Stewart, O’Reilly demonstrate superior etiquette, rhetoric in satirical ‘Rumble’
Something else happened Saturday night in Washington, D.C., while the Gamecocks dominated the football field here in Columbia. Two political humor rivals, one left-winged and one right-winged, went head-to-head in the GWU Auditorium. Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” and Bill O’Reilly of Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor” held their own debate, cleverly named “The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium.” Televised live and for an audience of mostly college-age students, the two touched base on various political topics while taking playful jabs at each other.
As ironic and satirical as the debate was, it turned out to be a total success. Stewart was the favorite at the beginning of the debate, and although O’Reilly grew on the audience by the end, Stewart was the champion. Stewart and O’Reilly debated like real competitors. Neither man held his head low or exuded a sickly presence, and neither man lied through his teeth. Instead, the same valid points made at the actual debate were made at this one and in a way more relatable for most Americans. They put the details in a language ordinary people could understand — not fabricated numbers and numerous definitions of “reform.” After months of intense promotion, the presidential debate was expected to be a display of politically charged fireworks; instead, the real presidential candidates held a weak debate, skirting around important topics in a generally lackluster event.
Stewart and O’Reilly, however, turned serious issues into something more watchable. In fact, some would say the satirical debate was better than the actual presidential debate held three days prior. Jim Lehrer — the moderator of the presidential debate — failed to take control of the event, letting Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama continue to ramble to millions of Americans. E.D. Hill — the moderator of the Stewart/O’Reilly debate — was barely a factor because of the professionalism of the two debaters.
The two presidential candidates could learn something from Stewart and O’Reilly. They rarely agree with each other, but they don’t make fools of themselves trying to destroy the other person’s reputation. They held a healthy, competitive and real debate. Neither man felt the dire need to hold tightly to his party, unlike the two real candidates — if issues could be agreed on, they were. Bipartisanship is a missing puzzle piece in today’s political world, and if two highly opinionated television personalities can learn to respect each other and agree on a few things, the two presidential candidates should be able to as well. “The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium” was what a real presidential debate should be like, except for the obnoxious jokes, of course. Hopefully, the incumbents and the hopefuls watched Stewart and O’Reilly this weekend and, along with having a good laugh, learned a thing or two about how to hold a debate.
More Like This
Column: GOP moderates must cooperate
By Andy Wilson | March 13, 2016
Column: Trump's big gamble
By Nick Vogt | Jan. 27, 2016