Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-10-2010, 07:08 PM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
(27-10-2010 07:00 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(27-10-2010 12:46 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  I LOVE Stewart's remarks to Carlson being just as big a dick on Crossfire as anywhere else.
What was tragic about that 2004 interview is the Crossfire hosts didn't listen to a word he said. He was right, and yet their ego's and partisan hackery wouldn't let them absorb serious criticism because they're not really about offering the electorate opportunity to witness impartial debate platform. They are just as Stewart said, whores strolling down spin alley.

Good link. Thank you.

No problem. Personally, my favorite bit was "I didn't realize that news programs looked to Comedy Central for their cues on honesty". Pure genius.

Oh, absolutely! He struck me as the kind of guy that could tell Carlson to kiss his own ass and Carlson would agree, only to realize what he'd acceded to after he was reapplying his lip balm.

Edit to add: (I did a search, can you tell?And yes, I watched them also.)



CNBC’s Jim Cramer sat down with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.




Jon Stewart vs. John Bolton.


I have grown respect for Stewart and retract my former observations, which were arrived at by surfing and watching opportune broadcasts, which did not provide his serious side. Thank you for enlightening me. Now I can just hate on Colbert! Tongue
Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2010, 11:46 AM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
(27-10-2010 12:46 PM)GassyKitten Wrote:  
(27-10-2010 12:06 PM)Dregs Wrote:  Look I'm no Obama apologist (didn't even vote for him), but how did he go back on his word about DADT?
Perhaps you're unaware of this.

The Obama administration today asked a federal judge to suspend her order for an immediate, worldwide end to the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, which prohibits gay and lesbian service members from openly serving.
(ABC News)

Sorry it took a while to respond. As much as people really want things to be cut and dry in government (as much at I want them to be!) they just are not. This is exactly why all those political ads can LIE so blatantly and get away with it because its all so convoluted that no one knows what the truth is. So this SEEMS like a cut and dry both sides of his mouth moment for Obama, but in reality:

Quote:I’ll have to agree with him on not letting the courts have the say….at least not until it has been ruled on by the Supreme Court. To not put a stay on this ruling would put the military in a very difficult position. It would also put gays wanting to come out that are currently in the military in a dangerous position, as well as new openly gay people wanting to join. If they go for it now, and the 9th Circuit is overruled later…which is highly possible…it would definitely be a mess. It is also unfair to the military to prepare and plan for this transition.

Makes sense to me in a completely governmental fucked up kind of way. BTW the main reason I don't like Obama is because of his supporters. For realists like me they were just setting the guy up to fail and fail hard, and sadly it's happening.
Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2010, 05:21 PM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
(28-10-2010 11:46 AM)Dregs Wrote:  Sorry it took a while to respond. As much as people really want things to be cut and dry in government (as much at I want them to be!) they just are not. This is exactly why all those political ads can LIE so blatantly and get away with it because its all so convoluted that no one knows what the truth is. So this SEEMS like a cut and dry both sides of his mouth moment for Obama, but in reality:

Quote: I’ll have to agree with him on not letting the courts have the say….at least not until it has been ruled on by the Supreme Court. To not put a stay on this ruling would put the military in a very difficult position. It would also put gays wanting to come out that are currently in the military in a dangerous position, as well as new openly gay people wanting to join. If they go for it now, and the 9th Circuit is overruled later…which is highly possible…it would definitely be a mess. It is also unfair to the military to prepare and plan for this transition.
Makes sense to me in a completely governmental fucked up kind of way. BTW the main reason I don't like Obama is because of his supporters. For realists like me they were just setting the guy up to fail and fail hard, and sadly it's happening.

I am another dreamer that would love the political machinations to be cut and dry. Unfortunately, it's like that old adage come true election after election and all time in between; absolute power corrupts absolutely.
And while it may well be argued that government does not have absolute power, because of the Legislative process and the USSC oversight, what remains abundantly evident is that all three branches are powerful. One governs, one passes the bills that become the laws that afford the governance, and one interprets founding documents, and those "letter of the law" , and keep it all legal by that interpretation.
While we the people are literally led to believe, that we have the power because we cast the vote that permits it all to work in just two of those branches of authority over us.

So that once the lying through their teeth and out of both sides of their face, (that's a visual before bed I could have done without, but it does recall images of the beloved quirky "Hellraiser" franchise Tongue Pinhead rocks! Especially if you sew! ), persuades us to either stay loyal as a Partisan or jump ship and hope it works to truly make a change we can believe in, once the ballots are counted it's back to business as usual. Only that process permits them to declare, when things screw up, that it's our responsibility! Because we either voted for the wrong party that caused that trouble. Or because we didn't vote at all.

Hell of a racket, when you think about it. In the meantime, I understand that the Legislative process implemented DADT. However, DADT was Unconstitutional on it's face, from it's inception. And while enlisted do not have the "luxury" of invoking Constitutional rights in the military, because they're commanded to obey orders, DADT applied in the professional military environment, as did illegal discrimination in the secular community. DADT precluded any citizen who would choose to join our all volunteer army, from joining if they were gay, because though "are you gay?" wasn't on the intake paperwork, the policy was known and a matter of military regulations. So it sent a message of discrimination to any gay American (and illegal) citizen who may have wanted to join the ranks, but knew if they did they would be instantly closeted.
When the Legislative process, who's keystone is empowered by the U.S. Constitution, chose to pass a law that violated that document's protections for free citizens, under threat of being made less free if they enlisted in a military service that is charged with protecting and defending that Constitution, this country and her people, they violated their trust.
We should not have to beg them to suddenly honor that covenant, and repeal what was unconstitutional and thus illegal, the moment it was inked.

If the Federal Circuit sets a higher standard than does the Legislative branch of power, so be it. The Federal Circuit didn't ask for that duty. The Legislative Branch made that Duty possible, by violating what they were entrusted to protect.

(Excerpted from the above cited quote)
…it would definitely be a mess. It is also unfair to the military to prepare and plan for this transition.

Prepare and plan for what transition? What's more unfair? That gay's die, closeted and denied their right to be free, while willing to sacrifice so that foreign strangers they do not know, can be free while they themselves are not while enlisted in the ranks?
And what difficulty is afforded in what you call, preparation and planning for this transition? Stop being bigots, stop discriminating against gays in the ranks! STOP, fearing to see and be aware there are gays in the world and some wear a uniform because they volunteer to give their life, not a gay life, their life, to further the agenda of the U.S. Government,and insure freedom and liberty for all but themselves!

What's more challenging in regard to planning and transition? Ignoring gays in the ranks, but drumming them out when even the charge is made against one? Or simply growing up, and doing the job the military is entrusted to?
If we can trust the professional military industrial complex with weapons that can end the world as we know it, but the professional military industrial complex can't stand to know there's a fag or a dyke with a gun and in military uniform, we're already dead!
Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2010, 10:17 PM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
(27-10-2010 11:21 AM)GassyKitten Wrote:  CNN Article
I completely disagree with the title of that CNN article. Stewart is a Satirist on his show, but is also mentally incapable of ever coming out of character long enough to ask real questions.

I'd love to see someone address Obama's betrayal of his promise to repeal DADT, and how his Administration, through channels, has even fought to thwart a Federal courts stay on further enforcement thereof.
But it won't happen. At least, not so that Obama can answer without Stewart interjecting an asinine remark so as to derail the topic or preclude his serious address of it.

I see your point, but I have to disagree as well. I think the power of political satire like Jon Stewart's is precisely his use of character to make outrageous pronouncements. I liked his interview with the President and thought he managed to ask quite a few important questions in 27 minutes.

Obama is pulling back the reins on DADT because the military tends to be populated with very conservative, macho, armed men who simply couldn't handle an overnight transition. To proceed full bore against the advice of those most familiar with the current military climate would be asinine. What could possibly be worse than newly openly gay soldiers getting beaten, hazed, and tormented?
Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 01:57 AM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
Keep in mind than the Daily Show is satiric comedy!! Their material always has a bite to it - his researchers are quite good at resurrecting old sound bites that show politicians, news "pundits", and such to be the hypocrites they truly are. As my friend, RJ Evans says ... The hypocrisy reveals the lie. But expecting Jon Stewart to be completely serious ignores what the show is ... comedy - it's neither news nor serious talk. I agree that I've seen moments when he's more serious than others, and I also wish sometimes he'd really nail some of his guests without sliding off into humor, but ... that's not what his show is. Expecting something else seems to be somewhat unfair.
Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 06:04 AM
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
And yet, in some instances, he does do it. He interviewed Betsy McCaughey, the woman who coined the term "death panels" and asked her to show him specifically where that was in the health care bill - and she couldn't. She tried to weasel it but he kept hammering her on the language and what the bill said.

She resigned from her position as the Director of Cantel Medical Corp the next day, as a direct result.

It's not fair to expect him to do this because, as 2Buck points out, that's not his primary goal. But, he does do it from time to time and I think he's about as good a journalist as any of the journalists I see on the news - and what a poor reflection that is on the state of journalism in the US.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 08:12 AM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
(29-10-2010 06:04 AM)BnW Wrote:  It's not fair to expect him to do this because, as 2Buck points out, that's not his primary goal. But, he does do it from time to time and I think he's about as good a journalist as any of the journalists I see on the news - and what a poor reflection that is on the state of journalism in the US.

Exactly!! He and his crew do more to expose the failings of the so-called journalism on TV these days than anyone else. Anyone with a modicum of brains and integrity could do for TV news what these guys do in the name of satire/parody ... but TV news winds up doing very little of this. Sad, sad, sad ...

I once contemplated being a journalist ... I'm happy now I didn't go down that road. I'd be ashamed of my profession. When a comedy show provides more insight than the "real" news ... things have gone south.
Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 10:11 AM
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
Seems like someone in here doesn't understand how satire works... Hm... I wonder...

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 11:16 AM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
My feelings about Jon Stewart are pretty simple. He's a very funny person with a brilliant staff that has the job of pointing out the ridiculousness of our government officials, and media. Their talent is more in figuring out what not to cover as the potential pool of stupidity runs very deep!
Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2010, 12:30 PM
 
RE: Tonight *Wednesday 10/27* Obama appearance, rally confirm Jon Stewart's reach
Did anyone watch his Obama interview? I just wish someone would nail him for his Bush-like foreign policy, which I feel gets swept under the rug by domestic issues.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: