Reply With Quote
It's not Jon Stewart's fault that people take the fake news more seriously than the real news, but in fairness, sometimes his coverage really is better than mainstream journalism.
I guess I find it a little interesting that he would target a TV personality that's pre-empted by cops running around in 3 inch shorts shooting themselves. Even Stewart doesn't take himself too seriously.
I believe that "liberals" are every bit as culpable for the horrors of the past as the right wing. Since when is Vietnam not viewed as a complete roto-rooting of the colon of America? Who makes excuses for that today or states that it was the right thing to do?
Conversely, some of the conservative movement are still attempting to convince people that the war in Iraq was prompt and just. Stewart may not be a super-courageous paragon of morality, but the other party will never admit they're wrong about anything.
Last edited by Cry Havoc; 05-06-2009 at 01:45 PM.
It's not Jon Stewart's fault that people take the fake news more seriously than the real news, but in fairness, sometimes his coverage really is better than mainstream journalism.
I call bull . Either this guy is the stupidest, laziest writer in the world that he can't/won't find out which network Stewart is on, or he just didn't want to evoke the rather ridiculous image of COMEDY CENTRAL executives actually getting angry about this and forcing Stewart to apologize.
Stewart is in the same vein as O'Reilly, Olbermann, etc... his show is just a lot funnier.
Yeah that part made me chuckle a bit... He's clearly seen enough of The Daily Show to know what channel it's on.
The assertion is completely unsupported, but I don't find it that implausible. Didn't Donahue get his show yanked for a much milder impiety? Norville too?
They had shows on Comedy Central? I don't find either particularly funny.
Are you saying Comedy Central isn't afraid of losing its advertisers like every other channel?
Sorry for changing my response, I edited in quite a bit there after the fact.
Also, since when is a comedy central host supposed to be courageous? I would really like to see what Stewart could do if he actually tried to go legit (well more legit than he is) with his show. He's intelligent enough to get the job done, but my thought is that he doesn't want to be lost amongst the mass media, and is rather content just making people laugh and making the occasional joke about how the internet is a series of tubes or pointing out the hypocrisy of people in power. I can't in good conscience fault him for that.
I'm saying the advertisers don't give that much of a about that particular issue.
Eh, could be.
Seriously, most of the demographic for that show don't know who Truman was anyway. So iPod and whoever is distributing Wolverine are going to pull their ads?
Good point.
This is what I don't get. It's so unrealistic and so dumb. It's so out of step with any conservative view of human nature. When did conservative politicians and policies become infallible?
What ES said about about American evangelicals being republicans first and Christians second is germane. Ideology has become a quasi-religious icon even for believers at this point, pushing Christ into the background.
For enlightened liberals of course, it replaced religion long ago.
How unexpected it is to see the forum's usual tweed-wearing pseudo-intellectuals cheering on some fringe gay atheist libertarian weirdo for his oh-so-nuanced "pox on both your houses" diatribe.
You used to be funny. Now you're just bitter and sad.
Why do you hate America?How unexpected it is to see the forum's usual tweed-wearing pseudo-intellectuals cheering on some fringe gay atheist libertarian weirdo for his oh-so-nuanced "pox on both your houses" diatribe.
Ah, the not-so-subtle irony. If they would admit to being fallible, they would take a step towards lacking so much credibility.
How unexpected it is to see the forum's usual tweed-wearing pseudo-intellectuals cheering on some fringe gay atheist libertarian weirdo for his oh-so-nuanced "pox on both your houses" diatribe.
I've gotta at least give you style points for that one.
Oh no! You've pulled out the most potent weapon in the whole liberal arsenal -- stern language!
I am undone!
For these liberal "intellectuals" to maintain their bona fides among their friends at tail parties, they simultaneously have to channel Che Guevara while mocking conservatives as violent mindless brutes. It's really quite an impressive balancing act.
I especially like ES's "I used to be a conservative until they got too stupid for me" concern troll act. That should win some kind of award for shameless baggery.
America is great. It's the useless people whose existence I suffer, yet who still don't know their proper place that get on my nerves.
e.g, you.
ES is a limousine lib?
Minicons like HS can't imagine that the GOP can be ever criticized from the right. That's why everyone who contradicts superpatriot dittoheads gets called a dirty ing hippie, regardless of their actual views. They think they own conservatism and enforce conformity to the party line like Jacobins. They don't realize their brand isn't even conservative anymore. It merged with Cold War liberalism in the 1970's and ultimately finds its roots in Trotskyism through James Burnham, Irving Kristol and Max Schactman.
Jacobinism is understood as a form of elitist insurrectionary politics, in which an elite possessed of true social and political knowledge, believes itself en led to seize and hold political power in the name of the people.
You should be the one handing out the award, that's for sure.
BTW, ES is still a conservative. Recognizing and regretting the parlous state of American conservatism makes him a realist, not a Georgetown socialite.
You, one the other hand, have no ing idea what conservatives are supposed to conserve. You worship power and shout down anyone who doesn't agree with you. That is your conservatism.
Last edited by Winehole23; 05-06-2009 at 05:58 PM.
Perhaps conservatives should take the Tennis Court Oaths again. I mean, they want to secede anyway, right?ES is a limousine lib?
Minicons like HS can't imagine that the GOP can be ever criticized from the right. That's why everyone who contradicts superpatriot dittoheads gets called a dirty ing hippie, regardless of their actual views. They think they own conservatism and enforce conformity to the party line like Jacobins.
I don't know what he rides around in, but he's definitely a hand-wringing weenie.ES is a limousine lib?
I'll tell you the difference between a liberal and a conservative. Let's say there's a problem that needs to be solved. Liberals sit on their hands, think about it, talk a whole lot, wring their hands some more, bring in some consultants, powder their faces, act ambiguously gay, blame America for the problem, wait until the problem snowballs, then implement some bureaucratic solution that does nothing to solve the problem but gives more power to the government.
Conservatives look at it, and figure out that most of the time there is no problem except that some losers screwed up their own lives. So they do nothing because there is no real problem. The times when there is a problem, like say somebody wants to attack America, or there are liberal traitors wanting to let people attack America because liberals feel guilty about inferior people getting inferior results, conservatives don't wait for 28 freaking studies on environmental impacts to get published. They take action.
That's why we are winners and you are losers.
Yeah, because if we want to reference an era when conservatism was really on top of things, let's go back to the freaking 1970's!
I don't worship power. I exercise power. And no, 150 posts about "conservatives are too stupid for my superior intellect" does not make ES a realist or a conservative.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions