Stewart vs O Reilly = Hilarity

[Atar554]

Greatest part of the exchange:

Stewart: 'Why are you drawing the line at Common? There is a selective outrage machine here at Fox that "pettifogs" only when it suits the narrative that suits them.'
:bowdown::bowdown:

I also liked that and when he said "Now who's pettifogging? I can't even see you through your pettifog." lmao

 

[Facetious]

OMG! For which of these two pompous assholes should I select as being the cool one? Oh, the pressure is too great, I . . I have to go with the rest of the flock here out of fear that I might be rejected from the majority.:shy:


Stewart is lord! :bowdown:

 

[Danglyparts]

hey guys, it's litterally parcipitating males. love you jon stewart. if there were more jews like you in isreal, maybe we could finally have world peace

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

After that quote is this:

"No time for that [uzi-related violence], because there's things to be done/Stay true to what I do so the youth dream come"

Nothing like some context to make sense of what he was really saying.

He talking about delayed retribution--i.e. I'll deal with them later because I have more important things to do.


You see a lot of subtle hints like that all through rap if you pay attention. The liberals see that and like it. Why WHITE liberals approve of it is another matter entirely. It speaks to their pathology.

 

[Hot Mega]

You see a lot of subtle hints like that all through rap if you pay attention. The liberals see that and like it. Why WHITE liberals approve of it is another matter entirely. It speaks to their pathology.

:dunno: Maybe the answer to this is much much simpler than quantum mechanics.

Maybe some people see it as merely another form of entertainment on par with similar genres portrayed in say, movies.:dunno:

What kind of lyrics would Vito Corleone pen or Tony Montana pen if their movie 'story' were set to a rap (or otherwise song)??:eek:

Even as such, hip hop is FULLLLL of metaphorical references where expressions of violence are that but in some cases they are just metaphors for rap battles consistent with the origins of the music.

How about that explanation?

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

:dunno: Maybe the answer to this is much much simpler than quantum mechanics.

Maybe some people see it as merely another form of entertainment on par with similar genres portray in say, movies.:dunno:

What kind of lyrics would Vito Corleone pen or Tony Montana pen if their movie 'story' were set to a rap (or otherwise song)??:eek:

??? How did we get on the topic of fictional Italian/Cuban mobsters?

 

[Hot Mega]

??? How did we get on the topic of fictional Italian/Cuban mobsters?

S l o w e r...

Music like movies are both forms of entertainment that depict/tell stories, convey messages, etc.

Some are based on fictional events, some are based on actual events.

The story of "The Godfather" would be an example of a fictional story account expressed in the form of a movie. "Public Enemies" would be an example of a true story account equally expressed in the form of a movie.

However, take the story of either and arrange it to be told as a story in another form of entertainment ..like say, rap. What would be the difference in terms of different people enjoying the way the stories are being told (irrespective of content) in a rap from them enjoying the way the stories were being told in a movie??

It's the same genre but just different forms of entertainment. Few people take most of this entertainment stuff serious unless they're 'pettifogging'.:1orglaugh

 

[lurkingdirk]

Stewart won, plain and simple.

Trouble is, those who watch Fox "News" think he lost.

Sigh.

Fox: Bad News for America.

 

[Hot Mega]

Stewart won, plain and simple.

Trouble is, those who watch Fox "News" think he lost.

Sigh.

Fox: Bad News for America.

Because they don't listen to a word the 'guest' says. The sit with bated breath awaiting O'Reilly's interruption, steamrolling of his 'guest' with an opinion couched as fact then recasts the debate by trying to pigeon hole them with a bait question.

If he does that, he's won!! :nanner:

 

[lurkingdirk]

Because they don't listen to a word the 'guest' says. The sit with bated breath awaiting O'Reilly's interruption, steamrolling of his 'guest' with an opinion couched as fact then recasts the debate by trying to pigeon hole them with a bait question.

If he does that, he's won!! :nanner:

He's "wining" as much as Charlie Sheen is. I don't care who he's fucking, he's just fucked.

I'll stick with Stewart.

 

[yoicham]

He's "wining" as much as Charlie Sheen is. I don't care who he's fucking, he's just fucked.

I'll stick with Stewart.

Here's my kind of winning (http://twitter.com/#!/autumnrileyxo/status/46732472876150784).

I agree, whenever Stewart and O'Reilly go at it, Stewart always seems to be the sane and reasonable one who presents points, and backs them up with proof/reasoning. O'Reilly seems to stick to a topic he's PO'd about and just keeps hammering the point, like if he yells loud enough, everyone will just accept his word as fact.

 

[Hot Mega]

I agree, whenever Stewart and O'Reilly go at it, Stewart always seems to be the sane and reasonable one who presents points, and backs them up with proof/reasoning. O'Reilly seems to stick to a topic he's PO'd about and just keeps hammering the point, like if he yells loud enough, everyone will just accept his word as fact.

I am waiting for the day someone finally says to O'Reilly, "I thought the name of this game was you ask the questions and I give the answers. If you're convinced you need to ask the questions and give the answers then I'll shut up (or leave) and you can just interview yourself.:thefinger:tongue:"