In between Stupid Pet Tricks, Top Ten Lists and witty banter with Paul Shaffer, David Letterman enlightens viewers with tutorial on Middle East
Noted geo-political expert David Letterman had Harvard Kennedy School of Government Masters of Public Administration grad Bill O'Reilly on his program last night, and among other things, said the following:
a) Cindy Sheehan is allowed to call the insurgents in Iraq "freedom fighters" because she lost a son in the conflict, and anyone who doesn't have kids in the war is not entitled to disagree with her;
b) Letterman asked "Why the hell are we there to begin with" in reference to Iraq; and
c) Said he felt that although 60% of what O'Reilly says is "crap", he doesn't watch the show so he couldn't give any concrete examples of the aforementioned "crap".
Read the transcript and see the video for yourself here.
I would like to see Letterman ask Clinton or Gore if someone got off a bus and handed THEM the intelligence which led to sanctions, repeated airstrikes and threats of war on Iraq through the mid-to-late 90s.
posted by Road Hammer @ 8:49 AM
13 comments
13 Comments:
What great TV! I disargree with O'Reily's perspective though, I find it sort of sad, sort of funny, that his take on Iraq boils down to a black and white prism of terrorists and the US military
Do you watch O'Reilly on a regular or semi-regular basis? I do, and I think he's good. He takes a lot of abuse and takes it all in stride.
You don't think terrorism is justifiable, do you, M.R?
Good response because it illustrates my point, the point of view you espouse falls back on "You don't support terror, do you?" line. I think the situ is much more complex. The insurgents in Iraq are just that - insurgents. Al Qaeda is another element working in Iraq. The disaffected Sunnis are not, as they are always portrated, former Sadaam hardliners. There's is a political struggle, no?
Do we get O'Reily on canadian tv?
You're right, I'm sorry for putting you on the spot like that. What I should have said was that there is no grey area when it comes to suicide bombings and the taking of innocent life through terror ... to me, at least. Not all Sunnis believe in terror as an option.
I have Rogers digital cable so I get him on channel 181 every night at 8.
I spent a year and half at the American University in Cairo and it really opened my eyes to the situ in the mideast. So much so that when I watch the news now it seems like such a distortion of what is actually going on in the hearts and minds of arab people. I dont know much about o'riely except all the neg press he gets
Neither does Letterman, apparently.
Terror is a tricky subject. I mean if we look at the Irgun in Israel during the 40s, does that constitute unjustifiable terror? Or Mandela in South Africa? The contras in Central America? This new wave of terror is perhaps worse than anything we've seen in awhile though and I think that allows for a black and white approach.
O'Reilly is a current affairs show.
Letterman is light, late night silliness.
Should Letterman be in the business of putting his guests on the spot about their views on international relations, or should he stick to asking them about what they did for their holidays, new books/movies/other projects they have coming up, and gently teasing them, etc.?
Remember when Rosie attacked Tom Selleck? That was awful. I must say though, when Letterman has Clinton or any heavyweight on it's always fabolous as it's a thoughtful interview and keeps you enraptured.
It's all roses and petals, that's why.
Anyone is free to make a fool of themselves from time to time by expressing hysterical and uninformed opinions about subjects for which they are out of their depth, that's indeed true.
I don't find O'Reilly arrogant. He never raises his voice, he always gives his guests the last word, and he always publishes hate mail at the end of every show. He is not nearly as agressive, shrill or abusive as he is made out to be.
If you want to see a truly obscene nutter who is everything O'Reilly is purported to be, watch David Menzies on Coren Monday nights at 6.
Nothing wrong with making a buck ... it's what creates the wealth for the far left to redistribute as they, and only they, see fit.
Where have I ever said Moore isn't entitled to make a buck? That's the beauty of capitalism, baby. You can bite the hand that feeds and STILL get rich off of it as long as you can pull the wool over enough people's eyes.
Many times, I have said he's a fraud and a jerk, and I will probably do so again ... but I've never said he's not entitled to make a buck.
I'm no central planner, you know.
Post a Comment
<< Home