2012 Election | Bill O'Reilly | Egypt | Jon Stewart | Libya | News | The Economy

Jon Stewart And Bill O'Reilly 'Rumble' In Epic Debate: VIDEO


Move over Mitt and Barack, because there's a far more rambunctious, exciting debate duo in town: Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly.

The men met at George Washington University in DC last night for "O'Reilly v Stewart 2012: the Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium," an event moderated by CNN's ED Hill and that featured the men facing-off on almost every subject under the sun, including the role of government, the attacks on U.S. embassies in Libya and Cairo and the ethics of government subsidies. Wondered Stewart, "Why is it if you take advantage of a tax break as a corporation you're a smart businessman, but if you take advantage of a tax break as a person you're a moocher?"

The LA Times offers some more details:

The Daily Show host centered his remarks around the idea that many on the right live in an "alternate reality," of which O’Reilly is allegedly the mayor. It’s a place, Stewart declared, where "problems are amplified, solutions simplified." The name Stewart gave O’Reilly’s domicile was somewhat more spicy, but you get the drift.

O’Reilly, host of the Fox News show The O’Reilly Factor, pulled no punches either, accusing Stewart of defending an addled, entitlement-laden society, the "poster child" of which is Sandra Fluke. Fluke, the Georgetown law student who came under attack from Rush Limbaugh after she spoke out on behalf of contraception coverage, is the embodiment of a country that is "lazy," "mooching" and overly dependent on the federal government, he said.

Asked at the end what they had learned, Stewart, using his affectionate honorific for O'Reilly's employer, Fox News, told Hill, "have learned that bullsh*t mountain is tall, bullsh*t mountain is wide, and it's deep." O'Reilly answer? "That I know I'm right."

Watch the video, via The Guardian, AFTER THE JUMP.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. The main difference in this debate is that Stewart is a clever, funny, intelligent and very quick guy who has the facts on his side and explains them brilliantly, and O'Reilly is basically a unfunny thug who is indeed the mayor of an alternate reality, who uses the existing facts to promote an extreme conservative agenda, ludicrously making hot buttons like Sandra Fluke and PBS as the cause for all society's ills. O'Reilly ignores facts when they don't suit him and Stewart wiped the floor with him.

    Posted by: JIm | Oct 7, 2012 2:06:01 PM

  2. "the men facing-off on almost every subject under the sun"

    Really? Did I miss the marriage equality segment? I skipped around a bit, but I just saw about four topics: Economy, Middle East, Health care, Social security.

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | Oct 7, 2012 4:08:47 PM

  3. @Jim. And Republican supporters will say the same thing but in O'Reilly's favor.
    This debate is merely another proof of the fact that Justice Holmes and all other philosphers of the right to free speech are wrong: the market place of ideas does not, has never and will never work. There comes a point (rather quickly) were discussion is pointless and all attempts at convincing people in good faith is a waste of time and breath.
    The sad reality is that free speech has no capacity whatsoever to help society arrive at Truth.

    Posted by: Alceste | Oct 7, 2012 4:32:17 PM

  4. This would put on the actualize philanthropy to slab man, further due to the tribute trade in is upon us, think of who monopoly your inventory would proceedings this watch!

    Posted by: rolex replica | Oct 8, 2012 2:05:08 AM

  5. You're a smart businessman, but if you take advantage of a tax break as a person you're a moocher?"

    Posted by: Selene Fierro | Oct 8, 2012 3:18:26 AM

  6. You're a moocher if you hired a lobbyist to enact legislation giving you that tax break. As a self-employed person who can't afford to hire lobbyists, I take what tax breaks I can, but I'll never reduce my tax burden the way the people who hire lobbyists can.

    So a qualified yes--if he hired a lobbyist (as, say, Mitt has) then yes.

    Posted by: kdknyc | Oct 8, 2012 7:45:48 AM

  7. Both made a number of bad points. Stewart for the most part doesn't know what he wants, he just knows what he doesn't want and O'Reilly just goes off the cuff on anything without any consideration of the consequences.

    Posted by: anon | Oct 8, 2012 1:28:28 PM

  8. It's Stewart's job as a 'liberal' pundit in commercial media to make weak arguments.
    He could have list 30 lies on the right; he listed 2. He could have asked if ORielly meant the redistribution that floods into the red states. Of course he didn't. Instead, we hear about Sandra Fluke, a total non issue.
    The incompetence of the liberal elite makes my teeth ache.

    Posted by: Wilberforce1 | Oct 8, 2012 5:08:59 PM

Post a comment


« «Sally Field And NAACP's Ben Jealous Honored At HRC Gala: VIDEOS« «