to throw the second punch. I have never thrown the first.
24 o.k., I didn't know the
August 22, 2009 - 17:45 ET by Radical197924 o.k., I didn't know the whole story. Just sayin...I enjoyed your links just sayin...
Sorry, can't let go of that. I wonder which genius at CNN thought that one up.
I have been nothing but
August 22, 2009 - 23:23 ET by Dan The Man 2I have been nothing but polite and respectful on this site,
Most likely "polite" and "respectful" is in teh eye of teh beholder.
Somebodies lying. I dropped a letter. That is called a typo.
August 23, 2009 - 04:32 ET by JWFThere is a difference between typos and backwards Kane the idiot's special brand of stupid. Get out your scales boys and girls. Put my typo one on side.
Now, let's put 24enak on the other. This is not all of his idiot, this is only from one thread on one day. >>>>>
Now I ask you guys. Should 24enak be pointing out my typo's?
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
"Put my typo one on side."
August 23, 2009 - 11:16 ET by 24enak"Put my typo one on side." Shouldn't this say 'Put my typo on one side' instead of the way you stupidly arranged the words. Your mistakes are starting to add up, idiot.
Many of my spelling mistakes you have called out I have only "dropped a letter" and the spelling mistakes from that one day was maybe 1% of the words I typed.
Whatever probaly troll.
August 23, 2009 - 20:30 ET by JWFYour IQ is well below that of chewing gum stuck under the library tables. And you are raising it how?
You have not brought one new idea to any discussion ever but you think you are showing some kind of intelligence by dissing on the Vet. No friggin' class.
The only IQ test I have ever
August 23, 2009 - 21:33 ET by 24enakThe only IQ test I have ever taken was back when I was a freshman in high school and I scored a 118. I have never dissed on you for being a Vet, I have dissed on your deplorable spelling mistakes because that is the exact same thing you have done to me. Apparently you can dish it out, but you can't take it.
→ enak
August 23, 2009 - 22:15 ET by Cool ArrowSorry about that IQ score. Wouldn't broadcast that if I were you.
Of course it does explain some things about you. But cheer up, you may develop some semblance of critical thought, regardless of how Janeane Garafolo might refer to you.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Oh gee
August 23, 2009 - 22:38 ET by nwahsA guy named Arrow with a symbol "---->" measuring. Go figure - nothing psychological there..
I am the mob. Don't tread on me.
→ Hey nwahs
August 23, 2009 - 22:47 ET by Cool ArrowThe "→" was given me by botg a couple of years back.
I can no more disown my "→" than I could my typical white grandmother.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
ok
August 23, 2009 - 22:50 ET by nwahsPut that away
I am the mob. Don't tread on me.
No problem nwahs
August 23, 2009 - 22:58 ET by Cool ArrowI'll just hide it over here, under the bus.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
118 is above average, and it
August 23, 2009 - 22:41 ET by 24enak118 is above average, and it is the only IQ test I have taken. What is your IQ? Not that I would believe you though.
→ Does it matter?
August 23, 2009 - 22:49 ET by Cool ArrowLet's just say I could whip out enough to win the turkey.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
JWF
August 23, 2009 - 20:00 ET by MrShyarugruement - an argument over arugula
→ Let us spray
August 23, 2009 - 20:05 ET by Cool ArrowJust had to throw in an old joke a priest made when a skunk got under our church back in 1959.
Funny the things you remember.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
CA
August 24, 2009 - 02:28 ET by MrShyHaha. That's a funny :)
Hey, btw, I found this .... "--->" .... under a bus. Is it yours, by chance?
Wow 24IQ
August 23, 2009 - 17:44 ET by well99Three times in 4 months.Aint that special.Once and a while he throws out something about the left but 99% of his spewing is about conservatives or those oppose to Obama.He has a lip lock on Obama's butt.If he isnt carefull Chrissy is going to share his tingle with him.
I'm laughing too, well
August 23, 2009 - 17:50 ET by Cool ArrowThe same brainiac who says, "Most young people whom watch his show on a daily basis", is doing a spellcheck.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
CA
August 23, 2009 - 18:01 ET by well99Guess he/she never heard of lead by example.
24
August 23, 2009 - 22:07 ET by RESTLESS 1"The point of the segment was to show how thing have changed since Obama was elected."
Do you see the grammar error here? Learn some basic english idiot. Learn the difference between singular and plural, idiot.
What, you simply made a typing error when leaving out an "s"? You mean much like the typing error involved when leaving out an "i"?
No, the can't be it. You're just an idiot, right?
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Stay out of this fight, I
August 23, 2009 - 22:34 ET by 24enakStay out of this fight, I know I make mistakes when I type, I know I don't proof read what I type or have it edited. I don't call out the myriad of minute mistakes made by many (alliteration) on this site.
But if you want to go on the list with JWF o.k. Any mistakes you make I will berate you for it.
→ Thanks enak
August 23, 2009 - 22:44 ET by Cool ArrowBut you just can't bump the "nattering nabobs of negativism" from its pedestal.
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Sniff. Sniff. Stay out of dis fight bullies. Sniff Sniff.
August 23, 2009 - 23:37 ET by JWFRestless1 is on my buddy list. He has carte blanche to jump into any fight of which I am currently engaged. Anyway, he has the clue stick this week.
We just finished the monthly NewsBusters Troll Busters meeting. He now has the Idiot Patrol until the next monthly meeting. Guess what Backwards Kane. That means he gets to pound on you for the next month.
Get used to it 24enak
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
enak
August 23, 2009 - 23:44 ET by misterbillwe be rating you too!
Who, me? Nah.
August 24, 2009 - 23:06 ET by RESTLESS 1I'll jump in anytime I please.
You may feel free to pounce on any and all mistakes in grammar I make.
It just strikes me as funny that you would invoke such invective at the dropping of an "i", especially given the dropped "s" in your post.
I mean really, does that not strike you as just a wee bit ironic?
i nose, yew wuz jest actin the idjut becuz of bad blud between youse too from befour.
There, pounce away.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
The fact that so many
August 22, 2009 - 16:15 ET by G. MayThe fact that so many people tend to get their news and views from a comedy show is indiciative of how many diseased minds there are in the political debate.
Hopefully they will grow out of it.
I personally think Stewart or Liebowitz or whatever...
August 22, 2009 - 17:02 ET by jawebster1his true name is not funny. His lame jokes are not funny. The way he mugs the camera is not funny. His Liberal politics is not funny. The guy with the floppy ear is funnier than this guy. He should not have changed his name because the name Liebowitz IS funny. Jim Webster
Michael (Weiner) Savage
August 22, 2009 - 17:09 ET by 24enakMichael (Weiner) Savage should go by his birth name, because Weiner is way funnier than Savage. Weiner IS even funnier than Liebowitz.
Real last names aside (like
August 22, 2009 - 17:42 ET by Chris NormanReal last names aside (like they really matter), who here has ever said they liked Michael Savage (yechhhh, phooey, blechhhh)?
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Yeah, that always bugged me...
August 22, 2009 - 22:49 ET by BosTarusWhy is it that whenever there's a post about Jon Stewart, someone will inevitably call him Jon LIEBOWITZ Stewart or something like that... it always comes off as a bit racist to me... like you're announcing HE'S A JEW. I'm sure that's not the intent but that's how it reads some times.
But seriously, why the need to point it out everytime? Hundreds of celebrities on both sides of the political aisle have changed their names... From Charlton Heston to Elton John. I don't see anything strange, or offensive, or anything about it. So why always point it for Jon Stewart? You can call him whatever you want based on his politics, but i see no point in using that against him.
Yea, no big
August 22, 2009 - 22:55 ET by GregEYea, no big deal.
Signed,
Greg Getirdone
Greg... I'm laughing
August 23, 2009 - 14:24 ET by bigtimerGreg...
I'm laughing about your signature at the bottom of your post...I love it!
Yea, no big deal.
Signed,
Greg Getirdone
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Actually is the the exact
August 23, 2009 - 05:42 ET by Jack BauerActually is the the exact opposite of what you claim.
Mark Levin, I believe, started the shtick of calling him by his given name to annoy him, as he thinks he's a talentless unfunny hack who can't say anything without having it written by his staff of 40 writers.
The gag is this, and I paraphrase: "He changes his name from Liebowitz to Stewart. Why? Oh I get it, because Jews have such a hard time making it in the comedy business."
Projection
August 23, 2009 - 11:24 ET by well99I think you have a bad case of projection. If you want to see a racist find a mirror. Your the one bringing it up that he is Jewish. Do you hate Jewish people? Are you a member of the KKK? Are you a racist on other sites too? Do you deny the Holocaust?Get help.
There is a bizarro faction
August 23, 2009 - 12:24 ET by balboaThere is a bizarro faction on here that thinks changing your name is blasphemy, one of the worst possible things you could do.
balbao
August 23, 2009 - 12:39 ET by well99Maybe you could provide links to those saying it was blasphemy.Oh is this another because I think it is true it must be?
It happened. The search
August 23, 2009 - 16:42 ET by balboaIt happened. The search function on this site is so bad, it's not worth trying to find.
balboa
August 23, 2009 - 17:48 ET by well99So there is a actually group or just one or two people?
→ I remember that group
August 23, 2009 - 17:54 ET by Cool ArrowIt's the "Obama-Soetero-Obama Anti-Name-Changing Group"
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
CA
August 23, 2009 - 18:04 ET by well99Shoot best to report them to snitchonyourneighbor@whitehouse.org
I don't remember, well99. It
August 23, 2009 - 21:36 ET by balboaI don't remember, well99. It was more than one. What does it matter.
balbao
August 24, 2009 - 00:41 ET by well99"There is a bizarro faction"
There will always be a few folks out in left field..well right in this case.The way you put it implied more.At least IMHO.
yeah...
August 24, 2009 - 01:58 ET by BosTarusit seems like a really silly and meaningless thing to point out. I'm sure there are plenty of celebrities and political figures they admire that, too, changed their names. There's nothing wrong with it. I just don't understand how its supposed to be used as an insult against the guy.
Also, apparently i'm a racist, so what do i know.
bos
August 24, 2009 - 03:27 ET by well99"Why is it that whenever there's a post about Jon Stewart, someone will inevitably call him Jon LIEBOWITZ Stewart or something like that... "it always comes off as a bit racist to me..." like you're announcing HE'S A JEW. I'm sure that's not the intent but that's how it reads some times."
Oh gee it is ok for your assume something but others arent?
"Also, apparently i'm a racist, so what do i know."
See we agree on something.
Ha, ok?
August 24, 2009 - 17:24 ET by BosTarusFirst off, i tried to use very tempered language... i didn't want to come out and call someone a racist-that would be inappropriate and unwarranted. In fact, i even went so far as to say that i didn't think that was the intent. So i wasn't actually "assuming" anything... just commenting that something like that can come off as racist, even if unintended.
Anyway, I'm assuming that that addresses the "sentence":
Oh gee it is ok for your assume something but others arent?...
At least that's the meaning i was able to parse from that absurd sentence. Aside from that, I think the constant pointing out of his original name is ridiculous, childish, borderline offensive, and doesn't do anything to support any argument. It's just unnecessary.
bos
August 25, 2009 - 03:52 ET by well99Then why did you bring it up?So you are the forum monitor for what is necessary?So do you have a list of what is necessary/unncessary?
Just a note: "So i wasn't actually "assuming" anything... just commenting that something like that can come off as racist, even if unintended. "
You know you seem to be the one with the problem if you think " that can come off as racist" .You really need to quit thinking like that.You are projecting your own racist views.Dont push it off on others because you think like that.
Mark Levin is Jewish
August 23, 2009 - 13:08 ET by Conservative VoicePersonally I have a hard time understanding why Jews aren't more conservative...
CV--
August 23, 2009 - 16:57 ET by Kat Outta the BagSame here, especially on the abortion issue considering that it is in one of the Ten Commandmants given by God to Moses about not killing. There are some Jews who are on the conservative side -- Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, for one -- but they are few and far between.
BosTarus, I brought it up this time and the last thing...
August 25, 2009 - 08:21 ET by jawebster1I was thinking about was that Stewart is a Jew. I just think if he wants to be a funny man then he use his funny name. You jerk! Jim Webster
Mark Levin riffs on Michael
August 23, 2009 - 06:44 ET by Jack BauerMark Levin riffs on Michael "Weiner" all the time when he compares ratings. Weiner Nation. Oscar Meyer Weiners, et al.
But of course, Levin was the also guy who started saying Jon Liebowitz aka Jon Stewart whenver the boneheaded Stewart says something even more pathetic than ususal.
Jack... It cracks me up
August 23, 2009 - 14:26 ET by bigtimerJack...
It cracks me up when Levin does that with good ol' Jon on his show.
Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh
Comedty vs Funny
August 22, 2009 - 17:15 ET by hwm98264I detest comedy shows. The make their living demeaning others and situations with no recourse for any kind of feedback. They rely on script writers and teleprompters and would be hopelessly lost if they were ever engaged in an actual live intelligent debate.
exactly
August 22, 2009 - 18:08 ET by Jnoblethe left's hero Jon would be utterly decimated in a one-on-one debate with a well spoken conservative like Mark Levin. Without the aformentioned writers and sheep-like studio audience and edited clips to hide behind, he'd be exposed as the useful idiot lib that he really is.
I would pay money to see this happen. Mark has actually offered to debate Stewart, but that would never happen. Besides, Jon would probably start crying and wee-weeing himself like he did on Crossfire years ago "You're destroying the country!" (??) How Tucker Carlson didn't take a swing at him that night is beyond me
Right on, right on...
August 25, 2009 - 08:23 ET by jawebster1Jim Webster
he he he
August 23, 2009 - 06:16 ET by kangarooyou just described BOzo the clown prez,
President Obozo
August 23, 2009 - 06:38 ET by Jack BauerBozo the Clown -- now if I had the Photoshop skills THAT'S the image I would create of el Presidente Papa Doc!
Not much of a rebuttal from
August 22, 2009 - 19:50 ET by balboaNot much of a rebuttal from O'Reilly.
So arrested protestors are loons? That makes sense...
tired of liberal lies I
August 23, 2009 - 01:00 ET by stunnedtired of liberal lies
I was in NYC at that time and the scenes are from the Republican Convention. Some lefties attacked attendees, tried to tie up traffic and attacked cops and they were loons but were treated respectfully by the media. NYC unlike Boston which put protesters in cages let tens of thousands march peacefully and protest the war but the media was furious at the arrests because they wanted pictures of violence to use against Bush. Funny how those folks disappeared since Obama was elected but the wars are still going on but I digress. Now if citicizens, mostly seniors, show up at a townhall meeting and voice their opposition they are called astroturfers and loons while the Dem bused in protesters with cute pre-printed signs paid for by unions and who beat up the opponents are the ones treated with respect by the same MSM and described as defenders of government healthcare.
I think
August 22, 2009 - 19:55 ET by katainkentthey're both incredibly full of themselves. Just my humble opinion.
___________________________________________
"Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller" Barack Obama (Dr. In Chief)
I hope its not another
August 22, 2009 - 22:52 ET by GregEI hope its not another "cable news battle," and I don't think it will be. But O'Reilly did right to address it, AND did right, by addressing it in a very short segment then moving on. Constant spotlighting on The Factor of someone speaking against O'Reilly would be way too much and get those others way too much airtime.
I pity the fools who take
August 22, 2009 - 23:38 ET by RR GOPI pity the fools who take what Stewart and Colbert have to say as being something like journalism and think their wise-ass shtick is in any way funny.
Also pathetic are those who have never watched BOR and laugh at him anyway because the drones think he's some kind of arch conservative.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
Clown
August 23, 2009 - 10:11 ET by slickwillie2001I'd like to see someone go on his show and bring their own clown-nose, and one for Jon to put on at the appropriate time. For those that missed the clown-nose meme:
I Always See the Clown Nose on Jon Stewart: http://patterico.com
Re his Jewish roots, it's very appropriate to point out that someone is a Jew if you suspect that they have changed their name to hide that fact, out of typical liberal self-loathing, or a desire to be more popular.
yeah... about that...
August 24, 2009 - 02:13 ET by BosTarusI don't know if its ever really "appropriate" to "point out that someone is a Jew"... that shouldn't even be a part of the argument. You shouldn't have to point out anybody's religion, ethinicity, etc when discussing their politics. At least not when the aforementioned qualifications have nothing to do with the debate. His heritage shouldn't have any impact on your political opinions of the man.
Even if you suspect the reasons for changing his name don't meet your high standards, its really none of your business. You don't know the circumstances involved, so it's really inappropriate either way. I know plenty of people who have changed their names, and I don't question their motives. And it'd be insanely rude to continue to point out the change. Also he's spoken about his name change in the past, and it wasn't anything so seedy as you seem to want it to be.
In short, its a stupid thing to point out each time. In a mature discussion about an issue, such childish things only dull your point.
Jon Stewart...
August 23, 2009 - 13:02 ET by Conservative VoiceActually that was one of his funnier clips, if you don't take him seriously. But as Bill said, unfortunately people mistake Jon for actual news.
→ Who's got a link?
August 23, 2009 - 16:57 ET by Cool ArrowDid Jon Stewart make jest of "All wee-weed up"?
Certainly, he did, didn't he?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
→ Still waiting
August 23, 2009 - 17:57 ET by Cool ArrowWaiting on Jon Stewart's wee-wee jokes.
Is it impossible to make wee-wee jokes?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
I get paid to cheap shot people
August 23, 2009 - 19:54 ET by woburn828I wished I got paid to cheap shot Jon Stewart. It would be short and sweet,
"Just how short are you"?
A miserable little man. I hope someone in the media can ridicule him enough to make him cry.
Oh Jon!!!
August 24, 2009 - 10:29 ET by kengieThis Steward guy is hilarious!! He brings the boil to a head, just like he did with Betsy McCaughey. One has to admire the way he uses humor to show the facts! Comedy Czar that would be him!
kengie, I think you
August 24, 2009 - 10:35 ET by hydrodynDMkengie,
I think you forgot to put a "...HA!" at the end of that.
Who is this Steward chap you speak of?
August 24, 2009 - 10:41 ET by SickofLibsWho is this Steward chap you speak of?
SOL
August 24, 2009 - 15:21 ET by well99Here is a picture of him.Must be on vacation.
http://www.desertusa.com/magjan98/jan_pap/du_wildburro.html
LOL, Well99
August 24, 2009 - 15:33 ET by SickofLibsThanks for showing the "front end" and not the "Kengie end", though!
Ha!