Stupid Human Comments

You know, back in my teens, I was a big fan of David Letterman. Staying up really late to catch Late Night was a treat, because it was original, funny, and entertaining in a way that was completely different from anyone else on TV. Even when Dave headed over to CBS in 1993, he was still pretty funny, although he never seemed to recover from losing out on the battle to succeed Carson.

Now, I can respect the fact that Dave has an opinion. I also think it's worth noting that the man really does have a sense of public service, because he has done Christmas shows from Afghanistan and Iraq in the last four years. And I don't object to Dave voicing his opinion on the air -- it's his forum and his show, and we've come to expect that from television hosts over the years.

But there's a difference between expressing a well-informed opinion and regurgitating the usual pablum from the MSM. Here's an excerpt from Letterman's recent interview with Bill O'Reilly that made me do a doubletake...

Bill O’Reilly: “I think that the Iraq thing has been full of unintended consequences and it’s a vital thing for the country and it's brutal, it’s absolutely brutal. We should all take it very seriously. This simplistic stuff about hating Bush or he lied and all this stuff, does the country no good at all. We've got to win this thing. You have to win it. And even though it's a screw-up, giant, massive, all right, right now, for everybody's protection, it's best for the world to have a democracy in that country functioning and friendly to the West, is it not?”

David Letterman: “Yes, absolutely.”

O’Reilly: “Okay, so let's stop with the lying and the this and the that and the undermining and let's get him. That is putting us all in danger. So our philosophy is we call it as we see it. Sometimes you agree, sometimes you don't. Robust debate is good. But we believe that the United States, particularly the military, are doing a noble thing, a noble thing. The soldiers and Marines are noble. They're not terrorists. And when people call them that, like Cindy Sheehan called the insurgents 'freedom fighters,’ we don't like that. It is a vitally important time in American history. And we should all take it very seriously. Be very careful with what we say.”

Letterman: “Well, and you should be very careful with what you say also.” [audience applause]

O’Reilly: “Give me an example.”

Letterman: “How can you possibly take exception with the 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 the woman.”

Letterman: “Have you lost family members in armed conflict?”

O’Reilly: “No, I have not.”

Letterman: “Well, then you can hardly speak for her, can you?” [applause]

O’Reilly: “I’m not speaking for her. Let me ask you this question.”

Letterman, referring back to O’Reilly’s examples of a war on Christmas: “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 soldier 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 insurgents 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, waht about their feelings, sir?”

Letterman: “What about, why are we there in the first place? [applause] The President himself, less than a month ago said we are there because of a mistake made in intelligence. Well, whose intelligence? It was just somebody just get off a bus and handed it to him?”

Bill O’Reilly: “No.”

Letterman: “No, it was the intelligence gathered by his administration.”

O’Reilly: “By the CIA.”

Letterman: “Yeah, so why are we there in the first place? I agree to you, with you that we have to support the troops. They are there, they are the best and the brightest of this country. [audience applause] There’s no doubt about that. And I also agree that now we’re in it it’s going to take a long, long time. People who expect it’s going to be solved and wrapped up in a couple of years, unrealistic, it’s not going to happen. However, however, that does not eliminate the legitimate speculation and concern and questioning of ‘Why the Hell are we there to begin with?’”

O’Reilly: “If you want to question that, and then revamp an intelligence agency that’s obviously flawed, the CIA, okay. But remember, MI-6 in Britain said the same thing. Putin’s people in Russia said the same thing, and so did Mubarak’s intelligence agency in Egypt.”

Letterman: “Well then that makes it all right?”

O’Reilly: “No it doesn’t make it right.”

Letterman: “That intelligence agencies across the board makes it alright that we’re there?”

O’Reilly: “It doesn’t make it right.”

Letterman: “See, I’m very concerned about people like yourself who don’t have nothing but endless sympathy for a woman like Cindy Sheehan. Honest to Christ.” [audience applause]

O’Reilly: “No, I’m sorry.”

Letterman: “Honest to Christ.”

“O’Reilly: “No way. [waits for applause to die down] No way you’re going to get me, no way that a terrorist who blows up women and children.”

Letterman: “Do you have children?”

O’Reilly: “Yes I do. I have a son the same age as yours. No way a terrorist who blows up women and children is going to be called a ‘freedom fighter’ on my program.” [mild audience applause]

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. [audience laughter] But I don’t know that for a fact. [more audience applause]

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, ah, I, okay. But I think you’re-”

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: “Well, you’re going to have to give me an example if you're going to make those claims.”

Letterman: “Well I don’t watch your show so that would be impossible.”

There's so much crap here that I'd need a shovel to sift through it, but let me give it a shot on some major points, Top Ten style...

10. Cindy Sheehan lost a son in Iraq. That's worthy of our respect. That doesn't mean that she's immune from criticism for making asinine statements about the war, about Isreal, and about terrorists. If she said we should nuke Iran, would everyone still say that her position is worthy of respect, if not unassaiable?

9. Try being polite to your guests, Dave, even if you disagree with them ideologically (or think that you do). I'm not asking you to fawn over them, ala Arsenio, but you've invited him onto your show, and you owe him more respect than that. I'd say the same thing if your guest was Howard Dean.

8. I think O'Reilly's more than a little arrogant, but he handled the interview very well. There's another portion where Dave is mocking O'Reilly's rants about the "War on Christamas" (where I agree that Bill's probably a bit too worried), and Bill handled it by pointing out specific absurd examples, and Dave's response was complete disbelief. He was clearly jesting, but it was also clear he wouldn't take the point seriously no matter what O'Reilly said.

7. Think about the comment where Letterman admits that he has drawn conclusions about O'Reilly's show without watching it. If someone criticized Dave on the same basis, he'd laugh in that person's face. Sure, it's as much a comedic point as any, but it's also revealing.

6. Back to Cindy Sheehan. This is slightly off the point, but why does Cindy Sheehan get so much press? Is it because she puts forth a viewpoint the media finds attractive in a package (mom who lost her son in Iraq) that the media thinks will garner sympathy? There are many more military families who have lost loved ones in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many support the war. I'm not holding my breath to see the mainstream media fawn over them.

5. There's a difference between funny and comedic, smarmy self-righteousness. Jon Stewart's interview on Crossfire was a good example of crossing the line. Dave isn't as bad, but he's close.

4. I love the line, "You should be very careful with what you say also." If Ari Fleischer says it after 9/11, it's censorship and an affront to our civil liberties. If conservatives repeat this statement, they're trying to chill public debate. If Letterman says it to Bill O'Reilly, he gets applause.

3. Last I checked, the intel for the war wasn't just gathered by this presidential administration -- it was also gathered by the CIA under the preceding presidential administration. Maybe that's the sort of point a fair and balanced host might make.

2. I kept hoping that maybe Rudy Guiliani would stop by and smack some sense into Dave.

1. You were right about one thing, Dave. You're not smart enough to debate O'Reilly point by point -- or at all. And that's not because O'Reilly is a towering intellectual figure. And while we're not looking for a ton of intelligence from our late night hosts, a little bit of common sense might be nice.