Jon Stewart’s Brilliant Audience
by Tim SlagleAre Jon Stewart fans smarter than the rest of us? Is that the reason why many of us do not find him hilarious… that we’re too dumb to get the joke? His audience goes into stitches when he rolls his eyes and puts his hand over his mouth, and I’m left befuddled. Or am I too old? We all know that the people who watch “The Daily Show” are young, intelligent and informed. Or at least that’s what they’ve been trying to tell us. Unfortunately recent polls paint an entirely different picture.
Maybe it is generational. I know that’s how some fans explain the humor gap to me. Stewart is playing to the young kids and I’m just too old to get it. The problem is, while “Daily Show” viewers might still think they’re kids, they aren’t anymore. Rather than holding a Student ID in their wallets, most “Daily Show” viewers are much closer to their AARP cards. In fact, a recent analysis puts the average age of a “Daily Show” viewer at 41.4 years old.
But are they brighter? Well, according to a recent online poll by Time magazine, 44% of respondents claim that Jon Stewart is America’s most trusted “Newsman.” You cannot convince me that bright people would trust a comedian to be a “Newsman.” (Or maybe it’s just normal for the kids today, since comedy is now considered ample experience to be a United States Senator.)
Of course, this is probably more telling of the Time Magazine readership than anything else. After looking at nothing but editorials and propaganda for the past several years, the readers of Time are perfectly incapable of distinguishing news from opinion. But this isn’t the first time. A 2007 Pew study found that around a quarter of internet users rely on “The Daily Show” or “The Onion” as their primary news source.
Are they complete and utter morons? “The Daily Show” conducted a poll to determine the education level of their audience and proudly trumpeted the results. According to Nielsen research, “Daily Show” audiences are more likely to hold a four-year degree than those watching “The O’Reilly Factor.” Of course, they didn’t find out what KIND of a degree those people hold, or whether it left them employable, or even employed. But that really doesn’t matter. If they’re confusing a comedian with a newsman, they certainly aren’t very bright. Once again we see how the value of an education is highly overrated. Just because you went to school with intelligent people doesn’t mean you are one yourself. You cannot gain intelligence through osmosis.
I think this is why the Left is so snarky. They assume they belong to the party of intellectuals and they can gain intelligence just by their allegiance. So even if they were never too good in school, as long as they vote Democrat, they can look down on the ignorant right-wingers.
These are the same people who make fun of Dittoheads and Spell Fox news “Faux.” They should at least give the Rush and Fox audiences a little credit. Even if you disagree with our assessment, and consider us impressionable zombies, we’re only doing what we’ve been told. If we think Fox is “Fair and Balanced,”" perhaps it’s because we’ve been told it’s Fair and Balanced–ditto for Rush. You cannot really fault us for that. On the other hand, Jon Stewart goes out of his way to tell everyone that his show is fake news, but millions of Americans refuse to believe him.
I’m reminded of a girl I once met who was selling dietary supplements. She was one of those girls who would be considered really dumb if she wasn’t so pretty. In the midst of her failing vitamin pitch, she thought she might turn things around by making a carnal appeal: “You know,” she whispered seductively, “we also carry Spanish Fly.”
(For Jon Stewart fans: “Spanish Fly” is what us old people used to call that stuff Russian spammers email you about every evening.) I still wasn’t buying. “I’ve heard all that stuff is just a placebo.”
She continued the pitch, “Well that’s what they SAY it is. I can’t promise you that it’s a REAL placebo…”
Not only is the “Daily Show” fake news, it is the home to fake intellectualism. It is the modern equivalent of a PBS tote bag–a way of signaling to the rest of your scrap-booking class that you find regular TV too pedestrian.
And the most frustrating part to me is that you KNOW every single one of these people voted for Obama.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
161 Comments
The big problem with much of Stewart's audience is that they don't realize that, rather than honest satire, Stewart (and his writers) selectively edit, quote, and manipulate the things they are mocking, all simply to set up those trademark eye rolls.
That, of course, makes the contention that his audience is, in any way, intelligent, laughable since they have no idea they're being lied to on a regular basis. (You could construct a drinking game around The Daily Show where everyone will come away with alcohol poisoning after a half-hour simply by drinking every time he intentionally takes something out of context to set up a joke.)
I am just floored he is deemed to be the MOST TRUSTED NEWSMAN……and the people that watch him have a four year degree? in what? space? honestly, I am not being a nOOb about this, but honestly the people that watch him actually have a degree and consider him a TRUSTED newsman… he is another PROMPTER READER!!!! I gather the chosen one saw something with Stewart and figured he better take the lead with the prompter… I was floored when I read this yesterday and STUMPED that he actually hold this crown at the moment!
throws hands up in the air and walks away from PC…..
In many ways I feel sorry for Jon Stewart. Because, unlike Maher, I can see in Stewart's eyes the knowledge that he's a hack.
That's why he at least tries to make a few Obama jokes. Sure, he still has a man-crush on the guy, but he at least tries. And they always, always fall flat. So he just goes right back to the 'Republicans are stupid' gags.
If Stewart has any self-respect left he'll keep trying to be on the cutting edge, and actually go full-bore on this president. But I don't think any of us will be surprised if this doesn't happen. As Stewart 'comedically' realized on his show the other night during his 'tax the rich' bit – hey, he's rich. He won't be biting the feeding hand too hard.
Let's see. An educated bunch of Socialists who think that a schtick comic that makes a lot of faces is funny?
Obviously the Stewert Show audience are French.
In his defense though, did you see Time's other three nominees? Hardly inspiring choices. Hell, I might've voted Stewart based on those poor 4 choices.
Frankly, saying Stewart is the most trusted newsman is like saying fertilizer is the best tasting poop.
FACT: Lou Dobbs is a douchebag and JS called him out on it, to the point that CNN's about to cut the cord on that old fart..that ticking you hear is the time left on Old Farty…
Slagle is to Stewart what Ron Burgundy was to Cronkite…
I have no respect for Jon Stewart. I think he knows that the Obama Administration and the Dems in Congress are screwing up, but he is a liberal (sheltered NYC one at that) and will not call them out consistently the way he does Republicans. He falls in line with the "racist Republican" story line (never questions the points raised). Democrats use race or the "race card" all the time to silence people and he does as well (The Sotomayor coverage). Stewart, like Maher, Maddow, says the tippy libby lines just to fit in with the elite establishment.
I wonder how many years it took them to get that four year degree. Basket weaving theology I understand is best done in 6 years.
They've been told that Jon Stewart's comedy is funny…………….to dumb to figure it out for themselves…………
AND WHO THE HELL SAYS HE'S A NEWSMAN?
I imagine you have no problem accepting an AIPAC shill like Wolf Blitzer to be a newsman.
"that we’re too dumb to get the joke?" If you are too dumb to see fighting wars for Israel doesn't help us and actually makes us less safe *while* thinking printing up money to give to bankers isn't going to destroy this country financially *while* ignoring other problems like massive illegal and legal immigration *while* also thinking things like "free trade" that has sucked the wealth out of this country is ok, (in other words, if you are a NEOCON the likes of McCain, Bush, etc…), well then I guess you probably are too dumb to humor like Stewarts….but I would say that is the least of your worries.
I imagine you have no problem accepting an AIPAC shill like Wolf Blitzer to be a newsman.
"that we’re too dumb to get the joke?" If you are too dumb to see fighting wars for Israel doesn't help us and actually makes us less safe *while* thinking printing up money to give to bankers isn't going to destroy this country financially *while* ignoring other problems like massive illegal and legal immigration *while* also thinking things like "free trade" that has sucked the wealth out of this country is ok, (in other words, if you are a NEOCON the likes of McCain, Bush, etc…), well then I guess you probably are too dumb to get humor like Stewarts….but I would say that is the least of your worries.
Stewart's audience represents the herd mentality of "the hip." Almost everyone of them that I have met is a smirking petty intellectual desperately looking for validation from the cool kids. Most of them couldn't find Iraq, Iran or their hometown on a map with a seeing-eye dog. However that isn't important. What is important is the attitude of dismissive irony toward toward anything that is serious and "grownup." They are so stuffed with their own moral vanity that any criticism of their positions is (to them) automatic evidence of "stupidity." Stewart is the perfect embodiment of their attitudes and their many prejudices.
I bash Stewart's audience and late night TV in general as a source of "news" in my piece on "Obamacare"…
http://shermansmarch.blogspot.com/
Yes, they consider themselves "smarter" mererly because they hold all the proper opinions with which all "smart" people agree. This is why they are driven sort of crazy when an otherwise obviously intelligent person actually disagrees with them.
T err y
What are you doing back?
Forget the NEwsman part. They can think him a newsman if they want.
Exactly who counts this Needle Noggin Gimp as "TRUSTED"
That is the real mystery?
Wolf Blitzer?!?!?!?!?……puh-leeeease
Comaring Jon Stewart to that miserable putz Shill Maher is a clear indication that you humorless neo-cons don't have a CLUE what you're talking about!
TDS are merely perfecting the style of reportage pioneered by Michael Moore. (Of course, the same people who watch the Daily Show consider him a genius, too, so…)
Thanks EDS for that post that had absolutely nothing to do with the original post or the comment that you replied to!
I do respect Stewart's talents as a comedian and as a proprietor of quality propaganda. I usually don't agree with him, but he produces good stuff and I often have to laugh.
On occasion, he will turn that satirical eye on the Left and be extremely effective. Unfortunately, that does not play well with his audience. I imagine he would do more of it if his core demographics weren't so heavily partisan.
Maybe, one day, his producers will realize that they could double the size of their audience if they played to all of America and not just the coasts.
That Stewart is considered a true newsman should be a warning shot to journalists, but it probably won't be; they all want to be the next Jon Stewart. When you take some time to think about it, when was the last time you can think of that we had a true newsman, and by that I mean a reporter who went out, and went for the who what where why when how. It all went south when it became necessary to have a degree to write news. In the better days of yellow journalism, you just needed to get your facts right (sorta), be dogged and persistent and have the talent to smell a rat, and write well. Your editor would go over the copy and make edits. These days, the "reporter" can't write, is in the tank to their heroes, there is no evidence of an editor, and all news stories just put up opinion…ill-informed opinion.
And now they mourn the man who started these changes, Cronkite. This is the guy who turned on the his own president, betrayed a victory in Vietnam, and ultimately gave us Nixon and Carter. And after Watergate, all of these poseurs want to be Woodward and Bernstein hoping to become the gray eminence Cronkite.
Stewart's audience with their constant hooting and hollering are insufferable like scratching a chalk board.
Did you vote for Stewart?
I think the "educated" idiots are about to take, what we rednecks call a thumpin on the health care debate.
[...] Joe Biden? (videos) Hot Air: Maybe this is the reason they picked Biden? Tim Slagle, Big Hollywood: Jon Stewart’s Brilliant Audience Chris Stigall, Big Hollywood: Remember When SNL Was Funny? (Obama Ushers in New Era of Comedic [...]
I am embarrassed for my friends and family that are of the "Stewart as trusted newscaster " ilk. Real intellectuals know that Redeye's Greg Gutfeld is the most trusted newscaster:)
[...] arrest “acted stupidly.” I kid you not. In a fabulous display of … Jon Stewart’s Brilliant Audience – bighollywood.breitbart.com 07/24/2009 Are Jon Stewart fans smarter than the rest of us? Is that [...]
Say it ain't so, James. America IS the reason that someone like Cameron could rise from obscurity and create the highest grossing film of all time. Yeah, America's really screwed him over. Get a clue. We are the world's light, protector of freedoms, liberator– and when there's a disaster, we are the world's 911 call.
Forgive me. This post should be moved to the Camero article.
I'm trying to think of a paradigm. Animal House? Mad Magazine? Peggy Lee's "Is that all there is?" I'm sure that Stewart's fans largely believe that they'll never collect a dime of Social Security, but still support Obama's heath care edict, which he doesn't even understand.
We're all Waiting for Godobama these days.
Review the typical liberal rantings on Huffington or digg . That's Stewart's audience.
They are frozen in time. They think it's Jan 09 when the whole world loved Obama and throngs were in the street singing Na Na Na Na, Hay Hay, Goodbye to Bush. They're not witnessing this train wreck of an administration or their president who set the land speed record on becoming so unpopular so fast.
They're still attacking Bush and Cheney and they are in complete denial. It will be entertaining to watch them self destruction when reality sets in.
I think that a very poorly organized and rather childish blog is hardly a good way to throw stones at people who at least think they are smarter than you.
To be fair, many of the jokes on The Daily Show and Colbert assume a certain level of knowledge about politics and current events. I often find myself explaining some of the gags to my wife who is not as up to speed on the scandal or news item of the day they might be poking fun at. Does it mean you are smarter than other people? Not really, however it does imply that you have a higher than average curiosity about the world around you.
Considering that parody work like The Onion or the Daily Show are really not funny at all if you do not understand the context of the joke….it seems highly unlikely that many are really using them as a primary news source as is claimed in this blog. I assume the majority of those who claim they use those sources as a primary news source are being smart alecs. Honestly, have you ever read The Onion, do you really think that people believe that Obama is planning to axe the the Pentagon's budget to build a billion dollar tank in the shape of a dragon…of course not. That would be as foolish as believing that the President of the United States doesn't have a valid birth certificate……
"Are Jon Stewart fans smarter than the rest of us?"
YES!
"Is that the reason why many of us do not find him hilarious… that we’re too dumb to get the joke?"
PRETTY MUCH!
"According to Nielsen research, “Daily Show” audiences are more likely to hold a four-year degree than those watching “The O’Reilly Factor.” Of course, they didn’t find out what KIND of a degree those people hold, or whether it left them employable, or even employed. But that really doesn’t matter. If they’re confusing a comedian with a newsman, they certainly aren’t very bright."
And you are confusing Bill O'Reilly with a newsman? How bright is that?!
At least Stewart regularly points out that its "fake news".
Man, you are right about Stewart's humor being the least of my worries, I just worry that I dont meet you on the road with all that rage you harbor. Time for your meds, my good man.
Right, a certain level of knowledge of politics and current events…as portrayed and reported by like minded individuals following a singular school of political thought. Your pretty liberal in your assumptions, just make sure YOU are smart enough to remember what happens when you ASSUME…
The guy's about as funny as a train wreck.
And the forced laughter that follows his bleatings bears a
resemblance to the fake joy of Obamamania.
There is going to be a lot of media personalities like Stewart
becoming irrelevant laughing stocks as the Obamamania implosion
hits hard… looks like it started this week, IMO
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com...
Well said. I prefer BBC over the crap they put on Fox and CNN these days. It's all Michael Jackson hoopla, but who gives a shit anymore. They focus more on saying they are the most trusted, and most watched, than they do on the content of their programs.
Israel was defeated by Lebanese irregular militia riflemen DESPITE infinite support from the US. You guys are fooling yourselves like the Georgians (who also had a near fatal case of Zionism-inspired "we are Chosen"-syndrome…..for a very short while. Israel's military history is making sneak attacks (funny, even though the Japanese did NOT sneak attack the US, they are condemned for it – meanwhile it is all Israel does) and tiny little attacks before running behind the apron strings of the US. Now they are wanting to attack Iran and let the US soldiers bear the brunt of their justified retaliation. I think even they know that they are in danger of overplaying their hand and the world finally ridding the world of this troublesome flea of a nation (a theocracy, even. How very outdated.)
The question you should be asking is "Who is really the better trained seal?"
a) the audience that roars with laughter at an insipid joke
b) the one who performs to an audience and plays to their biases
c) people like CgntvDssdnt, who are content to swim in the same large pod doing the same mindless circles
d) all of the above
Hmmmm
psst, couple things.
a Neocon is a jewish conservative and McCain and Bush are not conservatives. Let me restate that last part. George W. Bush was not and is not a conservative. He may be many things, including a gentleman, but being a republican does not make one conservative
thanks for coming to BH, though, stick round and you might be able to get that KOS fixation de-programmed
How many different facial expressiont can Seward do? Does he think of new ones to fit the story?
When I saw this poll, with Katie Couric at the top…………..all I had to say or post was "where is the none of the above" button.
And speaking of Fox…did anyone notice there wasn't one, not one representative from Fox. What, are they scared ?
The truth shall set you free…..Fox is only the most watched news program in 4 out of five shows if I recall correctly.
Jon Stewart = news….hhhmmm
I told you to stop making anti-Semitic remarks, you idiot, and of course you didn't, so now you're reported. Enjoy, racist.
This is a good column, but you made your mistake when you said, "Millions" in regards to Stewart's audience. A simple look at the ratings shows that while O'Reilly scores up to 3 million viewers per day (3 airings of his show), Stewart is far less than 1 million (for 2 airings). The fact is, the survey is ridiculous crap because not enough people watch Stewart to make a 44% figure even possible. This is an example of Liberals getting everyone to swing at their imaginary targets. Stewart and Colbert appeal to such a small audience that they'd be canceled if their show was on Fox.
This is a good column, but you made your mistake when you said, "Millions" in regards to Stewart's audience. A simple look at the ratings shows that while O'Reilly scores up to 3 million viewers per day (3 airings of his show), Stewart is far less than 1 million (for 2 airings). The fact is, the survey is ridiculous crap because not enough people watch Stewart to make a 44% figure even possible. This is an example of Liberals getting everyone to swing at their imaginary targets. Stewart and Colbert appeal to such a small audience that they'd be canceled if their shows were on Fox.
yeah! those stupid french people! all they did was save our AS*ES during the war of independence AND the war of 1812… allowing us to defeat britain in both cases and establishing/re-establishing this lil' ole country of ours. we really should box up that statue of liberty and send it back, fed ex! freedom fries! woo-hoo!
yeah! those stupid french people! all they did was save our AS*ES during the war of independence AND the war of 1812… allowing us to defeat britain in both cases and establishing/re-establishing this lil' ole country of ours. we really should box up that statue of liberty and send it back, fed ex! freedom fries! woo-hoo!
There is no doubt that they are shows targeted at a liberal audience. However they are also shows targeted at an audience that knows much more about current events than most Americans do.
You can attack the viewpoint without calling the people watching it idiots. Smart people can be conservative, smart people can be liberals. While watching the Daily Show is no litmus test for intelligence, you do have to at least get your news from other sources to get most of the humor.
"AIPAC shill like Wolf Blitzer"
last I heard schnitzer sucks up to palis – last I heard aipac's new head is an obamunist from chicago who doesn't like "settlements" (i,e, Jews living in Israel) any more than obama or you do.
and last I heard our liberation of iraq had nothing to do with Israel, and everything to do with getting rid of saddam who was, according to dems and repubs and brits and french, trying to reconstitute wmd while reaching out to bin laden.
So go back to watching your genius jino stewart- you seem to get illegal immigration and paper money BS, but here's a hot tip – STEWART AND OBOZO don't.
88 much?
say what you want. I much perfer Craig Kilbourn's smugness as TDS host. Stewart's shtick got old fast.
How DARE you insult the brave and highly TRAINED S.E.A.L. units?!
There is a local blog that when I posted a response that I thought people were pinheads for voting Stewart his title. The editor of that blog said I didn't get the joke. The joke wasn't funny.
I felt a society who would vote a novice senator President would be stupid enough to consider Stewart a newsman.
you don't know what you are talking about. The fish they give us seals is damn tasty.
"Once again we see how the value of an education is highly overrated."
In your case, yes. I think the government should ask for their money back.
Well, ok Staff. I try to be accurate and not fire from the lip. I'll look it up concerning Lebanon. Since Israel still exists I not sure they over ran the country and eliminated Israel. Israel is not a theocracy. There are factions from the entire spectum vying for leadership all the time in Israel's government. Right now in response to Iranian aggression vis a vis their supply of weapons top Hamas they are very right wing. Call it a defense mechanism. Concerning "sneak attacks" the '73 pre-emptive attack was based on great intell and great planning. Mossad knows what their doing. Being the only non-Islamic democracy in the M.E. is a lonely place to be. It's getting even lonelier with Obama in the W.H.
FACT: "JS" – couldn't hold Lou Dobbs jock strap there, fixed it for you.
yeah! those stupid french people! all they did was basically hand their country over to the Germans twice in two world wars … allowing Britain and , especially in WW2, the U.S., to bail out their sorry arses. after that they continue to prove that not only are they ambivalent to our country, they can be downright hostile when anyone asks for any kind of assistance, in any way, shape or form. it appears that now the "brave" french are in the midst of handing their country over to muslim extremists, in the name of political correctness. Sorry, but those truly brave frenchmen andrea speaks of above have been long gone for over 100 years. Just sayin'….
uhm, Staphy, where have you ever heard someone on this site support wolf blitzer??? Unless, of course it was a troll, or a simpleton( no, then you would support him ). I've been waiting for days for you to tie Israel into something or other. Now, where are the obvious links to the Mossad, the CIA, the CFR, Goldman-Sachs and the Rothchilds banking cabal? Tinfoil hat gettin' a little tight on you? Have you been sticking your head in the microwave again? By the way, Israel has NEVER been defeated in battle, no matter how much revisionist history you attempt to pile on. You think we are as moronic as yourself, don't you" Just sayin'….
Such BS, Staphy. Please wake up and see the truth for what it really is, before it's too late for you. Your comments above are so riddled with blatant and outright falsehoods that I'm not even going to adress them, I'm sure other commenters here will shred your inane post. I actually almost feel sorry for you, WHAT?? Like hell I do, for spouting this kind of garbage someday the truth will catch up with you. Don't look now, but I think the Mossad has your name and location on file. OOOHHH, I would SO NOT want to be on their bad side, heh heh. Just sayin' ….
We know your game, just trying to stir the pot, what a RUSH! Am I to assume that you are a fan of john stewart then? I suppose the article was too profound for you to grasp, as the point you so eloquently made was soundly refuted by Mr. Slagle. Nice try, I guess.
Once again, WRONG. Please see the comments made by Des, below. Thank you.
Excellent!!
Jon Stewart = blithering idiot. There, that was easy enough.
Stafford…we've gone over this before. Israel needs NO ONE to fight its battles for them. That is empirical fact. Many incursions BY Arab countries, many defeats OF Arab countries…totally by the IDF and IAF. Now, we do sell and/ or give arms to Israel ('73 for example) but even then we got valuable "hands on" data of performance versus the Soviet backed and supplied Egyptians, Jordanians or whomever was getting their butts kicked at the time. Don't get all crazy and start calling everybody names. We can debate these points calmly.
My guess is that Jon Stewart features on so many conservative blog posts because the bloggers recognise that he is very witty, and they are worried that this makes his Liberal bias all the more influential.
I say, "Why worry?". Laught at the bits that are funny – and there are more than a few of those – and dissect the bits that you disagree with. Like his analogy between the success of government control of the military and the potential for successful government control of healthcare. This analogy is not valid because the success of healthcare is dependent on the variable needs of consumers, whereas military targets never change – they are always about destroying things. There is no point building a "shock and awe" kidney dialysis machine if next to no-one is suffering from renal problems.
While I'm on the subject of Comedy Central, Colbert has collapsed since the run-up to the presidential election, when he dropped the spoof conservative theme and came out as a complete girl for Obama.
You are still harping on Israel?? Give it a break! Find something else to gripe about. You are like a never ending boil on the arse of humanity with that stuff. You pick at it, put some anti-septic on, have it lanced and bandaged and still–there it is: fetid and unproductive wasting the energy of the host body. Can you please find something else to harp on. Really–I'm seriously bored with your rantings. How do you feel about root canals? Let's tackle that subject. Regarding the narly little problems you're trying to push off on McCain and Bush etc. (as if the SUDDENLY popped up under their leadership) Look back a little further. Seems they "inherited" their problems from the previous administration. Gee–sound familiar?
No defeat, ceasefire. Difference there. Besides–not really sure what you are talking about. Cite sources. Need an intelligent debate.
I had to find that Rob Riggle segment. Here it is and it is awesome:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-march-10-20...
While looking for that one, I found another another Daily Show segment that makes fun of the left:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-september-1...
I watch the Daily Show every day. I'm 62 and have been an avid follower of the news since I was a child. Starting in about 1957, I read my local newspaper every day cover to cover–every section: national; local; business; society; sports; comics; everything–until the internet came along. Now I get news from all over the net.
I have supported both democrats and republicans at different times. I have on occasion called myself a republican but never a democrat. I strongly opposed Bush 2 for president because I didn't think he was up to the job (and still don't). I did strongly support his invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, however. I was doubtful about Iraq but got behind it when I saw the evidence Colin Powell presented at the UN.
I turned against the war when the real truth started coming out (e.g., cooked-up intelligence) and I saw that Bush/Cheney were putting their own political objectives ahead of the rule of law. I like John McCain very much but voted for Obama because McCain refused to repudiate Bush. I was thrilled that Obama won because he represents a return to the rule of law and also because he represents an end to the 'bad old days' of racism in
America. And, yes, I'm still happy he won.
But I don't learn all I know about the news on the Daily Show. In fact, I don't think anyone does. Most of what he does wouldn't make any sense outside the context of a good understanding of current news events. The Daily Show viewers know he edits in a way to make a humorous point. The only difference between the Daily Show and Fox News is that Stewart readily admits to it.
Fox News does the same kind of selective editing but will deny it with a straight face. For example, when a republican is caught in a scandal, Fox will label them as democrats ("D"). They did that with Mark Foley, the GOP'er who was hitting on male congressional pages, and recently with Mark Sanford, the republican governor who ran off to Argentina to visit a lover. "Whoops, mistake," they say. Simple mistake? Yeah, sure. Odd they never make the same mistake the other way.
People who don't find the Daily Show funny are probably people who simply don't enjoy having holes shot in their cherished beliefs.
I note that this blog has numerous Scientology advertisements. Superb target marketing given the thoughts behind, quality and character of most of the comments posted here!!!
One of the best pieces they did was with correspondent (and veteran) Rob Riggle who was covering a Code Pink (or similar) protest outside a military recruitment office. I kid you not, the conversation went something like this:
Protestor: "We're just here demonstrating our freedom of speech."
Riggle: "Yeah, and it wouldn't it be cool if there was an all-volunteer group of people who protected that right for you?"
Protestor: "I know, right?!"
300th post!! Not bad for an independent.
The laughter is computer generated.
I would guess that the degrees held by many of Stewart's viewers have the word "Studies" in them… like Women's Studies, African-American Studies, etc. etc.
Now, now, now, Cog. Some of us get it, we just don't what it…
They also put an R next to Blago when he was going through his corruption charges, or did you ignore that?
From starwatch.com: Stewart's entered the dangerous self-assured territory of "I know my audience is going to laugh at whatever I do so I can just mug and be silly because I know I`ll get applause if I do it long enough." I just don't find him funny. He has his moments, but studio audiences propel him even when he has no material.
They also put an R next to Blago when he was going through his corruption charges, or did you ignore that?
From starwatch.com: Stewart's entered the dangerous self-assured territory of "I know my audience is going to laugh at whatever I do so I can just mug and be silly because I know I`ll get applause if I do it long enough."
I just don't find him funny. He has his moments, but studio audiences propel him even when he has no material.
The Victim Arts, as I like to call them.
chuckle chuckle….
Holy crap!
It took me seven years!
Where'd I go wrong?
Hey – It's harder than it looks! Particularly if you go for the underwater variety!
Here's a site with some Onion-style humor from a different political perspective: http://www.optoons.blogspot.com/
No, I didn't ignore it. It's news to me. And after 30 minutes of searching the net I found only one reference to it, a blog asking for a screen shot.
I had no trouble finding photos of the mislabeled republicans, however. I found one more besides the one I mentioned earlier–Ted Stevens, the republican from Alaska was labeled as a Dem on Fox. And when Larry Craig, the republican caught soliciting sex in a toilet, was arrested they just didn't mention party affiliation at all.
Of course one reason they misidentify republicans more often could be the fact that republicans have been getting involved in scandals mor often …
Why does Stewart get the credit? All he does is read off a teleprompter. (hey…wait a minute…) Shouldn't his writers get the accolades? Stewart mugs for the camera like a third grader. Big freakin' whoop. If that's talent, I'll take the Three Stooges anyday. Moe's interpretation of Hitler had much more gravitas.
I noticed this phenomenon many years ago. Back in the day, Playboy ran an annual poll to find out who people (men) thought were the most important musicians. For years, they would people like Miles Davis, John Coltrane or Duke Ellington would be selected. Then somewhere in the 70's, all of a sudden, you had groups like Black Oak Arkansas and Alice Cooper at the top of the polls. Did music change that much? Yes. But more importantly, for the purpose of the polls, the voters changed. That is our current national problem. Our voters are increasingly those who think John Stewart is a NEWSMAN!!!
I would like a link count on the statement of "the fact that republicans have been getting involved in scandals moer often …
I watch the news too, and it appears that democrats lead in that catagory. Concerning "mislabeled republicans" I don't have a count on that, but I can assure you that the MSM leads in not identifing party affiation when the wrong doers are democrats. I sometimes (if it has not already been linked) google politicians and such to find out what their unidentified party affiliation is. And guess what, it is almost always democrat. But we are splitting hairs somewhat here. I have come to the conclusion that power corrupts everybody in politics…or at least almost everybody. I'm for term limits, higher pay for those term limits (so as to discourage politicians in office from accepting bribes or other illegal money) and for better vetting on canidates for public office.
But that is just me…an ol' man from Texas, with just a smiggen of higher education and not a Jon Stewart fan.
Papa Ray
West Texas
Wow, they've been to college (and probably employ the locution "Graduated high school and college," unaware of the necessary "from.")
For the last 40 years, a university degree has indicated nothing beyond the good fortune to have been born into a situation that allowed you to live off your parents for another 4 years. Hip/Edgy humor reached its apogee with Beavis and Butthead.
(For Jon Stewart fans: “Spanish Fly” is what us old people used to call that stuff Russian spammers email you about every evening.) I still wasn’t buying. “I’ve heard all that stuff is just a placebo.”
She continued the pitch, “Well that’s what they SAY it is. I can’t promise you that it’s a REAL placebo…”
*facepalm*
I'm older than dirt. I've seen it all (well, almost all).
My generation was deemed "lost", "corrupted" by music and dirty magazines and other factors at the time. But all in all we got our heads screwed on (most times by real life) in time to grow up and become productive adults who embraced "personal responsibility" and the "American Dream".
Now-a-days…not so much, at least for the last forty years. People are still, as adults, refusing to accept personal responsibility, make the most of education, recognize ignorance and satire as what they are and not trying to "grow up".
There is nothing more pathetic than a fifty year old "hippy", unless it is a fifty year old "eco-terrorist" who won't let America drill or wants to protect little fishes or bugs at the expense of humans.
But, never fear, the cycles continue. Except that the cycle through socialism, communism and me-ism is going to come close to destroying this great Republic.
But I have confidence that Americans who do have personal responsibility and who do love this Republic will in the end save her and themselves and even those Jon Stewart fans.
Papa Ray
West Texas
Actually I thought where you were going is those being polled were selected by those polling to reflect bias.
Stewart appeals to the young, college-educated slacker who thinks they're too cool and too hip for the rest of us. Time/Newsweek/any leftist publication admire Stewart because he's also a liberal, hates Republicans, and has influence over 20-somethings, which is something they covet, but can't get. So by being smarmy, bashing Republicans, tossing in a drug joke now and then, Stewart gets the slackers to laugh. Big accomplishment. What is the total of Stewart's audience? 1.5 million, maybe 2 million on a good night. Hardly a blip, but the left loves him.
MacCain and Bush neocons? Do you even know what that term means–apparently not. Google the name Michael Harrington and then go back to reading the Nation and Counterpunch because that's about your level and your speed.
Hmm…I seem to recall that Sarah Palin took six years to get her degree…they're it great company!
Are we seriously giving this much weight to an online poll? Based on a sample of fewer than 10,000 people in a nation of 300 million? (I guess not too many people check out the Time website) C'mon. And the MSNBC poll linked to is dated…2004? This sort of playing loose with facts gives the internets a bad name!
Tim-
Sadly, my own son is one of these. Although he is a self-described "libertarian" and didn't vote for Obama (at least, that's what he SAYS), he's definitely a "young, college educated slacker" who gets most of his political views from Stewart and Colbert. Sad, really.
I love the "real placebo" story. I'll definitely be using that somewhere, sometime. And probably without attribution. Sorry…
"Moe's interpretation of Hitler had much more gravitas."
I'll be chuckling over that all day long….
I used to like the Daily Show. I really did. Back in the Kilborn days, the show was more like "The Soup" than the "fake news" show it is today- pointing out humor in pop culture as well as politics- and not taking itself as "faux-seriously" as it does today.
When Stewart took over, I thought he was pretty funny. But then the Bush years started. I couldn't really stand seeing the same "Bush is stooopid huh huh huh" joke told over and over again. Though I did think that when Jon returned to the air after 9/11, he gave the second best return speech (Letterman was the ultimate victor there) When the Republicans won the Congress again in 2002, all Stewart (and his co-writers, apparently) could do was complain that this meant "more tax cuts for the rich". At that point, I realized that the show was not going to be attacking both sides fairly at all, and that (like Letterman after his kid was born), the show was going to have a message to say, and not just jokes to tell. At that point, I watched the show less and less…. but maybe it's because I was getting too old.
No, I voted for McCain/Palin like the rest of you neo-con losers!
So WHAT was taken out of context from the Lou Dobbs birther rant, then?
We report, you decide (which is lies and which is slander)…
James, please see the comments made above by Ray, who, unlike yourself, remains lucid and prescient in his critical analysis and thought process. As for BHO's administration being a " return to law", you're joking, right? Omg, this administration is already embroiled in more controversy than imaginable under Bush, EVEN Clinton. You actually recieve your daily news from HuffHo and Kos, correct? I suggest that you re-up your meds posthaste, you're losin' it, Jim. Just tryin' to help….Does ACORN,nationalizing the auto industry, healthcare and the banking industry, printing OBSCENE amounts of $ that will lead to hyper-inflation, kowtowing to special-interest groups, political paybacks on a massive scale, absolutely NO transparency in policy formation …. does any of this concern you or ring a bell?…. and this is merely the TIP of the iceberg, my friend. Talk about someone who dosen't "enjoy having holes shot in their cherished beliefs", time to get your head out of the sand, sir.
Probably because that dentist/lawyer/loon Orly Taitz is holding (and sniffing) it!
????,… wow, try again, only this time attempt to make a valid, lucid and/or sentient comment, perhaps someone will read it.
Doesn't speak well for Faux News when they can't even properly a Democrat or Republican crook properly; no wonder Fake Crier Glenn Beck and Fake So Many Things Gretchen Carlson are rising stars there…
I think you point out precisely the difference between the right and the real. Your moronic article illustrates that your agenda is so sour as to choke a dog. Just sayin. I'm a 60 year old with a PhD and I have not lost my sense of humor, evan after the past 8 years of fear-mongered social, economic, and legal devolution. I do agree with your hypothesis that you are too dumb to get the joke, and for that matter, I would predict that you do not know any jokes at all. Get a life.
Concur. Stopped watching his schtick a long time ago.
I think it is a stretch to use the word humor to describe the link you post. You might want to use the site as an example of how not to set up a joke or generate comedic premise. By the same token, I'm not fond of the Onion either.
Pick a new theme, troll.
I liked The Daily Show better when Craig Kilborne was on it and nobody watched it.
Hey stupid, neither one is funny nor entertaining. What's there to get a clue about? BTW, your little tin pot dictator wannabe racist god currently playing president is in way over his head and people are starting to see it. Now THAT is funny.
So, you're a jew hater.
CgntvDssdnt,
Yes, JS does regularly point out that his show is fake news. In spite of that, his audience *still* considers him a trusted newsman. If that doesn't speak volumes about their intelligence…
What would you rather watch someone like Maddow or Olberman? cmon…. what a farce or CROCK that is!!!
JJ, that is funny…. fertilizer…
Syvyn, your last sentence is PERFECT and SO true!!!
Slagle didn't actually refute anything, he just wondered a lot. Which is not surprising at a site that still hangs on to Bush like he's not some stinking albatross still dragging Republican fortunes down.
The poll is being taken seriously by many news outlets:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/colum...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-snow/jon-stew...
http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/07/jon-stewa...
http://www.seattlepi.com/tv/408371_stewart23.html
http://www.examiner.com/x-2601-Detroit-Conservati...
What are you talking about? I'm just a comedian writing a "fake" news blog here.
Didn't you find it funny? Don't you get the jokes?
Maybe I'm just shooting over your head.
It's called irony. Republicans come out with fake news , like Obama is a Muslim, went to a madras, doesn't have a birth certificate, and Stewart uses his shtick to prove how ridiculous they are .Educated people know the difference between the absurd lies and misinformation opinionists like Hannity and Rush spew as facts, and wonder how these guys call themselves reporters. Stewart points out the ridiculous, and drives his message with reason, albeit in a entertaining fashion. If you can't laugh at the absurdity that politicians and rightwingnuts use to defend their unpopularity,nor the danger of their hate speech and disingenuous agenda, then you have no outlet for your anger at these threatening losers. But I wouldn't expect an opinionated toadie to get it, and perhaps the author just hopes there are enough idiots out there to believe his preposterous hypotheses.
Doesn't make it one jot less absurd, just proves how the media lemmings work. If 10,000 Americans voted me Queen of America, I'd know better than to take it for a remotely representative sample of this country. (Although if I do say so myself, I would make an AWESOME queen of America)
Stewart is as much a newsman as Betty Croker (winner: the most trusted person in America!) was a real person!
Yeah, it's statistical nonsense. All it really proves, is that Jon Stewart has at least 5000 idiot fans.
But I figured since some mainstream publications found it newsworthy, someone in the opposition should have a say in the matter.
Actually, the two "news" sites I visit the most often are Drudge and Google. Where I go from there depends on what they link to and that is rarely Huffington or Kos.
You mention ACORN. They became famous when they collected voter registrations for the likes of Mickey Mouse. For that they were and still are improperly vilified. The fact is that they, like all voter-registration canvassers, are REQUIRED BY LAW to hand over _every_ form they receive NO MATTER WHAT NAME IS ON IT–even Mickey Mouse.
That law is designed to prevent canvassers from throwing away forms from people who they suspect won't vote for whoever they themselves happen to like. It's the job of the election commission to sort out the forms that are valid _not_ ACORN.
But that simple fact doesn't faze the wingnuts at Fox and elsewhere. They've got a hold of a juicy "scandal" and aren't about to let the facts get in their way.
As for the auto industry–those knuckle heads (both management and the unionized workers) deserve it. They've had over 30 years since the oil shocks and 50 years (half a century!) since Japan and Germany started eating their lunches with smaller fuel-efficient cars to get a clue. They refused to learn and now they're paying the price. Good on Obama for doing what needed to be done.
Ditto with the banking industry. They screwed up big time and now they have to pay the price. The most important thing with both the auto industry and banks is making sure the stockholders lose their investments. They hired the people who screwed it up so it's their responsibility. The government should take the companies over, wipe out the current stockholders and then get the taxpayer's money back by selling stock to new investors.
Complaints about kowtowing to special interests and lack of transparency in policy formation, political paybacks on a massive scale by Obama are silly. The same can be said of _any_ administration. Bush took secrecy to new levels in his administration and, just as predicted at the time, the subsequent president is continuing it. Enron? Halliburton? Plame? Ring any bells?
Don't blame Obama for printing money. He didn't make this problem. He just got stuck with it.
[...] http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/tslagle/2009/07/24/john-stewart-poll/ [...]
Oh, I was asked for a link on the number of repub vs. dem scandals. It's not necessary. Both have their share and neither is more prone to scandal than the other. For most of the last ten years, the majority of congressmen and the administration was republican so by the simple law of averages you can expect more republican scandals (and there were). If the Dems keep control of the WH and congress for the next two terms, then most of the scandals will be Dems.
One area the Repubs do seem to have the majority of scandals, however, is in the "self-righteous promotor of "Family-values" caught with his pants down" department. What's up with that?
" I wouldn't expect an opinionated toadie to get it"
you just don't want it because…you don't like it.
I will dare to suggest to you that sometimes "truth hurts". Maybe that's the case here, maybe its not. Please tell me some other reason you don't like it?
it is very easy to be a troll some times. E.g. to say something inflamatory! WHOOSH! Watch the gasoline fire up.
But I wonder is, why is it so easy sometimes, to post something that combines these two key ingredients:
1) audience doesn't like it or doesn't agree.
2) there's yet something to it that bugs people- something that (despite denial) resonates, perhaps as a catchy sound of truth, or maybe some how even masquarades as the truth. (How is that effectively done?)
it is very easy to be a troll some times. E.g. to say something inflamatory! WHOOSH! Watch the gasoline fire up.
But what I wonder is, why is it so easy sometimes, to post something that combines these two key ingredients:
1) audience doesn't like it or doesn't agree.
2) there's yet something to it that bugs people- something that (despite denial) resonates, perhaps as a catchy sound of truth, or maybe some how even masquarades as the truth. (How is that effectively done?)
it does not. It speaks volumes about your intelligence or your cultured-ness if you can't see how comedy, and art in general, is able to show a higher truth about things in our world than "the news" does.
"evan after the past 8 years of fear-mongered social, economic, and legal devolution."
But enough about the Clinton years . . .
Stewart's best work was in "The Faculty."
Daily Show will never be as smart, funny, or creative as SNL….especially the current SNL
He get's nasty but reserves it mostly for consevatives, and it's considered "comedy". That's fine, I don't have to watch it. So I don't. He trashes my values with a cruel, snarky East Coast, Ivy League, "I'm better than you are" smirk. He epitomizes the piss on "fly over country" type of attitude that will flip the house.
agreed. The sad fact that some people don't get is that Stewart pokes fun at the left all the time. Its easy to laugh at a lot of liberal stuff (what with Pelosi, Biden, et all) and Steward doesn't loose any opportunities there.
yeah, I suppose he might. I had an epiphany the other day, just mulling to myself how provincially minded I happen to be. See, I love where I live. I consider my part of our great nation one of the most deeply beautiful places. Now, i haven't been around all that much…so I can sort of imagine maybe there's places that would open my eyes – fine. At the same time tho…when I hear "flyover states", to me, that translates to "flat, and boring as sh*t." so does that make me a condescending a-hole? perhaps. I'm sorry because i don't mean to offend. I fully realize that in the subjective nature of what I'm talking about, there's a lot about what I enjoy where I live that other people would detest – fine.
Anyway, that's a long elaboration but, yeah, I do get Stewart, and maybe there's an obnoxious component that folks out there don't get. To that I say: "To each their own". I genuinely hope there are social commentators and comedians that others appreciate as much as I do Steward, Colbert, and for that matter, Bill Maher.
It'd be funny if Jay Leno did a "Jaywalking" segment outside the studio and asked questions to Jon Stewart fans about to be part of the audience. "Can you tell me what the 'Law of Supply and Demand' is?" "Who was president before Richard Nixon?" "Who was John Maynard Keynes?" If people wonder why they call it "the Dumbest Generation," calling Jon Stewart America's most trusted "newsman" might give them a clue.
"I'm a 60 year old with a PhD." And yet probably still a dues-paying member of the Cult of the State. Sad.
Wow, Stafford…try thinking for yourself once! FYI…BHO's administration is the one printing the money to give to the banks and it can't even get that right. Stewart can be funny sometimes, but most of the time, he's just plain mean and he's knows it, which makes him and his audience even more pathetic. Most liberals I know are all talk and feel good being a part of a group because they are cowards who are afraid to think or do for themselves.
I agree with you about the 'hip' quotient being a driver of his audience. The faux hipness has plagued the culture for years. This contributes to people actually confusing him with a newsman. However, he is somewhat like an O'Reilly in the sense that he's got a "take" sometimes and does sometime battle public figures on things they propagated. Like O'Reilly vs. Frank, there was Stewart vs. Kramer, etc. The Fact that the Daily Show spawned an O'Reilly parody show (Colbert) shows JS own roots as a political commentator…albeit one who masquerades as simply a comedian…except to the 'hip' who hold him up as more than that.
I have to say, I do not watch the Daily show much. I do find it funny at times, though admittedly Talk Soup is far more consistently funny doing essentially the same thing. Showing clips of earnest people saying really idiotic things (even if they must be taken out of context for humor purposes).
I do think it sad that people trust him more than other news anchors but perhaps that says more about Mainstream media than for TDS.
-M
it just proves that wisdom and intelligence (and a string of degrees) are two completely different things
Real quick, Mr. Larsen, I will answer your comments above later, as they are easily and soundly refuted. You state that dem's and repub's have their share of scandals, nonsense! As a conservative independent(although I tend to vote Republican, to be fair), I follow both party's activities closely. The democrats currently caught up in scandals FAR outnumbers the numbers of republicans in the same situation. If you have truly done any research on the subject, you cannot deny this fact. You denigrate Fox News for missing the politician's party affiliation, yet how can you deny the fact that this is everyday, commonplace, institutionalized modus operandi of the MSM. You state that you get most of your news from Drudge, I simply find that hard to believe, it may be true, but you may say this to give your comments an air of impartiality. However your comments stand alone, your liberal bias is shown for what it is.
Furthermore, how, on a (mostly) conservative site, could you EVER equate the commenters and bloggers with Scientology? The liberals have a solid liplock on Scientology, just read their membership rolls!!
I also take your self-righteous comment that Repubs have a majority of scandals from a veiw-point of being hypocritical espousers of family values to mean that since dems have NO family values, morals or standards they should then be given carte blanche to do as they please. After all, they don't stand for any type of decency, so why should they be held to any standards ar all, correct? This assumption by you is very telling, indeed.
Wow, what an obama apologist you seem to be!One of the worst I've personally came across.To state that ACORN is just doing their duty when they turn in voter registration forms with dead people, names in alphabetical order, pets registered as voters, mickey mouse, etc., etc. Do you honestly believe ACORN had nothing to do with this?Coincedence,right?ACORN is currently under investigation in over a dozen lawsuits, only one has been recommended for dismissal, in Ohio, by a democratic district judge, Tim Black. He was overturned by an appeals court.
Because the auto and banking industries made mistakes,you are in favor of nationalisation of these entities,good on obama?Shame on you,sir!You would have to be a Marxist to be in favor of gov't. takover of any private co.,much less the inroads BHO has tried to make at taking over the entire industry.You don't even make sense.Don't blame obama for spending more $ than ALL previous administrations combined?Enron,Halliburton,Plame?What do they have to do with ANY comments made above?BHO has printed so much $ we shall suffer hyperinflation,irrefutable. You,sir,have been exposed to be the Bush hating troll you are, your arguements holding no merit at all,only a thinly veiled attempt to lambaste Bush,not discuss this admin. and their flaws.
I love New York City by the way…in my opinion the entire universe spins around the axis that is New York City…more the reason to recapture it from the liberal elite..by the way the "car biz" is buying me a nice, shiny, liberal approved higher education…I plan to use it to expose and tear down liberal hypocracy and deceit…it should be great fun! So, will I need a Master's to "get" Stewart? I better surpass that level "just to make sure".
I'm a Texan by the grace of God but really don't feel that I view things all that provencially…my years in the car business gave my several rewards, a few bad like tired feet and sunburns, but many great, like the money and unfettered freedom to travel, and travel widely. By car or by air I've touched all four conrners of America in the last hand full of years and I just spent a month in Europe, seeing how screwed up we can become if we buy into Obama's vision of a vast North American Euro-style Nanny State. I use the term "fly over counrty" not just literally but also euphemistically, I think that elitists like Stewart really irk Americans coast to coast with their snobbish, dismissive, condesending attitude toward hard working, moral, balanced Americans. I love to see Stewart work a "real job" for a week or two with real Americans, you know, step out of his "New Yawk cocoon". Of course he's "too smart" for that. That's my opinion, he sustains ratings to stay on the air, that's fine. I learn more from "Southpark", it's more socially relevant and more truthful and accurate than Stewart.
I checked out Wikipedia and found hundreds listed on both side. They didn'lt have a score card, however, and I'm not interested in counting them. Needless to say, there are plenty to go around. Why don't you do a count, if you're so sure, and get back to us?
Believe what you like but I've been to Drudge almost daily since back in the Monicagate days. Drudge actually does precious little reporting. Most of the page is links to other sites. I'm aware most of his links are designed to support his own conservative views and he writes clever (read: "slanted") headlines to put on them. That doesn't bother me. I'm a voracious reader who reads both sides of the story but I don't believe everything I read.
I simply mean they're hypocritical. A playboy, whatever else he might be, is at least honest about it. Someone who preaches one thing while doing another compounds, on the other hand, compounds their sin with dishonesty. That's the point I was making.
And I reject your assertion that dems do not stand for any type of decency. Their sense simply may not match yours. They might, for example, think it's only decent to allow people to love whomever they please. But if you are of the opinion that _your_ sense of decency is the only correct one, then that makes you–guess what? Self-righteous!
Maxist, schmarxist. It's not the same thing as nationalization of a going concern. They're going down the tubes anyway so it's a salvage operation. Would you prefer that they just shut the doors? The point of the takeover is to try to resuscitate the industry because of its significant impact on the overall economy. If you have a better plan, please do tell.
The punishment for business mistakes under capitalism (which I strongly and absolutely support, by the way), is to lose your money and that's exactly what should happen. My concern, as noted earlier, is that the stockholders not be allowed to keep their investments. If the plan is to let the same people end up owning the companies, then that would be wrong (socialism for capitalists!).
Enron, Halliburton, Plame were posted as a counterpoint to your mention of ACORN which also has nothing to do with this. I notice you 'forgot' to respond to my comments about them. That's telling.
I don't hate Bush, by the way. I also have no respect for him. I suspect that you hate Obama, however, judging by the spittle all over the inside of my computer display.
Oh but yes, nationalisation of privately owned co.,s is just that, marxism. Read the "Communist Manifesto", by Karl Marx. Yes, I do have a better plan, let them fail, just as you mentioned. Also in the Manifesto is the idea of a heavy, progressive income tax, which obama is very much in favor of. By nationalising these co.,s, the gov't. has done that which you so fear and dread, the shares owned by the stockholders has taken a nose dive, never to return. I don't hate obama,I don't hate anyone.I don't use every forum to bash obama,if the topic du'jour is mistakes by Bush,I'll point out what I think he did wrong,not take the opportunity to lambaste obama.
Welll, democrats lying about being involved in scandals as they look you dead in the eye and say such things as "I did not have sex with that woman" are jusy as sanctimonious as anyone else.Happens all of the time.No, dems do not stand for any type of decency,being the party of "just do it".It is not my OPINION, merely the truth when I see the dems or repubs or anyone else for that matter engaging in sinful behavior.I get my truth from the Bible.Oh no, a bible-thumping hateful Christian,right.Look in the mirror before you throw assertions around of being self-righteous.Judeo-Christian principles are what this country was founded on and have served civilisation very well, thank you.
By the way, James, that spittle inside of your computer display you attribute to me is actually coming from yourself as you spew out your vacuous diatribe of Bush bashing, as well as the daily talking points from huff and kos. Jusy sayin' ….
Sorry James, forgot to respond to the Enron, Halliburton, Plame statement you made above. The simple fact is, who in the Bush administration has been conclusively linked to Halliburton oe Enron?Plame was a career CIA empolyee who grossly exaggerated her claims of being "outed" by yhe Bush administration, she was exposed as being an officer who did not work undercover and, in fact, was working against the administration and our countrys best interests. Several agents, such as the couple recently caught working for Cuba, have been apprehended working for foreign intelligence agencies. Guess what? Most of these people are LIBERAL in their political viewpoints and affiliations.Please don't ask me to do your research for you again,as Plame has now gone on the lib speech giving circuit,very well documented in the news.
I just stated a simple fact. By law, they are not allowed to turn in some and not others. Is that a hard concept to grasp? Were they doing something nefarious? Maybe. I don't know and neither do you. All you know is that something looks fishy. By your own comment above, you admit that nothing has been proved against them (all the lawsuits and investigations are pending and nothing has been decided).
In the meantime there is a little legal concept called "Not guilty until proven otherwise." It's a concept that came under attack during the Bush administration and is just an example of what was wrong with his administration.
Here's the thing, Mr. Hanzo. You and others are accusing them of this, that and the other. But the one single biggest thing attributed to them, the "banner headline" charge is that they turned in registrations with bogus names such as Mickey Mouse. My point is that, since they are required to turn them in, that charge against them is bogus. And if the _banner_ charge is bogus, it casts negative suspicion against all the other charges.
Now, let me ask you, do _you_ really believe ACORN was manufacturing bogus registrations with Mickey Mouse as the name? Do you believe they thought it would get past the elections commission and one of their confederates would be able to go to the poll station and voting under that name? Really? Do you believe that? If not, then _that_ complaint about them is meaningless. And if you do believe it, then it's _you_ who needs to get back on your meds.
What I believe is that they set up a registration table on a corner or in a mall and some youngsters filled the cards out with bogus names as a lark. When they handed them in, the ACORN staff probably rolled their eyes and then, as required by law, accepted them and passed them on the the elections commission, again, as required by law.
Which scenario is more plausible? A serious conspiracy to get Mickey Mouse to vote or kids on a lark? Please let me know.
Please read more carefully. I'm not in fear and dread of stockholders losing money. I'm in favor of it.
"My concern,as noted earlier,is that the stockholders not be allowed to keep their investments"."I'm not in fear and dread of stockholders losing money.I'm in favor of it". "Good on obama for doing what needed to be done"(re; gov.t takeover of the majority of American auto industry)"capitalism(which I absolutely and strongly support by the way)".Must be nice to have it both ways, you're never wrong, right?As for the Iraq war and "cooked-up intelligence",who had that?The U.N.,the British,the French,a majority of the dems,since their leadership as well as rank and file members, supported it?Seek help.You still haven't answered all of my comments,that's ok,I understand.
[...] and Late Night Wimps Still Won’t Mock Obama and Letterman = Uncool Tim Slagle, Big Hollywood: Jon Stewart’s Brilliant Audience Chris Stigall, Big Hollywood: Remember When SNL Was Funny? (Obama Ushers in New Era of Comedic [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.