• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

O'Reilly vs. Stewart!!!

You can call O'Reilly a lot of things, but insecurity is most definitely NOT one of them.

Perhaps he isn't insecure. I don't know the guy personally. However, having Dennis Miller and a body language expert come in after his interviews to stroke his ego certainly makes it appear that way.
 
Not live and not in its entirety.

Even Stewart admitted it.

Do you find that Fox News' cutting away early from the Q&A between the President and House Republicans is equivalent to other media cutting away from Brown's victory speech when he started the many acknowledgments typical of such events? Really?

Excerpted from “Jon Stewart in the No Spin Zone,” transcript, Fox News, Thursday, February 04, 2010
[SIZE="+2"]O[/SIZE]'REILLY: The other night on your program, you criticized Fox News for bailing out of the president's back-and-forth with the GOP, after we used an hour of it, an hour, all right, and bailed out for about 12 minutes because we had other stuff to do.

STEWART: Yeah.

O'REILLY: And you were offended, personally offended.



STEWART: I wasn't offended. I thought it was funny.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: The president at times being a little bit combative.

STEWART: We're going to cut away because this is against the narrative that we present.

(END VIDEO CLIP)



O'REILLY: On Massachusetts vote night, when we covered Coakley's speech in the entirety...

STEWART: Yes.

O'REILLY: ...when we covered the winner's speech in the entirety, Brown, OK, and the other CNN and MSNBC didn't cover Brown.

STEWART: I should have...

O'REILLY: You didn't say a word, did you?

STEWART: You're absolutely right.

O'REILLY: I rest my case.

STEWART: Your case is rested.

Personally, I thought Stewart was being patronizing of O'Reilly's counterpoint. Basically, cutting away from Brown thanking his campaign staff, each by name, and his volunteers, and his mother, and his father, and on and on, really, it's doing us all a favor.

The last 12 minutes of the Obama's encounter with the House Republicans was some of the best TV in the past year. Fox viewers missed out!
 
Being tough on John McCain is not the same as being tough on the GOP and you know this. ;) . Specially not when you have everyday Republicans on this forum claiming that John McCain is a liberal or a RINO. These is the same Republicans who is trying to get "conservatives" elected in Arizona.

No. Your argument seriously lacks at best, knowledge of John McCain-GOP relations and at very worst would be dishonest.

Glenn Beck used to be on CNN while Bush was still in office. He was saying all the same crazy stuff he says now. He hasn't changed at all. The man may be politically unsophisticated in some regards but he certainly isn't a GOP mouthpiece. He's just a crazy bastard who says what he thinks and it resonates with regular Americans, which is why Fox News hired him (ratings!).
 
Do you find that Fox News' cutting away early from the Q&A between the President and House Republicans is equivalent to other media cutting away from Brown's victory speech when he started the many acknowledgments typical of such events? Really?

Not even close. Brown was far worse.

They covered Obama for a full hour. A full hour before cutting away. Exactly how is that biased?

Personally, I thought Stewart was being patronizing of O'Reilly's counterpoint. Basically, cutting away from Brown thanking his campaign staff, each by name, and his volunteers, and his mother, and his father, and on and on, really, it's doing us all a favor.

And that is your liberal bias talking. They covered both speeches equally.

The last 12 minutes of the Obama's encounter with the House Republicans was some of the best TV in the past year. Fox viewers missed out!

Yes and I'm sure they are up each night thinking about it because its never been replayed has it? :2wave:
 
Glenn Beck used to be on CNN while Bush was still in office.

And what?

He was saying all the same crazy stuff he says now.

So he was spewing ignorant and dishonest lies about "the left" on CNN? So?

He hasn't changed at all. The man may be politically unsophisticated in some regards but he certainly isn't a GOP mouthpiece. He's just a crazy bastard who says what he thinks and it resonates with regular Americans, which is why Fox News hired him (ratings!).

You've yet to prove he's not a GOP mouth piece. You're welcome to. Anytime.
 
Last edited:
And what?

The point speaks for itself. Beck, while on CNN, was hating on BOTH sides, Bush included, and saying generally inflammatory things. He hasn't changed AT ALL since he came to Fox News. He's just an ADHD quasi-libertarian who says whatever comes to mind, whether it's right or wrong.

So he was spewing ignorant and dishonest lies about "the left" on CNN? So?

He was hating on whatever politicians were in power. The format of his show was very similar.

You've yet to prove he's not a GOP mouth piece. You're welcome to. Anytime.

How can I prove that Glenn Beck is NOT something? Can you prove that you're NOT a secret child molester?

Beck hasn't changed one bit since he left CNN. He gave it to Bush and the GOP while they were in power and now he's giving it to Obama and the Dems. He just hates politicians, doesn't matter who they are.

You've got an idea in your head, Hat, which means you won't be convinced otherwise.
 
Secondly, I would also add that:
-Sarah Palin is now a FOX news contributer
-Karl Rove is a FOX news contributer
-The only liberal they had was Colmes, who they fired.

Chris Matthews is a MSNBC anchor. David Gergen and Paul Begala are at CNN. Isn't Juan Williams and Bob Beckett and Kirsten Powers and Susan Estrich and Alan Colmes (still there) and Marc Lamont Hill and many, many more are on Fox ALL THE TIME.

You're not paying attention.
 
Chris Matthews is a MSNBC anchor. David Gergen and Paul Begala are at CNN. Isn't Juan Williams and Bob Beckett and Kirsten Powers and Susan Estrich and Alan Colmes (still there) and Marc Lamont Hill and many, many more are on Fox ALL THE TIME.

You're not paying attention.

Yea difference being is, "joining us now to comment on X news story is FOX news contributer Karl Rove".
 
The point speaks for itself. Beck, while on CNN, was hating on BOTH sides, Bush included, and saying generally inflammatory things. He hasn't changed AT ALL since he came to Fox News. He's just an ADHD quasi-libertarian who says whatever comes to mind, whether it's right or wrong.

Proof?

He was hating on whatever politicians were in power. The format of his show was very similar.

Proof?

How can I prove that Glenn Beck is NOT something?

How can you prove he's not a GOP mouth piece? Find what you consider to be the most damaging thing he's ever written or said about the GOP. I'll wait.
 
Being tough on John McCain is not the same as being tough on the GOP and you know this. ;) . Specially not when you have everyday Republicans on this forum claiming that John McCain is a liberal or a RINO. These is the same Republicans who is trying to get "conservatives" elected in Arizona.

No. Your argument seriously lacks at best, knowledge of John McCain-GOP relations and at very worst would be dishonest.

That was one example. There are many many. Beck slammed the GOP for signing on to TARP in late 2008, has slammed them for years re their fiscal irresponsibility, their unwillingness to stand up and be 'men' on the real problems with Iraq and for not taking on or even condoing certain groups engaged in unethical or dangerous policies, for not taking on the illegal immigration issues, for agreeing with George Bush's disastrous energy policy, and for turning a blind eye to what Beck considers subservive elements who are radically influencing American politics and economics but who do not have America's best interest at heart.

Plenty of conservative pundits have offered unsolicited advice to the Republican Party lately. But on his show Monday, Glenn Beck delivered what might be the weirdest counsel yet. Making an analogy to his preference for high-fat chocolate milk, "chunky milk," over his wife's skim "organic crap," he exhorted the party to be like the former. "I'm gonna for the chocolate milk with the lard and the fat in it," he said, not "progressive light."

Glenn Beck: GOP Should Be Like 'Chunky Chocolate Milk' (VIDEO)

He spent a good deal of his time expressing grave concerns about the new Republican senator from Massachusetts - enough time it made other (leftwing) news casts.

But his criticism of John McCain should not be dismissed as irrelevent either. The REASONS he criticized McCain are relevant when looking to get a handle on where Beck is coming from:

February 26, 2008
Sen. John McCain has yet to win over hard-core conservatives. Talk-show host Glenn Beck is one of them.

The Republican presidential front-runner is "more dangerous to the conservative movement than [Democratic candidate Sen.] Hillary Clinton," Beck says.

"Hillary Clinton, you know what you're getting from her; you know who she is," Beck tells Steve Inskeep. "She actually believes in things, and I think John McCain believes in things, but they're not conservative."

Beck describes himself as independent, not Republican.

"I think when I was really young, I considered myself a Republican because of Ronald Reagan," Beck says. "But the party of Ronald Reagan has been missing. It's kind of like the Republicans now are, 'Where did I put those values I used to believe in? Oh, I must have left them in my other jacket.'
Glenn Beck: GOP Must Rediscover Core Values : NPR
 
I think the reason O'Reilly and Beck get along so well and are so successful playing off of each other, is that they both think pretty much alike. They don't always agree, but they are both able to zero in on a logical and rational fundamental to support their point of view.

I honestly have never heard Jon Stewart be able to do that. Like most leftwing ideologues, he deals most in criticizing and accusing the other side while never quite expressing a clear rationale for why the 'progressive' way is better.
 
I think the reason O'Reilly and Beck get along so well and are so successful playing off of each other, is that they both think pretty much alike. They don't always agree, but they are both able to zero in on a logical and rational fundamental to support their point of view.

I honestly have never heard Jon Stewart be able to do that. Like most leftwing ideologues, he deals most in criticizing and accusing the other side while never quite expressing a clear rationale for why the 'progressive' way is better.

Stewart makes a living by making fun of, and criticizing people. That's his job, he's good at it, he also brings things up that the mainstream media doesn't discuss. He isn't an ideologue. Most left-wing "ideologues" as you call them, could find plenty of points to back up their ideology. Jon doesn't preach on his show. Noam Chomsky is a left wing ideologue, Jon Stewart isn't one.
 
Last edited:
"If you think Beck is a shill for the republican party, you're out of your mind!"

:rofl:lol::lol:

Over all though, a pretty decent interview. I agree that the focus should have been more on policy views like at the beginning than a squabble about FNC.

Now why on earth should the show discuss policy when the guest is a... COMIC ENTERTAINER?!!?
 
Stewart makes a living by making fun of, and criticizing people. That's his job, he's good at it, he also brings things up that the mainstream media doesn't discuss. He isn't an ideologue. Most left-wing "ideologues" as you call them, could find plenty of points to back up their ideology. Jon doesn't preach on his show. Noam Chomsky is a left wing ideologue, Jon Stewart isn't one.

I would agree if Jon was as scathing and pointed in taking on any leftwing dogma, sacred cow, or liberal figure as he is when he takes on the right. Even serious journalists are beginning to appreciate how he is able to steer the young and gullible into negative impressions of conservative concepts and conservatives and implant notions that those on the Left have it right.

To say that Stewart isn't an ideologue I think would be as ludicrous as saying that Glenn Beck and/or Rush Limbaugh aren't ideologues just because they use a lot of humor to make a point. Don't get me wrong. I don't find Stewart offensive and now and then actually enjoy his act--I especially appreciate that he rarely takes cheap shots at his targets; he is likable--but I don't doubt for a minute where he is coming from. Or why.

From PR Watch (a extremely left leaning group) - a highly biased view that proves my point:

Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "Daily Show"An article in the New York Times asks whether Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's Daily Show has become the most trusted man in America, pointing out that his fake news comedy show has emerged in recent years as a "genuine cultural and political force." While 24-hour news networks like FOX, MSNBC and CNN have been pumping out infotainment-style news about topics like dead celebrities and sexual predators, the Daily Show has been critically tracking the cherry-picking of prewar intelligence, the politicization of the Department of Justice and the efforts of the Bush Administration to increase the power of the executive branch. Stewart has proven to be a master at calling out government and corporate spin, hypocrisy and red herrings, and helping his audience see them, too. A 2008 study from the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Enter for the People and the Press found that the Daily Show has had an impact on American dialogue and that it is "getting people to think critically about the public square."
Recent posts about media | Center for Media and Democracy
 
I would agree if Jon was as scathing and pointed in taking on any leftwing dogma, sacred cow, or liberal figure as he is when he takes on the right. Even serious journalists are beginning to appreciate how he is able to steer the young and gullible into negative impressions of conservative concepts and conservatives and implant notions that those on the Left have it right.

To say that Stewart isn't an ideologue I think would be as ludicrous as saying that Glenn Beck and/or Rush Limbaugh aren't ideologues just because they use a lot of humor to make a point. Don't get me wrong. I don't find Stewart offensive and now and then actually enjoy his act--I especially appreciate that he rarely takes cheap shots at his targets; he is likable--but I don't doubt for a minute where he is coming from. Or why.

From PR Watch (a extremely left leaning group) - a highly biased view that proves my point:


Recent posts about media | Center for Media and Democracy


Well we'll have to agree to disagree.
 
Back
Top Bottom