What Bill O'Reilly edited out of his interviews with Jon Stewart: Total evisceration!
By David Neiwert Saturday Feb 06, 2010 8:00am
If you thought, after watching the two segments of Jon Stewart's interview with Bill O'Reilly this week, that Stewart landed some telling observations, but he seemed to pull his punches a bit -- or at least they seemed to have been pulled for him -- you were right.
If you also noticed, as I did while making the clip, that the segments were pretty hamhandedly edited -- the continuity, especially in terms of Stewart's demeanor, was jarring -- it turns out you were also right.
Fox actually put the entire, unedited version of the interview up on its site, and the difference is jaw-dropping.
John Cook at Gawker (with the help of a couple of interns) got ahold of the full interview first, and provides a nice dissection that you should read (and watch) in full.
We've clipped some of the highlights for our own video, above.
If nothing else, the unedited video will be long remembered for the following quip:
I know what this is. I come from Jersey—it's the same thing: "I'm not saying your mother's a whore. I'm just saying she has sex for money. With people." [F]ox News used to be all about, you don't criticize a president during wartime. It's unacceptable, it's treasonous, it gives aid and comfort to the enemy. All of a sudden, for some reason you can run out there and say, "Barack Obama is destroying the fabric of this country."
Though I also thought this exchange was perhaps the most telling:
Stewart: But let's go into this. Because all I hear on your network is, this guy is -- it's tyranny, and socialism.
O'Reilly: That's what he believes.
Stewart: So, how is Barack Obama a socialist? As far as I can see, the majority of the billions of dollars he's given, he's given to banks. So if he is a socialist, he's dyslexic! Because when you redistribute the wealth, it's supposed to be going to --
O'Reilly: But he does believe in redistribution of income.
Stewart: Well, he's redistributed it to the banks.
O'Reilly: And that is a socialist tenet -- no, he's redistributing it --
Stewart: He's going up. He's dyslexic! It's supposed to be coming down!
O'Reilly: He -- Look. If you don't know that the Obama administration is redistributing income, then I'm gonna have to haul your program away from you. Get you off the air.
Stewart: Let me ask you: What is different about his redistribution of income and all other presidents -- he wants to raise the marginal tax rate back to where it was during the Clinton era. Was Clinton a socialist?
O'Reilly: He has promoted a variety of programs, OK, that --
Stewart: We already have Medicare, right? We have Medicaid. We have Social Security. Are we a socialist country? Do you want to get rid of those three?
O'Reilly: No.
Stewart: So are we a socialist country?
O'Reilly: But I want to moderate them so we don't go bankrupt.
Stewart: OK, but that's different. Now you're talking about fiscal responsibility.
O'Reilly: In a socialist country, the government pays for all of these entitlements -- the Obama administration is down that path.
Stewart: Who pays for Medicare? Who pays for Medicaid?
O'Reilly: The government pays for it.
Stewart: So now we're socialist.
O'Reilly: But now we're on Medicaid and Medicare with steroids, with the new health care bill. That's steroids!
Stewart: Once again, this is like the old joke. "Would you sleep with me for ten dollars?" "No." "Would you sleep with me for a million?" "OK." So now we know what you are, you're just negotiating price. For you guys to stand up --
O'Reilly: Of course, that's the degree of anybody when you describe socialism. There are little socialistic programs and giant socialist programs. OK? And some people believe that Obama is on the huge government creation -- the government dominance. And you yourself said it! You yourself said it! He wants more regulation, he wants to create things, he wants big government.
Stewart: But he's given back so much executive power!
O'Reilly: What?
Stewart: Executive power!
O'Reilly: He hasn't given back anything. He just hasn't handled the Congress. He doesn't know how to handle them yet. That's inexperience. Now --
Stewart: So he's not a tyrant. Because if he's a tyrant, then he's pretty lame for a tyrant.
O'Reilly: I don't object --
Stewart: How many tyrants do you know that really suffer because they can't get cloture? Very few.
OK, OK. So it wasn't a literal evisceration. Stewart did not unzip O'Reilly from scrote to sternum and empty out his intestines. We understand that he's a tad sensitive about how his takedowns are described these days.
Still, you can sure see why O'Reilly's producers edited this stuff out. Lord knows the regular septuagenarian Bold/Fresh audience would have fainted dead away.
Login or Register to post comments.
One of the things I've always liked about Jon is that he's a comedian with the smarts to engage in serious debate.
Stewart would have only done the interview if it was agreed to be shown unedited, on-air, on O'Reilly (not just the net). Frankly, the whole thing was a waste. O'Reilly is a retarded bully.
I'm happy that FOX made the entire thing available on the net. Stewart does the same thing. You have the condensed, time-restricted version, and you have the entire version available for people who want to do the analysis. If FOX aired the entire interview, most wouldn't make it through it.
So typical of fox. Just show the parts that are favorable to the cause, or in this case, the host. God help us if they had allowed Jon to provide intelligent points to the tea baggin' suckers.
I'm kinda liking the fact that the spotlight is on this Tennessee Tea Baggin' jamboree. The more the country hears from and sees them, the more they will realize how out and out bizarre they are. They are getting fleeced at this convention and they don't even know it. They showed a little gold necklace you can purchase there. It's a gold chain with a little gold tea bag on it. Cost? $90.00
Undoubtedly made in China...
The roads leading to the Gaylord Opryland are probably lined with Gomers from Gatlinburg who are selling the attendees Sarah Palin towels and crockery, just like the Elvis and Dolly Parton ware they normally sell outside Smoky Mtn. Natl. Park.
let's see, last week, the pres. does a verbal take down with the wwf gop senators, and now Stewart beats looofah with truth and logic. and all the reply's from the reichwing is obfuscation. because the GOP thugs, have no facts just hyperbole......
this will be the last time ailes allows anyone with an iq over 90 to be a guest on fux....
I think John probably demanded that Fox post the whole interview or he
would blast the Fox network on the Daily show. John's best point was Hannity
continually saying that you don't go after a president during war time. Fox News
does not want this "narrative" to take hold while Hannity et al calls Obama a
radical every day. I wish Huffington had mentioned this to Ailes on ABC last week.
that really made a big impact. or rather, should have.
when he notes the thing about the dipshits on Fox and Friends "I looked up Czars on the internet, did you know that's a Russian word?" and the thing about Cavuto, "I'm not saying he's like Stalin, I just have a photo of Stalin behind me."
Those things are perfect examples how Fox operates. And feeds the bullshit to the dipshits.
The most telling point - when Stewart made the above comments, old BillO had a big shit-eating grin on his face - even the studio personnel couldn't avoid the occasional guffaw. Fox plays the smoke and mirrors, knows they are doing it, and aren't particularly ashamed of it.
On the other hand, these two sitting down together is largely positive; there is not enough discussion of this sort - and one has to admire Stewart for his chutzpa for bearding the lion in his den...
Fox knew and we knew that Jon would prevail against BillO, so why did they have him on the show? Did they ask him and then were surprised when he said yes? The parts they showed on teevee made Jon look rather subservient to Bill. I'm glad to see that it wasn't that way at all.
so why did they have him on the show?
I think I can answer that. It is two fold. 1st ratings and 2nd but much more important, they need to push the fair and balanced bullshit to their brain dead audiance.
You won't believe how many fox watchers will point to this and say fox had Jon Stewart on the oliar show and point that out as making them fair and balanced. You can bet money on it. fox watchers are pretty dimwitted.
republicanism/conservatism is a mental illness!
I think it's because Fox Noise is afraid of him. I also get the impression, that deep down, BillO has a man-crush thing going on for Jon.
I think he was invited on because of Bill's colossal ego. In his warped, pea brain he has to answer the shots Stewart takes at him so he can "prove" that he's better than Stewart.
Unfortunately, his colossal ego also prevents him from seeing that he's completely out-gunned by Stewart in every way. I think Bill would LOVE to have Jon's audience of nubile young people over the geriatrics he's actually got.
Good point. Faux can now say "See? We ARE Fair and balanced!" (and edited). The regulars there won't have the motivation to watch the entire interview. Mission accomplished. I certainly don't think that Stewart is broke enough to take the gig just for the money. Keep trying, Jon.
I particularly liked this quote:
O'Reilly: "He -- Look. If you don't know that the Obama administration is redistributing income, then I'm gonna have to haul your program away from you. Get you off the air."
This is typical bully tactics. Losing the arguement, you turn to empty personal threats. If he had feathers, they would have been sticking straight out!
"Fox knew and we knew that Jon would prevail against BillO, so why did they have him on the show?"
I think BillO WANTS to be proven wrong and shown up. I believe it was he that in 2006 said he was tired of covering up for the republican failures and trying to spin things for them. I have read that he stated he hated culture warriors in one of his books, but is now paid to be one.
I really do believe he wanted Jon Stewart to own this discussion, and to systematically dismantle his (BillOs') arguments.
Both O'Reilly and Stewart are millionaires working for billionaires.
Jon Stewart makes my point perfectly within the first seconds, but his role is not of public servant or a crusader.
Obama IS redistributing the wealth, it is going UPWARD.
He is a reverse Robin Hood. He steals from the poor and gives to the rich.
O'Reilly is the stooge of Murdock. His paycheck DEPENDS on his NOT being able to repeat what Stewart says.
On the other hand, Stewart is in the role of the court jester, he is able to say what others in the media will not repeat.
Obama is a reverse Robin Hood for the billionaires.
O'Reilly would only admit that if someone else were paying his check, and it was a few dollars more. We know what he is, it is a matter of the price.
great job by stewart skewering this absotively idiotic meme the right is pushing that obama is of the left and all-powerful
...to hear people on the set openly laughing at Stewart's comments as he skewered Billo. O'Liar had to be feeling a little off-balance, wondering where his loyal servants had gone.
"Yuh muthahs not a whoah, she just sleeps wid people fuh money." Cracked up the floor staff.
those floor staff have now been sacked? Emperor Billo hates underlings who show anything but total subservience to his fragile and suffocating ego.
I really think that O'Reilly know and has seen that Stewart is so much smarter than he is. I saw this last night on Olbermann and Stewart just put O'Reilly in the dirt. This exchange is so good. There is nothing that O'Reilly can say. O'Reilly's talking points about socialism are thrown right in his face and he can't rebut it.
Wow, Stewart schools O'Reilly and Fox News on Truth and Honesty! Although trying to teach O'Reilly and Fox about facts is about as challenging as teaching Republican/Conservatives about Democracy.
Hey Jon!
Stewart Destroys O'Reilly!
Stewart Rips O'Reilly A New #sshole!
Stewart Annihilates O'Reilly!
Jon Stewart did a segment on evisceration and the blogs. Worth watching.
and on the off pages of this blog to avoid charges of a cover up.
It is a plot by R*hm the Reta^d and Darth Ch&%y.
Duh. That was why I used it in the headline.
See my note at the end of the post.
expurgation of this expsoe to blog purgatory later in this otherwise fine compendium of commentary. You probably believe there was only one shooter on the grassy knoll. Worse, you probably believe the knoll was really grassy.
Anna Nicole Smith meets the Munsters.
The hell you say!
Seriously, Jon (as always) took BillO to the woodshed.
How come no one,absolutely no one has ever asked Bill-o about the following:
How did you in the summer of 1969,(after graduation from college in May,1969)at the same time you were pitching for the New York Monarchs (a semi-professional team) and also trying out for the New York Mets,flunk a Selective Service Physical to be drafted?
How could you be physically fit enough to pitch and try out for the major leagues but not physically fit to be drafted?
Billo's Selective Service Classification Records are just a request away! Request them from the National Archives Records Regional Office that covers the State of New York and read them yourself!
O'Reilly was being fatuous in exampling the fact out that John McCain didn't appear on Fox during the campaign. It had nothing to do with the tough questions that McCain might receive. Appearing on Fox would have been pointless because McCain would have garnered no more votes as a consequence since the loyal viewers of Fox are people predisposed to vote Republican anyways.
against a kindergartner. Arrogant. Stupid. Bully...that's all O'Reilly is and will ever be.
Credit to Stewart for exposing this ignorant liar for what he truly is.
untrained kindergarters. Try a little three on three with some who have previous court time in scrimmages and you will find yourself wondering what happened to your ankles.
He's saying we need clear, non-bombastic language so we can have a proper discussion. Sloppy, hyped up words hurt us all in the end because it poisons the point, just like labeling him "a tad sensitive" is a wrong description of what he was saying.
I'm pretty sure he also was suggesting that we all keep our senses of humor as well as perspective.
He should not have used O'Reilly's "redistribution" definition of socialism and told him what it is, the equitable use of public resources by government designed to promote social and economic equality for the population at large, not just certain favored segments. The argument here is about redirecting our resources to guarantee equality and fairness, not arbitrary "redistribution."
Neocons like O' Reilly wrongly equate socialism with corrupt Soviet Communism, obviously they are not the same.
the taxpayers pay for all the programs.
Jon missed an opportunity here:
Stewart: Who pays for Medicare? Who pays for Medicaid?
O'Reilly: The government pays for it.
It is OUR money that goes into a general fund and it is supposed to be our Senators and Representatives who decide how to spend that money in THE PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST.
I believe it would be in the public's best interest to extend Medicare to everyone. I believe this would make our society more free (among other things). If we all had our health care paid for out of the general fund (OUR money...not the "government's"), all Americans would be free to take what ever job they liked and not give a thought to health insurance. Employers would not have to give a thought to health insurance. There would be no more arguments about what is covered and what isn't covered. Doctors, nurses and other medical personnel would be happier with their jobs. People would be free to MOVE anywhere without worrying about "losing their health insurance benefits".
I think an argument could be made that if the American People were all under the same Medicare healthcare umbrella that we would be more productive....and HEALTHIER and we would probably have longer life spans.
A "Medicare for All" healthcare system would be a natural for creating lots of new jobs and I think, over time, we would become a healthier nation since those who never see a doctor would suddenly be able to have a routine physical and in the process they would be given aids to stop smoking, lose weight, control diabetes (DIET!!!/EXERCISE!!!).
Neither of the major parties have connected the dots on the healthcare crisis in this country. They may see that there's a problem fiscally, but the simple solution that all the other industrialized nations figured out years ago, seems to elude them.
And the obvious reason is that they care more about greed and profits than they do about the American People. And this is what we need to be hitting each and every one of them with when they are out campaigning over the next nine months.
We need to ask of ALL the candidates: Will you vote "Yes" for Medicare for All and sign a pledge to do so?
It's time to play hardball with ALL these jerks.
.
where doctors would get bonuses for preventive care....not for running extra tests
but the dems cant sell medicare for all
despite the fact that it would remove the costs of health care to private biz, local, county, state and federal programs
sure, taxes would go up...but would be offset by the higher wages that could now be paid
Time for people of goodwill and conscience to push back hard against corporate blowhards and prostitutes like O' Reilly. Don't let them frame the issues with their lying propaganda.
Both people, though I enjoy Stewart, are going for the buck. If it weren't to build each other's ratings, and thus bank accounts, neither, if sincere in their beliefs, would appear on the other's show. Stewart should refuse to go on FOX. Since he does not, he's a whore.
to cry out in protest.
Hey, at this point, I think we'd go for the bucks if we could find anyone willing to give them to us.
To suggest that these two men are the same makes you a liar also.
get over it
his number one goal is ratings...not to fix the country
man has a family...just like colbert
It's always dangerous to compare the "average" person in different cultures, but don't Americans seem amazingly naive in their baby-like trust in the "truth" they see on TV? Doesn't most of the world understand that their mass media are selling them propaganda and take everything with a grain of salt? And shouldn't Americans cultivate a Soviet-style cynical humor toward what they are being told? How many decades has it been since "The Medium is the Message" -- but I guess he was Canadian.
And precisely why it has little value to agree to appear on mass media since they are always in control of the framing. Air America understood the importance of _being_ the media even if they might not have known much about business. In this case I assume FOX was either sloppy or didn't think enough people would see the internet version to matter. If it looks like this is a problem (and it might not be -- a "free" nation can allow some opposition as long as it doesn't make enough noise to taint the mass media message), I'm sure they will learn from this example and make sure the versions correspond.
What does it say that O'Lielly is the lone voice of reason at Fox? I do, however, believe that it's useful to have intelligent, reasonable people like Stewart and Obama takes these ideologues on in a public format where they can directly challenge their lies, assertions, and absurdities for all to see. You'll never convince a certain percentage of right wingers, but for the most part, the Fox News/right wing propaganda just doesn't hold up under scrutiny, especially when confronted with real facts, reason, logic, etc. Jon did a great job. He really is voice of moderation and reason. He does a far better job than 95% of the journalist in the broadcast news media.
O'Reilly was just about to get into this when the clip ended. Do you really think he asked Darth Cheney to come on his show?
C&L cleverly buried Jon Stewart's devastating, on point critique of Blog Headline nonsense on its off pages. Then they trot out respected author/poster Dave Neiwert to make a few oblique insider references to Stewart's courageous and ground breaking expose. Most invlove references to body parts, a familiar staple of their commentariat. They add a late link to the buried post they know most of their readers will not use. The latter allows them to deny their part in the sinister blogosphere cover up.
I, along with thousands of scorned would be Haitian child eliminationists will be praying for you on Sunday, before we get our skinny asses down to the Fat Camp Super Bowl party to watch the True Tales of Timmy Tebow.
Haitian child eliminationists? What, have you been listening to Bubba the Love Sponge again?
(And FWIW, we were gonna front-page the "Blogs Must Be Crazy" segment because we loved it -- he's got an AWESOME!!!! point -- but we kinda ran out of room and we've run a ton of TDS stuff the past couple of days. It just got nudged out.)
I just wanted to practice my paranoid commentarian schtick.
Going to a tin foil costume ball for Super Boil Sunday.
BTW thanks for the Bubba Love Sponge Link. Without it I wouldn't have know what Jimmy Johnson recommends for male enhancement.
disembowel, maul, hammer, destroy, slam, and slap?
Can't wait to tell the "socialist!" screaming retirees that they are actively participating in the very socialism they oppose.
"O'Reilly: He -- Look. If you don't know that the Obama administration is redistributing income, then I'm gonna have to haul your program away from you. Get you off the air."
Lotsa luck with that, fuckhead!
is how much loofa boys crew must despise the man
total laughter following many of stewarts lines
silence when loofa boy attempts humor
wonder if the fat headed idiot noticed that
The problem with these demagogues on the radio and Tv is their abys-
mal ignorance on almost every subject----they bandy concepts and
ideologies like socialism, commmunism,facism,capitalism around,with-
out knowing anything about them.Europe is a socialist/capitalist
continent with a thriving economy and health care for every one-
but that seems so be UNAMERICAN,we'd don't dare to think of change,
heaven forbid. We rather stick with our outdated,medieval measurements from Henry the VIIIth time, rather than the metric system
but we are obsessed with electronic gadgets so we can call and TEXT
our idiotic and mindless messages. Best of British luck~!!!!!
I'm not surprised O'Reilly edited that. Bill had has ass served up to him as part of a four course meal with silver service and a nice Chianti. Th-th-th-th-th-th-thp.
Kinda asking for trouble, but the timing couldn't be better. :)
"If you also noticed, as I did while making the clip, that the segments were pretty hamhandedly edited -- the continuity, especially in terms of Stewart's demeanor, was jarring -- it turns out you were also right."
This sounds intentional and conventional, not "hamhanded". Avoiding the false appearance of continuity by deliberately mismatching cuts is standard practice in editing video interviews for television in the wake of Westmoreland v. CBS.
for sticking it to them.
Nice dig at Stewart at the end of your post, David. He was RIGHT about the blogospere, and you just reacted to it the same way Fox News did when he pointed out Hannity faking Tea Party crowds. Where's YOUR humility?
Login or Register to post comments.