Letterman: You don't have to know what you're talking about

The classic narcissist's conversational gambit, "Enough about me. Let's talk about you. What do YOU think of me?" came to mind as Bill O'Reilly and David Letterman jostled for the last word on the Late Show Tuesday night. We rarely watch either one but caught a decisive moment while surfing the other evening, when Letterman unwittingly exposed the soft underbelly of his reflexive liberalism. Read on for our take on the vulnerable little guy inside "The Big Man."

"You're too smart to believe what you're saying," David Letterman tossed guest Bill O'Reilly the other night, shining a spotlight on the Late Show host's reliance on prefab pc opinions to avoid ostracism from the self-proclaimed tribe of "smart." First a few excerpts from the sparring partners' exchange for context, then on to our analysis:

Letterman: Here's what I've always thought about Rush Limbaugh, yourself, and your buddy, Glenn Beck, even admitted this. I always thought that Rush Limbaugh could have been a TV weatherman, could have done sports, he could have hosted a game show, but somebody said "Rush, we need a right-wing commentary niche," [and he said] "Oh, yah, I can do that" …

O'Reilly: Didn't you used to be a TV weatherman?

Letterman: Yah … But now, I'm not the face of the Republican Party [Yah, yah, yah. So you bought Rahm Emanuel's anti-Limbaugh jihad, "Dave." Not very original.] … It just seems to me like he's too smart to believe what he's saying. And I feel the same way about you. You're too smart to believe what you're saying.

A body-language expert's dream team, "Bill" and "Dave" know what "the folks" — O'Reilly's toe-curlingly annoying term for his fans — like. It didn't seem to matter whose ox was being gored. The audience roared with pleasure at every thrust and parry. That's entertainment!

It's unlikely that David Letterman or any other card-carrying member of the self-proclaimed tribe of "smart" has ever listened to or read enough of O'Reilly or Limbaugh to have even a faint notion of their political philosophies. But that's the beauty of the thing. You don't have to know what you're talking about. You don't have to think for yourself. In fact, boys and girls, you don't have to think at all. Instead, it's all about feelings. As Letterman acknowledged back in January of 2006:

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].

The importance of being noticed — maintaining honor and shedding shame, however defined — is where it's at. Being recognized as a member of the tribe trumps truth.

Comments

[goomp]

No doubt I am a member of an obsolete breed but I never listen to talking heads. I prefer to read and then make my judgements. If one is not too lazy to read, the internet is full of knowledgeable writings of people who are not ignorant as are so many talking heads.

[pam]

If that was supposed to be television entertainment I'll keep streaming old Britcoms off Netflix.

Funny, but my tv is never on anymore. I prefer to not be spoon fed what they think I should hear and believe. Like Goomp I want to make my own judgements, thankyouverymuch. ;)

[Gayle Miller]

I won't watch either of them. Letterman is on too late and I've never found him even mildly amusing and O'Reilly just grates. He talks about "the folks" as though he is referring to a bunch of halfwitted rubes! Like we aren't smart enough to "get" what he's talking about. Bill - we are. And we don't like your smarmy self-idolatry!

[Teresa]

I can tolerate a little bit of O'Reilly and zero of Letterman (who hasn't been the least bit amusing for about 20 years now).

I have yet to figure out who is in the Letterman audience that they find any of this schtick worth a smile, much less the laughter and applause it seems to draw from them.

Although we should always remember it's tv and what you see/hear isn't always what is really happening.

[Donna B.]

I almost never watch TV. And since my sound card went kapluie I don't watch videos on the internet. I don't think I've missed much.

The transcripts are much more revealing, as the the words must stand on their own. Where sarcasm is not involved, this usually means a better understanding of what is said.

Sarcasm is useful, but it just doesn't do well in print.

[Webutante]

Sissy, thanks for featuring this great clip. Wow. I rarely watch either man, but have to say O'Reilly does a great job in taking hit after hit from Letterman, who's a self-righteous jerk.

BTW, if you haven't read Mark Levin's new book, "Liberty and Tyranny," do have a look. It's wonderful.

[Sissy Willis]

It's good to know so many sisu commenters are readers, not TV watchers. I AM reading Mark Levin's new book and loving it, by the way. Gotta finish before next week's Boston Tea Party in front of the State House so I'll have all his felicitous phrases on the tip of my tongue! :-)

[Gayle Miller]

Let's have a SAL-UTE to felicitous phrases!