O'Reilly is a bullying buffoon. He talks loud and fast and bends (or makes up) facts to his advantage. He sites many supporting "facts" that just aren't accurate. Letterman was disdainful of him but unprepared to debate O'Reilly point by point. It's more fun to watch Al Franken or Jon Stewart dissect this baloney mill.
.....they are both dull. ...i want a good debate between Ann Coulter and Hillary Clinton.:-)
Letterman is paid to be a buffoon and he is. At least he admits that he has little credible information to base his shallow words on. Most entertainers do not even do that.
Kills me....when it's O'Reilly raggin' Donahue, then it's steamrolling, blah, blah. Now, when it's Letterman "60% crap"'ing O'Reilly, then it's a guy with "disdainful" approach who's admirable for admitting that he's ill-informed??The wind is blowing, and as usual, the liberal weeds are swaying.O'Reilly has balls of steel, he KNOWS what he is talking about, and doesn't let anyone bully him from being a sharply-tuned Neutral critic. Yeah, and bring it on....
I think Bill shut Letterman up. He would probably do the same with a bunch of the liberal commentators if they visited with him one on one. I don't always agree with him but don't think he's more of a right-wing nut that Al Franken is a left-wing nut.
A challenge for right wing intellectuals (if there are any): read "The Truth with Jokes" by Franken. Franken actually has the "balls" to document his positions (go research them your self). You needn't like the guy - just read the stuff and report back.
I'm sorry, I'm not into comedian "literature." When Lorne Michaels writes a book? Maybe.
Post a Comment