America’s most trusted newsman doing what he does best!!

Not a big Stewart fan , however I’m glad he is restoring sanity to a largely liberal audience , that wouldn’t get it anywhere else.

Jon Stewart’s book is still number 2 on the bestseller list and has watched Palin’s. Beck’s and O’Reilly come and go.

This is one reason why. He hit just the right note w/o pointing the finger of blame at the other side like Beck and Olby did.

He has become a National Treasure.

BFD said:
He has become a National Treasure

I agree.

Finally….some sanity injected into the media…sadly, it won’t last for a while

murf said:
Not a big Stewart fan , however I’m glad he is restoring sanity to a largely liberal audience , that wouldn’t get it anywhere else.

Whoosh…

Wait til you hear Maher on CNN. Completely the opposite of Stewert.

gar said:
Wait til you hear Maher on CNN. Completely the opposite of Stewert.

Wait til you hear Gutfeld on Red Eye. Completely the opposite of Stewart.

What is your point again?

yungchii said:
Finally….some sanity injected into the media…sadly, it won’t last for a while

Sadly, I fear you’re right. It’s sad that the words of a comedian on basic cable at 11:00 at night have more meaning and reason than the majority of what is being said in the media as a whole right now.

I’ve avoided commenting on these sites about these things. The discussions have only made me more upset and I’ve listened to plenty of pundits and analysis on this tragedy, and it has only made me more upset. But, a comic, a satirist, is the one who sat down and address the subject with the gravitas that we are feeling toward this subject, and found a truth hidden that really hit the right nerve for me. The whole idea that this hasn’t numbed us, that we are still horrified by such events. And despite the horror and the tragedy of this event, there is a sense of humanity, a sense of good, and even I missed out on that. I never responded here since I never wanted to point my finger at anything. I didn’t want to come here to read this story, because one of my first thoughts was how the political sides were going to treat this. I really hope that Americans, be they liberal or not, would watch what Stewart says. He said it was more for him, but I think that it’s good for all of us.

BFD said:
Wait til you hear Gutfeld on Red Eye. Completely the opposite of Stewart. What is your point again?

The point is when they post that article the sanity will stop. Did you listen to Maher and do you agree with him?

BFD said:
Wait til you hear Maher on CNN. Completely the opposite of Stewert.
Wait til you hear Gutfeld on Red Eye. Completely the opposite of Stewart.
What is your point again?

agreed. bill maher’s a jackass. jon stewart is not. i don’t even understand why the comparison was drawn.

well. scratch that. i do…since both are more to left, but jon stewart=/=bill maher. bill maher is no better than glenn beck or sarah palin.

I am consistently impressed with Jon’s human perspective and his ability to analyze life through that lens. Not only with humor, insight and plain ole silliness, but with depth and a commitment to to strive honestly and fairly.

Arthur (Not a Political Comic) said:
I’ve avoided commenting on these sites about these things. The discussions have only made me more upset and I’ve listened to plenty of pundits and analysis on this tragedy, and it has only made me more upset. But, a comic, a satirist, is the one who sat down and address the subject with the gravitas that we are feeling toward this subject, and found a truth hidden that really hit the right nerve for me. The whole idea that this hasn’t numbed us, that we are still horrified by such events. And despite the horror and the tragedy of this event, there is a sense of humanity, a sense of good, and even I missed out on that. I never responded here since I never wanted to point my finger at anything. I didn’t want to come here to read this story, because one of my first thoughts was how the political sides were going to treat this. I really hope that Americans, be they liberal or not, would watch what Stewart says. He said it was more for him, but I think that it’s good for all of us.

Well said, my friend.

I’d call Billy Graham a National Treasure . This guy is just a comic .A good one . But still a comic .

BFD says:

Wait til you hear Gutfeld on Red Eye. Completely the opposite of Stewart.

You’re right, Greg is MUCH better!

Media Ghouls Exploit Tragedy to Score Political Points by Greg Gutfeld

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ggutfeld/2011/01/10/media-ghouls-exploit-tragedy-to-score-political-points/

I think Bill Maher and Jon Stewart are both right, Bill Maher is just more “fiery”@!

Here’s a little from Greg Gutfield:

And this rush to judgment reveals the media’s not-so-secret biases toward certain political personalities and movements. Among a few prominent leftist columnists, celebrities and talking heads, their responses barely concealed a morbid glee in getting their assumptions met – using incendiary rhetoric that they themselves pretend to condemn. The shooting was the best thing that ever happened to their own reservoir of anger. It was a leftwing Lalapalooza.

Actually, it was like watching an opening at Walmart, with sweaty hacks in a tug of war over a table of identical, knee jerk assumptions. All designed to control the narrative. To get there first, to fill a void. It was the world’s worst cocktail party, without the cocktails – featuring Jane Fonda, KooKoo Krugman, Piers Morgan, the puppets at Daily Kos and Media Matters – and even WaPo columnist Courtland Milloy, who wanted “to spit on” the tea party, now blaming the right for the shootings. Capping it off, we have a Democrat who wants to ban symbols that may seem threatening to elected officials. I believe that’s symptom one in the diagnosis, “God, You’re Stupid.”
It even reached the other side of the pond, as Morgan, the ruddy replacement for Larry King, leapt into the fray, with a tweet….

“This now deleted image from Sarah Palin website will be reason this terrible shooting has huge political ramifications.”

This, from a man who ran- on the cover of his old newspaper- a faked image featuring a British soldier urinating on a prisoner. What “political ramifications” did that have for the British military? Thankfully, not much, compared to Piers – who was fired.

And so, on Saturday, Twitter was a feeding frenzy of amnesiacs, galloping to one singular conclusion, forgetting that doing so with the Fort Hood shooter was mindless bigotry.

As a rightie, I wanted to go after the ghouls capitalizing on this tragedy to score political points. But you realize, as Congressman McCotter once said to me, quoting someone famous: wrestling with a skunk only leaves you smelly and the skunk happy.

There were a lot of skunks out there this weekend, and boy did they stink.

Seeing 2012 From My Window said:
Here’s a little from Greg Gutfield:

Thanks for taking a dump on Jon Stewart’s thread..

Sorry, but no one gives a shit what Greg Gutfield has to say, a complete nobody!!

GUTFELD: “There were a lot of skunks out there this weekend, and boy did they stink.”

Doesn’t quite equal the impassioned eloquence of Jon Stewart.

Well it’s not his fault the leftist media stunk it up this weekend.

Tucker P. said:
I’d call Billy Graham a National Treasure . This guy is just a comic .A good one . But still a comic .

He’s more than a comic; he’s probably the best and most rational social commentator on a national, check that, world wide scale. He’s not perfect, but he’s eons better than most others who share a media platform on his scale.

“…and now, here’s the gospel choir I hired to tell people I don’t like to go fuck themselves.”

BFD said:
Thanks for taking a dump on Jon Stewart’s thread..

She’s been on a copy and paste roll all day. Guess she had to make up for all this time she’s restrained herself.

mcf1757 said:
Sorry, but no one gives a shit what Greg Gutfield has to say, a complete nobody!!

You’re a nobody!

“…and now, here’s the gospel choir I hired to tell people I don’t like to go f*** themselves.”

Kird said:
He’s more than a comic; he’s probably the best and most rational social commentator on a national, check that, world wide scale. He’s not perfect, but he’s eons better than most others who share a media platform on his scale.

Very true.

BFD said:
GUTFELD: “There were a lot of skunks out there this weekend, and boy did they stink.”

Doesn’t quite equal the impassioned eloquence of Jon Stewart.

That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

What Jon Stewart said tonight was clearly not written by writers. It came from the heart and is more relevant than the majority of the commentary out there regarding this tragedy.

Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material..

Oh.

Well his writing is like a raccoon and boy does it bite.

Leave it to Jon Stewart to try to get above it all by wading through the swamp and claiming he’s clean.

This guy is getting applauding by saying that “vitriolic rhetoric” didn’t cause this… and then he goes and soapboxes on the vitriolic rhetoric in America. If it didn’t cause it, then what the hell is the point of talking about it?

Sorry, Stewart, but I’m not watching my rhetoric, I’m not censoring myself, and I’m not telling anyone else to do it either. The way you defeat hate speech and vitriolic rhetoric is with MORE speech. This is an ingenious idea that the fathers of ACTUAL liberalism such as John Locke and our nation’s Founding Fathers devised centuries ago and it works every time. You try to regulate the marketplace of ideas and it’ll turn to shit just like the regulated financial sector.

Of course he feels this way the guy with the most toxic discourse is his buddy Obama.

Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

stoogedudes said:
What Jon Stewart said tonight was clearly not written by writers. It came from the heart and is more relevant than the majority of the commentary out there regarding this tragedy.

How about we just go with both Gutfeld and Stewart are good at what they do?

People will laugh at this, and maybe I will someday, but I think Stewart and Beck will grow closer and closer over time. I think both are honest guys coming from very different viewpoints. But I don’t see either being the sort on intellectually dishonest sort that Olbermann/Maddow/OReilly/Hannity are. Aside from OReilly, those four won’t admit 2+2=4 in a discussion. And OReilly will, but he doesn’t care.

Beck and Stewart are more honest, regardless of what you think of their views. AND, it is worth noting that their views evolve as they learn. Beck has actually changed a lot. Stewart some, and will more and more. Give him 10 more years and he’ll have evolved like Dennis Miller without the warmongering.

Anyhow, I don’t expect many will take this seriously, but if you listen closely to which people are intellectually honest or not and I think you’ll start to see what I mean. I mean..if you can see with your ears…I guess.

*Clap clap* jon nails it as usual

Jim Treacher said:
“…and now, here’s the gospel choir I hired to tell people I don’t like to go f*** themselves.”

That was the catharsis he mentioned.

Interesting point of view, Just_MC; I think it may have merit.

Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

And he sure as hell isn’t no writer if that’s the case.

Just_MC said:
Beck has actually changed a lot

Honestly curious , because I do see Beck as intellectually dishonest, how do you think he’s changed?

stoogedudes said:
What Jon Stewart said tonight was clearly not written by writers. It came from the heart and is more relevant than the majority of the commentary out there regarding this tragedy.

Don’t tell the Writer’s Guild that or else they’ll go on strike again.

If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

CosmosDan said:
That was the catharsis he mentioned.

I hope he enjoyed it, because it stripped him of his license to lecture me on what’s acceptable speech.

The Great Recession of 2008 was a direct result of the no regulation policy strategy put into place by George Bush!

the real john t said:
Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

And he sure as hell isn’t no writer if that’s the case.

Huh?

Apparently you’re not no writer neither.

Tony Westover said:
If it didn’t cause it, then what the hell is the point of talking about it?

He actually spelled it out pretty dam clearly. Did you miss it?

Tony Westover said:
You try to regulate the marketplace of ideas and it’ll turn to shit just like the regulated financial sector.

He’s not talking about regulating the marketplace of ideas. I guess you did miss it.

mcf1757 said:
The Great Recession of 2008 was a direct result of the no regulation policy strategy put into place by George Bush!

Oh please do inform us on which regulations that George Bush repealed in order to cause The “Great” Recession… a moniker that’s been recycled several times throughout modern American history.

Tony Westover said:
Don’t tell the Writer’s Guild that or else they’ll go on strike again. If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

Well, given that Stewart himself is a writer of the show, I’d think he’d be able to speak from the heart.

So you’re saying that he has to stick to script and cannot say anything that’s not written for him? You must know more about the television business than I do.

Tony Westover said:
If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

Becasue you know exactly what’s in those contracts and how his show works?

Tony Westover said:
Oh please do inform us on which regulations that George Bush repealed in order to cause The “Great” Recession… a moniker that’s been recycled several times throughout modern American history.

No don’t, because this discussion has nothing to do with any “W” nonsense. Don’t feed the trolls, Tony.

Tony Westover said:
If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

Well if Gutfull writes his on stuff isn’t he violating union contracts?

Just_MC said:
People will laugh at this, and maybe I will someday, but I think Stewart and Beck will grow closer and closer over time.

No.
When Stewart said in the above the clip that he despises the insanity that passes for political debate one of the people he was referencing was Glenn.
I know this because when Jon was about to do a Beck clip a coupla weeks ago he just lamented, “Why bother!” and moved on.
Beck is beneath contempt to Stewart, although a steady source of comedy.

Beck would have to do a complete 180, or at least approach “O’Reilly sanity” for those two to ever get along.

Also, Glenn is jealous of Jon, so there’s that too.

Tony Westover said:
Don’t tell the Writer’s Guild that or else they’ll go on strike again. If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

But you said…

Tony Westover said:
That’s because Greg Gutfeld actually writes his own material and isn’t an actor.

Then why are you giving Stewart guff for not writing his own material like Gutfeld supposedly does when he us supposedly contractually unable to?

CosmosDan said:
Tony Westover said:
If it didn’t cause it, then what the hell is the point of talking about it?

He actually spelled it out pretty dam clearly. Did you miss it?

It is pretty clear what he’s doing, so clear that I didn’t bother to bring it up. He’s exploiting a tragedy to push his agenda. “Oh free speech isn’t what cause this mass murder… but you know, you should really watch your speech and I’m gonna go on about this for several minutes.”

Gimme a friggin’ break…

CosmosDan said:
Tony Westover said:
You try to regulate the marketplace of ideas and it’ll turn to shit just like the regulated financial sector.

He’s not talking about regulating the marketplace of ideas. I guess you did miss it.

That’s specifically what he’s doing (and he’s obviously not alone). Telling people that they modify, censor, or not express ideas that pose no direct harm to anyone — and there’s zero proof of any evidence of this — is trying to regulate the marketplace of ideas.

CosmosDan said:
Tony Westover said:
If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

Becasue you know exactly what’s in those contracts and how his show works?

Yes, I do. The WGA strike was only a few years ago, do you have the memory of a goldfish? There was a reason that shows like the Daily Show, Letterman, and Leno had to shut down. WGA union contracts stipulate that non-interview material by written by WGA writers.

Stewart’s “from the heart” monologue had to be scripted by WGA writers.

the real john t said:
Tony Westover said:
If Stewart wasn’t reading something that writers wrote for him, and he almost certainly was despite his accompanying acting, then he’s violating union contracts.

Well if Gutfull writes his on stuff isn’t he violating union contracts?

Different show format, and Red Eye doesn’t employ WGA writers so obviously they wouldn’t be bound by that union’s contracts.

Oh, Please George Bush failed the American people, by letting the thugs on Wall Street run wild, unchecked!

BFD said:
No.
When Stewart said in the above the clip that he despises the insanity that passes for political debate one of the people he was referencing was Glenn.
I know this because when Jon was about to do a Beck clip a coupla weeks ago he just lamented, “Why bother!” and moved on.
Beck is beneath contempt to Stewart, although a steady source of comedy.

Beck would have to do a complete 180, or at least approach “O’Reilly sanity” for those two to ever get along.

Also, Glenn is jealous of Jon, so there’s that too.

Eh . . . no to the no. Neither Stewart or Beck are static individuals so it is possible they may be able to find common ground . . . on something . . . eventually . . . maybe.

Kird said:
No don’t, because this discussion has nothing to do with any “W” nonsense. Don’t feed the trolls, Tony.

The only troll I see on here is Tony.

BFD said:
Jon Stewart’s book is still number 2 on the bestseller list and has watched Palin’s. Beck’s and O’Reilly come and go.
…
He has become a National Treasure.

oh BFD …what list is that? the Media Matters bestseller list? on the NYT besteller list, the one us earth people use, Stewart’s book is #6, and has been on a respectable 8 weeks. Beck’s latest book “Broke” is #8, at 8 weeks. (W’s book is #2.)

O’Reilly’s latest is “Pinheads and Patriots” and that’s at #16. it has been on the list for 53 WEEKS. oh yeah and 8 of his 9 books have been NYT bestsellers.

you were saying…?

at any rate I actually do agree with you about Stewart, to an extent. he’s a smart guy and he makes sense a lot of the time, and he can be VERY funny. I do think he’s serving a useful purpose in the country, but then, I also think Glenn Beck is, so…make of THAT what you will.

Tony Westover said:
Stewart’s “from the heart” monologue had to be scripted by WGA writers.

Sorry, but I don’t believe a word of this.
I suppose his 9/11 monlogue and what he saw out his own window and his tears was scripted by his writers also.

With all due respect, you are full of shit on this.

Tony Westover said:
Different show format, and Red Eye doesn’t employ WGA writers so obviously they wouldn’t be bound by that union’s contracts.

Just where do you get all your expert information of Fox and how it’s run?

BFD said:
No.When Stewart said in the above the clip that he despises the insanity that passes for political debate one of the people he was referencing was Glenn.I know this because when Jon was about to do a Beck clip a coupla weeks ago he just lamented, “Why bother!” and moved on.Beck is beneath contempt to Stewart, although a steady source of comedy. Beck would have to do a complete 180, or at least approach “O’Reilly sanity” for those two to ever get along. Also, Glenn is jealous of Jon, so there’s that too.

by definition, if they couldn’t be further apart now, ANY change in either and I win the bet. :)

Like I said, many people will find it sounds odd and impossible. Perhaps it is. But I still think you might be surprised.

Tony Westover said:
Yes, I do. The WGA strike was only a few years ago, do you have the memory of a goldfish? There was a reason that shows like the Daily Show, Letterman, and Leno had to shut down. WGA union contracts stipulate that non-interview material by written by WGA writers. Stewart’s “from the heart” monologue had to be scripted by WGA writers. Different show format, and Red Eye doesn’t employ WGA writers so obviously they wouldn’t be bound by that union’s contracts.

I remember. Leno took heat because he performed during the strike. He wrote his own material and it was a violation of the union rules because, since Leno himself is a writer, he went against the union because they were striking.

Jon Stewart is a writer and a member of the WGA, therefore he doesn’t need a slew of writers to speak from the heart.

stoogedudes said:
Then why are you giving Stewart guff for not writing his own material like Gutfeld supposedly does when he us supposedly contractually unable to?

I’m giving other people guff for acting like this was some from the heart, non scripted moment since it all likelihood it wasn’t. Don’t get me wrong, I still think Stewart is for the most part a hack.

Is it unfair to compare Stewart and Gutfeld and to point out that one’s reading other people’s work while one is reading his own — even if it’s due to contractual obligation? Maybe… but I didn’t make their career choices.

Ruth Gretzinger said:
oh BFD …what list is that?

Publishers Weekly:

1
Decision Points
George W. Bush; Crown
1 7
2
Earth (The Book): A Visitor’s Guide to the Human Race
Jon Stewart et al.; Grand Central
4 14
3
Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption
Laura Hillenbrand; Random
2 6
4
Life
Keith Richards; Little, Brown
3 9
5
Autobiography of Mark Twain: Vol. 1
Edited by Harriet Elinor Smith; Univ. of California
5 10
6
Decoded
Jay-Z; Spiegel & Grau
8 6
7
Barefoot Contessa How Easy Is That?: Fabulous Recipes and Easy Tips
Ina Garten; Clarkson Potter
6 9
8
Cleopatra
Stacy Schiff, Little, Brown
7 8
9
Sh*t My Dad Says
Justin Halpern; It Books
13 34
10
America By Heart
Sarah Palin; Harper

Thank you Mr. Stewart for pointing out the error of the “Left’s” ways.  Perhaps you can speak to them and suggest that an official apology from them is in order.  Not an apology to the “Right” for they do not require one, but one to the victims and the families of the victims that they exploited for political gain.

Jim Treacher said:
I hope he enjoyed it, because it stripped him of his license to lecture me on what’s acceptable speech.

Here’s the thing. What’s the goal of his show? What network is he on?

Jon’s thing is that he hopes the people who have the job description of informing us and voluntarily take upon themselves the mantel of journalist, or appear with a “fair and balanced” logo in the corner, do a better job, because it’s an important job. He does his job , and you can’t criticize HIM for not doing theirs.

I feel certain he wouldn’t object to a little profanity if they actually did what they ought to be doing.

BFD said:
Sorry, but I don’t believe a word of this.

It doesn’t matter what you believe. That doesn’t magically change the truth. They’re bound by their WGA contracts.

BFD said:
With all due respect, you are full of shit on this.

A.) Clearly you don’t say that with any respect whatsoever. Don’t worry, I have about the same respect level for you, so I won’t hold it against you. And,
B.) I’m right. If you can’t handle that, that’s your hang up not mine.

the real john t said:
Just where do you get all your expert information of Fox and how it’s run?

Pretty simple: the Daily Show runs credits during it’s closing, as per WGA requirements.

Red Eye doesn’t, because it doesn’t employ WGA writer.

Get a clue.

Tony Westover said:
I’m giving other people guff for acting like this was some from the heart, non scripted moment since it all likelihood it wasn’t. Don’t get me wrong, I still think Stewart is for the most part a hack. Is it unfair to compare Stewart and Gutfeld and to point out that one’s reading other people’s work while one is reading his own — even if it’s due to contractual obligation? Maybe… but I didn’t make their career choices.

How do you know it wasn’t heartfelt? How do you know Stewart’s feelings on this?

But then again, Stewart’s a liberal, so of course he’s a hack, right? What if Dennis Miller was the host of the Daily Show and was in the same situation? Would you hold him to the same standard?

Ruth Gretzinger said:
oh BFD …what list is that? the Media Matters bestseller list? on the NYT besteller list, the one us earth people use, Stewart’s book is #6, and has been on a respectable 8 weeks. Beck’s latest book “Broke” is #8, at 8 weeks. (W’s book is #2.)

O’Reilly’s latest is “Pinheads and Patriots” and that’s at #16. it has been on the list for 53 WEEKS. oh yeah and 8 of his 9 books have been NYT bestsellers.

you were saying…?

I was saying Stewart’s book seems to be outlasting Beck’s, O’Reilly’s and Palin’s at the top of the bestseller list and your post doesn’t refudiate that.

Thank you.

CosmosDan said:
Honestly curious , because I do see Beck as intellectually dishonest, how do you think he’s changed?

I think if you look back 5 years (CNN days I think then) he was far more classically GOP than today. As time has gone on, he’s concluded the establishment GOP is not on the side of the people and is in truth selling them out. Which I think is clearly true. I don’t think Stewart would disagree, BTW. Beck is clearly gaining concern about civil liberties and the potential abuse of the Patriot Act. I suspect Stewart would agree.

Beck is a voracious reader and is truly studying history in a way more people should. Both the establishment GOP and the Democrats are very comfortable with each of their revisionist histories. Stewart is actually behind Beck here, but I think Stewart is smart enough he will wise up on some of the usual nonsense.

Ask Stewart and Beck about Wall St and the banks. I think you will find a LOT of common ground.

Beck needs to come a long way from his views on the wars. I think his blinders are still on about 9/11. Which is expected from anyone who doesn’t know the history of our meddling in the affairs of other nations. Propping up dictators who torture half their people, toppling elections and sitting regimes, neverending war. I think Beck will continue to study history and will ultimately be sickened by the military industrial complex and our actions in sovereign nations in undeclared acts of war. May take a while. Right now he is so busy exposing the Obama community’s internal network for its own rhetoric and associations. A lot of people hate this but most of what Beck shows there, or a lot of it anyway, is indisputable as THEIR OWN RHETORIC.

In short, I think both will continue to gravitate toward libertarian views. Not sure Stewart will reach far enough on this front, as he is just tnot very good at understanding economics yet. But I think he is smart enough, and honest enough, that he will almost certainly come around to a degree. I could well be wrong. Maybe I just want to think so.

oops, forgot to ask, where do you see Beck as intellectually dishonest? I see times where I think he just can’t think his way through things, but I think he is trying and just missing it. But you may see something I don’t, and I’m curious.

CosmosDan said:
Here’s the thing. What’s the goal of his show? What network is he on?

Clown nose on, clown nose off.

stoogedudes said:
I remember. Leno took heat because he performed during the strike. He wrote his own material and it was a violation of the union rules because, since Leno himself is a writer, he went against the union because they were striking.

Jon Stewart is a writer and a member of the WGA, therefore he doesn’t need a slew of writers to speak from the heart.

Your memory isn’t accurate. Leno and Letterman aren’t writers. They weren’t going against their union, they were going against their deal with the WGA which requires writers to write their bits for them.

You are right about Stewart, however. I just doubled checked and he is also listed as a writer. So he very well may have written the monologue himself — and entirely possible (perhaps likely?) that others contributed. But it still does have to be entirely scripted.

Tony Westover said:
Yes, I do. The WGA strike was only a few years ago, do you have the memory of a goldfish? There was a reason that shows like the Daily Show, Letterman, and Leno had to shut down. WGA union contracts stipulate that non-interview material by written by WGA writers.

Better check your facts Tony. The Daily Show and Colbert Report went on the air during the strike, and the DS actual got a bump in ratings. Soooooo, what’s that you were saying while you were you making crap up?

Just_MC said:
Beck is a voracious reader and is truly studying history in a way more people should.

You completely ignore when he says things like a 14 year old Jewish boy is responsible for sending people to death camps just because he disagrees with their politics.
I don’t care what kind of a historian he is, he is a truly horrible human being to attack someone in that manner.

Jon Stewart sees that.

CosmosDan said:
Better check your facts Tony. The Daily Show and Colbert Report went on the air during the strike, and the DS actual got a bump in ratings. Soooooo, what’s that you were saying while you were you making crap up?

Score!
Thank you.
I didn’t feel comfortable letting that bullshit lie there.

Seattle Superhero ‘Phoenix Jones’ Patrols Streets, Fights Crime

http://newsallaroundus.blogspot.com/2011/01/seattle-superhero-phoenix-jones-patrols.html

Tony Westover said:
I just doubled checked and he is also listed as a writer. So he very well may have written the monologue himself

Another Righty who lies freely until he is confronted with facts.

Tony Westover said:
B.) I’m right. If you can’t handle that, that’s your hang up not mine.

Remember when you said that?

Good times….

+1 Stewart

This is the new normal: hyper partisanship. It so painful to see pundits screaming at each other overtake the fact that innocent people died on Saturday.

God help us if we suffer another terrorist attack: it may be the end of us.

Just_MC said:
Right now he is so busy exposing the Obama community’s internal network for its own rhetoric and associations. A lot of people hate this but most of what Beck shows there, or a lot of it anyway, is indisputable as THEIR OWN RHETORIC.

Oh, yes. Brck is just an intellectual genious. Good Grief man, get a grip on yourself before you become as braindead as Beck is.

I predict Tony Westover will be disappearing from this thread soon, if not already.

I’m psychic, you see.

IMDB has Leno listed as a writer, although it looks like he is a writing supervisor, and yada yada yada…my point is, I think it is unfair and cynical to say that Stewart is a hack because he didn’t write his monologue or wasn’t supposed to or whatever, and as such didn’t truly mean what he said.

I know your opinion of Stewart won’t change and I won’t try to change it. But I thought at least conservatives would applaud Stewart for his reasoned words. I know nothing I can say will change your mind about his monologue, so I might as well call it a night.

stoogedudes said:
How do you know it wasn’t heartfelt? How do you know Stewart’s feelings on this?

Like I recently said, after this post I’m quoting, you’re right that he’s a writer for the show. Despite him being an actor, the feelings may be genuine.

But it’s still scripted. Has to be or else they violate union rules.

stoogedudes said:
But then again, Stewart’s a liberal, so of course he’s a hack, right? What if Dennis Miller was the host of the Daily Show and was in the same situation? Would you hold him to the same standard?

Only a grain of truth to that. I primarily think he’s a hack since he’s reading — for the most part — other people’s material. A lot of things attributed him quite probably aren’t his intellectual property.

But as far as his ideology goes, I think Stewart’s a hack because he’s an intellectual coward. Whenever he speaks candidly during interviews on politics, he just spouts some Progressive talking point, gets challenged on it, and then says a joke and deflects. It’s quite boringly predictable…

And if Dennis Miller did a segment where he said speech wasn’t the cause of a disaster, but that we should regulate our speech I’d hold him just as accountable. I judge the message, not the messenger.

w_t_f said:
She’s been on a copy and paste roll all day. Guess she had to make up for all this time she’s restrained herself.

LOL…never an original thought in her brain. She does that all the time.

Kird said:
How about we just go with both Gutfeld and Stewart are good at what they do?

No. Gutfeld sucks. He’s not funny or as smart as Stewart. I will confess, I have never watched an entire Gutfeld show aka RedEye but I watch when he appears on The O’Reilly Factor and Fox’s News Watch show. Leaves a lot to be desired. Maybe he’s clever on his show. the jury’s out on that. Not impressed by his cameos on other shows however.

Dem4Ever said:
Thank you Mr. Stewart for pointing out the error of the “Left’s” ways.  Perhaps you can speak to them and suggest that an official apology from them is in order.  Not an apology to the “Right” for they do not require one, but one to the victims and the families of the victims that they exploited for political gain.

Apology right after Lush Limpballs for his incendiary rhetoric.

CosmosDan said:
Better check your facts Tony. The Daily Show and Colbert Report went on the air during the strike, and the DS actual got a bump in ratings. Soooooo, what’s that you were saying while you were you making crap up?

Yes, and so did Leno and Letterman. They went on without their WGA writers.

If you’re going to call people out for “making up crap”, you should probably actually remember the events correctly first.

BFD said:
Tony Westover said:
I just doubled checked and he is also listed as a writer. So he very well may have written the monologue himself

Another Righty who lies freely until he is confronted with facts.

Yeah…. except I corrected and verified myself. Speaking of “lies”, you clipped my quote.

CosmosDan said:
Better check your facts Tony. The Daily Show and Colbert Report went on the air during the strike, and the DS actual got a bump in ratings. Soooooo, what’s that you were saying while you were you making crap up?

LOL. :)

Had to relay this to you all!

“So Palin & crew are feeling unjustly blamed for the actions of an extremist. Maybe they can ask Muslims for advice on how to deal w/ that”–

Jim Treacher said:
Clown nose on, clown nose off.

Jim, you have been really digging (as in liking) this blog of late. I guess not too much happening over on your boy Tucker’s blog.

mcf1757 said:
Had to relay this to you all!

“So Palin & crew are feeling unjustly blamed for the actions of an extremist. Maybe they can ask Muslims for advice on how to deal w/ that”–

I am glad you did.

mcf1757 said:
“So Palin & crew are feeling unjustly blamed for the actions of an extremist.

I guess today on his radio show Glenn Beck told Palin to get security because if she were attacked the Republic would decade or die, or whatever. That’s how braindead the idiot is.

Tony Westover said:
It is pretty clear what he’s doing, so clear that I didn’t bother to bring it up. He’s exploiting a tragedy to push his agenda.

Wow you really did miss the point, but you go ahead with any baseless assertion you care to make.

Tony Westover said:
That’s specifically what he’s doing (and he’s obviously not alone). Telling people that they modify, censor, or not express ideas that pose no direct harm to anyone — and there’s zero proof of any evidence of this — is trying to regulate the marketplace of ideas.

There’s direct physical harm and then there’s the harm done by willful dishonesty and distortion, needless exaggeration and hyperbole. Such as; painting your fellow American citizens as a dangerous threat and the enemy rather than people with different ideas. Jon doesn’t want anyone to stop expressing themselves or being passionate about what they believe in, and he has said so pretty explicitly. All he suggests is that we express those ideas rationally and maybe honestly, with a little less vitriol. With language that promotes an exchange rather than insults. Apart from the skits, he demonstrates this technique night after night with his interviews.

the real john t said:
Oh, yes. Brck is just an intellectual genious. Good Grief man, get a grip on yourself before you become as braindead as Beck is.

Big difference between being an intellectual genius and being intellectually honest. I said I thought he was the latter,and alluded to how I thought he was not the former, actually.

Mission accomplished Markos Moulitsas and Lamestream media!

TWITTER USERS WISH DEATH ON SARAH PALIN

http://www.breitbart.tv/twitter-users-wish-death-on-sarah-palin/

BFD said:
You completely ignore when he says things like a 14 year old Jewish boy is responsible for sending people to death camps just because he disagrees with their politics.I don’t care what kind of a historian he is, he is a truly horrible human being to attack someone in that manner. Jon Stewart sees that.

I hear you. However, my recollection of that is Beck quoted Soros’s answer when Soros was interviewed about it, later, as an adult. As I recall, the interviewer asked Soros if it bothered him to be helping evict families, some of whom he knew, from their homes, seizing their property, etc, and Soros said ‘no’, and that it was invogorating and empowering or something. Happy to listen to the reality if memory is failing me.

Fox News: Enlisting Patriots for Pam Geller's Rally Jan 12th said:
Jim, you have been really digging (as in liking) this blog of late. I guess not too much happening over on your boy Tucker’s blog.

What a characteristically substantive retort. Well done.

Gasket said:
LOL…never an original thought in her brain. She does that all the time. No. Gutfeld sucks. He’s not funny or as smart as Stewart. I will confess, I have never watched an entire Gutfeld show aka RedEye but I watch when he appears on The O’Reilly Factor and Fox’s News Watch show. Leaves a lot to be desired. Maybe he’s clever on his show. the jury’s out on that. Not impressed by his cameos on other shows however. Apology right after Lush Limpballs for his incendiary rhetoric.

DVR his show. He’s actually quite funny, but you are right, it usually doesn’t translate when he does a bit on someone else’s show. You might hate him anyway just for his opinion, which may be too different from your own, but you are so right about his bits not hitting that you should try the show first.

Just_MC said:
Beck is a voracious reader and is truly studying history in a way more people should. Both the establishment GOP and the Democrats are very comfortable with each of their revisionist histories. Stewart is actually behind Beck here, but I think Stewart is smart enough he will wise up on some of the usual nonsense.

You made some interesting points. It’s certainly reasonable that Beck has become more libertarian as time has gone on. I don’t see Beck’s historic lens as very accurate. His religious beliefs and political leanings seem to distort his interpretation IMO.
Beck certainly seems very sincere at times but his reasoning is too distorted and there are too many contradictions in his morality for me to see it as other than an act. But that’s just me. Interesting take though.

Just_MC said:
I hear you. Happy to listen to the reality if memory is failing me.

Would you quit being so reasonable!
I’m trying to be mad at you cuz you’re a Beck fan.

Shit, I guess I’m gonna have to like you.
Now I’m sad.

Just_MC said:
Big difference between being an intellectual genius and being intellectually honest. I said I thought he was the latter,and alluded to how I thought he was not the former, actually.

Was he intellectually honest in telling Palin to get security because if she were attacked the Republic would crumble or die, or something like that? Is Palin that important that she keeps the Republic standing and together?

Jim Treacher said:
Clown nose on, clown nose off.

Yeah, I’ve seen this before and read the article. It’s the right’s way of trying to discredit Jon for all the crap he gives their heroes but it just doesn’t work.
Jon does not use being a comedian as a defense but merely accurately points out that his job description is vastly different than those who profess to be journalists and are on news networks.

BFD said:
Would you quit being so reasonable!I’m trying to be mad at you cuz you’re a Beck fan. Shit, I guess I’m gonna have to like you.Now I’m sad.

LOL, classic! I’m a limited Beck fan, it it helps with the cognitive dissonance at all. :)

I’m frustrated with his war blinders and many other things. My preferred Beck product is the interesting original-source-material he digs up through research. I think I do a far better job of interpreting data, at the risk of sounding like O’Reilly. (Shiver. That creeped even me out.)

The nice thing though is Beck is more malleable than SO many in the Hannity/Olbermann/Maddow/OReilly crowd. He really does learn from some of his mistakes and from new information. I don’t think he is nearly so blindly fitting history and observation into a pre-arranged picture. The other 4 seem to be, in my experience.

Jim Treacher said:
Clown nose on, clown nose off.

I think you have Stewart and Beck mixed up. Beck admitted he was a Rodeo clown.

Beck is also condemning ALL violence right now, as I watch. Here’s where I think he can be a real mental midget. I don’t think he’s thought this one through very well. He might want to consider the wars he doesn’t speak out against more. And the crime of sending our troops into those undeclared, undefined meat-grinding missions, to try to invent a solution on the ground, while the big defense contractors get crazy rich bankrupting the country.

He might also consider the violence of REAL defense, both of the country and within it. After all, “George Washington did not defeat the British with freedom of speech. He shot them.”

I’m not sure anyone honestly decries all violence, besides Jesus Christ or others of a higher power than we..

Tony Westover said:
Yes, and so did Leno and Letterman. They went on without their WGA writers.

If you’re going to call people out for “making up crap”, you should probably actually remember the events correctly first.

You brought up the strike and mentioned their shows went off the air as if that gave weight to your assertion that Jon’s personal comments had to be written by his writers. Since they went on the air without their writer’s it kinda demolishes that point. Letterman and Leno are irrelevant to this conversation which is why I didn’t mention them. As it turns out, the whole strike reference you made is irrelevant.

I see you’ve now checked your facts and admitted you were wrong. Guess that snotty attitude didn’t make your assertion correct, but at least you were man enough to check it out and admit your mistake so kudos for that. It’s too rare around here.
.

it doesn’t surprise me that the wing-nuts take what stewart was saying as directed at the opposing wing-nuts.

you’re both to blame, as is your rhetoric. one side antagonizes while the other does the same. vicious circle. all the while, the pundits and talk show hosts watch their ratings go up and their advertisers become happier.

All because the wing-nuts don’t want to take ownership of their own actions.

Well done.

the real john t said:
Was he intellectually honest in telling Palin to get security because if she were attacked the Republic would crumble or die, or something like that? Is Palin that important that she keeps the Republic standing and together?

Maybe she sort of is, if I can agree and disagree. I don’t think she keeps the Republic standing, as you don’t.

That said, I don’t want to be standing in a large crowd anywhere if something happened to her. Holy cr@p, time to start work on the bunker again. I think that would make a SERIOUS mess erupt. Let us all pray to whatever higher powers we sense that we can avoid such things.

Fair?

Tony Westover said:
But as far as his ideology goes, I think Stewart’s a hack because he’s an intellectual coward. Whenever he speaks candidly during interviews on politics, he just spouts some Progressive talking point, gets challenged on it, and then says a joke and deflects. It’s quite boringly predictable…

Perhaps you could be more specific because I’ve never seen an interview like that , that I’d consider a serious interview.

BFD said:
Remember when you said that?

Good times….

Ouch! LOL!

Just_MC said:
oops, forgot to ask, where do you see Beck as intellectually dishonest? I see times where I think he just can’t think his way through things, but I think he is trying and just missing it. But you may see something I don’t, and I’m curious.

I watched Beck for over a week a year or so ago because a friend asked me to. I found him to be consistently illogical in the way he strings random facts and quotes together. So consistently that it can’t be an accident but a something deliberate.
His use of select quotes from those he likes to target while purposely avoiding evidence to the contrary, is grossly unfair as well as illogical. All the while he talks of God’s love, while he’s willing to bear false witness for money.

The latest one was his big rally. I was actually going to start watching him again to see if he had changed his approach at all. The day after he has his big rally and makes a show of honoring MLK and calling for religious unity he attacks Black Liberation Theology and does his classic quote mining thing to discredit it.

Hmmm, my sense is that Black Liberation Theology and the teaching of MLK clash, but maybe I’m wrong.

That said, I will look for the pattern you mention, especially with quote streams. Maybe I tune that out as I absorb what original source material he does furnish. No worries, but if you see a good example of the quote thing, I’d be interested to see a particular example. You have me thinking….

Regards,

MC

Just_MC said:
Just_MC says:
January 11, 2011 at 3:22 am

Here you go MC, some outrageous quotes from Beck:

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/stupidquotes/a/glenn-beck-quotes.htm

Yeah, there’s some stupid stuff in there. Though the only thing I saw that fit the false-quote-syllogism phenomenon you described was #8 about eugenics and stem cell research.

The one about silencing the opposition, #7, struck me as not being outrageous at all. Except for the kneejerkers who flip whenever the Nazis are mentioned. The fact being that they are simply a good example of police state tactics and propaganda. Useful for all.

But item 8 does, I think, illustrate what you meant. Thanks for digging that up.

Just_MC said:
Hmmm, my sense is that Black Liberation Theology and the teaching of MLK clash, but maybe I’m wrong.

If you look at MLK and the beginnings of Black Liberation theology in historical context they are very similar. It just didn’t make sense to praise one and condemn the other. His representation of the belief of group salvation was completely dishonest. Mlk is credited with being a major inspiration.

The basics was the idea that Jesus was an advocate for the poor and oppressed. At the time white Christianity either was prejudice or stood by and allowed prejudice. Under the principle of MAtt 25, “Whatever you do unto the least of these you do unto me” that’s unacceptable. That’s what both MLK and BLT promoted. Both used Christianity to push for social justice for Black Americans.

Just_MC said:
Except for the kneejerkers who flip whenever the Nazis are mentioned. The fact being that they are simply a good example of police state tactics and propaganda. Useful for all.

No, using Nazi Germany is not a valid comparison. Especially when you do it repeatedly and keep telling listeners that this is what they really want.

Here is a lot of hate;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxgJKNpjSNI&feature=player_embedded#!

A few of your need straight jackets.

Re: Beck – I’d draw a comparison to Loughner before I would to Stewart.

BFD said:
Another Righty who lies freely until he is confronted with facts.

Fact: Soros did it, he said so himself. Beck didn’t make it up.

YOU don’t like the facts.

Just_MC said:
He might want to consider the wars he doesn’t speak out against more. And the crime of sending our troops into those undeclared, undefined meat-grinding missions, to try to invent a solution on the ground, while the big defense contractors get crazy rich bankrupting the country.

YOU sound like the shooter. You clearly have a mental problem. There are NO illegal wars going on by the U.S. There is NO crime sending our troops to defend the country. YOU are delusional. YOU are a loon hiding behind a phony name so they won’t come and take you away.

Geez Jon… din’t you get the memo..it was Palin’s fault. I’ll have Olbermann e-mail you the talking points.

the real john t said:
I think you have Stewart and Beck mixed up. Beck admitted he was a Rodeo clown.

Yes, and Stewart is only a clown when it suits him.

CosmosDan said:
Jon does not use being a comedian as a defense but merely accurately points out that his job description is vastly different than those who profess to be journalists and are on news networks.

However you want to rationalize it.

gordonbloyershow said:
Fact: Soros did it, he said so himself. Beck didn’t make it up.

YOU don’t like the facts.

Ummm…my post was about Jon Stewart writing his own monologue.

Have you had your morning coffee yet?

BFD said:
Ummm…my post was about Jon Stewart writing his own monologue.

Have you had your morning coffee yet?

It’s bitterly cold in Central Texas this morning, and we have an enormous caldron of Mexican chocolate steeping. Cinnamon, nutmeg, vanilla, cocoa, even a dash of chili powder. Wonderful smells. When Basil, I mean Gordon, goes off the air, I’ll invite him over for a cup to clear his mind.

The Real Royal King said:
When Basil, I mean Gordon, goes off the air, I’ll invite him over for a cup to clear his mind.

I doubt you have a cup large enough to fulfill that task.

gordonbloyershow said:
Fact: Soros did it, he said so himself. Beck didn’t make it up. YOU don’t like the facts.

Oops. Gordon accidentally replied here using the style of one of his other personalities but likely forgot he still logged in as Gordo.

mcf1757 said:
The Great Recession of 2008 was a direct result of the no regulation policy strategy put into place by George Bush!

Did you have a big bowl of dumbass for breakfast or does this level of stupidity come natural?

Tony Westover said:
Sorry, Stewart, but I’m not watching my rhetoric, I’m not censoring myself, and I’m not telling anyone else to do it either. The way you defeat hate speech and vitriolic rhetoric is with MORE speech. This is an ingenious idea that the fathers of ACTUAL liberalism such as John Locke and our nation’s Founding Fathers devised centuries ago and it works every time. You try to regulate the marketplace of ideas and it’ll turn to shit just like the regulated financial sector.

I find it absolutely amazing that the extremists (on both sides) on this website are more worried about soiling the reputation of the other side rather than the life of the congresswoman who was seriously wounded by a crazed gunman. Thank God I’m a moderate.

CosmosDan said:
Such as; painting your fellow American citizens as a dangerous threat and the enemy rather than people with different ideas.

Which is exactly what’s going on.

CosmosDan said:
All he suggests is that we express those ideas rationally and maybe honestly, with a little less vitriol. With language that promotes an exchange rather than insults.

Exactly, he’s telling them to censor, modify, or not express their ideas. If “vitriolic rhetoric” didn’t cause this according to him, then why the hell is he bringing it up? That’s like saying “this was a terrible tragedy, America… but you need to each you vegetables from an organic farm”.

His comments are self-serving, no matter how compassionate they may seem.

BFD said:
Publishers Weekly: 1Decision PointsGeorge W. Bush; Crown1 72Earth (The Book): A Visitor’s Guide to the Human RaceJon Stewart et al.; Grand Central4 143Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and RedemptionLaura Hillenbrand; Random2 64LifeKeith Richards; Little, Brown3 95Autobiography of Mark Twain: Vol. 1Edited by Harriet Elinor Smith; Univ. of California5 106DecodedJay-Z; Spiegel & Grau8 67Barefoot Contessa How Easy Is That?: Fabulous Recipes and Easy TipsIna Garten; Clarkson Potter6 98CleopatraStacy Schiff, Little, Brown7 89Sh*t My Dad SaysJustin Halpern; It Books13 3410America By HeartSarah Palin; Harper

Nope, here is the list from Publisher’s Weekly
Rank Bibliographical Information Weeks on List
1 Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption
Laura Hillenbrand.
Random, 27 (496) 978-1-4000-6416-8
review » » » 7 [history]
last rank 3
Initial Rank 3
Initial Date 20101129
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20110110
Average Rank 2.57
[details]
2 Decision Points
George W. Bush.
Crown, 35 978-0-307-59061-9 8 [history]
last rank 1
Initial Rank 1
Initial Date 20101122
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20101122
Average Rank 1.12
[details]
3 Life
Keith Richards.
Little, Brown, 29.99 978-0-316-03438-8 10 [history]
last rank 4
Initial Rank 1
Initial Date 20101108
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20101108
Average Rank 3.00
[details]
4 The 4-Hour Body
Timothy Ferriss.
Harper, 25.99 978-0-307-46363-0 3 [history]
last rank 15
Initial Rank 12
Initial Date 20101227
Highest Rank 4
Highest Rank Date 20110110
Average Rank 10.33
[details]
5 Cleopatra
Stacy Schiff.
Little, Brown, 29.99 978-0-316-00192-2 9 [history]
last rank 8
Initial Rank 13
Initial Date 20101115
Highest Rank 5
Highest Rank Date 20110110
Average Rank 10.56
[details]
6 Straight Talk, No Chaser
Steve Harvey.
Amistad, 24.99 978-0-06-172899-0 4 [history]
last rank 16
Initial Rank 6
Initial Date 20101220
Highest Rank 6
Highest Rank Date 20101220
Average Rank 9.50
[details]
7 Earth (The Book): A Visitor’s Guide to the Human Race
Jon Stewart et al.
Grand Central, 27.99 (256p) 978-0-446-57922-3
review » » » 15 [history]
last rank 2
Initial Rank 1
Initial Date 20101004
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20101004
Average Rank 4.40
[details]
8 Autobiography of Mark Twain: Vol. 1
Edited by Harriet Elinor Smith.
Univ. of California, 34.95 (744p) 978-0-520-26719-0
review » » » 11 [history]
last rank 5
Initial Rank 3
Initial Date 20101101
Highest Rank 2
Highest Rank Date 20101213
Average Rank 5.73
[details]
9 Decoded
Jay-Z.
Spiegel & Grau, 35 978-1-4000-6892-0 7 [history]
last rank 6
Initial Rank 2
Initial Date 20101129
Highest Rank 2
Highest Rank Date 20101129
Average Rank 6.86
[details]
10 Getting More
Stuart Diamond.
Crown Business, 26 978-0-307-71689-7 1
11 Barefoot Contessa How Easy Is That?: Fabulous Recipes and Easy Tips
Ina Garten.
Clarkson Potter, 35 (256p) 978-0-307-23876-4
review » » » 10 [history]
last rank 7
Initial Rank 3
Initial Date 20101108
Highest Rank 3
Highest Rank Date 20101108
Average Rank 6.30
[details]
12 Debt Free for Life
David Bach.
Crown Business, 19.99 978-0-7679-2986-8 1
13 Broke
Glenn Beck.
Threshold, 29.99 978-1-4391-8719-7 10 [history]
last rank 11
Initial Rank 2
Initial Date 20101108
Highest Rank 2
Highest Rank Date 20101108
Average Rank 7.10
[details]
14 Assholes Finish First
Tucker Max.
Gallery, 25.99 978-1-4169-3874-3 14 [history]
last rank 17
Initial Rank 3
Initial Date 20101011
Highest Rank 3
Highest Rank Date 20101011
Average Rank 14.36
[details]
15 Sh*t My Dad Says
Justin Halpern.
It Books, 15.99 978-0-06-199270-4 35 [history]
last rank 9
Initial Rank 9
Initial Date 20100517
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20100628
Average Rank 8.17
[details]
16 I Remember Nothing and Other Reflections
Nora Ephron.
Knopf, 22.95 (160p) 978-0-307-59560-7
review » » » 8 [history]
last rank 13
Initial Rank 5
Initial Date 20101122
Highest Rank 5
Highest Rank Date 20101122
Average Rank 11.12
[details]
17 The Last Boy: Mickey Mantle and the End of America’s Childhood
Jane Leavy.
Harper, 27.99 (464p) 978-0-06-088352-2
review » » » 12 [history]
last rank 12
Initial Rank 4
Initial Date 20101025
Highest Rank 4
Highest Rank Date 20101025
Average Rank 11.67
[details]
18 America By Heart
Sarah Palin.
Harper, 25.99 978-0-06-201096-4 6 [history]
last rank 10
Initial Rank 2
Initial Date 20101206
Highest Rank 2
Highest Rank Date 20101206
Average Rank 9.33
[details]
19 400 Calorie Fix
Liz Vaccariello with Mindy Hermann.
Rodale, 25.99 978-1-60529-494-0 1
20 Washington: A Life
Ron Chernow.
Penguin, 40 (904p) 978-1-59420-266-7
review » » » 5 [history]
last rank 14
Initial Rank 9
Initial Date 20101018
Highest Rank 9
Highest Rank Date 20101018
Average Rank 12.60
[details]
21 The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks
Rebecca Skloot. .
Crown, 26 (369p) 978-1-4000-5217-2
review » » » 22 [history]
last rank 19
Initial Rank 5
Initial Date 20100215
Highest Rank 3
Highest Rank Date 20100308
Average Rank 13.32
[details]
22 Guinness World Records 2011
Guinness World Records.
Guinness, 28.95 978-1-904994-58-9 16 [history]
last rank 21
Initial Rank 12
Initial Date 20100927
Highest Rank 12
Highest Rank Date 20100927
Average Rank 21.06
[details]
23 The Power
Rhonda Byrne.
Atria, 23.95 978-1-4391-8178-2 13 [history]
last rank 19
Initial Rank 1
Initial Date 20100830
Highest Rank 1
Highest Rank Date 20100830
Average Rank 11.85
[details]
24 The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
Siddhartha Mukherjee.
Scribner, 30 (592p) 978-1-4391-0795-9
review » » » 5 [history]
last rank 25
Initial Rank 15
Initial Date 20101129
Highest Rank 15
Highest Rank Date 20101129
Average Rank 20.60
[details]
25 a Course in Weight Loss
Marianne Williamsom.
Hay House, 24.95 978-1-4019-2152-1 4 [history]
last rank 17
Initial Rank 21
Initial Date 20101129
Highest Rank 17
Highest Rank Date 20101213
Average Rank 20.75
[details]

FEATUREDPOPULAR Best Books of 2010
This year we took our annual slugfest to the pub underneath our new office and came up with a list of the year’s top 100 books that could be our best ever. It wasn’t any easier with a drink in hand to pick what we had to agree on were the best books of 2010, but once again, we’ve got a list we love. Len Riggio: PW’s Person of the Year
By any standard, the past 15 months have been eventful for Barnes & Noble. In September 2009, the company completed its purchase of Barnes & Noble College Booksellers and two months later introduced the Nook, its entry into the e-reader wars. This spring, B&N appointed William Lynch as CEO and announced a $140 million investment to upgrade its digital capabilities. 1Upcoming NewSouth ‘Huck Finn’ Eliminates the ‘N’ Word2NewSouth Moves Ahead with Controversial ‘Huck Finn’3What’s Ahead In 20114Best Books of 20105Two Borders Execs Resign; B&N Issues Statement On ‘Special Terms’6Paperback Bestsellers/Trade7No iPad E-reading Deal? No Problem8People9Deals10Galley Talk

BLOGSBeyond Her Book
Barbara Vey
Update That Website
Every time I write about an author, I go to their website so I can link it up to their name. Many times I’m also searching for their book cover. I’m always astonished when I can’t even find a website. To me, being an author is a business and as a business you need people to see the product. What’s available and what’s coming up at the very least.
ShelfTalker
Elizabeth Bluemle
My First Read of 2011: Franny Billingsley’s ‘Chime’
When I was trying to decide which ARC to take with me on vacation, it wasn’t too difficult to choose. Ever since Franny Billingsley’s CHIME arrived in the mail, it’s been crooking tentacles of intent at me.
Genreville
Josh Jasper
Paolo Bacigalupi’s Ship Breaker Wins the Printz Award
As Josh Ellis points out, what we would consider a dystopia is part of life for kids in some places in the world. Bacigalupi’s work says that science fiction can and should address that reality as well as painting a picture of rosy possibilities.Top BestsellersWhat the Night Knows Hardcover Fiction
Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption Hardcover Nonfiction
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Mass Market Paper
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Trade Paper
The Lost Hero Children’s Fiction
Elf on the Shelf Children’s Picture Book
Diary of a Wimpy Kid Children’s Series & Tie-ins
Port mortuary (abr.) Audio Fiction
Decision Points Audio Nonfiction

PICK OF THE WEEK
The Dressmaker of Khair Khana by Gayle Tzemach Lemmon
In 2005, Lemmon went to Afghanistan on assignment for the Financial Times to write about women entrepreneurs. When she met a dressmaker named Kamila Sediqi, Lemmon (once a producer for This Week with George Stephanopolos) knew she had her story. more…

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/bestsellers/hardcover-nonfiction.html

CosmosDan said:
You brought up the strike and mentioned their shows went off the air as if that gave weight to your assertion that Jon’s personal comments had to be written by his writers.

They do. It’s required by WGA union contracts.

CosmosDan said:
Since they went on the air without their writer’s it kinda demolishes that point.

Correct, and again if you actually had any memory of the strike — which you don’t — you would know that they had to change their formats because of this until the strike ended.

CosmosDan said:
I see you’ve now checked your facts and admitted you were wrong. Guess that snotty attitude didn’t make your assertion correct, but at least you were man enough to check it out and admit your mistake so kudos for that. It’s too rare around here.

I was wrong that Stewart wasn’t credited as a writer. I am right that it has to be scripted. Look, it’s not my fault that you didn’t understand the WGA strike and that your only response to facts about the strike is “nuh-uh!!!!”

Tony Westover said:
Which is exactly what’s going on. Exactly, he’s telling them to censor, modify, or not express their ideas. If “vitriolic rhetoric” didn’t cause this according to him, then why the hell is he bringing it up? That’s like saying “this was a terrible tragedy, America… but you need to each you vegetables from an organic farm”. His comments are self-serving, no matter how compassionate they may seem.

Spoken like an extremist that doesn’t give a damn about America. And like most extremists, take out the hate, and the rest of your comments are so rediculous as to make little sense to normal Americans.

CosmosDan said:
Perhaps you could be more specific because I’ve never seen an interview like that , that I’d consider a serious interview.

Perfect example is his latest interview with Bill O’Reilly, think it was three or four months ago when he was promoting his book. Stewart wasn’t getting tossed softballs like he usually gets, he was being challenged to defend his views and he punted with a joke every time. There aren’t many examples of this because Stewart obviously avoids them and enjoys demagogue status among Progressives.

The Enola Gay said:
Spoken like an extremist that doesn’t give a damn about America. And like most extremists, take out the hate, and the rest of your comments are so rediculous as to make little sense to normal Americans.

Spoken like a holier-than-thou busybody.

I find it amusing that you think defending natural rights is “hate”. But of course, when you can’t defend your own ideals, that’s all you’ve really got left as a defensive mechanism, huh. It’s pretty pathetic.

Jim Treacher said:
However you want to rationalize it.

I choose reality and common sense. You pick what you want.

Jim Treacher said:
Yes, and Stewart is only a clown when it suits him.

Yeah, it’s actually his career. It turns out that as a comedian who fell into a comedy news show, he also is a human being with opinions of his own that are reflected in his show. Reading his interviews you find that doing what he does day after day he has looked at our media and our political system for years and is cynical and disappointed.
Agree or disagree, he has been very straightforward about it in several in depth interviews.

I’m not watching my rhetoric, and if my favorite TV and radio shows become PC I’m not gonna watch them either. It’s time for Americans to wake up, this IS a free country, not a safe country, a green country, a multicultural country, but a FREE country. Freedom is number one, over safety, over sensitivity, over anything. If you can’t be free then you might tattoo the words Slave of Uncle Sam in your forehead because nothing else will matter then.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

The biggest compliment that I can give Jon Stewart is that as a conservative – I love him and his show. The guy is funny, intelligent, and knows when to be professional. He calls out “his own side” when appropriate to do so and pokes fun at the “other side” with humor and cynicsm vs angry hate filled rants. May not always agree with his politics but I always agree with how he goes about them.

Tony Westover said:
They do. It’s required by WGA union contracts.

Tony Westover said:
Correct, and again if you actually had any memory of the strike — which you don’t — you would know that they had to change their formats because of this until the strike ended.

Uhuh I have no problem admitting I don’t know WGA contracts work. I’m amused by your need to be condescending and insulting over some crumb of information. You must be a riot at Trivial Pursuit.
You’re the one who claimed to know how it all worked and then admitted you didn’t , so this

Tony Westover said:
I was wrong that Stewart wasn’t credited as a writer. I am right that it has to be scripted. Look, it’s not my fault that you didn’t understand the WGA strike and that your only response to facts about the strike is “nuh-uh!!!!”

little bit of additional condescension is pretty unimpressive. The strike is irrelevant to any point about scripting requirements, and your credibility on knowing how it all works, is running low. But knock yourself out.
It wouldn’t diminish my view of Jon one bit to know he sat down with his staff writers to talk about how to deal with it. It wouldn’t make his expression any less sincere or personal. He does have the final say.

So Stewart goes a teeny bit to the right of Maher, Maddow, Olbermannnn, etc. and somehow he’s a hero.

Some people think Stewart is another Ed Murrow, but h’es just another huckster. His interviews with people are HIGHLY edited and designed to make them look bad and him look good.

Tony Westover’s comment is good:
“Leave it to Jon Stewart to try to get above it all by wading through the swamp and claiming he’s clean.”

Tony Westover said:
Which is exactly what’s going on.

I know, and Jon points out what BS it is night after night.

Tony Westover said:
His comments are self-serving, no matter how compassionate they may seem.

Of course, and he said exactly that. That;s it’s more for him than the audience. It’s his career and his show. There’s nothing wrong with him being self serving and thoughtful at the same time.

He said clearly that we can’t draw a line of causation from the rhetoric to this tragedy, but that maybe we can cut back on the rhetoric so we can more easily tell the difference. A joke with a point which is what he does so very well. Maybe if we didn’t have pundits getting rich from alarmist conspiracy theories day after day, and painting the opposition as the enemy within , the real crazies wouldn’t blend in so well.
We’ve always had a lunatic fringe but now technology has amplified their voice and given them far to much credibility. The media, turning to cheap sensationalism and manufactured controversy helps it along, rather than actually informing us about relevant issues.

Jon is trying to stifle or control ideas, but suggesting that how those ideas are communicated matters, and one way leads to better problem solving.

TexasTeaSipper said:
The biggest compliment that I can give Jon Stewart is that as a conservative – I love him and his show. The guy is funny, intelligent, and knows when to be professional. He calls out “his own side” when appropriate to do so and pokes fun at the “other side” with humor and cynicsm vs angry hate filled rants. May not always agree with his politics but I always agree with how he goes about them.

I like him to, but he could call out his own side quite a bit more.

Alz said:
Some people think Stewart is another Ed Murrow, but h’es just another huckster. His interviews with people are HIGHLY edited and designed to make them look bad and him look good.

Wrong. He has a time limit on TV but puts the entire interview on the web and consistently makes that known on the air when the subject is interesting and controversial. Several conservatives express an appreciation for Jon being the kind of interviewer who allows them to speak their piece and express their ideas, even when he disagrees. He doesn’t shout them down or demand they answer his question. It’s actually a two way dialogue. What a concept.

greg454 said:
I’m not watching my rhetoric, and if my favorite TV and radio shows become PC I’m not gonna watch them either. It’s time for Americans to wake up, this IS a free country, not a safe country, a green country, a multicultural country, but a FREE country. Freedom is number one, over safety, over sensitivity, over anything. If you can’t be free then you might tattoo the words Slave of Uncle Sam in your forehead because nothing else will matter then.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/

That’s right. You’re free to find a more effective way to communicate with your fellow citizens or not bother. Whichever you think promotes freedom.

“It would be really nice if the ramblings of crazy people didn’t in any way resemble how we actually talk to each other on TV. Let’s at least make troubled individuals easier to spot. ”

The thing is, this guy was really easy to spot, and his incoherent rantings about mind control and grammer really don’t resemble any kind of political rhetoric, or “vitriol”, or whatever. This guy was crazy, and he was apparently obsessed with Giffords for some time. The shooting itself appears to have had nothing to do with political discourse. The only tie to political discourse comes from reprehensible comments made by high-profile leftists after the shooting, comments with no basis in fact. I see those comments as more damaging to our political discourse than anything Sarah Palin or Glen Beck have ever said.

BFD said:
Wait til you hear Gutfeld on Red Eye. Completely the opposite of Stewart. What is your point again?

No way this point is lost on anyone, it was very simple. Is Gutfeld blaming Palin and Beck for the actions of the shooter even though there is no connection? WTF are you even talking about?

http://crazyconservative.wordpress.com/

BFD said:
I was saying Stewart’s book seems to be outlasting Beck’s, O’Reilly’s and Palin’s at the top of the bestseller list and your post doesn’t refudiate that. Thank you.

What best seller list?

BFD said:
You completely ignore when he says things like a 14 year old Jewish boy is responsible for sending people to death camps just because he disagrees with their politics.
I don’t care what kind of a historian he is, he is a truly horrible human being to attack someone in that manner.

Jon Stewart sees that.

There is so much wrong with your statement I do not really even know where to begin. Glenn Beck never said that, nor was it an attack. If you actually paid any attention to the show, instead of just reading other people paid attacks against it, you would know what the source was & how Glenn presented it.

Everything on George Soros was source FROM George Soros. His books, his writings, his interviews all of the material that was presented on Beck’s show was from Soros himself. If you think it is an attack on Soros to point out what he did & that he has no remorse over it then maybe you need to examine your feelings and knowledge of George Soros.

And before you go around spreading more lies about Glenn Beck, why don’t you actually check some facts before posting: Glenn did not BLAME Soros, in fact went out of his way to say that due to his age Soros could not be blamed for the actions he had to take at that time. What Glenn pointed out is that Soros has never had any regrets over what he did at the time.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-puppet-master-read-the-beck-tv-background-guide-to-george-soros/
All the sourcing and research for the show can be found at that link.

Stewart is wise enough to bring marshmallows to each political campfire rather than gasoline.

Voidseeker said:
There is so much wrong with your statement I do not really even know where to begin. Glenn Beck never said that, nor was it an attack. If you actually paid any attention to the show, instead of just reading other people paid attacks against it, you would know what the source was & how Glenn presented it.

Everything on George Soros was source FROM George Soros. His books, his writings, his interviews all of the material that was presented on Beck’s show was from Soros himself. If you think it is an attack on Soros to point out what he did & that he has no remorse over it then maybe you need to examine your feelings and knowledge of George Soros.

The Soros nonsense has been filtered through Beck’s Swiss cheese brain filter. Just read the Soros bio on Wikipedia and you’ll see much more factual information without the Beckian distortions. Do your homework.

And before you go around spreading more lies about Glenn Beck, why don’t you actually check some facts before posting: Glenn did not BLAME Soros, in fact went out of his way to say that due to his age Soros could not be blamed for the actions he had to take at that time. What Glenn pointed out is that Soros has never had any regrets over what he did at the time.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-puppet-master-read-the-beck-tv-background-guide-to-george-soros/
All the sourcing and research for the show can be found at that link.

Re: Voidseeker post by my dogs gone.
Just a posting error.
Read the wikipedia bio on Soros.
It won’t take long and omits the spin that Beck must put into his narrative.

BTW; Here’s Colbert’s brief mention of the Tuscon tragedy.
http://www.colbertnation.com/home
After correctly pointing out that now is not the time to point fingers of partisan blame he runs a clip of the right and left doing exactly that.

Tony Westover said:
Perfect example is his latest interview with Bill O’Reilly, think it was three or four months ago when he was promoting his book. Stewart wasn’t getting tossed softballs like he usually gets, he was being challenged to defend his views and he punted with a joke every time. There aren’t many examples of this because Stewart obviously avoids them and enjoys demagogue status among Progressives.

That’s exactly what I was thinking of as a not serious interview. They were promoting their books and appeared on each others shows. Bill and Jon have a friendly rivalry and trade jabs. There’s no in depth interview there.

There are several out there and I’ve seen them. Jon’s interviews are often about his and the shows role as political satire and how that has developed and changed. They are also about what he sees , after watching the political and media news landscape for years, as a failure by DC and the media outlets to honestly address serious issues, because that’s their dam job not his. His honesty comes from a commitment to his craft and making the joke work because it’s often grounded in the truth.

CosmosDan said:
No, using Nazi Germany is not a valid comparison. Especially when you do it repeatedly and keep telling listeners that this is what they really want.

I don’t follow, “not a vailid comparison” to WHAT?

CosmosDan said:
That’s exactly what I was thinking of as a not serious interview. They were promoting their books and appeared on each others shows. Bill and Jon have a friendly rivalry and trade jabs. There’s no in depth interview there. There are several out there and I’ve seen them. Jon’s interviews are often about his and the shows role as political satire and how that has developed and changed. They are also about what he sees , after watching the political and media news landscape for years, as a failure by DC and the media outlets to honestly address serious issues, because that’s their dam job not his. His honesty comes from a commitment to his craft and making the joke work because it’s often grounded in the truth.

This is one of my complaints about Stewart. He DEMANDS to be taken seriously about some things. But in my experience, when someone addresses a serious topic with him and persists (as described in the post you’d quoted), he ducks and runs to a joke.

Completely the opposite of his best work ever. Which was….anyone want to guess…doing his homework and sticking it to that weasel Jim Kramer, calling him on his hypocrisy and NOT letting anyone off the hook with a joke.

CosmosDan said:
Uhuh I have no problem admitting I don’t know WGA contracts work. I’m amused by your need to be condescending and insulting over some crumb of information.

Just returning the favor. I think it’s most effect to respond to condescension with condescension and facts.

CosmosDan said:
You’re the one who claimed to know how it all worked and then admitted you didn’t

I admitted correctly that Jon Stewart is a credited writer. Sorry, but that doesn’t miraculously change the WGA strike.

CosmosDan said:
It wouldn’t diminish my view of Jon one bit to know he sat down with his staff writers to talk about how to deal with it. It wouldn’t make his expression any less sincere or personal. He does have the final say.

And I’m very skeptical, particularly because it’s Jon Stewart saying it. Not because he’s a Progressive or a comedian or whatever.

Stewart rails on Beck and says that he exploits a message of alarmism for a profit. (Actually, he accuses all of Fox News of this.) There’s merit to that depending on your perspective because Beck indeed does sell books about the topics he discusses on his radio and TV shows for profit. And depending on your perspective, you could make the argument that Beck may have to embellish examples of this in order to keep making money. I of course don’t agree with this because my exposure to Glenn Beck isn’t limit to Media Matters clips and Jon Stewart parodies, I’m just speaking generally here.

Stewart has now gone and done the same thing that he accuses Beck of doing. Instead of alarmism, it’s “reason” or however the hell he wants to call it for Stewart. Basically it’s a message of “simmer down, square”. That message itself is fine, but the hypocrisy is that Stewart also profits off of his “reason” or “simmer down” platform. Therefore, in order to keep profiting off this platform, it’s equally plausible that Stewart has to embellish example of rhetoric in order to make them look extreme for the sake of profit.

So I’m just holding Jon Stewart to the standard he created. And this is a perfect example, no matter how pleasant the wrapping may look to some.

CosmosDan said:
That’s exactly what I was thinking of as a not serious interview. They were promoting their books and appeared on each others shows. Bill and Jon have a friendly rivalry and trade jabs. There’s no in depth interview there.

I was referring to Stewart’s appearance on O’Reilly. I’d expect an O’Reilly interview on the Daily Show to be funny and not serious. They’re friends, they should have fun.

It’s a different matter on O’Reilly’s show because it’s clearly a different format there. The discussions are more engaging. That was the case when Stewart was promoting Earth on O’Reilly’s show. It obviously wasn’t disruptively contentious because they’re friends, but it was still serious and followed the formula I said earlier: Stewart says a Progressive talking point, O’Reilly refutes it, Stewart makes a joke to deflect the refutation.

And again, I’m just holding Stewart up to his own standard. He wants to be viewed seriously, which is perfectly reasonable and fine, so I’m going to assess him accordingly. He doesn’t get a pass because he has an 11:00 time slot on a cable network.

Just_MC said:
Completely the opposite of his best work ever. Which was….anyone want to guess…doing his homework and sticking it to that weasel Jim Kramer, calling him on his hypocrisy and NOT letting anyone off the hook with a joke.

Completely disagree. He called Kramer a snake oil salesman, with no humor whatsoever inferred, and completely ignored the fact that:

A.) Kramer ALWAYS tells his viewers to do their own homework before investing, and
B.) Kramer routinely — weekly, actually — does whole segments on investments he got wrong on the show and analyzes where he went wrong.

Stewart didn’t do any homework whatsoever. He just found an opportunity to grandstand, which he gladly did.

It was actually that show which was a turning point for me. Since then I’ve tuned off Stewart almost entirely. It was that point where I realized that not only is Stewart an intellectual coward, but that he was increasingly exploiting his show’s format to bolster his intellectual cowardice. He hosts a comedy show, but he dictates when he’s going to be taken seriously, and it comes without warning. It’s a cowardly sneak attack. These shows aren’t spontaneous, they’re prepared and rehearsed with talking points so there’s a flow to the conversations and so there’s no dead air. I don’t think this is some big secret and I think any show would be a bad product if they didn’t do this. But Stewart frequently breaks this in a cheap attempt to gain intellectual high ground. It’s pretty pathetic.

Tony Westover said:
Completely disagree. He called Kramer a snake oil salesman, with no humor whatsoever inferred

In some ways, this was why it was his best. It wasn’t humor, it was real journalism. But I agree it was very different in that regard from his usual tone.

Tony Westover said:
.) Kramer ALWAYS tells his viewers to do their own homework before investing, and
B.) Kramer routinely — weekly, actually — does whole segments on investments he got wrong on the show and analyzes where he went wrong.

I don’t disagree with this.

Tony Westover said:
Stewart didn’t do any homework whatsoever. He just found an opportunity to grandstand, which he gladly did.

Here’s where our views diverge radically. Stewart dug up a bunch of video where Kramer practically giggled about how to ARTIFICIaLLY MANIPULATE the prices of securities. And giggled about how the Securities and Exchange Commission was so dumb they couldn’t figure it out. Stewart went on, with original source video, to show Kramer pushing Bear Stearns and discussed why Kramer should have known better. It was the best researched discussion in the history of the show. Which I think is why Kramer ended up in tears for having not only been exposed to the country, but also to himself, as a guy who was willing to artificially manipulate prices to distort buyer perception of the correct market value, as a means to make money for himself and his customers. Which, I think is the definition of fraud.

Anyhow, while I agree that he puts in the caveats you describe, which is good, I don’t think it excuses deliberate manipulation of prices to distort their market value. Which he ADMITTED on the video.

Am I wrong on this?

Sorry, meant this to continue as part of the post above and fat-fingered it.

Tony Westover said:
… He hosts a comedy show, but he dictates when he’s going to be taken seriously, and it comes without warning. It’s a cowardly sneak attack. These shows aren’t spontaneous, they’re prepared and rehearsed with talking points so there’s a flow to the conversations and so there’s no dead air. I don’t think this is some big secret and I think any show would be a bad product if they didn’t do this. But Stewart frequently breaks this in a cheap attempt to gain intellectual high ground. It’s pretty pathetic.

I agree here. There is a fundamental problem with a comedy show about politics. The more serious or dire the politics, the harder the leap to sardonic humor. Imagine Stewart doing his show in 1863. It’s just too serious to be funny. While I think Stewart does a good job with it all things considered, the gravity of the mess in the country means the tone needs to go more and more serious and critical, where the appropriate audience response is not jubilant laughter but basically outrage. Stewart’s show is going to have to change a lot in tone as things get worse.

Just_MC said:
I don’t follow, “not a vailid comparison” to WHAT?

To the political atmosphere in the US and specifically the Obama administration.

He’s chicken little telling his audience the sky is falling and their fellow Americans want to control them, when the reality is it’s overcast, and people disagree about what the best solutions are. He talks about unity but immediately turns to us vs them.

Yes, the left is loving, arms wide open to all ideas, thye of the “it takes a village”…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxVVhF3jQis

ARTHUR:

If Mr.Stewart’s words helped you, so be it, good for you. But, as for me, having a comic tell me the obvious, doesn’t rise to the lofty goal of “national treasure”. If you did not already know and feel the very human conditions Mr.Stewart was talking about, your in serious trouble.
What Mr.Steward did accomplish was explaining the obvious to the Liberal mush-heads that are so full of hate that they couldn’t understand the obvious even when it hit them squarely in the face. Think about this! A liberal leaning comedian had to explain the obvious….A COMEDIAN…for God’s sake people!!

CosmosDan said:
Wrong. He has a time limit on TV but puts the entire interview on the web and consistently makes that known on the air when the subject is interesting and controversial. Several conservatives express an appreciation for Jon being the kind of interviewer who allows them to speak their piece and express their ideas, even when he disagrees. He doesn’t shout them down or demand they answer his question. It’s actually a two way dialogue. What a concept.

Stewart is for Stewart, never forget that. He’s a bit self serving.

Some examples. I don’t agree with all of this, but the point is clear about Stewart.

(I think the second one has been removed for copyright violations.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7Wz0pWnWIU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlL1lrNMJtU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AwqRIoZipY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDZSXmfnDLo

Just_MC said:
Sorry, meant this to continue as part of the post above and fat-fingered it.

I agree here. There is a fundamental problem with a comedy show about politics. The more serious or dire the politics, the harder the leap to sardonic humor. Imagine Stewart doing his show in 1863. It’s just too serious to be funny. While I think Stewart does a good job with it all things considered, the gravity of the mess in the country means the tone needs to go more and more serious and critical, where the appropriate audience response is not jubilant laughter but basically outrage. Stewart’s show is going to have to change a lot in tone as things get worse.

Yes.

One issue though is how the Left and the media circle the wagons and simply don’t report on many things. Stewart and the other liberals play to that and they get to pull out the news as they see fit. The liberals who get most of their news from Stewart think he’s revealing things first.

Stewart has a teeny amount of credibility because he acts like he’s angry at the left sometimes.

It’s a nice shtick because he’s protected by the media. Stewart can’t go too far in pointing out how goofy the left is because he is a lefty.

You know when he would be going to far by when Maher, Olbermann, start whining.

Tony Westover said:
Just returning the favor. I think it’s most effect to respond to condescension with condescension and facts.

In this case it was you who started this little spree with your response to stoogedudes who was not condescending to you. So, giving what you get doesn’t quite fly.

Tony Westover said:
I admitted correctly that Jon Stewart is a credited writer. Sorry, but that doesn’t miraculously change the WGA strike.

Since the strike was and is irrelevant to the point you were making , and incorrect about I’m not sure why you’re still bringing it up.

Tony Westover said:
Stewart rails on Beck and says that he exploits a message of alarmism for a profit. (Actually, he accuses all of Fox News of this.)

And he’s correct. He’s also correct that the media in general no longer serves it’s purpose of presenting the news and informing us. Real investigative journalism is too costly so sensationalizing the mundane and filling the space with largely uninformed and agenda driven opinions seems to be the trend. When he was went on Madow’s show after being accused of a false equivalency by those on the left he said he thought the media that claims to be news, might choose the format of corruption vs non corruption rather than left vs right, and that might better serve the public.

Tony Westover said:
I of course don’t agree with this because my exposure to Glenn Beck isn’t limit to Media Matters clips and Jon Stewart parodies, I’m just speaking generally here.

It strikes me as odd that the same folks {not necessarily you} that complain about the clips Jon uses as unfair, will point to the ones Fox and Beck uses with the argument “well it’s their own words” without noticing the glaring contradiction. I’ve watched Beck’s show and don’t find it much more substantial than the clips. I think all pundits get some things right, even the ones I don’t like and don’t watch. Jon has said a couple of times that he admires Beck’s success and commitment to his technique, but his jokes about Beck’s absurd non logic and ludicrous conclusions are pretty accurate.
If you want to discuss why you think socialism is wrong and we’re headed in that direction that’s a very valid discussion to have. Holding up swastikas and hammer and sickle insignias turns what could be an informative exchange into a money grubbing joke.

Tony Westover said:
Stewart has now gone and done the same thing that he accuses Beck of doing. Instead of alarmism, it’s “reason” or however the hell he wants to call it for Stewart. Basically it’s a message of “simmer down, square”. That message itself is fine, but the hypocrisy is that Stewart also profits off of his “reason” or “simmer down” platform.

You can make that argument but it’s hard to support. How exactly has Stewart profited off that? He’s doing the same show he’s been doing for years. There’s not a lot of new Restore Sanity products out there. No book tour or high paid speaking tours. His job is a comedy show and he’s successful at it. His personal opinions about politics and the media have become known because of that success and his comedic technique and they resonate with enough people who agree.

CosmosDan said:
To the political atmosphere in the US and specifically the Obama administration. He’s chicken little telling his audience the sky is falling and their fellow Americans want to control them, when the reality is it’s overcast, and people disagree about what the best solutions are. He talks about unity but immediately turns to us vs them.

Can I ask you to consider one thing? I think a lot of people just shut down mentally when the word Nazi gets used to illustrate anything. To me, this really a shame. Have stupid comparisons to the Nazis been overused? Yes. Is the lesson of the Nazis something we should all become blind to? No. We have whole museums, across multiple continents, dedicated specifically to the notion of “never forget.”

That said, it doesn’t do any good at all to warn people what it was like under the Nazis when they had forged a complete police state. No need to tell anyone. If it happens to them, they’ll know it sucks. So, USEFUL comparisons to the Nazis must show the slippery slope that allowed Germany to slide into that disaster. Which means, you need to warn the frog what it looks like to be in a pot of water BEFORE it’s too late. Which means pointing out specific moves that the police state makes, so people can recognize them.

(Now is about the time for some idiot to inject himself into this and say “oh come on, and I suppose the Obama administration is going to kill 6 million Jews?! HRRUMPH!” Ummmm, no.)

The point is to point out tactics of anyone (the Obama administration is in power now) who shows signs of moving toward a police state. So, when someone shows parallels about IDs or papers, or hyperinflation tearing down a government, or whatever, I think it is critical to judge the particular comparison on a case by case basis. The Bush Administration and the Congress did plenty in the Patriot Act that similarly moved us further toward a policie state.

In the particular example cited, Beck was speaking about the need to stifle dissent in order to achieve further globalization, and the tactics to do it. Not anything as uselessly vague as comparing “The Nazis” to ” the political atmosphere in the US and specifically the Obama administration,” which I agree would be uselessly vague and Chicken-Littleish.

Just_MC said:
This is one of my complaints about Stewart. He DEMANDS to be taken seriously about some things. But in my experience, when someone addresses a serious topic with him and persists (as described in the post you’d quoted), he ducks and runs to a joke.

How does he DEMAND to be taken seriously? He has an interview portion of his show and he’s smart and informed, and decent enough to be good at it, but he always interjects humor into the interviews. He has talked often of how people shouldn’t look to him to deliver the news or take him too seriously because that’s not his job description. It’s really not his design that the media fails at their job so badly that it makes Jon look so reasonable.

Just_MC said:
Completely the opposite of his best work ever. Which was….anyone want to guess…doing his homework and sticking it to that weasel Jim Kramer, calling him on his hypocrisy and NOT letting anyone off the hook with a joke.

Thanks for mentioning it. I watched it again
http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/03/13/jon-stewart-and-jim-cramer-the-extended-daily-show-interview/

You’ll notice in this interview that Jon acknowledges that it’s not his job , which he describes as fart noises and funny faces, but the interview is about CNBC not doing their job correctly. There are great links to the back story too? Jon took a shot at CNBC and they made the mistake of calling him on it.
It seems to me that what some people are saying is that if Jon’s satire is going to be that right on, and he’s going to occasionally be somewhat serious about serious issues, then he should be held to journalistic standards. The problem is that’s completely wrong. His job description doesn’t change when his satire points out the media not doing theirs. He’s not demanding he be taken seriously. He’s questioning why they aren’t taking their jobs more seriously?

CosmosDan said:
. He’s not demanding he be taken seriously. He’s questioning why they aren’t taking their jobs more seriously?

Additionally I wanted to mention that he acknowledges to Cramer that his critique wasn’t fair and makes the what should be obvious observation that that’s also not their job.
It cracks me up when people criticize him for not being fair and balanced. He’s not a journalist and that’s not a slogan he promotes. The company that promotes that should be the one being questioned.

Regardless of whether or not Jon Stewart wrote his material regarding the tragic happening in AZ I believe that what he said made much sense. It seems to me that Stewart is saying that what happened in AZ was the result of a man with severe mental illness, specifically paranoid schizophrenia. I remember some time 2010 the Daily show host’s guest was Roselynn Carter. She talked of the book she wrote about how the mental health system and people’s attitude toward people with mental illness needed major improvement. She mentioned her start with mental health advocacy starting with her work in her home state with her husband in Georgia. Then she went on with the terrible state of how most persons view the mentally ill. One thing she stated was stigma. I am terribly fearful this incident will fuel the belief that if somebody has a mental diagnosis they will be violent. This is definitely not true. In fact these persons are much more likely to be victims of crime then to commit criminal acts. I wonder if this shooter received the right treatment this tragedy would’ve been never occurred. One thing re:stigma is it makes people feel feelings of shame concerning their psychiatric illness and they don’t seek treatment. I think trying to eliminate stigma, funding for mental health care, support in the community are some of the things that can work out that more persons who need psychiatric treatment will get it.

If Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, and Keith Olbermann, really think the right is ‘dangerous’, why do they keep trying to incite violence, with the constant name-calling and badgering of the right? If the right really is dangerous, why would those idiots want to take a chance on provoking a dangerous ‘righty?’ The truth is, the fringe liberals want to provoke violence from the right. All 3 of those stooges are [getting off] on this latest act of violence and murder, in AZ. In reality, no SANE person would want to hopefully provoke someone they genuinely believe is dangerous, as these stooges do, daily. Why doesn’t one sane liberal come forward, if there are any, and demand that the 3 stooges stop trying to provoke acts of violence on the right? Why? Because that’s their sole objective. A young child has died, but the looney left continues with their BS. Pathetic human beings. It’s all theatre to these loons; just a game. With other people’s lives. They are the root of all the rot in America, today.

newzmaker said:
If Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, and Keith Olbermann, really think the right is ‘dangerous’, why do they keep trying to incite violence, with the constant name-calling and badgering of the right? If the right really is dangerous, why would those idiots want to take a chance on provoking a dangerous ‘righty?’

Good point. We know the answer: Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Stewart, Maddow, etc. are deranged. It’s just scare tactics.

Lynda Appell said:
Regardless of whether or not Jon Stewart wrote his material regarding the tragic happening in AZ I believe that what he said made much sense. It seems to me that Stewart is saying that what happened in AZ was the result of a man with severe mental illness, specifically paranoid schizophrenia. I remember some time 2010 the Daily show host’s guest was Roselynn Carter. She talked of the book she wrote about how the mental health system and people’s attitude toward people with mental illness needed major improvement. She mentioned her start with mental health advocacy starting with her work in her home state with her husband in Georgia. Then she went on with the terrible state of how most persons view the mentally ill. One thing she stated was stigma. I am terribly fearful this incident will fuel the belief that if somebody has a mental diagnosis they will be violent. This is definitely not true. In fact these persons are much more likely to be victims of crime then to commit criminal acts. I wonder if this shooter received the right treatment this tragedy would’ve been never occurred. One thing re:stigma is it makes people feel feelings of shame concerning their psychiatric illness and they don’t seek treatment. I think trying to eliminate stigma, funding for mental health care, support in the community are some of the things that can work out that more persons who need psychiatric treatment will get it.

I think that most people are smarter than you may be giving credit. People know that there are varying degrees of mental illness.

What we have here is a case, like the Virginia tech killings, where the system failed. This guy should have been dealt with a long time ago. i think this is why the sheriff is doing some CYA.

Many people expressed grave concern over this guy but the authorities did nothing. Why? Maybe the reason why nothing was done is because we all have been taught to tolerate many bad behaviors and to not judge. The authorities didn’t want to hurt his feelings.

And because of this, the liberals will soon turn him into a victim.

Tony Westover said:
I was referring to Stewart’s appearance on O’Reilly. I’d expect an O’Reilly interview on the Daily Show to be funny and not serious. They’re friends, they should have fun.

I didn’t take either appearance very seriously because of their banter and the book promotion. I assumed they had some agreement before either appeared on the others show but I don’t know. I’ll see if I can find it to watch again.

Here’s a lengthy clip from early 2010 with Jon and Bill, with some serious questions answered. I think part of the issue is that Jon sees the nuances as important, so big too broad questions need to be made more specific
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4003531/entire-jon-stewart-interview?r_src=ramp
Here’s the book tour clip in it’s entirety .
http://www.mediaite.com/online/unedited-interview-reveals-oreilly-producers-cut-best-of-jon-stewarts-comments/

I don’t see what you’re describing. It’s just a very general not to serious interview.

Alz said:
Stewart is for Stewart, never forget that. He’s a bit self serving.

This is an meaningless criticism. Any media figure that has their own show is a bit self serving. It goes with a serious career. But your job description matters.

Alz said:
It’s a nice shtick because he’s protected by the media.

I have no idea what this means and I’m guessing you made it up or read it on some blog.

Only one of 3 things is involved to motivate people to do things including unstable people.
One of three different things are present when some nut case person either decides to blow up a building , kill someone or invest his money somewhere. Greed, Fear or Religion. If you were spreading any of these three over the airwaves you were probably responsible in some way for shoving this unstable guy over the edge. You can’t be blamed for the whole thing. Do what the insurance companies do. You know, 40% at fault for radio, 40% fault for TV, and 20% fault for milking the economy putting it into a deep recession. All of these things play some part in promoting crime, poverty and death. The thing I worry about is some rich person or persons may have had a secret agreement with this nut case person through 2, 3, or 4 different parties to cover up this crime, telling him, don’t talk, someone will take care of him after a short stay in jail. You or I would not fall for a gig like this but a nut case would. That is why past history reveals some nut cases fell for this type gig. People have proven some will do just about anything for money. The three things theory is good way to recognize motive. It makes sense

Just_MC said:
So, USEFUL comparisons to the Nazis must show the slippery slope that allowed Germany to slide into that disaster.

I see your point. I agree that knee jerk reactions against any WWII Germany reference isn’t necessary or helpful, but I haven’t heard a Nazi reference made in the last two years that was realistic and useful. It’s more the the boy who cried Nazi, or as Lewis Black put it, “Nazi tourettes”

CosmosDan said:
This is an meaningless criticism. Any media figure that has their own show is a bit self serving. It goes with a serious career. But your job description matters.

I have no idea what this means and I’m guessing you made it up or read it on some blog.

In my opinion.Stewart is far more concerned about himself than people think.

the other thing I said is about the media protecting him. He’s a liberal and the media is filled with liberals. The Left “protects” him so he never has t worry about being called on about what he says..

I am VERY pleased to see the haughty Paul Krugman getting bludgeoned. He deserves every bit of ridicule being heaped upon him now. When Obama’s radical Leftist agenda started to unravel, Krugman seethed with rage because Obama’s failure was now Krugman’s failure: Keynesian economics is a lie. The man is a danger to his family and pets. He should be monitored.

181 comments
mcf1757 says:
January 10, 2011 at 11:39 pm mcf1757(Quote)
71 47
America’s most trusted newsman doing what he does best!!

YEP- YEP -YEP That just about covers it !!!!

Alz said:
In my opinion.Stewart is far more concerned about himself than people think.

So you think you know what Jon thinks and what people think about Jon? I’m skeptical.

Alz said:
the other thing I said is about the media protecting him. He’s a liberal and the media is filled with liberals. The Left “protects” him so he never has t worry about being called on about what he says..

I respectfully submit that you are making things up and have nothing to back up this claim.