December 9, 2005

Stern versus O'Reilly.

Have you been watching Bill O'Reilly interviewing Howard Stern this week? It's been highly amusing. In my view, Stern wipes the floor with O'Reilly -- though, as a visual image, I'd prefer O'Reilly wiping the floor with Stern, Stern bearing the greater physical resemblance to a mop. He's so tall and skinny and that hair! But the hair has lost its old Ramones feeling. Now each curl is meticulously arranged, including the long strand that hangs over his eye, trying to act like it just fell forward, but rigidly twirled just so. He must have a hairdresser who follows him everywhere (like Valerie Cherish's Mickey). What do you think Stern's curl-wrangler gets paid?

Stern is so sharp that he makes O'Reilly look smushy. The O'Reilly bluster just can't get going. O'Reilly seems cowed by the knowledge of how damned much money Stern is getting from Sirius radio. Is it $500 million? Stern wouldn't quite say. Is it $500 million? O'Reilly kept asking.

News Hounds -- "We watch FOX so you don't have to" -- summarizes last night's Stern/O'Reilly encounter:
"Who's your audience?" O'Reilly asked.

Stern set the tone for the rest of the interview by answering, "Strippers, hookers and crack whores." Then he tried to explain that he always envisions his audience as a guy going to to work, a buddy in the locker room talking honestly about reality....

From all this, somehow O'Reilly concluded that Sterns audience was a "blue collar guy." Stern shot back with the analysis of the Scarborough Report which concluded that his audience was highly educated and high income.

O'Reilly didn't like that and made a crack about having lesbians on his show. Stern didn't blink answering, "There will always be lesbians. I will give the people lesbian's because theres nothing sexier than two women getting it on." One can only imagine what Bill was thinking?

Before O'Reilly could respond to the lesbian comment, Stern turned to O'Reilly's merchandise sales making cracks about all the "kazari". "Who's walking around with a Bill O'Reilly briefcase?" he wondered. O'Reilly got all indignant and self righteous about giving 100% to charities like Habitat For Humanity but Stern claimed that he didn't believe it.

Making fun of O'Reilly he quipped, "Come outside with me right now!" O'Reilly then suggested that Stern could build houses for poor lesbians.

Stern then accused O'Reilly of selling the stuff out of ego and demanded a jacket for free. O'Reilly offered it on the condition that he wear it. "I won't wear it but I'll give it to a crack whore."
That caused great hilarity chez Althouse.

21 comments:

Icepick said...

I heard Stern compare his hair a few years ago as a Louis the 14th style, which I think is correct.

Years ago, when I still watched late night TV, I would see Stern occassionally show up on Leno's show. From the moment Stern walked on stage, it was his show, and Leno was helplessly floundering trying to regain some sembelance of control. Leno may have been putting on a little bit of 'show' but there was never any doubt Howard was running things.

I'm surprised O'Reilly would have the nerve to let Stern on his show, even if it is taped and editted. (I'm just assuming that part.) Bill's ego must be even bigger than I thought!

tefta said...

Stern may be vulgar, but people seem to like his show. Years ago I read a profile on him which said that he's a very smart guy, knows his market and turned his schtick into an enormous amount of money

O'Reilly did basically the same thing. The difference being that O'Reilly pretends to care about issues. I never believed for a moment that he's conservative and cares about righting wrongs and all the blather that spurts out of his mouth.

If CBS wanted him to be their anchor, he'd be there in a shot and start spouting the liberal line without missing a beat. Thank God this is still a free country and I don't have to listen to either of them.

me said...

I don't think O'Reilly is that conservative, and I've never understood why the left is so obsessed with him. I think he tends to make some inaccurate opinions, and label these opinions as facts.

I caught the first Stern segment with O'Reilly and thought is was pretty amusing. Too bad Howard was prohibited from bringing up the phone sex incident. That would have made great television. I'm sure O'Reilly and Howard have more in common than meets the eye.

37383938393839383938383 said...

Stern didn't blink answering, "There will always be lesbians. I will give the people lesbian's because theres nothing sexier than two women getting it on." One can only imagine what Bill was thinking?

Well, it was funnier than that. Stern said: "There will always be lesbians. I will give the people lesbians because there's nothing sexier -- other than you, of course, Bill O'Reilly -- there's nothing sexier than two women getting it on."

Ron said...

and that, my friends, is the best way to deal with verbal thugs of all political persuasions!

PatCA said...

I agree with 'me', the first interview was better. Now that I think about it, isn't Howard Stern more or less the unconstrained-libido doppelganger of O'Reilly? The Evil Twin!

Most of the time I get a kick out of O'Reilly. He reminds me of all the Irish Catholic wiseacres I grew up with. It's a type. Stern is waaay too raw for me.

Pooh said...

I don't warch/listen to him often, but Stern is the gold standard for verbal gadflyery (not a wordm but it should be.) Everyone else is just a poor imitation.

Tom said...

I listend to Howard when I lived in a market that carried him and I found about 50 percent of his show to be useless, childish immature garbage, and the other 50 percent to be brilliant and amazing radio. I found it was worth wading through the garbage to get to the rest. He knows how to use the medium for maximum value, something not many people know how to do with radio anymore.

As for what O'Reilly was thinking, my guess is that he was jealous that he's not able to say and do the kinds of things Howard can.

Ann Althouse said...

I'm pretty sure O'Reilly is a much dirtier old man than Stern. I'm also willing to bet: O'Reilly is more into the money than Stern, and Stern is much smarter than O'Reilly. Stern is also much braver and much more honest. Stern versus O'Reilly? Stern wins, hands down. The idea that O'Reilly thought he could best Stern by making Stern look dirty and making himself look virtuous? That must have put Stern in a delightful mood as he walked into that interview.

Sally said...

Go Howard! I love anyone who can humiliate the oh-so-smug O'Reilly. Did anyone see the Michael Moore episode? It was hillarious. O'Reilly had acted all tough for months against Mr. Moore (whom I also can't stand), but when they finally got together, Bill had nothing on Moore. What a fool.

Hamsun56 said...

Saw Stern on Letterman recently and he seemed very deferential to Dave. Maybe he didn't want to blow the plugging of his new radio show.

Harkonnendog said...

It is a win-win for O'Reilly- if Stern mops the floor with him but O'Reilly is cool about it then O'Reilly is a gracious host- if O'Reilly hangs with him it shows he can handle controversial guests- imagine Rather even TRYING to give this kind of interview... impossible.

John Jenkins said...

What do I get for not liking either of them? I could never get into the Stern radio show (or TV show for that matter when it was on E!). He just bothered me more than he entertained me (and I'm certainly no prude). It just seems childish and unfunny to me (but there's no doubt that has some appeal, else any number of "comedy" actors would have had no career).

O'reilly is on another level though. That guy's just dumb. I agree that he's certainly not conservative in any real sense. He's just a loud-mouthed jerk. I think I would call any confrontation between the two a draw and be done with it.

SteveR said...

Well they both got what they wanted from it and, like them or not, that's what they are both good at. Sorry for ending my sentence with a preposition.

Timothy said...

Anybody else remember O'Reilly on Inside Edition or as a newscaster in Portland, OR? Thinking about that is pure comedy gold.

DEC said...

Stern and O'Reilly both belong in a P.T. Barnum sideshow. Stern can be The Bearded Lady. O'Reilly can be Krao The Missing Link.

Norman said...

Well, right now O'Reilly (and Fox) is about the only right-leaning source on television, if one is looking for that.

I imagine the same things can be said of Rush Limbaugh that have been written here about O'Reilly. But I think instinctively O'Reilly and Lumbaugh both are indeed conservative. But they're making money off of it, and that's not a problem. It's not an issue to be judgmental about, I feel.

XWL said...

Tefta said what I think of these interviews, they are both excellent self-promoters who were playing to their respective audiences and the 'showdown' was about as real as the 'showdowns' before wrestling or boxing PPV events.

Also, At $13 dollars per month, Sirius satellite must figure that the $100M/yr they're paying Howard Stern is justified since he'll add 2M subscribers all by his lonesome, and that those 2M will build word of mouth for their system over XM to grab another 10-15M subscribers over the 5 years of the contract.

They might be right. But what will other successful personalities demand? At some point the numbers get troublesome and this kind of money sets a precedent.

On a completely other note...

I do have to wonder, how Howard would react if someone convinced his two oldest daughters (both over 18 now) to shoot an explicit porn film together?

(He has said many times over, there is nothing hotter than lesbian incest)

cons_pr said...

I wasn’t able to see the interview, and I can’t find part 1. Were the interviews aired in succession? I did read what ever popped up on Google (about the interview) and the official transcript of the interview (part 2). Strangely, what I’m finding is when I’m reading the top (google) hits, it’s almost like the interview is flipped back to front and Oreily’s name is replaced with Sterns. Am I wrong or crazy? Or is everyone posting and writing about the interview so subjective, that they’re projecting? …I’m at a loss.

cons_pr said...

I wasn’t able to see the interview, and I can’t find part 1. Were the interviews aired in succession? I did read what ever popped up on Google (about the interview) and the official transcript of the interview (part 2). Strangely, when I’m reading the top (google) hits, it’s like the interview is flipped back to front and O’reily’s name is replaced with Sterns. Am I wrong or crazy? Or is everyone posting and writing about the interview so subjective, that they’re projecting? …I’m at a loss.

Metroplexual said...

O'reilly is insane. He spouts nonsense check mediamaters.org