A little disappointment with The Daily Show

Jon Stewart had a favorite guest on his show Wednesday: Bill O'Reilly. This is just a day or two after Stewart showed a clip of O'Reilly saying that if his taxes increase to 50%, he might just quit. So Stewart asked him about this and some other things in the two parts of his interview below:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Bill O'Reilly Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

My breakdown of the interview:

So of course O'Reilly fesses up to the fact that he won't quit even if that happens. Of course not. No rich person would. Yet they say they might, and this makes people believe them. Now, I never believed that when I saw the clip, yet folks use that very idea to convince people that they could quit or move away in an effort to keep taxes low. It's BS and the rich know it. The non-rich think "Well, rich people must be smart or they wouldn't be rich, so what they are saying must be true." It's not. Jon did a decent job of trying to tear his argument down here. Bill was really on his game, and much faster than Jon was with quips.

O'Reilly's Solyndra comment was valid, and I though Jon did a decent job of putting the $500 million loan Solyndra got into the correct context. But then Jon should have mentioned all the WASTE that goes into Defense spending. That would have put O'Reilly on the defensive with his own talking point about having the government spend money efficiently. I can't argue against what O'Reilly is talking about when he says he wants to see the government spend money efficiently. How can you? But most politicians DON'T want to see efficiency because their donors will make less money. That's where I take issue with the Right and their ideas of efficiency. Efficiency means CUTS. O'Reilly even brings this up later in the interview, and I think that Stewart rightly puts it into the correct context again.

So then O'Reilly mentions the $16 muffin story. This is complete bunk. ABC news debunked this story here. It's too bad, because Stewart could have nailed him with this one. Disappointed with Stewart. He tried to save face by mentioning the bailouts, but the point was already won by O'Reilly. Stewart tries to paint O'Reilly into the box that most Republicans put themselves into by saying that all regulation is bad and business should be unfettered, but O'Reilly rightly denies that and mentions the efficiency comment again.

End of interview part 1. Part 2:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Bill O'Reilly Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

O'Reilly admits that he's a Democrat in terms of Financial regulation. Great. His flat tax wouldn't work, but the VAT (consumption tax) is awesome and we should do that. (Don't mention to him that is what most of Europe (socialists!!) does). O'Reilly's whine about all of the taxes is dumb. It's not the FEDERAL government's fault that his property, state, sales, etc are so high. Jon then brings up the good point about how little the top 1% pay in income taxes. O'Reilly's attempt to hide behind the other taxes he has to pay is lame, because EVERYONE else is paying those taxes too. Rich people pay income taxes because they have all the money.

O'Reilly's 10% across the board cuts is...nuts. A LOT of spending can be cut, but not across the board. Some government programs work a lot better than others.

Stewart should have brought up the class warfare comments that are all over Fox news, then asked him if Eisenhower is a socialist for having a 90% tax on the wealthy after WWII. It's a shame, as I would have enjoyed hearing O'Reilly's comments on the subject. Stewart's constant giggling was a little irritating, and something I wish he did less of that.

Oh well. Overall, a good interview even with a mildly disappointing performance by Stewart. I think O'Reilly has reasonable views, but he is so bombastic that I just can't be a fan.

Macys.com

Just had a CRAZY conversation with a macys.com phone support person about an order I made for Mother's Day. I feel bad for folks that have to work the phones. It's a tough job. But the reason they gave me for why my order didn't get the guarantee was BONKERS, CRAZY GO NUTS.

I ordered my gift for my wife for Mother's Day on May 3. Macy's has a website that explains that if you order before May 4, you are guaranteed to have the order by Mother's Day. So I'm a day early. Great.

I get an shipping confirmation on May 5. I track the order. No order by Friday. Nothing by Saturday. Sunday morning, the order arrives in Redmond. UPS tracking says the order will arrive on Monday, May 9. Ugh!

My wife is way cool about it and doesn't mind the delay, but I do. So I call up Macy's and ask about my order. I have the following exchange: "Your order does not qualify for the guarantee because it was made on May 3. The guarantee only applies to orders made between May 4 - May 8. "

"What? That's not what the website says."

"Sir, that is what the guarantee is for. Only orders made on May 4 - May 8."

"So if I made an order on May 7, UPS would show up and deliver the package by the next day? How is that possible, when UPS doesn't deliver on weekends?"

"...."

"They have a...special....delivery...." (I'm not kidding about all the pauses)

"I would like to speak to your supervisor."

"Ok, but my supervisor will tell you the same thing."

"Great, I want to hear them tell me that. What you said doesn't make any sense."

"Ok, please hold."

After a couple of minutes of waiting, I am told that I will be getting an accommodation for the guarantee. Good. That is why I called.

So we'll see what the accommodation is. It should be what the website says. This isn't a big deal, but I'll be darned if some corporation is going to try to stick it to me like that.

I would be understanding if they said the order was delayed due to weather or something. But to just say absolute bullshit like that is upsetting. I'm not going to be scared off like that, Macys.

UPDATE: My Accommodation is they are resending me my order! I don't want another order! I want what the guarantee is. Oh well. I'm just going to return this order to a local Macy's store and get my money back. Same as the guarantee, except I can spend the money where ever I want and not just Macys.

Happy New Year!

Get back to work, ya lazy scum! ;)

Saw a great movie about blogging over the break: Julie and Julia. Fantastic film. You can view the blog that started all this here.

I also highly recommend going to Kellog, Idaho and staying at the Silver Mountain Resort. Aside from good skiing (when there is snow) the resort added a most awesome water park. I haven't had that much fun in a long time. Thanks to my Dad for arranging a free stay at the resort!

Onto business...

2 weeks ago, Paul Volker testified to Congress about what should be done with financial reform. You can read what he said here and here, but the best quote is this: "The only useful financial innovation in the last 20 years is the ATM."

David Frum explains why the GOP lost the Healthcare battle.

The New Republic talks about Republican nihilism.

Brad DeLong finally likes something that the AP has posted about Republicans and the deficit.

The Huffington Post explains, in great detail how Wall Street owns congress.

David Frum is pushing an idea of his that I linked to a long time ago as to why American health care costs so much: We are lazy fatties, and we like it!

Call Now!

Ridiculous Infomercial for the Colgate Wisp - Click here for this week’s top video clips

Song get's stuck in your head

Boy, this is NOT what the makers of AutoTune had in mind, but boy what fun.

I love my Ipod Touch

I love my Ipod Touch. It keeps getting more and more great apps! It's pretty good for gaming, with Simcity, Fieldrunners, and Wolfenstein 3d. (I can't wait for Doom!). The Touch also shines in other apps. Today I just downloaded the Wall Street Journal App for free. It appears to be very similar to the New York Times app, meaning you get all the content for FREE! This is great! People complain about the banner ads being too big or whatnot. Big deal, it's free. So far, the performance seems ok. The NYT app was really flaky for awhile, then was upgraded to v2.0 which was very stable.

My wife has an iPhone, and it sucks as a phone. Lots of dropped calls. What's the point of a modern phone if it drops calls like it's 1998? If it didn't drop so many calls it would be an incredible phone. I'm so glad I don't have to pay for an iPhone contract.