Pace your rage!

[greg1000]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!

[ScarlettOhara]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!

Our democratically elected president is dismanteling our republic at lightening speed. Not time for pacing the defense.

[fjccommish]

"He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy."

Too bad nobody was there to point out he was wrong on every point:

- He could cut taxes on the wealthy - unlike Obama who is raising taxes on a select group (income) and on everyone through various increases such as cigarette tax, Bush lowered taxes on all tax payers. Everyone who pays income tax received a tax cut.

- Remove government's oversight capability - Government interference, not lack of oversight, caused this mess.

- Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny - Who thought that at the time? The democrats voted yes. Now Saddam is gone. Does Stewart think it would be a better world and Iraq with Hussein still in power?

[CaptainCrunch]

Who's Jon Stewart?

And do I care?

[stereo]

That's exactly what the libs want is more time to pass their agenda.

[Conservatismfirst]

"He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy."

Too bad nobody was there to point out he was wrong on every point:

- He could cut taxes on the wealthy - unlike Obama who is raising taxes on a select group (income) and on everyone through various increases such as cigarette tax, Bush lowered taxes on all tax payers. Everyone who pays income tax received a tax cut.

- Remove government's oversight capability - Government interference, not lack of oversight, caused this mess.

- Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny - Who thought that at the time? The democrats voted yes. Now Saddam is gone. Does Stewart think it would be a better world and Iraq with Hussein still in power?


I think that pretty much covers it, no more response needed. Mr. Stewart is a comedian and was in one of my favorite movies "Half Baked"...as you can tell by the title the entire plot was about pot. I think Mr. Stewart may want to stick with pot smoking and making pot smokers laugh

[ddye]

Another dead on Stewart piece.

Doug

[Conservative16]

Jon Liebowitz is a known supporter of the Marxist Imam, he and Col-burt were Obama cheerleaders during the eleciton

[dad49er]

"He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy."

Too bad nobody was there to point out he was wrong on every point:

- He could cut taxes on the wealthy - unlike Obama who is raising taxes on a select group (income) and on everyone through various increases such as cigarette tax, Bush lowered taxes on all tax payers. Everyone who pays income tax received a tax cut.

- Remove government's oversight capability - Government interference, not lack of oversight, caused this mess.

- Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny - Who thought that at the time? The democrats voted yes. Now Saddam is gone. Does Stewart think it would be a better world and Iraq with Hussein still in power?

""He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability."

Why do something that didn't work, and helped put us in the crises we are now in?

"Remove government's oversight capability - Government interference, not lack of oversight, caused this mess."

Too funny, I don't assign blame to any one person, or entity. Plenty of blame to go around. But that was a MAJOR cause. As a matter of fact BOTH candidates campaigned on that theme.
I saw an interview on the news yesterday, big CEO, wheeler-dealer who blames the LACK OF governmental oversight on allowing him to get away with what he did. It's not his fault because the government didn't supervise him enough, so it's their fault, not his.

[dad49er]

That's exactly what the libs want is more time to pass their agenda.

So?
That is what both sides want.
Nothing new there.

[ddye]

Jon Liebowitz is a known supporter of the Marxist Imam, he and Col-burt were Obama cheerleaders during the eleciton
You DO understand that Marxism and Islam are polar opposites, right? You're obviously just putting words together that you think are "bad".

And I notice that you're unable to rationally debate the OP.

Doug

[ogibillm]

I think that pretty much covers it, no more response needed. Mr. Stewart is a comedian and was in one of my favorite movies "Half Baked"...as you can tell by the title the entire plot was about pot. I think Mr. Stewart may want to stick with pot smoking and making pot smokers laugh

i think it's funny that you don't believe that jon stewart is capable of commenting on politics because he is an entertainer, and you post that comment on a political entertainer's website.

[tguns]

I read as far as "Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President" and figured this was an old article, something Stewart said 4 or 8 years ago.

[ChaosControl]

Well he is correct about the people who said that if you questioned the president you were anti-American and all.

But duration of a presidency is irrelevant if that president is intent on destroying the country at record pace. 10 weeks in and he has already proven to be the worst president in my life time.

[ogibillm]

Well he is correct about the people who said that if you questioned the president you were anti-American and all.

But duration of a presidency is irrelevant if that president is intent on destroying the country at record pace. 10 weeks in and he has already proven to be the worst president in my life time.

i've never met a ten week old that could type that well. your parents must be proud

[Clamp]

Stewart busts both the left and the right's chops.

When the right was in power, they got mad because he was busting their chops...

Now that the left is in power...he is busting their chops, but the right doesn't watch Stewart because he busted the right's chops when they were in power.

Ahhh comedy.

[dad49er]

I'm getting a different message from "Pace your Rage"

I found myself listening to LESS of conservative talk radio, even though I have always enjoyed it. I have friends who have done the same.

Much of it still seems stuck in pre-election mode. The accusations are the same, the out of context remarks, and pure fabrication are the same. The only difference is that they have become louder and more shrill.

It's like hard rock, or rap, after awhile it all sounds the same. Vying for attention by being more shocking than the rest.

Something constructive might be more effective.

[Herman Melville]

Well he is correct about the people who said that if you questioned the president you were anti-American and all.

But duration of a presidency is irrelevant if that president is intent on destroying the country at record pace. 10 weeks in and he has already proven to be the worst president in my life time.
You unsquelched dismay in Obama is really something to revere. I happen to feel the opposite, but I like your passion.

[dad49er]

Our democratically elected president is dismanteling our republic at lightening speed. Not time for pacing the defense.

It is not the republic, but conservative tenants that are being dismantled. Much like what happened to liberal tenants during the 80's.
Just one of the consequences of elections as sweeping as the last.

[Conan]

You DO understand that Marxism and Islam are polar opposites, right? You're obviously just putting words together that you think are "bad".

And I notice that you're unable to rationally debate the OP.

Doug

What do both have in common?

[Nashville]

Can Jon Stewart talk without saying **** or ****ing?

[ogibillm]

Can Jon Stewart talk without saying **** or ****ing?

he's a comedian. it's funnier if he does say them

[Plasmaball]

Can Jon Stewart talk without saying **** or ****ing?

well ****, who knows?

[Nashville]

he's a comedian. it's funnier if he does say them


Really? ****, ****, ****ing! Man that takes comedic talent! Nobody thought of that before!

What kind of people still find that funny? A total talentless moron could think of saying that, on air. Doesn't he have writers?

I could say or hear ****, ****, ****ing, all ****ing day but don't find it particulary funny, unique or daring.

[ogibillm]

Really? ****, ****, ****ing! Man that takes comedic talent! Nobody thought of that before!

What kind of people still find that funny? A total talentless moron could think of saying that, on air. Doesn't he have writers?

I could say or hear ****, ****, ****ing, all ****ing day but don't find it particulary funny, unique or daring.
like any other words curse words are effective if used in the right spots. stewart is good at choosing when to use them.

[Nashville]

like any other words curse words are effective if used in the right spots. stewart is good at choosing when to use them.

Yes, sure. Knowing when to say **** or ****ing requires such precision, timing and skill. The ****er is ****ing hilarious!

[ogibillm]

Yes, sure. Knowing when to say **** or ****ing requires such precision, timing and skill. The ****er is ****ing hilarious!

you're living proof that not everyone who uses them is funny, so the proper use must take some sort of talent.

[dad49er]

Its evolving.

I hope so.

[jwil59]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!



:))

[jelake]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:


Just watched it. Hilarious.

Oh, and Stewart is wrong. The Obama Plate IS a mandatory purchase!;)

[Ex_Spy_Guy]

Another dead on Stewart piece.

Doug

the 'nuts' part?

[ogibillm]

Just watched it. Hilarious.

Oh, and Stewart is wrong. The Obama Plate IS a mandatory purchase!;)

it will be as the lamb's blood over the doors when obama sends his acorn death squads out.

[Ex_Spy_Guy]

that video is a banner...

[Nevarwinter]

so Stewart the comedian is now an official mouthpiece for leftist democrats?

It's real easy "taking people to task" when they're not there.

[ogibillm]

so Stewart the comedian is now an official mouthpiece for leftist democrats?

It's real easy "taking people to task" when they're not there.
no he's not.

but rush and sean the pundit entertainers sure seem like mouthpieces for the right.

how would jon stewart the entertainer be any worse?

[plugwrench]

Daily Show cuts right through all the BS and gets to the truth once again. If only "real" news programs could do the same.

[Dim Reefer]

that scripted idiot has nothing on Mark Levin

[ogibillm]

that scripted idiot has nothing on Mark Levin
Jon Stewart has a strong grasp of the issues and what's going on in the world - stronger than most radio pundits. he can speak intelligently about nearly anything and he can do it with a sense of humor.

[Dim Reefer]

I think that pretty much covers it, no more response needed. Mr. Stewart is a comedian and was in one of my favorite movies "Half Baked"...as you can tell by the title the entire plot was about pot. I think Mr. Stewart may want to stick with pot smoking and making pot smokers laugh

John Lebowitz Stewart has writers.. this bozo is nothing without a script.

[Dim Reefer]

except humor and a grasp of issues.

other than that, nothing at all.

ROFLMAO :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: See the "scripted" part genius man.

[ogibillm]

ROFLMAO :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

you're welcome to believe he doesn't. his interviews prove you wrong, but you can believe what you want.

[grapabeaux]

Why should conservatives "pace their rage", when this administration is doing nothing to pace its suckiness?

Seriously, the speed at which this power grab into private enterprise is unprecedented. I'm sure Stewart would prefer everybody wait until it's finished before we start complaining, but we'd prefer complaining when it might make a difference.

[Erick_KS]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!


Stewart is plain wrong on what he thinks are his main three points, as others have already pointed out here.

His overall thing here comes across to me as another lib whine that the other side isn't willing to shut up and meekly accept what's happening. He'd better get used to it, or shut up himself.

[7ranz]

John Lebowitz Stewart has writers.. this bozo is nothing without a script.

And he is one of them.

[Dim Reefer]

you're welcome to believe he doesn't. his interviews prove you wrong, but you can believe what you want.

Ok. So he doesnt have writers? :lol::lol: Levin would run circles around him. It would be nearly as classic as Friedman vs. Phil Donahue.

[ddye]

Ok. So he doesnt have writers? :lol::lol: Levin would run circles around him.
If Jon Stewart had the same exact show, but from a right wing perspective, he would be worshipped here.

Doug

[7ranz]

Ok. So he doesnt have writers? :lol::lol: Levin would run circles around him. It would be nearly as classic as Friedman vs. Phil Donahue.

I read Levin's chapter in Liberty and Tyranny on faith and the founders...I don't think he could.

[Dim Reefer]

remember the writers strike? bahaha

[ogibillm]

Ok. So he doesnt have writers? :lol::lol: Levin would run circles around him. It would be nearly as classic as Friedman vs. Phil Donahue.

i've heard mr. levin. i disagree.

[Dim Reefer]

I read Levin's chapter in Liberty and Tyranny on faith and the founders...I don't think he could.

"that Jon Stewart of The Daily Show has committed to pay the salaries of his own writers and those of The Colbert Report for the next two weeks, so his writers won't be harmed financially by the strike during that period."

bahahahahaha... that's the ticket. You know why his dumb ass was paying out of pocket... his show was a complete joke in itself during the writers’ strike.

Mark writes books.. John Leobowitz writes checks.

[Dim Reefer]

i've heard mr. levin. i disagree.

sure you have

[ogibillm]

"that Jon Stewart of The Daily Show has committed to pay the salaries of his own writers and those of The Colbert Report for the next two weeks, so his writers won't be harmed financially by the strike during that period."

bahahahahaha... that's the ticket. You know why his dumb ass was paying out of pocket... his show was a complete joke in itself during the writers’ strike.

Mark writes books.. John Leobowitz writes checks.

Dr. Seuss wrote books too...

[7ranz]

"that Jon Stewart of The Daily Show has committed to pay the salaries of his own writers and those of The Colbert Report for the next two weeks, so his writers won't be harmed financially by the strike during that period."

bahahahahaha... that's the ticket. You know why his dumb ass was paying out of pocket... his show was a complete joke in itself during the writers’ strike.

Mark writes books.. John Leobowitz writes checks.
Jon Stewart actually has two books.

[grapabeaux]

If Jon Stewart had the same exact show, but from a right wing perspective, he would be worshipped here.

Doug

Not quite. The Daily Show plays too fast and loose with the facts to be substantively informative.

If there were a parallel universe where the general TV audience were watching a conservative version of TDS, there might be an audience, but people who follow the issues more closely -- i.e., geeks like us -- would find the substantive value wanting.

[ogibillm]

Not quite. The Daily Show plays too fast and loose with the facts to be substantively informative.


too much irony right there.

[ddye]

Not quite. The Daily Show plays too fast and loose with the facts to be substantively informative.

If there were a parallel universe where the general TV audience were watching a conservative version of TDS, there might be an audience, but people who follow the issues more closely -- i.e., geeks like us -- would find the substantive value wanting.
You misunderstand me, I meant that Stewart would then be the first funny Republican EVER. :))

And no one ever said that Stewart was a reporter at all. But his commentary on the news is pretty good, and well respected.

Doug

[Nevarwinter]

no he's not.

but rush and sean the pundit entertainers sure seem like mouthpieces for the right.

how would jon stewart the entertainer be any worse?

so is he or isn't he? You say no, then you mindlessly bring up Rush, and then you ask how he can be any worse.

So, which is it? He's "taking pundits to task" (without them being there) and won't say a negative word about Chairman Maobama. Answer the question...

You and I both know what the answer already is.

[ogibillm]

so is he or isn't he? You say no, then you mindlessly bring up Rush, and then you ask how he can be any worse.

So, which is it? He's "taking pundits to task" (without them being there) and won't say a negative word about Chairman Maobama. Answer the question...

You and I both know what the answer already is.

in no way is jon stewart a mouthpiece for democrats or liberals. he is an entertainer. sometimes he says things well but in no way is the democratic party looking to him for leadership.

we do not put entertainers in charge, unlike the right.

[grapabeaux]

too much irony right there.

No irony. The fact record of Limbaugh vs. Stewart is no contest. Limbaugh has three hours of mostly ad-libbed material based on his own research, and he manages to be both informative and entertaining, and faithful to the facts.

Stewart, on the other hand, relies on a staff of writers to compose a heavily scripted half-hour show, and he can't manage to portray the facts honestly to set up the joke. In other words, TDS is political pornography - a wishful fancy of how the world is, a setup to jokes that have little or no bearing to the reality of the situation.

Do you want to know why this is true? Because if Limbaugh ever makes a mistake in fact, the news picks up on it. Can't say the same for The Daily Show's licenses from reality.

[ogibillm]

No irony. The fact record of Limbaugh vs. Stewart is no contest. Limbaugh has three hours of mostly ad-libbed material based on his own research, and he manages to be both informative and entertaining, and faithful to the facts.

Stewart, on the other hand, relies on a staff of writers to compose a heavily scripted half-hour show, and he can't manage to portray the facts honestly to set up the joke. In other words, TDS is political pornography - a wishful fancy of how the world is, a setup to jokes that have little or no bearing to the reality of the situation.

Do you want to know why this is true? Because if Limbaugh ever makes a mistake in fact, the news picks up on it. Can't say the same for The Daily Show's licenses from reality.
limbaugh is a protected entity, so i will not comment on your claim that he is 'informative' other than to say that he is a pundit and as such has no interest in presenting the entirety of a story, all the facts, or even depicting a story accurately but instead has an interest in spinning things and presenting them in such a way that they support his opinions.

however, i'd like to see you show me something from the daily show that was inaccurate.

[CrusaderFrank]

The Libs have such a great pantheon of thinkers: Jon Stewart, Al Franken, Kumar. I don't know why we bother debating them

[ogibillm]

The Libs have such a great pantheon of thinkers: Jon Stewart, Al Franken, Kumar. I don't know why we bother debating them

you know what the biggest difference is between Jon Stewart, Al Franken, and Kal Penn when compared to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.

sheepskins.

[ddye]

you know what the biggest difference is between Jon Stewart, Al Franken, and Kal Penn when compared to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glen Beck.

sheepskins.
Yeah, but educated people are the ones that hate the "real" America! :))

Doug

[croupier101]

The Libs have such a great pantheon of thinkers: Jon Stewart, Al Franken, Kumar. I don't know why we bother debating them

http://weblogs.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/blog/fn_morris_dick.jpg

:)) :))

[grapabeaux]

limbaugh is a protected entity, so i will not comment on your claim that he is 'informative' other than to say that he is a pundit and as such has no interest in presenting the entirety of a story, all the facts, or even depicting a story accurately but instead has an interest in spinning things and presenting them in such a way that they support his opinions.

however, i'd like to see you show me something from the daily show that was inaccurate.

This is a cop-out. Critiquing Limbaugh for what he says is not a TOS. You just don't have any examples to provide. He keeps a transcript of his show on the free side at his web site. It's not as if the information isn't available.

As for me, I haven't watched the Daily Show in years, so I won't have an up-to-date example of anything. But the show's style of humor - taking one element of a story and blowing it up for humor - wouldn't be egregious were it not for the fact that both Stewart and his audience take this as if it's a serious and thoughtful commentary. Like people did with "George W. Bush"'s use of the word "strategory" or "Sarah Palin's" statement that she could see Russia from her house, the audience doesn't distinguish fiction from fact.

But if you want one example, The Daily Show was one among many who grossly distorted what Rush Limbaugh said about Michael J. Fox's condition when Fox starred in the TV ads in Missouri in 2006.

Even if you don't agree with Limbaugh's analysis, you're at least better informed of what the other side has to say. You can't say the same after watching a half hour of The Daily Show.

[ogibillm]

This is a cop-out. Critiquing Limbaugh for what he says is not a TOS. You just don't have any examples to provide. He keeps a transcript of his show on the free side at his web site. It's not as if the information isn't available.

As for me, I haven't watched the Daily Show in years, so I won't have an up-to-date example of anything. But the show's style of humor - taking one element of a story and blowing it up for humor - wouldn't be egregious were it not for the fact that both Stewart and his audience take this as if it's a serious and thoughtful commentary. Like people did with "George W. Bush"'s use of the word "strategory" or "Sarah Palin's" statement that she could see Russia from her house, the audience doesn't distinguish fiction from fact.

But if you want one example, The Daily Show was one among many who grossly distorted what Rush Limbaugh said about Michael J. Fox's condition when Fox starred in the TV ads in Missouri in 2006.

Even if you don't agree with Limbaugh's analysis, you're at least better informed of what the other side has to say. You can't say the same after watching a half hour of The Daily Show.
how many people on this board believed that the barack obama was going to nationalize their 401ks because Rush put forward that hypothetical?

maybe the daily show does represent things through a fish eye lens from time to time for comedic effect but rush's and others 'i bets' and 'don't you thinks' and other hypothetical straw-man arguments.

as to MJF i think it's fair to say that rush himself grossly distorted what it was he said and did, just as he did with 'phony americans'.

[mrsc696]

Stewart is in the tank for Obama and he sends that tingle up Matthews other leg. They all have man crushes on Obama and get off on defending there man.

[StemcellFajita]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!


Radness. Thanks for sharing!

[XBlacklashX]

Clever but hollow.

[1997lancer]

Someone quick remind me why Stewart has refused to talk to Levin on the air...

Wait a minute...

Its easier for him to fling his senseless bullcrap to libs who are all to willing to eat said bullcrap and regurgitate it as if its a great message. All too predictable.

The fact is Stewart is caccooned in his own little world throwing his own special brand of dung (Kind of like a monkey at a zoo), without being willing (and pay attention here libs) to respond in kind LIVE. Al Gore similarly has this problem with Global Warming.

I never thought Id see the day the American people would not only allow the destruction of this country, but cheer it along.

Congrats Doug, et al...

[WreckedParty]

Lol i almost forgot how funny the daily show was, awesome vid. :))

[grapabeaux]

how many people on this board believed that the barack obama was going to nationalize their 401ks because Rush put forward that hypothetical?

No one, because Limbaugh has never said it. Neal Boortz has brought up the possibility that Obama may revive an idea brought up early in the Clinton admininstration that the 401(k)s might get hit with a 15% tax.

maybe the daily show does represent things through a fish eye lens from time to time for comedic effect but rush's and others 'i bets' and 'don't you thinks' and other hypothetical straw-man arguments.

Any kind of analysis is going to engage in hypotheticals. That doesn't make it a "straw-man argument".

as to MJF i think it's fair to say that rush himself grossly distorted what it was he said and did, just as he did with 'phony americans'.

You're absolutely wrong. Fox himself said in a book he put out that prior to testimony before Congress, he deliberately off his medication to show the effects of later effects of Parkinson's when the medication wouldn't work. Limbaugh repeated this passage from the book, and people accused him of accusing Fox of faking his medication. And when Limbaugh was demonstrating how Fox appeared on the commercial, he did it to show how vastly different it was than his other TV appearances, not to make fun of him. But the MSM have never let fact get in the way of a story if they can trash Limbaugh with it. News outlets even did feedback loops to make it look like Limbaugh was doing it over and over.

As for the "phony soldier", Limbaugh was correct. Of course, despite MSM accusations that he was referring to soldiers who spoke out against the war, Limbaugh was talking about someone who was, in fact, a phony soldier. As in faking his credentials.

[sgtmac_46]

Best Jon Stewart piece in some time:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/daily-show-wingnuts-gone-wild

-----

Jon Stewart takes Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Bachmann and Fox News to task for their over the top rhetoric about President Obama only a ten weeks into his presidency.
Stewart: Yes, tyranny. A.K.A. our democratically elected President. You know what guys....I think you might be confusing tyranny with losing. And I feel for you because ah...I've been there. A few times. In fact one of them was a bit of a nail biter. But see, when the guy that you disagree with gets elected, he's probably going to do things you disagree with. He could cut taxes on the wealthy. Remove government's oversight capability. Invade a country that you thought should not be invaded but that's not tyranny. That's democracy.
See now you're in the minority. It's supposed to taste like a s#%t taco. And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were in power I believe the response was "Why do you hate America?". "Watch what you say." "Love it or leave it." "Suck on my truck nuts."
.....
For god's sake guys. You've been out of power for ten f*%#ng weeks. You've got a mid-term election in twenty months. Pace your rage!


Papa Doc Duvalier was democratically elected President of Haiti.....just sayin'. ;)

'And by the way, if I remember correctly when a disagreement was expressed about that President's actions when ya'll were making them against Bush I believe the response was'.......DISSENT IS PATRIOTISM! ;)


So suddenly Dissent is no longer patriotism, Jon Stewart, you ****ing shameless shill?

[ogibillm]

No one, because Limbaugh has never said it. Neal Boortz has brought up the possibility that Obama may revive an idea brought up early in the Clinton admininstration that the 401(k)s might get hit with a 15% tax.


limbaugh did say it, i don't listen often, but this is one i caught

Any kind of analysis is going to engage in hypotheticals. That doesn't make it a "straw-man argument".
this is also true, but when you invent a policy or position, assign it to your opponents, and the rail against it, what would you call it if not a straw man?


You're absolutely wrong. Fox himself said in a book he put out that prior to testimony before Congress, he deliberately off his medication to show the effects of later effects of Parkinson's when the medication wouldn't work. Limbaugh repeated this passage from the book, and people accused him of accusing Fox of faking his medication. And when Limbaugh was demonstrating how Fox appeared on the commercial, he did it to show how vastly different it was than his other TV appearances, not to make fun of him. But the MSM have never let fact get in the way of a story if they can trash Limbaugh with it. News outlets even did feedback loops to make it look like Limbaugh was doing it over and over.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease."
"It's purely an act."
"He can control himself enough to keep in the frame of the picture, and he can control himself enough to keep his eyes right on the lens"
take those how you want.

As for the "phony soldier", Limbaugh was correct. Of course, despite MSM accusations that he was referring to soldiers who spoke out against the war, Limbaugh was talking about someone who was, in fact, a phony soldier. As in faking his credentials.
and again, i don't listen often, but that exchange i heard. i know what was said, and i know limbaugh's spin. i'm sticking with what was said.

[dad49er]

No irony. The fact record of Limbaugh vs. Stewart is no contest. Limbaugh has three hours of mostly ad-libbed material based on his own research, and he manages to be both informative and entertaining, and faithful to the facts.

Stewart, on the other hand, relies on a staff of writers to compose a heavily scripted half-hour show, and he can't manage to portray the facts honestly to set up the joke. In other words, TDS is political pornography - a wishful fancy of how the world is, a setup to jokes that have little or no bearing to the reality of the situation.

Do you want to know why this is true? Because if Limbaugh ever makes a mistake in fact, the news picks up on it. Can't say the same for The Daily Show's licenses from reality.

Limbaugh also has a large staff. He doesn't get his 'stack of stuff', and sound bites on his own. I don't know how much is scripted vs ad libbed, but he usually states what is to be covered on a given show.
I have wondered why though he waits close to two hours to take calls on some days. That would seem to indicate he is scripted, as responding to callers has to be ad libbed.

[Clamp]

I find it extremely humorous that some folks think The Daily Show, which airs on Comedy Central, is anything more then comedy.

John Stewart is not a mouthpiece for the left. As I posted earlier in this thread, he is an equal opportunity chop buster of both the left and right.

The right leaning folks on this board don't watch the show because for the last 8 years there was a Republican in office, and they got too angry at the show because it was aimed at mocking Republicans.

Now there is a Democrat in office, the Daily Show is shredding Democrats, but the right is still too angry to even check it out again...