Bill O'Reilly went on David Letterman's show Tuesday night and got a little more than he expected. I'll give you short bits of what happened.
Letterman: Well, and you should be very careful with what you say also.
O'Reilly: Give me an example.
Letterman: How can you possibily take exception with motivation and the position of someone like Cindy Sheehan?
O'Reilly: Because I think she's run by far-left elements in this country. I feel bad for this woman.
Letterman: Have you lost family members in armed conflict?
O'Reilly: No, I haven't.
Letterman: Well, then you can hardly speak for her, can you?
O'Reilly: I'm not speaking for her. Let me ask you this question.
(Letterman goes back to his war on Christmas reference: Let's go back to your little red and green stories.
O'Reilly: This is important, this is important. Cindy Sheehan lost a son, a professional solider in Iraq, correct? She has a right to grieve any way she wants, she has a right to say whatever she wants. When she says to the public that the insurgants and terrorists are "freedom fighters", how do you think, David Letterman, that makes people who lost loved ones, by these people blowing the Hell out of them, how do you think they feel, what about their feelings, sir?
(Letterman goes on to talk about why are we in Iraq to begin with and redebates O'Reilly on Cindy Sheehan.)
Letterman: I'm not smart enough to debate you point to point on this but I have the feeling, I have the feeling about 60 percent of what you say is crap. But I don't know that for a fact.
Paul Shafer: 60 percent.
Letterman: 60 percent. I'm just spit-balling here.
O'Reilly: Listen, I respect your opinion, you should respect mine.
Letterman: Well, I -- I-- OK.
O'Reilly: Our analysis is based on the best evidence we can get.
Letterman: Yeah, but I think there's something, this fair and balanced, I'm not sure that it's -- I don't think that you represent an objective viewpoint.
O'Reilly: You have to give me an example if you're going to make those statements.
Letterman: Well, I don't watch your show, so that would be impossible.
O'Reilly: Then why would you come to that conclusion if you don't watch the program?
Letterman: Because of things that I've read, that that I know.
O'Reilly: Your going to take things that you've read? Do you know what they've said about you? Come on. Watch it for -- look, look, watch it for a half an hour, you'll get addicted, you'll be a Factor fan. We'll send you a hat.
O'Reilly also talked about the war on Christmas with him as well. Today on his radio show he said Letterman is a card-carrying member of the "secular progressive movement." First I believe it is wrong for someone to say that there not objective if they have never watched that person. You do have to give examples to backup your claim. I think O' Reilly does fair analysis, he may go to far on some issues, but he knows what he's talking about most of the time. Though I did hear him say the students who shouted down Ann Coulter were Nazis, he said that he said they were using Nazi-like tactics. But I watched the show and the repeats, O' Reilly made a mistake. But all journalists make mistakes, I thought it was wrong, those students were immature, he should of apologized. But one incident doesn't define who he is. I also think that O'Reilly was right to criticize Cindy Sheehan, I felt sympathy for her but my last draw to turn me aganist her was her cheering after a protest like she was proud, I had no sympathy for her after that. I do feel for her but you don't call terrorists freedom fighters and you don't align yourself with Michael Moore(by posting on his website). Letterman was fair when it came to the Iraq debate and when they were talking about the war on Christmas(like Letterman it doesn't bother me, but I still think one exists, unlike him.) I had my say. How about you?
By the way congrats to Texas on beating USC 43-38 last night and stoping them from winning a third national championship. I wish people though would stop saying that's the greatest game ever. Nice try. But both teams have horribile defenses and at least the Rose Bowl game from 2003(my Miami Hurricanes vs Ohio State) had good defenses and that's what made it a better game, even if we lost. Oh, the Miami Hurricanes of 2001 could stop both those teams(well at least contain them), Vince Young wouldn't have put up the 200 yards he did and they would have contained Leinhart of USC. But I'm not taking way anything from Texas's victory congratulations. You won't repeat though.
Recent Comments