The part of the interview that made it to O’Reilly’s show diminishes the scope of the debate Stewart attempted to get the ill informed O’Reilly to engage in. Thankfully, Gawker has broken the entire interview out for posterity here. Watch how a well educated informed short comedian can make a 6′5″ blowhard look silly. Awesome.

Fox News has generously placed the full, unedited conversation between Bill O’Reilly and Jon Stewart online, so we can see precisely how unfairly and deviously Fox edited the interview in order to weaken Stewart’s case: A lot!

Last night on his show—Part Two of a ludicrously overhyped “faceoff” between O’Reilly and Stewart in which Stewart attempted, among other things, to present a critique of Fox as a fear-mongering GOP messaging operation—O’Reilly boasted that his edit of their 42-minute interview for broadcast was “a fair cut” and invited viewers to have a look at the unedited version online to judge for themselves: “Some of these idiots in the press who hate us, ‘O’Reilly cut the interview to make Stewart look’—OK, all of that is bull. It’s a fair cut. And then when you watch the cut and watch the whole interview you’ll see it.”

So we took him up on the offer, and guess what? If by “fair cut” O’Reilly means “cut in a manner that left some of Stewart’s best lines, most effective arguments, and most convincing evidence out of the interview and hidden from the broadcast audience,” then he’s absolutely right.

The good news is the death penalty is being enacted less and less given it has been proven empirically to be a complete failure as a deterrent.

Last fall, the American Law Institute, which created the intellectual framework for the modern capital justice system almost 50 years ago, pronounced its project a failure and walked away from it.

There were other important death penalty developments last year: the number of death sentences continued to fall, Ohio switched to a single chemical for lethal injections and New Mexico repealed its death penalty entirely. But not one of them was as significant as the institute’s move, which represents a tectonic shift in legal theory.

Stephen Colbert talks with Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project about the death penalty. The group has used DNA to exonerate over 249 wrongly convicted people sitting on death row.

Keith calls Lieberman a health insurance whore and describes why he feels the present bill is unsupportable

Stimulus spending on infrastructure has worked! Non infrastructure stimulus spending has not worked. Oh, and big wind generators are built overseas, not in the US.

Fox’s Hannity uses footage from a rally two months earlier to make Michelle Bachman’s health care rally appear bigger than the forty busloads of people brought in.

How important is NY’s 23rd district? Not very…

Several people, particularly Commissioner Kevin Stufflebean, believe the circumstances of his bankruptcy are a personal matter and not a news item. Stufflebean made his bankruptcy a public issue when he repeated apparently false claims to the news media. Previously, I criticized The World for not reporting on the glaring factual discrepancies from Stufflebean’s own mouth with respect to the bankruptcy (and the firing of 22 county road workers). The news is not Stufflebean’s bankruptcy, the news is that an elected official may have lied to the public he serves. That is news. That is big news!!!

Today, The World has done some fine investigative reporting and correctly informed the public that an elected official may be playing fast and loose with the truth.

Coos County Commissioner Kevin Stufflebean’s public explanation of his recent bankruptcy filing contains factual discrepancies, The World has learned.

In July, Stufflebean and his wife filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection in federal court in Eugene. In a subsequent interview with Eugene’s The Register-Guard newspaper, Stufflebean mentioned five factors contributing to his financial wreckage.

Information available from public records, however, raises questions about each of the five factors. Stufflebean has defended his statements in recent interviews and e-mails to The World, but he has provided neither full details nor any documents to support his contentions.

The World staff writer, Meghan Walsh did an excellent job of investigating this matter. Right on!!! This is what newspapers are supposed to do.