If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Blaze)   For a debate that will sure be as exciting and thrilling as a Ross Perot TV special, Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart will engage in 90-minute debate   (theblaze.com) divider line 113
    More: Interesting, television special  
•       •       •

2254 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Sep 2012 at 12:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-18 12:36:35 PM
For some reason I'm not really looking forward to this.
 
2012-09-18 12:53:50 PM
I am, DamnYankees, they're both very intelligent men with diametrically opposed viewpoints, though they both have a decent level of respect for each other. I feel O'Reilly is more willing to be disingenuous, but Stewart has no problem in calling him on it.
 
2012-09-18 12:59:07 PM

timujin: I am, DamnYankees, they're both very intelligent men with diametrically opposed viewpoints, though they both have a decent level of respect for each other. I feel O'Reilly is more willing to be disingenuous, but Stewart has no problem in calling him on it.


You can't explain that.
 
2012-09-18 01:00:14 PM
I would rather see John Stewart vs. Hannity.
 
2012-09-18 01:01:09 PM

Gotfire: I would rather see John Stewart vs. Hannity.


This.
 
2012-09-18 01:01:23 PM
Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.
 
2012-09-18 01:01:26 PM
Sad part is that it will be fully scripted by writers to provide the appropriate outcome. Plus, they really are friends and are unlikely to get exceptionally aggressive towards each other.
 
2012-09-18 01:01:31 PM

DamnYankees: For some reason I'm not really looking forward to this.


It'll be boring and predictable, with both sides going for the lols rather than actually debating policy.

"You libs with your hippies and lazy"
"No, you cons with your fascism and dancing horses"
"How dare you"
"How dare YOU"
 
2012-09-18 01:02:25 PM

intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.


Now *that* I would pay to see.
 
2012-09-18 01:03:03 PM

Lost Thought 00: Sad part is that it will be fully scripted by writers to provide the appropriate outcome. Plus, they really are friends and are unlikely to get exceptionally aggressive towards each other.


What I want to see is Colbert vs Bachmann.
 
2012-09-18 01:03:05 PM
Ross Perot might not have been interesting but he warned us what was going to happen, he was ridiculed for it, and then it happened. And still no one gives him credit.

timiacono.com
 
2012-09-18 01:03:35 PM
I think debates are useful when it comes to actual, controversial issues. And when I say "controversial", I mean both supported by evidence but lacking enough evidence or data to make side "final" or not.

In this case, however, we're going to hear a right-wing blowhard argue right-wing talking points over and over against a comedian who tends to present rational, supported points when it comes to policy and outcomes -albeit with a side of humor and sarcasm.

Long story short: Billdo's idea of conservatism doesn't work, hasn't worked, and it's farking annoying to keep hearing people support it.
 
2012-09-18 01:04:03 PM
Oh, hellz yeah.

It will be closer to an actual debate than most people have seen in a while is my guess.

*checks popcorn suplies* 

/Can we get Maddow v Coulter next?
//Cos that would seriously rawk.
 
2012-09-18 01:04:36 PM

intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
2012-09-18 01:04:57 PM
I accidentally some words on this tiny phone keyboard.
 
2012-09-18 01:05:57 PM

canyoneer: Ross Perot might not have been interesting but he warned us what was going to happen, he was ridiculed for it, and then it happened. And still no one gives him credit.

[timiacono.com image 526x377]


Unfortunately, you (and the cartoonist) are correct.
 
2012-09-18 01:06:09 PM
I saw this last night on TDS. Haven't we talked these issues to death? Is the debate between Obama and Romney not enough? Can we stop giving O'Reilly more airtime?

Let's be honest, there are no happy endings here:

1) O'Reilly will hold his own w/Stewart because he's a paranoid journalist. Stewart will agree with some of O'Reilly statements and O'Reilly will occasionally act childish and accuse Stewart of hiding behind his comedy.
2) Stewart will own he guy and Bill will get angry and leave the debate early.

In the end, nothing of real substance will be added to the debate. O'Reilly is a smart guy and has had years of avoiding being hemmed in on discussion points. Stewart is a smart guy but he's never been able to launch a full-throated attack at the right. He's been on several news programs over the years and while he's had some good moments nothing has actually changed in the news world, if anything it has gotten worse.

Either way, both sides will claim victory and O'Reilly will get some nice well-edited talking points for his next segment of the Factor.

You ever talk to a Teatard? In the end you get nowhere, the person just shrugs it all off at the end with a 'Harrumph', and you just feel stupider for having come down to their level to discuss things. It's all appeals to emotion and logic has nothing to do with it. This is O'Reilly's bread and butter.
 
2012-09-18 01:06:14 PM
John Stewart is lowering himself by even acknowledging this philandering douchenozzle of a FAIL in journalism.



All will be forgiven if he can manage to mention Andrea Mackris and/or Scott Roeder, but I know Stewbeef is too milquetoast to not toe the "both sides are bad" line.
 
2012-09-18 01:06:36 PM

Gotfire: I would rather see John Stewart vs. Hannity.


Hannity is an total airhead. Ever try to read one of his "books"?

[donotwant]
 
2012-09-18 01:06:51 PM
Roll 210
 
2012-09-18 01:08:36 PM

intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.


Winner of the debate (chosen by a team of winner-choosers - rhetoricians, political analysts, fact-checkers and Cee-Lo Green) gets to moderate a presidential debate at primetime Monday night, 3NOV. At this debate, the moderator will have real-time fact-checks, and be empowered to cut off a participant if the fact-check returns an unequivocal "pants on fire".

// and I will watch this debate from underneath a pile of Scarlett Johanson, Kate Beckinsale and Drew Barrymore
// and my (new) gf - it's still new enough
 
2012-09-18 01:09:13 PM
Jon Stewart is also not a person who's going to be good in a debate, IMO, because he tries to find common ground and doesn't like to be accusatory. He's not going to be giving a full throated defense of anything but civility. And the overton window will continue to pull right.
 
2012-09-18 01:09:46 PM
I hope it isn't scripted. Their previous on camera affairs have been great.

www.csmonitor.com

Both Jon and Bill are at their best off script, when they are speaking their mind. They are intellectual equals on opposite sides of the table who both have respect for each other and their efforts to bring some manner of civility into the conversation.

also Jon doesn't need to dismantle Hannity for the crowds enjoyment, the looming fear that Jon could break him in a single conversation enough to keep Herr Helmet in his place.
 
2012-09-18 01:11:25 PM
First there was The Thrilla in Manila

then The Rumble in the Jungle

now - The Lamers Quote the Framers
 
2012-09-18 01:12:06 PM
O'Reilly vs. Stewart is like the Yankees vs this year's Astros.
How about a fair fight.....Charles Krauthammer vs John Stewart? I'd even go for Laura Ingraham or Ann Coulter vs John Stewart. O'Reilly? Lightweight.
 
2012-09-18 01:13:52 PM
So it's a debate between a bad co median who has sold out to an ideological agenda and poses as a news anchor versus Jon Stewart? Should be funny, if nothing else.
 
2012-09-18 01:14:11 PM
I'd rather see Rachel Maddow debate him
 
2012-09-18 01:14:58 PM

CPennypacker: I'd rather see Rachel Maddow debate him


Who? Jon, or Bill?
 
2012-09-18 01:15:17 PM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


(/ ̄(エ) ̄)/ \( ̄(エ) ̄)/ ヽ( ̄(エ) ̄)ノ
 
2012-09-18 01:16:00 PM

Cythraul: CPennypacker: I'd rather see Rachel Maddow debate him

Who? Jon, or Bill?


bill

or anyone really

i like her
 
2012-09-18 01:16:00 PM

Cythraul: CPennypacker: I'd rather see Rachel Maddow debate him

Who? Jon, or Bill?


Honestly, Id rather see her debate Jon.
 
2012-09-18 01:16:20 PM

timujin: I am, DamnYankees, they're both very intelligent men with diametrically opposed viewpoints, though they both have a decent level of respect for each other. I feel O'Reilly is more willing to be disingenuous, but Stewart has no problem in calling him on it.


I've noticed that as well, they don't agree on anything yet seem to have genuine respect for one another and rather than getting angry they just enjoy debating one another. I have a long-time friend like that, honestly the only conservative I will talk politics and religion with. Looking forward to this debate very much!
 
2012-09-18 01:20:26 PM
The only thing better than Jon Stewart being funny, is Jon Stewart being serious.
 
2012-09-18 01:20:27 PM

timujin: I am, DamnYankees, they're both very intelligent men with diametrically opposed viewpoints, though they both have a decent level of respect for each other. I feel O'Reilly is more willing to be disingenuous, but Stewart has no problem in calling him on it.


It's not that O'Reilly is disingenuous, it's that he's an egotistical bullshiat artist. Yes, O'Reilly has an MPA from Harvard. He's smart when it comes to public policy and talking head rhetoric. But when it comes to anything outside of policy, which is most things, he often comes off as a loudmouth moron.

O'REILLY: I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam, in my opinion: tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that.

SILVERMAN: Tide goes in, tide goes out?

O'REILLY: See, the water, the tide comes in and it goes out, Mr. Silverman. It always comes in, and always goes out. You can't explain that.

Video
 
2012-09-18 01:21:18 PM

DamnYankees: Cythraul: CPennypacker: I'd rather see Rachel Maddow debate him

Who? Jon, or Bill?

Honestly, Id rather see her debate Jon.


Although I wouldn't call it a debate, she had a discussion with Jon on her show before. Or maybe it was a special. Not sure. And Jon played the centrist and said that MSNBC was almost as bad as Fox news.
 
2012-09-18 01:22:32 PM
Hey, I voted for Perot. You know, he had a good idea spending some of his own money to explain his ideas and conventions to the public. Why doesn't Romney do the same? Oh wait, spend money Ha ha! Romney only spends other peoples money, amirite? And he would need to scrape up some ideas and convictions..
 
2012-09-18 01:22:49 PM
O'Reilly v Franken

/the Jew in 2!
 
2012-09-18 01:22:57 PM

Kome: So it's a debate between a bad co median who has sold out to an ideological agenda and poses as a news anchor versus Jon Stewart? Should be funny, if nothing else.


5/10. Stewart has no problems going after the left for stuff. He points out the hypocrisy of the news media more than anything. And lots of people who love watching his show would tend to disagree with you about his comedy, buddy. Comedy is hard, and it's very hard to be consistently funny just about every night. I would argue he's one of the best comedians ever for his ability to put together topical comedy on a daily basis (and yes he has a writing team to help him but like I said - the show is consistently funny to a lot of people).
 
2012-09-18 01:24:05 PM
shiat, go ahead and laugh at Ross Perot but unlike Mitt Romeny ol' Ross was actually good at something outside of government. And his running mate was a retired admiral who won the Congressional Medal of Honor. Paul Ryan on the other hand was voted biggest brown noser by his high school class.

Am I saying Ross Perot's the best choice now? No, but I am saying he's light years better than Romney/Ryan
 
2012-09-18 01:25:27 PM
Oh shiat, subby you had my hopes up.

I thought this was going to be a 90 minute primetime special infomercial on the state of the economy since 1996. Hosted by the Man himself.

fantasyracingcheatsheet.com

Now...the economy is like the crazy aunt down in the basement...
 
2012-09-18 01:26:05 PM

Expolaris: They are intellectual equals


Really? Listen, if you can be demolished by Al Franken when Franken isn't even trying, you"re a lightweight moron.
 
2012-09-18 01:27:30 PM

intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.


Plus there's a rerun of Here Comes Honey Boo Boo on.
 
2012-09-18 01:27:34 PM

bdub77: Kome: So it's a debate between a bad co median who has sold out to an ideological agenda and poses as a news anchor versus Jon Stewart? Should be funny, if nothing else.

5/10. Stewart has no problems going after the left for stuff. He points out the hypocrisy of the news media more than anything. And lots of people who love watching his show would tend to disagree with you about his comedy, buddy. Comedy is hard, and it's very hard to be consistently funny just about every night. I would argue he's one of the best comedians ever for his ability to put together topical comedy on a daily basis (and yes he has a writing team to help him but like I said - the show is consistently funny to a lot of people).


You need to re-read his post.
 
2012-09-18 01:28:09 PM

lysdexic: ExperianScaresCthulhu: intelligent comment below: Who cares? neither of them are running for office or dictating policy. Both will go on rants and O'Reilly will never directly answer tough questions. It's just a circle jerk for both sides. Get them to be moderators at a Presidential debate, that means something.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(/ ̄(エ) ̄)/ \( ̄(エ) ̄)/ ヽ( ̄(エ) ̄)ノ


I had to look that up... so .. those are japanese bears? ahhh. well, thank you for joining me in joining intelligent comment below in not thinking this is a very big deal.
 
2012-09-18 01:28:50 PM

pontechango: O'REILLY: I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam, in my opinion: tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that.

SILVERMAN: Tide goes in, tide goes out?

O'REILLY: See, the water, the tide comes in and it goes out, Mr. Silverman. It always comes in, and always goes out. You can't explain that.


28.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-09-18 01:29:36 PM

DamnYankees: For some reason I'm not really looking forward to this.


I hope this is the equivalent of the Stewart/Colbert mockery of the Citizens United/SuperPAC issue, being both entertaining while also demonstrating everything that is wrong with the status quo of presidential debates.
 
2012-09-18 01:32:16 PM
For those calling on Jon to debate other people, no. Jon vs. Bill works because they essentially treat each other with (possibly fake) respect, but its how they have handled each other for a decade. There is no screaming and frothing so they (BOTH amazingly) come out and display some very real and very honest opinions that exist on both sides of the political spectrum without making it look like two monkeys throwing shiat at each other. This would not be the case in a Jon v Hannity or Coulter debate.

Jon built his career on using his wit to hold his own and even surpass Bill and others. Without Jon Stewart, I swear Bill would have been out of work years ago. Bill knows this and doesn't try to pull the same shiat with Jon that he does with virtually every other verbal sparring partner he has yelled at. Somebody wrote an article long ago about how to "handle Bill Oreilly". You stroke his ego, point out a few facts, let him go on a bit and then compliment his argument before you continue. Like debating a child about his allowance. After that I watched a "fight" between Bill and Jon over something silly in the latest news, and Jon followed that advice almost to the letter. Bill, who usually turns red and tries to go super sayin on his verbal opponent, mellowed right the fark out. Bill never said mean shiat about Jon again, disagreed sure, but he even stuck up for him after that. It was after this period that Jon was able to start tearing apart other people like Tucker and Kramer, and was almost untouchable in return. Remember when Jon was laying the smack down on Kramer for a few weeks? Kramer was practically begging for forgiveness on camera.

Makes me wonder if Bill and Jon are weekend beer buddies when nobody is looking.
 
2012-09-18 01:33:01 PM

DamnYankees: Jon Stewart is also not a person who's going to be good in a debate, IMO, because he tries to find common ground and doesn't like to be accusatory. He's not going to be giving a full throated defense of anything but civility. And the overton window will continue to pull right.


that's his interview mode though, which is helps get alot of politicians to come on to talk. hopefully it'll be the crossfire stewart, calling o'reilly out on everything.
 
2012-09-18 01:33:27 PM
yeah, where is the idea that O'Reilly is smart coming from? I've never seen him exhibit a thrilling amount of intelligence and when I do see him he's usually just a smug bully who shuts down his guest's microphone if they appear to be getting the better of him. Jon Stewart, while a comedian is so witty in comparison to Bill "Where's the Harlem Boys Choir, probably out stealing your tires" O'Reilly.
 
2012-09-18 01:35:29 PM
This seems appropriate. Thank you Mark Twain.

ethendras.files.wordpress.com
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report