Jon Stewart

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Funny how “liberals” (by the current definition" are so often intolerant of those having political views different than theirs, in ANY regard. Even learning that a given person disagrees with them on ONE point often yields a nasty, negative emotional response of attacking the person, such as yours.

Sad really.

Yes because only liberals are like this. C’mon man, there are “intolerant” people on every side of the fence. Just look at O’Reilly or Limbaugh.
[/quote]

First, you miss the point.

Perhaps you don’t know what the word liberal means. And what, historically, liberalism has stood for. (Which is completely different than what modern “liberalism” has become.)

For someone to claim to be a liberal while going nuts whenever anyone expresses a view different than theirs, and/or promptly hating anyone on learning that they think differently, is highly ironic, not to mention hypocritical.

Second, so far as I can tell you are in error that Rush Limbaugh, O’Reilly, or conservatives in general get bent out of shape from people HAVING or EXPRESSING views different than their own. I’ve seen absolutely no sign of this.

They don’t like views other than their own going into effect when such results in themselves losing freedoms, property rights, etc or others unwillingly suffering such, but that is not being intolerant of others having or expressing their own opinion.

That, rather, is the hallmark of the modern “liberal.”

22

Oh, and as for your idea that the Daily Show is a news show, let alone as you claim “the only news show on TV where there is the least amount of bias and where you can get at least get an overview of what is going on in the world currently,” frankly that’s sad. You’ve been duped.

24

[quote]pushharder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
I love John Stewart. He’s not quite as great as Bill Maher, but he’s up there.

One of the only shows that openly mocks the absolute ridiculousness of politics that are different from his.

Fixed that for ya, bud.[/quote]

No you didn’t. It’s not his fault that Republicans are often way more ridiculous than Democrats.

25

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
How about, comedian that usually is not much funny and is generally very predictable?

As to not watching regularly, I don’t know why watching constantly, instead of seeing him say 50 times total, would be the key to having a more accurate appraisal.

Except, if having the requirement that for opinions we value, we select only for those persons that watch constantly, we would be pre-selecting almost exclusively for those that really like him in the first place. Huh, wonder how that will turn out?

Selection bias is a great way to get, well, biased results.

Wow, if we consider only those that watch him “regularly,” those people think he’s really good! That’s amazing!

Not that I am saying you are in this category – I’d quite doubt it – but what is really sad is people that think his show is news and he is not only a newsman of sorts, but great. Uh, news flash: he has no interest in giving anything like a full picture and has no great interest in his picture being accurate, but rather that it be amusing. If there is a single sound bite that will make it sound like what he is saying has a point – never mind that it requires omitting the context which will prove otherwise – then he’ll grab it. Fine, it’s a comedy show!

But mistaking this for being a news source, as some actually do, is sad.[/quote]

True. Well, he is the first one to say that his program should not be viewed as news and people should get it elsewhere. In fact, he’s been quoted as saying his program goes on after a dog puppet who sniffs his own ass (Triumph the Insult Dog) and people would be fools to treat it as serious journalism.

Still, he gets good guests and raises interesting issues. If people actually want to follow-up, they can then pursue it on their own time.

As far as bias, unfortunately most mainstream and even alternative news organizations are no less biased. To truly be educated, you must consult conservative and liberal biased sources and also do your own primary source investigation where news is presented without a filter. Unfortunately, most don’t have the time.

26

[quote]optheta wrote:
Great or Greatest American ever?[/quote]

This occasionally funny comedian is now a shill for the democratic party. I don’t think his career started off that way, but that’s what it’s come to.

27

To be clearer, I don’t have any problem with Stewart himself in all this. As JSBrook said, Stewart himself is the first to say his is not a news show and people should look elsewhere for news.

The fact that he finds that advancing, in the public domain, that which he prefers either still allows him to have a very successful show or perhaps adds to his ratings, is nothing to condemn him on either.

My only objection, and there would also be near-astonishment if not having already seen this kind of thing in other regards in many ways prior to this, is with the segment of the public that actually, just because there’s a News Desk stage and the topic is news, thinks it really is news, let alone the “only place you can get the real news about the world” (paraphrase) or other such ideas.

This may be a commentary on what public schools have produced in terms of the electorate.

28

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
To be clearer himself, I don’t have any problem with Stewart himself in all this. As JSBrook said, Stewart himself is the first to say his is not a news show and people should look elsewhere for news.

The fact that he finds that advancing, in the public domain, that which he prefers either still allows him to have a very successful show or perhaps adds to his ratings, is nothing to condemn him on either.

My only objection, and there would also be near-astonishment if not having already seen this kind of thing in other regards in many ways prior to this, is with the segment of the public that actually, just because there’s a News Desk stage and the topic is news, thinks it really is news, let alone the “only place you can get the real news about the world” (paraphrase) or other such ideas.

This may be a commentary on what public schools have produced in terms of the electorate.[/quote]

As is, I fear, in terms of convolution, that which is your writing.

29

Oh, snap!

How witty.

30

[quote]ZEB wrote:
This occasionally funny comedian is now a shill for the democratic party. I don’t think his career started off that way, but that’s what it’s come to.[/quote]

His career started WAAAAYYY off from what it is now. He had a short-lived show on MTV in the 90s, where he would interview unknown punkers and D-list celebrities. He even had Slayer on one of his shows, not high ranking government officials and nobel winning authors.

31

I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.

With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.

LOL

32

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
PB Andy wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Funny how “liberals” (by the current definition" are so often intolerant of those having political views different than theirs, in ANY regard. Even learning that a given person disagrees with them on ONE point often yields a nasty, negative emotional response of attacking the person, such as yours.

Sad really.

Yes because only liberals are like this. C’mon man, there are “intolerant” people on every side of the fence. Just look at O’Reilly or Limbaugh.

First, you miss the point.

Perhaps you don’t know what the word liberal means. And what, historically, liberalism has stood for. (Which is completely different than what modern “liberalism” has become.)

For someone to claim to be a liberal while going nuts whenever anyone expresses a view different than theirs, and/or promptly hating anyone on learning that they think differently, is highly ironic, not to mention hypocritical.

Second, so far as I can tell you are in error that Rush Limbaugh, O’Reilly, or conservatives in general get bent out of shape from people HAVING or EXPRESSING views different than their own. I’ve seen absolutely no sign of this.
[/quote]

You’ve got to be kidding me. The right wing scream machine that gives us Hannity’s “Enemy of the State” and shouted down the plentiful legitimate opposition to the war in Iraq (egregious, now ironic example: David Frum on paleocons) as treason or anti-Americanism is saying that “conservatives” have no problem with opposing views?

33

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
PB Andy wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Funny how “liberals” (by the current definition" are so often intolerant of those having political views different than theirs, in ANY regard. Even learning that a given person disagrees with them on ONE point often yields a nasty, negative emotional response of attacking the person, such as yours.

Sad really.

Yes because only liberals are like this. C’mon man, there are “intolerant” people on every side of the fence. Just look at O’Reilly or Limbaugh.

First, you miss the point.

Perhaps you don’t know what the word liberal means. And what, historically, liberalism has stood for. (Which is completely different than what modern “liberalism” has become.)

For someone to claim to be a liberal while going nuts whenever anyone expresses a view different than theirs, and/or promptly hating anyone on learning that they think differently, is highly ironic, not to mention hypocritical.

Second, so far as I can tell you are in error that Rush Limbaugh, O’Reilly, or conservatives in general get bent out of shape from people HAVING or EXPRESSING views different than their own. I’ve seen absolutely no sign of this.

You’ve got to be kidding me. The right wing scream machine that gives us Hannity’s “Enemy of the State” and shouted down the plentiful legitimate opposition to the war in Iraq (egregious, now ironic example: David Frum on paleocons) as treason or anti-Americanism is saying that “conservatives” have no problem with opposing views?[/quote]

I dunno.

Am I a conservative?

Because if I am, they are not.

34

[quote]orion wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
PB Andy wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Funny how “liberals” (by the current definition" are so often intolerant of those having political views different than theirs, in ANY regard. Even learning that a given person disagrees with them on ONE point often yields a nasty, negative emotional response of attacking the person, such as yours.

Sad really.

Yes because only liberals are like this. C’mon man, there are “intolerant” people on every side of the fence. Just look at O’Reilly or Limbaugh.

First, you miss the point.

Perhaps you don’t know what the word liberal means. And what, historically, liberalism has stood for. (Which is completely different than what modern “liberalism” has become.)

For someone to claim to be a liberal while going nuts whenever anyone expresses a view different than theirs, and/or promptly hating anyone on learning that they think differently, is highly ironic, not to mention hypocritical.

Second, so far as I can tell you are in error that Rush Limbaugh, O’Reilly, or conservatives in general get bent out of shape from people HAVING or EXPRESSING views different than their own. I’ve seen absolutely no sign of this.

You’ve got to be kidding me. The right wing scream machine that gives us Hannity’s “Enemy of the State” and shouted down the plentiful legitimate opposition to the war in Iraq (egregious, now ironic example: David Frum on paleocons) as treason or anti-Americanism is saying that “conservatives” have no problem with opposing views?

I dunno.

Am I a conservative?

Because if I am, they are not.

[/quote]

How I’ve felt for a few years now.

35

If someone in fact has a problem and/or objection (as opposed to someone else reading it into them) with others expressing their opinion in their own space, on the Internet, in the free press, on television or radio etc when it differs from their own, then they are neither a conservative nor do they stand for what liberalism historically has stood for, though such a person absolutely does fit right in with the Moveon.org, Democratic Underground, Huffington Post, Daily Kos etc style “liberal.”

If someone is trying to use people objecting to for example anti-war protestors disrupting a funeral of a deceased veteran to try to claim that conservatives are the ones trying to suppress freedom of speech, such an individual is just a fuckwad. Not the same thing as the general matter, which is what I was talking about and what is of importance.

You want to say whatever you want to say about the war, for example, fine. In general. But if you want to disrupt a military funeral in the process, the problem is not a freedom of speech one, it is a DISRUPTING A FUNERAL one.

Sorry, those who do that are pieces of shit.

36

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.

With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.

LOL[/quote]

John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.

37

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.

With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.

LOL

John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.[/quote]

True, they’re nothing alike…

38

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
If someone in fact has a problem and/or objection (as opposed to someone else reading it into them) with others expressing their opinion in their own space, on the Internet, in the free press, on television or radio etc when it differs from their own, then they are neither a conservative nor do they stand for what liberalism historically has stood for, though such a person absolutely does fit right in with the Moveon.org, Democratic Underground, Huffington Post, Daily Kos etc style “liberal.”

If someone is trying to use people objecting to for example anti-war protestors disrupting a funeral of a deceased veteran to try to claim that conservatives are the ones trying to suppress freedom of speech, such an individual is just a fuckwad. Not the same thing as the general matter, which is what I was talking about and what is of importance.

You want to say whatever you want to say about the war, for example, fine. In general. But if you want to disrupt a military funeral in the process, the problem is not a freedom of speech one, it is a DISRUPTING A FUNERAL one.

Sorry, those who do that are pieces of shit.[/quote]

What does this have to do with anything? The issue is that many “conservatives” are just as happy to attack others for the opinions they hold and the things they say. They just do it under the banner of nationalism, not cultural Marxism.

39

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.

With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.

LOL

John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.[/quote]

Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.

40

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:

What does this have to do with anything? The issue is that many “conservatives” are just as happy to attack others for the opinions they hold and the things they say. They just do it under the banner of nationalism, not cultural Marxism.[/quote]

They would be neocons, not conservatives.