I especially love the part where Dave says he never has seen the show but knows what he says is crap from what he has read, typical.

Thank you, Video Dog, for reminding me why David Letterman is one of the things I miss most as an expatriate.

Don't get me wrong, I laugh at O'Reilly as much as the next guy. But I don't think Letterman really knocked him out. As usual, O'Reilly made himself look dumb- he didn't need Letterman for that. At best their interview was another battle of simplified talking points- and while the cheering was mostly for Letterman, they cheered for O'Reilly as well. This may just be a personal thing for me- I don't really like either of those guys. :-/

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21855

In 2001, O'Reilly described The Late Show as "the toughest interview show on television." He continued, "That's because Mr. Letterman is a smart guy who can spot a phony with telescopic accuracy and expects his guests to bring something to the table. If a guest begins to sink on this show, the bottom is a long way down."

Heh heh heh.

Sure beats Jon Stewart's interview with him, that was disappointing.

Regards

O'Reilly is just another school yard bully. Dave, a good ex-Indiana boy like myself, just had to give him a little tap to make him dizzy. But Dave, 60% "Crap Rate" for O'Reilly is a bit low, you really must not have seen his show.

I totally agree. Dave knocked Bill out of the water. Bill may have won the debate on each point they went over but Dave had the more creative put downs. I think Dave is totally right in defending Cindy Sheehan. To criticize her in any way is poor taste. It doesn't matter if she calls the people killing our troops and many Iraqs freedom fighters. Besides, whenever Bill talks about Sheehan he only expresses sympathy for her plite once or twice. What is Bill thinking with this Christmas thing. Just because there are a few places where people are very intolerant about Christmas doesnt mean its

in jeopardy anywhere else. As Dave pointed out, he doesnt feel very threatend. Usually social movements happen extremely quickly and not in a few places and then later spreading through the rest of the culture. And when Bill pointed out that he wasnt a friend of the Bush administration the cackling was enourmous. You can only hear one person cackling but they were very loud. What is Bill thinking saying he is not a friend of Bush. The only time he criticizes Bush is over Bushes border policy, P.R. ability, overestimation of Iraqi support after we invaded Bagdad and several other topics. And could you believe his hand movements during some of the questioning. Thanks for pointing that out I hadn't seen it before. The last time I felt like Bill looked was when I was being attacked unfairly. But Bill is obviously not in that predicament. Letterman treats him with great respect.

As Nick Cage said in "The Weatherman". It was more than refreshing to watch Letterman take that pompous prig down a few notches. Amazing to me that folks watch him and listen to the pompous, porky Limbaugh.

I love Dave! I don't watch O'Reilly's show either, but anyone with have a brain can pick up on that kind of bullshit - like his manger in Tennessee story. But thank you Dave, for calling him on his criticisms of Cindy Sheehan. The arrogance of anyone questioning the motives of someone who's son was killed in senseless violence... amazing. Even if she is totally irrational (and I don't think she is) maybe it's because she's enraged with grief, not because she's being manipulated by the far left. That's the kind of bullshit you don't need to watch his show to recognize.

Thank god for David Letterman. Truly the best thing going on late night TV. For those of us who do not have cable.

I missed the show when it was broadcast, precisely because I figured I would not be able to stomach O'Reilly. Looks like I should have watched. Thanks, Salon, for providing these highlights. Great stuff.

letterman couldn't back up any of his claims. he wasn't able to cite a single thing o'reilly ever said on his show. o'reilly backed up his claims--even if only with anecdotal evidence in the instance of "war on christmas" argument--and letterman only had the petulant and smarmy rebuttal that he didn't believe o'reilly. Notice also how Letterman didn't even know if o'reilly had descendants, yet o'reilly was able not only to confirm that he did, but that they were the same age as letterman's.

i'm a tempermentally conservative progressive. i'm in favor of more, not fewer, civil rights (including privacy) for all americans--including the commonsensical right to marry for citizens who happen to be gay (i believe sexual orientation is essential to a person often, but also essentially unimportant); i'm a defender of the separation of church and state; i'm weary of and wary of the harm the religious right has been doing to the republic for 30 years; i'm distressed by the laziness of corporate-controlled and fairly partisanly Republican big media, i'm a registered democrat, and i don't agree with bill o'reilly often. but, i also think the cheap and easy cheerleading for cheap and easy sucker punches by a late-night entertainer is, in a single word, PATHETIC, and it is a pathetic display of progressives' weakness rhetorically, philosophically, and politically that letterman's interview is seen by generally prudent and informed outlets like Salon.com as something somehow impressive or extraordinary.

in the letterman vs. o'reilly match-up, the round clearly goes to O'Reilly, and those of his viewers who saw it will have only had their maybe not-so-unreasonable-after-all assumptions of "liberals" being out of touch and arrogant seem basically correct.