Well no crap. As the media fawned over Weiners weiner for a week and a half not a word was said about the Clarence Thomas scandal.

Damn liberal media!!!!

I heard that huge sigh of relief from you East Coast Lefty Media all the way out here in the West.

That sign was saying “John Stewart just covered our butt’s- see we aren’t Liberal, we are just lazy!”

I say, you are not only lazy, but you drink the Liberal Kool Aid and don’t mind telling us about it on a daily basis!

Hint – “We NO longer listen to you!”

How sad for this guy . No insight , not funny , not witty . Comparing himself to Will Rogers was ridiculous . Stewart is as funny as Arthur , the not political comic . Which is , not at all . That Fox viewers are misinformed nonsense was disproven long ago , but he still brings it out as a last resort . His sorry performance during Weinergate and this appearance proves that the lefty version of humor is like the 20th season of SNL . Pitiful .

There’s one network that leans right. All the others lean left. But hey, that one on the right is more active!

And as proof of a lack of partisanship, Stewart suggested the media “jumped into the Weiner pool with such delight and such relish.”

Well, that’s not true. The media held off as long as they could on the story… it was only after Wiener started attacking the media for covering it, and his lies became more apparent that they “jumped” in. Compare that to how the NYTimes reported the McCain affair story… which no evidence, and was forced to retract it later.

And then he admitted himself, “the embarrassment is that I’m given credibility in this world because of the disappointment that the public has in what the news media does.”

This is something that really bothers me about Stewart. He uses his “comedian” status as a defense, but recognizes that it’s simply not true. He SHOULD be seen as just a comedian, and treated as such… but he’s not. As because he’s not, and because he knows he’s not, he has a greater responsibility towards his audience.

He calls himself a comedian as it suits him, but has no problem speaking out on political topics, interviewing political figures, and writing political books. He rather apparently wants to have it both ways. He wants to be a political player, but doesn’t want the seriousness or the responsibility that comes along with it. I find this to be the lest respectable thing about Stewart. He should make a decision to go one way or the other, and stop hiding behind his “comedian” status.

Stewart is dead on about the laziness. I hope he also included himself in that. I mean if he wants to be fair about his laziness. When this administration gives him almost daily comedic blunders he focuses on Palin and the Republicans.

we are not liberal, we are lazy

ImNotBlue said:
Compare that to how the NYTimes reported the McCain affair story… which no evidence, and was forced to retract it later.

Whoops… make that “WITH no evidence,”

seems too edited

waiting to watch the show now, but it looks like he got rather angry….
http://lockerz.com/s/112195428

All Stewart needed to say was that Fox is the only network run by former operatives from one party. The greatest example is Roger Ailes, the CEO of the network, who was George Bush’s leading communication operative in 1988. Or he could have said that Fox is the only network that actually financially supports one party over another. Fox has given over 1 million to the Republican Governors Association. Enough said.

Stewart could have also said that since Fox is the only one that leans right, if you’re on the political left you can watch any of the others and be happy.

WillP said:
All Stewart needed to say was that Fox is the only network run by former operatives from one party. The greatest example is Roger Ailes, the CEO of the network, who was George Bush’s leading communication operative in 1988. Or he could have said that Fox is the only network that actually financially supports one party over another. Fox has given over 1 million to the Republican Governors Association. Enough said.

he probably did…and they edited it out

Headline: Jon Stewart On Fox News Sunday: Media’s Bias Is Not Liberal, It’s Towards ‘Sensationalism And Laziness’

Lazy writers and reporters can be spotted easily when the preface a question by saying , “Some People say….”

Or like Breitbart got hit with….”Someone who worked for you said…. what do you think about that? Hmmmmm?”

Some say….it is an easy way for a Reporter to make crap up….yes sir, some say that alright!

Go outside today people. Spend time with your family. It’s Father’s Day.

Let’s just pick up the constant state of ideologically driven rage tomorrow.

catfishjuggling show said:
ideologically driven rage tomorrow

Don’t tell me what to do , you @#$%&&( ! .

You may want to try a salad and a situp or two .

Seems like if Fox was that biased, they wouldn’t be inviting Stewart to appear so frequently.

The Lantern of Truth said:
Don’t tell me what to do , you @#$%&&( ! .

You may want to try a salad and a situp or two .

The Lantern of Truth fails to see the irony in my avatar. Unless he or she is actually a green and black symbol.

Stewart’s argument went right over Wallace’s head. There’s a difference between believing in an ideology and being a partisan activist. Fox is a partisan activist, plain and simple. So it assumes that any media figure or outlet who is NOT conservative (including mainstream media) is an equally partisan activist for their side. To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

WillP said:
All Stewart needed to say was that Fox is the only network run by former operatives from one party. The greatest example is Roger Ailes, the CEO of the network, who was George Bush’s leading communication operative in 1988.

Or how one of ABC’s top anchors used to be the communications guy for Bill Clinton?

Or he could have said that Fox is the only network that actually financially supports one party over another. Fox has given over 1 million to the Republican Governors Association. Enough said.

Versus how many journalists on all the other networks give to Democrats over Republicans? Seriously… you’re making that argument?

What a bunch of lame arguments, Will.

A.R. said:
he probably did…and they edited it out

It’s a CoNspIRacY! WOOOOO.

The avatar of Robert Stephenson is very fetching.

you cannot accuse fox news of laziness. it takes a lot of work to deceive their viewers into being the most uninformed of all news media.
i missed the memo on this being a fallacy. it must have come out when they were defending palin for screwing up the paul revere story.

dandelion28 said:
So it assumes that any media figure or outlet who is NOT conservative (including mainstream media) is an equally partisan activist for their side.

Are you sure that’s the “assumption,” and not the plethora of evidence seen in how most in the media treat Republicans, versus how they treat Democrats, or Democratic issues?

I always find it humorous when liberals can claim with a straight face that there is no liberal bias in the media. Then again, lying appears to come naturally for a lot of libs. Here is a GREAT article that says what I’ve been saying all along, that it’s not that FOX is biased, it’s that the rest of the media is SO bias that anyone that doesn’t tow that liberal line appears way more Conservative than they are. I highly recomment reading it.

Book: Liberal Media Distorts News Bias

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/06/16/book-liberal-media-distorts-news-bias

Some wingnut friends of mine say the MSM is “liberal” because they report on evolution/genetics instead of Creationism.

Apparently, “liberal” = fact based and “conservative” = faith based.

ChiliPeppersFan said:
you cannot accuse fox news of laziness. it takes a lot of work to deceive their viewers into being the most uninformed of all news media.

IOW: “They don’t agree with me, therefore they’re stupid.”

Stewart is right, but he should also be thankful. Were it not for the sensationalism and laziness of the media, he wouldn’t have a platform.

Fox News has exactly 30 minutes of NEWS on per day – the first half our of the Bret Bair news hour. The rest is all lies and GOP propaganda.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m glad the two of them can appear and discuss their differences and in doing so realize some common ground. The MSM has always had a definite liberal slant. After Watergate, there was a flood of applicants to journalism schools. Being a crusading journalist was hip and sexy. Fox reminds me of what the MSM was like in the 50′s and 60′s.

And by lies, Girth means he hears opinions that differ from his own.

ImNotBlue said:
IOW: “They don’t agree with me, therefore they’re stupid.”

Which is also the way you guys feel about liberals.

Again, I am sure it is nice in that town where you live. Go see some of it today. Even The Clower/Piven Strategy is taking the day off for Father’s Day.

Now breathe.

ImNotBlue said:
Or how one of ABC’s top anchors used to be the communications guy for Bill Clinton?

Versus how many journalists on all the other networks give to Democrats over Republicans? Seriously… you’re making that argument?

What a bunch of lame arguments, Will.

It’s a CoNspIRacY! WOOOOO.

editing isnt a conspiracy…it’s common practice…check last year’s or even this year’s interview between bill o and stewart you moron
a conspiracy is you and your birther movement

and you equate the head of the whole network to 1 anchor stephanapalous at ABC who’s more fair and balanced than all the ppl at fox?

Robert, have you been working out?

heavily edited.

david r said:
After Watergate, there was a flood of applicants to journalism schools.

Back then , journalists would be skeptical of Johnson , Nixon and the rest and look for the truth , not to prop anybody up . Now , ” What enchants you most about the job , Mr. President ? “

FACT: the media has a heavy liberal bias. If you deny it, you are:

A – a liar
B – too stupid to be able to function in the real world
C – Both

writer said:
And by lies, Girth means he hears opinions that differ from his own.

BullScat. Every time I turn FNN on within 10 minutes someone calls the great capitalist and Communism fighter George Soros a “socialist/commie”.

Despite the fact he has written eleven books on capitalism and spent billions of his own money supporting the Rose and Orange anti-communist Revolutions in Eastern Europe. Even Warren Buffett is treated in a similar way – although WB gets 1/100 the attention Soros does.

Stewart got uncharacteristically really angry, declaring that viewers of Fox News are the “most consistently misinformed

How long are you libs gonna cite this long DEBUNKED story. There’s an example of bias right there. Repeating things you know are lies. Thanks for proving the point, Jon!

The CEOs of Time Warner, Disney, Viacom, etc. who own the other networks are all liberal Democrats. But Ailes is a Republican? Well, there you have it. Fox is biased!

catfishjuggling show said:
Which is also the way you guys feel about liberals.

Which is the way SOME people feel about liberals. Sure, that’s a two way street. Personally, I think it’s childish and stupid… but not everyone agrees.

Again, I am sure it is nice in that town where you live. Go see some of it today. Even The Clower/Piven Strategy is taking the day off for Father’s Day.

It is nice out. Just watered the garden, thanks.

Now breathe.

Just carried my new air conditioner in… i’m breathing enough for both of us at the moment.

A.R. said:
editing isnt a conspiracy…it’s common practice…check last year’s or even this year’s interview between bill o and stewart you moron
a conspiracy is you and your birther movement

Assuming that they edited things out to cover up or ignore certain topics of discussion, without evidence of such behavior, is a conspiracy theory. Your ad hominem shows you don’t know what you’re talking about, have no evidence, and is simply making stuff up to fit your opinion of how things work.

Oh, and I’m not a birther. Sorry. But yes, that was a conspiracy too! Just like the Truthers! Or the “Stolen Election”-ers.

and you equate the head of the whole network to 1 anchor stephanapalous at ABC who’s more fair and balanced than all the ppl at fox?

You think that Ailes writes every newscast, controls everything everyone says ever, but that former Democratic officials (or even journalists who then go to work for Democratic campaigns) don’t have any influence? It just goes to show your selective outrage, and your goofy conspiracy theories.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Stewart got uncharacteristically really angry, declaring that viewers of Fox News are the “most consistently misinformed

How long are you libs gonna cite this long DEBUNKED story. There’s an example of bias right there. Repeating things you know are lies. Thanks for proving the point, Jon!

fox does have the most uninformed audience…who was most likely to believe death panels were real? who was most likely to believe obama was muslim? who was most likely to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq?

Girth Brick said:
Some wingnut friends of mine say the MSM is “liberal” because they report on evolution/genetics instead of Creationism. Apparently, “liberal” = fact based and “conservative” = faith based.

Actually, I don’t believe you have any friends.

“Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes” – PAUL KRUGMAN

A.R. said:
fox does have the most uninformed audience…who was most likely to believe death panels were real?

Countries that already have socialized medicine systems.

who was most likely to believe obama was muslim?

Birthers… who were routinely exposed to be loony on FNC.

who was most likely to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq?

Democrats in congress who voted for the Iraq war, and the Clinton administration who said they were there.

Girth Brick said:
Some wingnut friends of mine .

By friends , he means the mailman and the checkout guy at the liquor store .

ImNotBlue said:
Or how one of ABC’s top anchors used to be the communications guy for Bill Clinton?

Versus how many journalists on all the other networks give to Democrats over Republicans? Seriously… you’re making that argument?

What a bunch of lame arguments, Will.

It’s a CoNspIRacY! WOOOOO.

How about naming these so-called journalist gave to Democrats over Republican. Typical Rightwing drivel — when our side is looks hypocritical — make up something and try to impugn the other side.

A.R. said:
fox does have the most uninformed audience…who was most likely to believe death panels were real? who was most likely to believe obama was muslim? who was most likely to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq?

Exactly – the lies and propaganda of FNN permeates everything there.

Gingrich is running on that and on his book that Obama is a “secular socialist” – because if you are not a Bible-beating Bush-loving redneck you MUST be a Secularist Socialist from Sweden!

TheBiggestBrax said:
How about naming these so-called journalist gave to Democrats over Republican. Typical Rightwing drivel — when our side is looks hypocritical — make up something and try to impugn the other side.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0910/Journalists_donating_to_political_campaigns.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455/ns/politics/t/list-journalists-who-wrote-political-checks/

If you’d like more, Google is your friend.

ImNotBlue said:
Countries that already have socialized medicine systems.

Birthers… who were routinely exposed to be loony on FNC.

Democrats in congress who voted for the Iraq war, and the Clinton administration who said they were there.

what do you about know other countries? you probably share and live under a bunker with beck

rumor that obama is a muslim has been around longer than the birthers…and it was propagated by fox…remember the terrorist fist jab? the madrasas?

i bring up what audiences were the most informed now…and you bring up votes in congress?

he certainly got cranky when Wallace showed the herpes commercial. He completely tried to color that something it wasn’t. That was a dirty low blow.

“I think that the majority of people working in it probably hold liberal viewpoints, but I don’t think they are as relentlessly activist as the conservative movement that has risen up over the last 40 years and that movement has decided that they have been victims of a witch hunt. And to some extent they’re right. People on the right are called racists and they’re called things with an ease that I am uncomfortable with and homophobic and all those other things. I think that that is absolutely something that they have a real right to be angry about and to feel that they have been vilified for those things. And I’ve been guilty of some of those things myself.

The liberal media aren’t *activists* because they control the majority of the message (excluding FOX and right wing radio).

Liberal voices control the information, tone and viewpoint coming out of the majority of the tv local and national news, newspapers, comedians, movies and TV. Where is the need for *activism*?

And Stewart himself explains why the need for *activism* on the part of Conservatives – to correct the negative image that has been repeated and perpetuated by the liberal media, spreading lies and misinformation about them, and disregarding and stifling the beliefs of the majority of the country.

went to fox news sunday to watch the full unedited video of the Stewart inteview. there is a click on to the video, but does not lead you there.
wonder why?

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
–President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

ImNotBlue said:

If you’d like more, Google is your friend.

Google is my friend.

I am actually a fan of this guy Santorum who is running for President.

I am going to Google him and learn more.

Laziest person of all is Stewart himself. He uses ‘comedian’ as a cover-up his lazyness. Did he indirectly compare Diane Sawer to Glen Beck. Dian Sawer is the ABC journalist. Glen Beck and Hannity never claimed to be journalists

A.R. said:
fox does have the most uninformed audience…who was most likely to believe death panels were real? who was most likely to believe obama was muslim? who was most likely to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq?

They also have the most obedient audience that told by their leaders: “You don’t need to think, I’ll think for You!” El Rushbo.

A.R. said:
what do you about know other countries? you probably share and live under a bunker with beck

Not a Beck fan. But please, keep making things up.

rumor that obama is a muslim has been around longer than the birthers…and it was propagated by fox…remember the terrorist fist jab? the madrasas?

Uh-huh… the “terrorist fist jab” which was a tease into a break, where the story went over the trend of the “fist bump,” but was exploited by the FNC haters who love to take things out of context to feed their FOX-hating sheep? That story?

And the “Madrassa” story? The one that was discussed, and presented evidence of Obama NOT going to a Madrassa? That story?

i bring up what audiences were the most informed now…and you bring up votes in congress?

Well, you imply what audiences were most informed… but have no actual evidence. Much like everything else you’ve said thus far, you’re just creating things you BELIEVE to be true, based on your own biases.

My comment just went to show that Democrats TOO (important and influential Democrats) believes what you believe to have been an FNC creation. Sorry… but my evidence shows your fantasy to be wrong.

mandennis said:
went to fox news sunday to watch the full unedited video of the Stewart inteview. there is a click on to the video, but does not lead you there.
wonder why?

Because it was only on television a few hours ago?

catfishjuggling show said:
Google is my friend.

I am actually a fan of this guy Santorum who is running for President.

I am going to Google him and learn more.

Okay… great? IMO, Santorum is wasting everyone’s time by being in the race. He doesn’t have a shot… and the only person who believes he can make it is himself.

But hey, reading is always good. Just as long as you’re looking for real facts, and not the manufactured fiction by left-wing activists who are so worried that their candidates can’t stand on their own, they have to invent things to attack the opposition.

It would be easy to say that Stewart embarrassed himself during this interview with Chris Wallace, but for one fact; embarrassment requires a certain self-awareness. He repeats the nonsense about Fox viewers being “consistently ill-informed.” Translation: Fox viewers don’t believe what Stewart takes to be unimpeachable truth (man-caused global warming, for instance). I wish Wallace would’ve asked him to explain his so deferential intro for Yusuf Islam (the Muslim convert formerly known as Cat Stevens) who endorsed Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwah to assassinate author Salman Rushdie for offending Islam.

writer said:
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
–President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

A meaningless quote, did President Clinton actually attack Iraq? I bet that’s the only time you every quoted Bill Clinton in a positive way.

Yogi Gupta said:
Glen Beck and Hannity never claimed to be journalists

Nor does Bill-O or Greta or the foxy blonde on in the afternoon or the morning show Fox and Freaks.

Who is a journalist there now that Major Garrett is gone? They are paid liars and “opinion” people – that is the point.

hahahahahaha…….

o yea baby…..
Not only did Jon crushed Wallace,but Chris can thank God for editing……

Wow…….

hehehehe…..

Brax, the left is always saying that Bush was lying about the WMDs. If that’s the case, so was Clinton.

ImNotBlue said:

But hey, reading is always good. Just as long as you’re looking for real facts, and not the manufactured fiction by left-wing activists who are so worried that their candidates can’t stand on their own, they have to invent things to attack the opposition.

I’m being a wiseacre. Santorum has a huge Google problem. Google is not his friend. Ergo, the joke.

Okay. I have cooled off enough after my run by sitting on here and laughing at the homebodies. I am going to take my kids to the pool now and enjoy the day.

Take care and have a nice one.

Liberals like Stewart must think Fox is biased. They must think that because liberalism uses a different belief system and ANYTHING that doesn’t fit their belief system IS biased to them.

They don’t understand where we are coming from and we don’t understand where they are coming from.

The only thing we have to go on is liberalism always leads to pain for people over time. In the areas with the most liberalism, the inner cities, about all we can say about 50 YEARS of utter liberal control is that there is a lot of hopelessness, despair and death.

And what we are seeing now are some of these liberal ideas applied to the whole country. As we can see, things are getting worse.

writer said:
Brax, the left is always saying that Bush was lying about the WMDs. If that’s the case, so was Clinton.

I wonder which lie cost us $2 trillion?

A.R. said:
fox does have the most uninformed audience…who was most likely to believe death panels were real? who was most likely to believe obama was muslim? who was most likely to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq?

Google these headlines, for starters:

Women are denied surgery for cancer ‘if they are over 70′

Some U.K. patients denied costly cancer meds

UK’s NHS Seeks to Limit Care for Smokers, Obese

Who thought Obama was a muslim? Anyone that knew his dad was a Muslim, read his books, or that had ever listened to him.

WMDs? 70% of Congress, including http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

catfishjuggling show said:
. I am going to take my kids to the pool now and enjoy the day.

Don’t do a cannonball into the pool .

Stewart spent a lot of time downplaying what he does. He was dishonest with the viewers and a dishonesty with himself if he really believes what he says. He protested too much.

So Girth, you’re admitting Clinton was lying too.

Girth Brick said:
Fox News has exactly 30 minutes of NEWS on per day – the first half our of the Bret Bair news hour. The rest is all lies and GOP propaganda.

Shepard Smith actually does a very good job as a journalist.

Yogi Gupta said:
Laziest person of all is Stewart himself. He uses ‘comedian’ as a cover-up his lazyness. Did he indirectly compare Diane Sawer to Glen Beck. Dian Sawer is the ABC journalist. Glen Beck and Hannity never claimed to be journalists

He is lazy. He’s not dumb, but he’s got a bunch of writers who feed him material. Plus, he doesn’t have to be consistent, just funny.

Not a bad gig. …but dangerous when so many people actually believe a significant chunk of what his writers come up with.

mandennis said:
went to fox news sunday to watch the full unedited video of the Stewart inteview. there is a click on to the video, but does not lead you there.
wonder why?

hehehehe…

Because they need time to edit it some more of course….hahaha…..

Don’t wanna let Chris look like he’s been owned huh?

hohohohhohihihihihih….

PWND.

GuessWhoSuka said:
hahahahahaha…….

o yea baby…..
Not only did Jon crushed Wallace,but Chris can thank God for editing……

Wow…….

hehehehe…..

Only in your head sweets. Stewart spent his time trying to cover what he does. That doesn’t bode as a crushing in my eyes. Wallace wasn’t buying what Stewart was selling and neither does any free thinking individual, He dodged by saying the rest of the media is not partisan – they are lazy and go for the sensationalism. What absolute nonsense. Diane Sawyer – lazy? no – Diane Sawyer being dishonest – yes.

Alz said:

In the areas with the most liberalism, the inner cities, about all we can say about 50 YEARS of utter liberal control is that there is a lot of hopelessness, despair and death.

Wow – “most liberal” would be Berkely/Palo Alto, Boulder, Austin, Greenwich, La Jolla.

and you wonder why we call you liars?

Ok – most conservative – Dogdick, Alabama. A big trailer park with Confederate flags and Bush boys everywhere.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Shepard Smith actually does a very good job as a journalist.

So does Meghan Kelly. There are a lot of very good “reporters”. Even Hannity – allows the “other voices”. So, Jon – care to rethink your “bias”?

You’ve got to wonder… if all you keyboard jockies just “know” that FNC was going to edit the interview to make Jon look bad… why didn’t Jon know that? For a guy so smart (as you say), you’d think he would have known better.

Or he disagrees with you, and thinks you guys are just loons… much like the rest of us.

Fox should take a page from Olbermann’s book. Only invite guests who agree with you.

Yogi Gupta said:
Laziest person of all is Stewart himself. He uses ‘comedian’ as a cover-up his lazyness. Did he indirectly compare Diane Sawer to Glen Beck. Dian Sawer is the ABC journalist. Glen Beck and Hannity never claimed to be journalists

That’s why the shouldn’t be on a program with the word “News” in it. Do you really think most the Faux Noise viewers can distinguish between the two? (opinion versus news)

TheBiggestBrax said:
They also have the most obedient audience that told by their leaders: “You don’t need to think, I’ll think for You!” El Rushbo.

They also have the most well behaved audience. Remember Beck’s rally? Not a scrap of paper to pick up. How much did it cost to clean up the mess after Stewart’s? Yes, the left environmentally friendly crowd trashed the place – please explain.

Brax has a point. MTV is called music television, yet many of the shows have nothing to do with music. How dare they!

..as for the loons who think it was all in the “editing”. I would bet that an “unedited” version will be available. Fox doesn’t hide behind anyone, they have nothing to hide.

TheBiggestBrax said:
That’s why the shouldn’t be on a program with the word “News” in it. Do you really think most the Faux Noise viewers can distinguish between the two? (opinion versus news)

This is the problem, in a nutshell. You feel you have to malign and ridicule something you don’t agree with. What an “adult” way to behave.

writer said:
Fox should take a page from Olbermann’s book. Only invite guests who agree with you.

How do you know Olbermann never invited people with different point of view? Maybe they all declined. We know El Rusho always brings on people with opposing viewpoints: ON LOAN FROM GOD!!!

TheBiggestBrax said:
That’s why the shouldn’t be on a program with the word “News” in it. Do you really think most the Faux Noise viewers can distinguish between the two? (opinion versus news)

Yes. Can you?

TheBiggestBrax said:
How do you know Olbermann never invited people with different point of view? Maybe they all declined. We know El Rusho always brings on people with opposing viewpoints: ON LOAN FROM GOD!!!

Because he’s said that debating people who disagree with him is something he does not care to do. He even said as much in a recent interview about his Current show.

How do you know Olbermann never invited people with different point of view?

Um, because Olby himself said it on Daily Kos?

seek said:
This is the problem, in a nutshell. You feel you have to malign and ridicule something you don’t agree with. What an “adult” way to behave.

Oh yeah the Rightwing never ever besmirches liberals, progressives, or the left. NEVER!! Spare me the BS.

seek said:
..as for the loons who think it was all in the “editing”. I would bet that an “unedited” version will be available. Fox doesn’t hide behind anyone, they have nothing to hide.

Hon,Chris got pwnd…no shame in that…
The point here is that the unedited version is very likely to be a lot worst for him..hehe..
And please don’t say Megan Kelly or Hannity just report the news or are “fair and balanced”…wow…
It’s so easy to debunk it’s not even funny….hahahah….

I mean I like you even if we disagree on a lot of things but jeez…don’t push it yea?
Let’s stay in reality here…

And Stewart perpetuates the bs that FOX viewers are less informed, according to a *study*.

http://tinyurl.com/5tczpt8

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=19990

http://tinyurl.com/6ycxugt

more Fox News lies –

1- Obama apologized to other countries
2- Obama tripled the deficit (up only 10% or so)
3- Obama wanted to Mirandize terrorists
4- Obama bailed out the banks (TARP was Bush)

seek said:
They also have the most well behaved audience. Remember Beck’s rally? Not a scrap of paper to pick up. How much did it cost to clean up the mess after Stewart’s? Yes, the left environmentally friendly crowd trashed the place – please explain.

Was that a rally or a revival?

ImNotBlue said:
IOW: “They don’t agree with me, therefore they’re stupid.”

no, they are given wrong information by people like bureau chief bill sammon and when a study by university of maryland shows they repeat the misinformation, i agree with the research.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

Stewart is ready for a ‘reality show’ of some kind by now. He never was very funny, but mostly rude and insulting like most comedians. He’s just not very smart, and is beginning to realize that perhaps there are other individuals with more intelligence and human empathy than he even understands.

I am moving towards a position of pity for him. Which means I won’t pay any attention to him because feeling the pity diminishes me.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Oh yeah the Rightwing never ever besmirches liberals, progressives, or the left. NEVER!! Spare me the BS.

another freaking childish tactic. “but they do it too” – how old are you – 12?

ChickaBOOMer| Jon Stewart to Chris Wallace: “The bias of the mainstream media is sensationalism, conflict, and laziness.”
http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2011/06/jon-stewart-to-chris-wallace-bias-of.html

ChiliPeppersFan said:
no, they are given wrong information by people like bureau chief bill sammon and when a study by university of maryland shows they repeat the misinformation, i agree with the research.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

Chili… we’ve all already discussed this now debunked study. It’s been done. It’s make believe. You gotta move on, buddy.

Oh, and the Sammon emails (despite what Media Matters has told you to think) didn’t actually tell anyone to repeat any misinformation.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Was that a rally or a revival?

Your ADD medication hasn’t kicked in yet. What the hell kind of answer was that?

You do have to appreciate the irony when Fox repeatedly has Stewart on, so he can tell them they don’t allow opposing viewpoints.

writer said:
You do have to appreciate the irony when Fox repeatedly has Stewart on, so he can tell them they don’t allow opposing viewpoints.

….ain’t that the truth. But still Fox is blah blah blah. Stewart is too partisan to admit it – that Fox allows his voice to be heard ad nauseum.

Oh no, Chris Wallace made him drink the Kool-Aid.

I’m having a hard time believing Wallace really believes in the premise of most of these questions.

Also how is Fox News not part of the mainstream media? Isn’t News Corporation the biggest media conglomerate on the planet? Come on, man!

seek said:
So does Meghan Kelly. There are a lot of very good “reporters”. Even Hannity – allows the “other voices”. So, Jon – care to rethink your “bias”?</blockq

It's Megyn Kelly and she always inject her opinion in the "supposedly" hard news hours. She more opinion like O'Reilly and Hannity. Major Garrett was also a very good reporter before he departed and Wendell Goler seems impartial.

nice change of the headline mediaite

Oh btw the non-existent “death panel” – removed

Thanks Sarah. Although it was non-existent and made up – they removed it. Makes sense now doesn’t it.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/14/nation/na-health-end-of-life14

seek said:
Your ADD medication hasn’t kicked in yet. What the hell kind of answer was that?

Then why don’t YOU come and give them to me. (those ADD meds)! Chump.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Then why don’t YOU come and give them to me. (those ADD meds)! Chump.

cause you’re not worth the cost of gas.

writer said:
Brax has a point. MTV is called music television, yet many of the shows have nothing to do with music. How dare they!

Haven’t watch MTV in many years…so I can’t tell what their doing with their programming.

seek said:
cause you’re not worth the cost of gas.

Typical Rightwing “Chickenhawk’ talk bad and ridicules from the keyboard. I’m not one of those Birkenstockers!

The Lantern of Truth said:
Girth Brick said:
Some wingnut friends of mine .

By friends , he means the mailman and the checkout guy at the liquor store .

c’mon man. the mailman works for the government and is in a union and you think he’s a right-wing nut?

ChiliPeppersFan said:
c’mon man. the mailman works for the government and is in a union and you think he’s a right-wing nut?

not a real union, postal workers are not allowed to strike

“Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers”

Sad that Faux viewers don’t seem to mind that fact.

How embarrasing for Wallace and Faux News even with the editing to be owned by a comedian.

dandelion28 said:
Stewart’s argument went right over Wallace’s head. There’s a difference between believing in an ideology and being a partisan activist. Fox is a partisan activist, plain and simple. So it assumes that any media figure or outlet who is NOT conservative (including mainstream media) is an equally partisan activist for their side. To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

When you are putting down someone’s intelligence at least get the say right. A hammer can’t see anything. What you meant to say was, “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

m_mayhem said:
How embarrasing for Wallace and Faux News even with the editing to be owned by a comedian.

As any English major knows, in Shakespeare’s plays the only character the audience can believe is the court jester.

That is Stewart.

Jonathan Leibowitz aka Jon Stewart was uncharacteristicly out of sorts.  Chris Wallace was able to get under his skin and hit a nerve.  It is rare to see Stewart freak out like he did.

I thought Stewart was better than this, but he decided to escape all rationality and go for the same tired liberal rhetoric of Fox is the evil bad news network that is tearing down the very fabric of society. Please…

With all the time people like to obsess with Fox News, the plans and endeavors on the left mght actually get done.

RichS said:
When you are putting down someone’s intelligence at least get the say right. A hammer can’t see anything. What you meant to say was, “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

thank you for clearing that up for me because i really didn’t understand what he was saying.
(btw, any spelling errors you could point out would be greatly appreciated.)

Stewart has an even more skewed perspective on the news than I had originally thought. I really thought he was wiser than that.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Typical Rightwing “Chickenhawk’ talk bad and ridicules from the keyboard. I’m not one of those Birkenstockers!

Seriously? You think you’re honestly going to provoke someone into a fight from behind your keyboard?

Yikes. Yes, I’m sure you’re very tough. We’re all terrified.

m_mayhem said:
How embarrasing for Wallace and Faux News even with the editing to be owned by a comedian.

And what was edited? Prove it.

Jackyboy said:
I thought Stewart was better than this, but he decided to escape all rationality and go for the same tired liberal rhetoric of Fox is the evil bad news network that is tearing down the very fabric of society. Please…

With all the time people like to obsess with Fox News, the plans and endeavors on the left mght actually get done.

i don’t think he ever called fox a bad or evil network. why would you consider conservatism to be bad and evil?

MSNBC is now owned by Comcast which greatly diminishes my view although I like Rachael Maddow and Lawernce O’Donnell…

ChiliPeppersFan said:
no, they are given wrong information by people like bureau chief bill sammon and when a study by university of maryland shows they repeat the misinformation, i agree with the research.http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

Chili,
This story was completely debunked, so please stop repeating it. Come on, you’re getter than that.

Dem4Ever said:
Jonathan Leibowitz aka Jon Stewart was uncharacteristicly out of sorts.  Chris Wallace was able to get under his skin and hit a nerve.  It is rare to see Stewart freak out like he did.

what is it about his last name that you feel the need in pointing it out for us?

I believe that Stewart is extremely clever and smart in many ways, but unable to see beyond the boundries of liberalism and therefore remains terribly unwise. He doesn’t take into account the vast majority out here in flyover country, ’cause we don’t really count.

Wow! I know you Stewart fans won’t/don’t/couldn’t see it but…..he sounded like an idiot.
Every time Wallace gave him an example of bias, he called it “laziness?”

The left needs to start being more specific. What are all these lies that are being told on the news broadcasts? And I’m not talking about the opinion shows where O’Reilly or Hannity say something the left disagrees with, and thus considers a lie. I’m talking about the actual news broadcasts, like with Shep Smith. What are some of these lies we’re being told?

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Chili,This story was completely debunked, so please stop repeating it. Come on, you’re getter than that.

Most people would be ashamed of using a discredited story as an example to support their opinion. Apparently Chili has no such concern.

Paul G said:
Wow! I know you Stewart fans won’t/don’t/couldn’t see it but…..he sounded like an idiot.Every time Wallace gave him an example of bias, he called it “laziness?”

stewart’s defense was funny, bias, lying, no just lazy lol

cjd ohio 1 said:
nice change of the headline mediaite

No doubt. Matty, you KNOW that has been debunked, so why don’t you put that in your journOlism article? Oh I know, because you are a great example of the liberal media bias we are referring to. Keep up the GREAT work!!

seek says:
Oh btw the non-existent “death panel” – removed

Thanks Sarah. Although it was non-existent and made up – they removed it. Makes sense now doesn’t it.
……………………………………………..
Advance care planning is a “death panel”,… ok. They removed it because of the wording a moron tagged it by. The site supports the same! Keep the spin alive!

truth hurts

timcajun said:
seek says:
Oh btw the non-existent “death panel” – removed

Thanks Sarah. Although it was non-existent and made up – they removed it. Makes sense now doesn’t it.
……………………………………………..
Advance care planning is a “death panel”,… ok. They removed it because of the wording a moron tagged it by. The site supports the same! Keep the spin alive!

Have you ever been exposed to an “advanced care planning” session? Let me assure you – it’s a death panel.
Been there, seen it, heard it – got the full monty on it.

TheBiggestBrax said:
Typical Rightwing “Chickenhawk’ talk bad and ridicules from the keyboard. I’m not one of those Birkenstockers!

my rover – expensive gas – no ridicule, just a realist.

While spewing his lies, leftist propaganda and socialist BS ON FOX, lefty buffoon steward says “Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” !!! Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy !!!!!

ChiliPeppersFan said:
what is it about his last name that you feel the need in pointing it out for us?

I’ll answer that one. I dislike that he changed his name to sound “less Jewish.” As a Jew, I think that suggests a certain degree of insecurity and betrayal. That’s just my personal opinion, and I hold the same view for others who have done the same (Robert Zimmerman aka Bob Dylan, for example)… but there are more important things worth talking about.

TeaPartyNation said:
While spewing his lies, leftist propaganda and socialist BS ON FOX, lefty buffoon steward says “Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” !!! Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy !!!!!

well in a way he was right – that particular segment was attempting to misinform fox viewers on Stewart. So, he didn’t lie – he didn’t say 24/7! lol

What a doofus – lying through his teeth and yes he was misinforming but we weren’t buying.

Jon, IF you had any credibility (and that’s highly debatable), you lost it when you said that FOX is biased but that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, A-MESS-NBC, NYT, WA post, etc, aren’t. Talk about embarrassing yourself. Thank you for proving what we’ve know about you all along, you are nothing but a partisan hack.

He doesn’t want to be a ‘political player’? And Wallace was “dead wrong”?….what was his little ‘rally’ on the mall about? I don’t know if he’s lying or in denial…I’ll go with lying.

Fox News is the first broadcast entity in history that was created for the sole purpose of appealing to an audience based on their ideological fanaticism. I tell all of their fanatical followers that they can GFT.

I liked this interview, the very honest way they discussed their differences.

Fokker, all the others appeal to your left wing ideological fanaticism, so what’s the problem?

Fokker News said:
Fox News is the first broadcast entity in history that was created for the sole purpose of appealing to an audience based on their ideological fanaticism. I tell all of their fanatical followers that they can GFT.

Fox news was created to give people the opportunity to get both sides of an issue, not just the one that denigrates the right. What a concept. Seems to sell – who knew?

Stewart doesn’t matter, nothing matters because the economy is tanking and there is nothing the idiot president can do now that he’s set it all in motion. So the last laugh will be at Stewart not with him.

Jon Stewart got p0wned by Steve Crowder, and so is on the defensive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdW4geJ-lik&feature=relmfu

writer said:
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”–President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

You just don’t understand how it works. If President Clinton says they are there he is telling the truth. If President Bush and the Democrat Congress say they are there then President Bush is lying and the Democrat Congress is telling the truth. I hope that helps?

Jon Stewart doesn’t believe he or the MSM have a liberal driven agenda. Now that IS funny.

TristramShandy said:
Stewart doesn’t matter, nothing matters because the economy is tanking and there is nothing the idiot president can do now that he’s set it all in motion. So the last laugh will be at Stewart not with him.

Stop blaming Dumbya.

Bush drove the car in the ditch but Obama has the keys now.

I don’t even watch Jon Stewart anymore. He says anything be it WRONG/RIGHT just to get a laugh, so who is he to CONDEM anyone.. Chris Matthews I have always watched, and with his reporting on stories, he is very good at what he does, and his technique. He isn’t there as a **JOKESTER**, he is a news COMMENTOR/MEDIATOR… He does it like it should be done, and is an HONEST reporter, just like Brian Williams.. and I never missed Tim Russert, and Peter Jennings…

tatboy said:
Jon Stewart doesn’t believe he or the MSM have a liberal driven agenda. Now that IS funny.

hell , even here on mediaite they change the headlines of stories to reflect bias views

Yep…people that tune in to the Comedy Central for their news are very informed. Pffftt.

Alice67 said:
“Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” Sad that Faux viewers don’t seem to mind that fact.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

This is old ground, and Mark Joyella here at Mediaite said it best:

Even

Mark Joyella said:
Of course, one could argue that the academic world is the province of progressive thought, filled with many individuals who’ve developed a distaste in Fox News’ unique brand of opiniotainment.

Its the ‘consider the source’ argument that liberals should be quite familiar with. Also on a couple of points its ironic what they consider to be misinformed:

“the economy is getting worse”- It isn’t? I think its excusable that if you go outside and you get wet to think its raining. So regardless of what economists tell you cant be “misinformed” when you are ostensibly asking someone their opinion. Plus economies are different in certain areas: Im sure someone in DC will tell you things are fine but someone in Vegas will not. Who is wrong? Neither of them of course- This is utter garbage.

“Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit” – It depends on when this question was asked, because the CBO revised their numbers and Obamacare DOES raise the deficit:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/cbo-health-care-bill-will-cost-115-billion-more-than-previously-assessed.html So how is that being misinformed?

But nonetheless Mediaite has the ability to discern these nuances and does consider the source- why doesn’t Jon Stewart?

Because this “study” is a useful tool to for him to use as a weapon against conservatives and to discredit Fox. It doesnt matter whether or not its true- once again truth takes a back seat to agenda with liberals.

TeaPartyNation said:
While spewing his lies, leftist propaganda and socialist BS ON FOX, lefty buffoon steward says “Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” !!! Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy !!!!!

Stewart was just citing what polls report.

donalan said:
Stewart was just citing what polls report.

Even if they’re wrong, poorly compiled, and fraudulent. Just so long as they fit the opinion the left had before the study came out, it’s all good.

TeaPartyNation said:
While spewing his lies, leftist propaganda and socialist BS ON FOX, lefty buffoon steward says “Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” !!! Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy !!!!!

Stewart was just citing what polls report.

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2010/12/16/135438/poll-fox-news-misinformation/

ChiliPeppersFan said:
thank you for clearing that up for me because i really didn’t understand what he was saying.(btw, any spelling errors you could point out would be greatly appreciated.)

You’ll have to go to the ridiculous racist king for that.

donalan said:
TeaPartyNation said:
While spewing his lies, leftist propaganda and socialist BS ON FOX, lefty buffoon steward says “Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers” !!! Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy !!!!!
Stewart was just citing what polls report.

If Stewart is going to make a reference to that poll, then he should make himself familiar with it, because it was thoroughly debunked. We’ve discussed that poll many times here at Mediaite: who conducted the poll, who paid for the poll, who was sampled, and — most importantly — what answers they considered right and wrong.

If someone questioned the scientific basis for the global warming hypothesis, they were considered “uninformed”. If they believed the $800 billion stimulus package created jobs, they were considered “uninformed.” If they weren’t sure Obama was born in America, they were “uninformed” — but when 46% of Democrats questioned in another poll said they thought George W Bush had something to do with the attack on the World Trade Center, that little factoid never made any news.

In fact, the only people who seemed to be influenced by what they watched were the MSNBC viewers. Everyone else seemed to be mostly unaffected by where they got their news.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

The study about Fox News viewers being the most misinformed is solid work. I noticed that Fox’s response completely dodged the substance of the study’s findings.

Nobody has yet given a real answer (has anyone asked the question to prominent Fox hosts or officials?) to this: Don’t you feel a responsibility as a news organization to do a better job of providing your viewers with accurate information and making sure they retain accurate information? Forget about the whole defensive “everyone hates Fox” thing you talk about all the time. It shouldn’t matter if others hate you, but it should matter that your viewers are misinformed. Don’t you think, as a news organization, this study is telling you that you need to do better? And if they’re getting the wrong information from the opinion shows, don’t the opinion hosts have a responsibility to not undo the good work of the news folks by putting out wrong information? I’m sure they could still be entertaining and stick to the same facts as the news people.

Girth Brick said:
Stop blaming Dumbya.

Bush drove the car in the ditch but Obama has the keys now.

he lost them on the golf course. Must be in some bunker no?

Correction: DIDN’T create jobs.

As for who paid, the money came from the Tides Foundation and ultimately from George Soros.

As for who was sampled, the poll was conducted online and the persons who were polled selected themselves. No real polling organization does this — every online poll you see has a disclaimer stating that the poll is not scientific.

J Baustian said:
If Stewart is going to make a reference to that poll, then he should make himself familiar with it, because it was thoroughly debunked. We’ve discussed that poll many times here at Mediaite: who conducted the poll, who paid for the poll, who was sampled, and — most importantly — what answers they considered right and wrong.

If someone questioned the scientific basis for the global warming hypothesis, they were considered “uninformed”. If they believed the $800 billion stimulus package created jobs, they were considered “uninformed.” If they weren’t sure Obama was born in America, they were “uninformed”

They were considered “uninformed” because global warming is real and caused by humans – this is a fact; because the stimulus package did save or create millions of jobs according to objective reporting by the CBO – this is a fact; and because Obama was born in America; this is a fact. If they don’t think these facts are facts they are uninformed. That would be why they’re called “uninformed.”

As far as the study being debunked, find me serious professionals in the field who are qualified to evaluate the study’s methodology and find it lacking and make a good case, and then I’ll consider it debunked. Attacks on the Internets by people who don’t like the study’s findings does not mean it was debunked.

ImNotBlue said:
I’ll answer that one. I dislike that he changed his name to sound “less Jewish.” As a Jew, I think that suggests a certain degree of insecurity and betrayal. That’s just my personal opinion, and I hold the same view for others who have done the same (Robert Zimmerman aka Bob Dylan, for example)… but there are more important things worth talking about.

Well, it seems he hasn’t had any contact with his dad since he was 11 so you just may be misjudging him. I have no idea, but its worth taking into consideration.

“Bill Kristol, perhaps the most honest and intelligent conservative in Washington (excluding, of course, that funny, friendly, charming McCain fellow). ‘The press isn’t quite as biased and liberal. They’re actually conservative sometimes,’ Kristol said recently on CNN. If Chris missed that one, he might have come across a similar admission by Kristol offered up in the spring of 1995. ‘I admit it,’ Kristol told The New Yorker. ‘The whole idea of the ‘liberal media’ was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures.’”

http://makethemaccountable.com/myth/LiberalMedia.htm

“Reality has a well known liberal bias.”
— Stephen Colbert

This is a repost from the December discussion:

This was a web survey, so the sample was not random. The survey was conducted by World Public Opinion, an organization that is funded by Soros.

90% of both Republicans and Democrats thought they had been exposed to inaccurate or misleading information prior to the election.

Some of the questions were themselves misleading or unverifiable. For instance, most voters did not think the stimulus programs had created or saved any significant number of jobs. The CBO claimed that it had. So voters who reported no effect from TARP or other stimulus legislation were marked down as being misinformed.

But was the CBO right? Were the voters wrong? The stimulus bill was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%, yet unemployment peaked at 10% and has not dropped appreciably from that level. So who is right and who is misinformed? Additionally, the report mentions a WSJ article which said the stimulus bill created jobs, but the WSJ gave most of the credit to the Federal Reserve Bank!

As for healthcare reform’s impact on the deficit, again it appears that the voters’ “misconception” might very well turn out to be accurate, and the experts wrong. The CBO report on the fiscal impact is based on 10 years of revenue (2011-2020) but only 6 years of spending (2015-2020). Comparing apples to apples, the healthcare reform bill adds hugely to the national debt.

Climate change is another issue where the voters may very well have a better grasp of reality than the “experts”.

Most people did not get any tax relief, so it was reasonable for most voters to not know about tax relief in the stimulus bill.

As for the 15% who did not think Barack Obama was born in the US, that closely matches those who aren’t sure the Earth is round, or that the Apollo astronauts actually landed on the moon, and is less than those who think the federal government caused the collapse of the Twin Towers in 9/11. You can always find 15% who will believe any crackpot idea; it does not mean they are uninformed or misinformed, merely stupid. (Remember, nearly half of all Americans have a below-average intelligence.)

Quote: “Those who watched Fox News almost daily were significantly more likely than those who never
watched it to believe that:
… the stimulus failed to create jobs (12 points more likely)
… the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)
… climate change is occurring (30 points) (end quote)

Because of these findings, the survey concludes that FNC viewers are more uninformed. I would argue that FNC viewers are in fact properly skeptical of what the so-called experts have been telling them. And if MSNBC viewers are more likely to believe in manmade climate change, that tells me that MSNBC viewers are more gullible and possibly misinformed.

Also, regarding the question about jobs created because of the stimulus, only MSNBC viewers seemed to be affected by frequent viewing. The people who never watched, listened to, or read network news, public radio, or newspapers had similar opinions to those who accessed those news sources nearly every day. Only those who watched MSNBC nearly every day had a significantly different opinion — they and not the FNC viewers were the ones most likely to be influenced. The survey claims MSNBC viewers are better informed, but maybe they are the ones most misinformed, compared to those who get their news from all other sources.

Again, those who conducted the survey decided arbitrarily what they would count as correctly informed or misinformed; the survey was conducted online so did not question randomly selected respondents; and someone with different biases than the World Public Opinion group could use the same data to prove the exact opposite point, that in fact FNC viewers are BETTER informed than those who get their news from CNN or MSNBC or NPR or daily newspapers.

In fact the survey is worthless. Soros gave them money, he expected a particular result, and they produced that result. It is not newsworthy.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/dec10/Misinformation_Dec10_rpt.pdf

writer said:
Fokker, all the others appeal to your left wing ideological fanaticism, so what’s the problem?

Because free speech doesn’t apply to speech he disagrees with.

da-wdc said:
They were considered “uninformed” because global warming is real and caused by humans – this is a fact; because the stimulus package did save or create millions of jobs according to objective reporting by the CBO – this is a fact; and because Obama was born in America; this is a fact. If they don’t think these facts are facts they are uninformed. That would be why they’re called “uninformed.” As far as the study being debunked, find me serious professionals in the field who are qualified to evaluate the study’s methodology and find it lacking and make a good case, and then I’ll consider it debunked. Attacks on the Internets by people who don’t like the study’s findings does not mean it was debunked.

You cherry picked some results, let me do the same:

“the economy is getting worse”- It isn’t? I think its excusable that if you go outside and you get wet to think its raining. So regardless of what economists tell you cant be “misinformed” when you are ostensibly asking someone their opinion. Plus economies are different in certain areas: Im sure someone in DC will tell you things are fine but someone in Vegas will not. Who is wrong? Neither of them of course- This is utter garbage.

“Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit” – It depends on when this question was asked, because the CBO revised their numbers and Obamacare DOES raise the deficit:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/cbo-health-care-bill-will-cost-115-billion-more-than-previously-assessed.html

So yeah I thnk it is right to call this study into question.

Wow, I just came across this Blog. Lots of attention.

I suggest Mr. Stewarts rhetoric is that of the intellectually moribund.

The same Leftists that occasionally call in to Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin, occasionally, They deluge and surround Mr Stewart constantly. Stewart, being as intelligent as he is, must find the Leftists company tedious and stultifying. (Perhaps, even dangerous as they will someday eat their own)

Warmed over Mao and Che Guevara gets old, hence, Stewart can’t take it anymore. He can no longer live the lie. Socialism has always failed while it, coincidentally, murdered its wide eyed adherents and believers!

Even under the guise of entertainment, one cannot continuously deceive themselves without some psychologic dysphoria.

Stewart is lashing out as his Liberal acolytes and their needs can no longer be maintained. Stewarts Rhetoric has weakened and he can no longer feed the hogs.

Abandon the “Dark Side” Jon, use the Force, use the Force”…

Thank God for FOX News

“… declaring that viewers of Fox News are the “most consistently misinformed.”

sarainitaly said:
And Stewart perpetuates the bs that FOX viewers are less informed, according to a *study*.

http://tinyurl.com/5tczpt8

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=19990

http://tinyurl.com/6ycxugt

Or, in other words, Liberal poll declares FOX viewers misinformed because FOX viewers don’t regurgitate, accept or buy into the spin on liberal policies.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blogger-dismantles-fox-viewers-are-misinformed-study/

Once again Mediate columnist Matt Schneider distorts the truth by falsely claiming that Jon Stewart was angry. How about some journalistic integrity? How about some truth telling? Disagreements to not necessarily indicate anger. There is a difference between spouting ideology and reporting facts. Obviously Matt Schneider does not understand the difference, or if he does he values more highly the potential economic benefit of engaging in yellow journalism.

Resistance Is Futile said:
Once again Mediate columnist Matt Schneider distorts the truth by falsely claiming that Jon Stewart was angry.

Yea, he was a happy go lucky guy. not at all angry.
http://lockerz.com/s/112195428

Resistance Is Futile said:
Once again Mediate columnist Matt Schneider distorts the truth by falsely claiming that Jon Stewart was angry. How about some journalistic integrity? How about some truth telling? Disagreements to not necessarily indicate anger. There is a difference between spouting ideology and reporting facts. Obviously Matt Schneider does not understand the difference, or if he does he values more highly the potential economic benefit of engaging in yellow journalism.

anger is subjective, one thinks anger, another doesn,t …………be mad they changed the headline to reflect bias

if i recall the interview correctly, it seems every time Stewart got angry was when Wallace made a good point. The Palin ad and about FOX viewers being happy with FOX are two that come to mind. He got angry when Chris made those points, and he couldn’t defend them. He lashed out about the hokey *poll* and he got very defensive about the Palin herpes ad because he was busted. He couldn’t defend it.

cjd ohio 1 said:
anger is subjective, one thinks anger, another doesn,t …………be mad they changed the headline to reflect bias

What was the old ‘headline’?

Paul G said:
What was the old ‘headline’?

not exact but……………stewart say MSM not bias, just lazy and for sensationalism

da-wdc said:
The study about Fox News viewers being the most misinformed is solid work. I noticed that Fox’s response completely dodged the substance of the study’s findings.

So you think they would talk about the substance AFTER they had determined the whole premise to be false? How does that make sense?

Nobody has yet given a real answer (has anyone asked the question to prominent Fox hosts or officials?) to this: Don’t you feel a responsibility as a news organization to do a better job of providing your viewers with accurate information and making sure they retain accurate information?

Well, how much a viewer retains isn’t really the responsibility of the network… that’s up to the individual. But couldn’t you also ask this question to any other network?

Forget about the whole defensive “everyone hates Fox” thing you talk about all the time.

Um, nobody says “everyone hates FOX,” except for those trying to minimize it. The ratings would show the exact opposite of “everyone” hating FOX, wouldn’t they?

It shouldn’t matter if others hate you, but it should matter that your viewers are misinformed.

Shouldn’t matter… except when the haters make stuff up. Just because you dislike something, doesn’t mean you have to create new reality to hate it. But that appears to be the case very often.

Don’t you think, as a news organization, this study is telling you that you need to do better?

No. The study was greatly flawed, as has already been pointed out.

Here, let me do my own study. Of everybody that is currently in my sample, 100% of them think that most of the media has a left-ward tilt, and is victim of group think. That’s everyone! Don’t you think that means the media at large should try to do a better job?

Now, my sample is just me. But hey, why bother talking about how the survey was conducted… let’s just talk about the results.

And if they’re getting the wrong information from the opinion shows, don’t the opinion hosts have a responsibility to not undo the good work of the news folks by putting out wrong information? I’m sure they could still be entertaining and stick to the same facts as the news people.

The problem is when people can’t tell the difference between “opinions” and “facts.” As a result, they see certain things as the “wrong opinion,” and transform it into “wrong facts.” This study confused facts and opinions, and basically said if you don’t have the same left-wing opinion, you’re “wrong.”

da-wdc said:
They were considered “uninformed” because global warming is real and caused by humans – this is a fact;

No it’s not, it’s an opinion.

…because the stimulus package did save or create millions of jobs according to objective reporting by the CBO – this is a fact;

No it’s not, the numbers used where highly suspect… and measuring a “saved” job is impossible.

…and because Obama was born in America; this is a fact.

Well, that’s true. But since the majority of FNC said that, and debunked the Birthers (prior to the BC reveal), I’m not sure you can really blame FNC for that. It would be like blaming MSNBC for having more Truthers in the audience.

If they don’t think these facts are facts they are uninformed. That would be why they’re called “uninformed.”

Again, that’s your opinion… and the fact (pun) that you can’t differentiate between opinion and fact, really isn’t our problem. It’s yours.

As far as the study being debunked, find me serious professionals in the field who are qualified to evaluate the study’s methodology and find it lacking and make a good case, and then I’ll consider it debunked. Attacks on the Internets by people who don’t like the study’s findings does not mean it was debunked.

Common sense, logic, and honesty isn’t enough for you? You need an “expert” to tell you that stuff? Yikes.

RichS said:
Well, it seems he hasn’t had any contact with his dad since he was 11 so you just may be misjudging him. I have no idea, but its worth taking into consideration.

Meh… maybe.

TheEagle said:
If Chris missed that one, he might have come across a similar admission by Kristol offered up in the spring of 1995.

Ooh, and quote from 1995! Good thing nothing has changed since then.

sarainitaly said:
Yea, he was a happy go lucky guy. not at all angry.

It is a well known fact that only Republicans (and non-Liberals) get angry. Anyone left-of-center just gets more “passionate.”

Here’s an idea for Fox viewers who disagree with Stewart: Try taking the time to verify Fox News stories, check out the facts they are saying for yourself and see if they are correct. That will tell you whether or not Fox News is telling you the full story or not.

seek said:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blogger-dismantles-fox-viewers-are-misinformed-study/

Seek, liberals do NOT care. It’s been pointed out several times on this thread alone that this bogus poll was debunked, yet they’ve repeated it about 5 times. I image them with their hands over their ears with their eyes closed, rocking back and forth saying, “I can’t hear you”. They think if they repeat a lie often enough it will become the truth, Of course, in their defense, that happens alot in the corrupt, liberal media.

mtjade4 said:
Here’s an idea for Fox viewers who disagree with Stewart: Try taking the time to verify Fox News stories, check out the facts they are saying for yourself and see if they are correct. That will tell you whether or not Fox News is telling you the full story or not.

Why do you assume that doesn’t happen already?

mtjade4 said:
Here’s an idea for Fox viewers who disagree with Stewart: Try taking the time to verify Fox News stories, check out the facts they are saying for yourself and see if they are correct. That will tell you whether or not Fox News is telling you the full story or not.

I have and they are. That is why no one touches them in the ratings war.

It was funny to see Wallace try to play gotcha with the clips. I like Wallace he is a great interviewer and I enjoy his playful chats with Imus that I see here, but who ever told him to try that stuff should be scolded. It was a bad idea that didn’t work and was bellow Wallace.

After viewing the Fox News slant, it’s always a pleasure to read the New York Times or Washington Post, or view CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, or PBS for the for the most unbiased and middle-of-the-road reporting available in America today. Provided you’re a liberal moonbat who believes socialism/Marxism should be implemented by Obama and his band of merry Marxists. Oh yea, get a job and pay your own way scumbag.

ImNotBlue said:
Why do you assume that doesn’t happen already?

Because he’s a brain dead liberal and that’s how they roll. They believe whatever they read on the Daily Kos or Media matters. They think A-MESS-NBC is purely unbiased. In other words, they aren’t too bright.

Someday when Jon matures past the 18 to 24 year olds he may understand his impact was just as shallow.

mtjade4 said:
Here’s an idea for Fox viewers who disagree with Stewart: Try taking the time to verify Fox News stories, check out the facts they are saying for yourself and see if they are correct. That will tell you whether or not Fox News is telling you the full story or not.

have and do alll the time. Guess what? Don’t go to any of the other channels because they’re all slime.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Seek, liberals do NOT care. It’s been pointed out several times on this thread alone that this bogus poll was debunked, yet they’ve repeated it about 5 times. I image them with their hands over their ears with their eyes closed, rocking back and forth saying, “I can’t hear you”. They think if they repeat a lie often enough it will become the truth, Of course, in their defense, that happens alot in the corrupt, liberal media.

You’re right. The corrupt left just talks over the truth and figures they can drown it out. Absolute bs.

ChiliPeppersFan said:
what is it about his last name that you feel the need in pointing it out for us?

Oh, guess.

NBC Cuts ‘Under God’ From Pledge of Allegiance

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/06/19/nbc-omits-under-god-pledge-allegiance#ixzz1Pkwm4Wnd

Nacho said:
It was funny to see Wallace try to play gotcha with the clips. I like Wallace he is a great interviewer and I enjoy his playful chats with Imus that I see here, but who ever told him to try that stuff should be scolded. It was a bad idea that didn’t work and was bellow Wallace.

lol – I thought Wallace did great – Stewart sort of fell on his own sword. It’s hard to keep your stories straight when you lie and misrepresent.

SmartAlec said:
Yep…people that tune in to the Comedy Central for their news are very informed. Pffftt.

This makes no sense. One would need to be on top of the news in order to get the jokes. Which, come to think of it, is why righties probably don’t find him funny.

Bottom line: Wallace admits he and Fox are telling one “SIDE” of the narrative. He damns himself.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
I have and they are. That is why no one touches them in the ratings war.

What do you use to verify F#X? You’ve already said you don’t trust the networks, the NYT, and just about everything else.
Who, besides F#X, do you trust?

Alice,
Shouldn’t you be making out with your cardboard cutout of Barack? You’re so drunk on the kook-aid you can’t see straight.

Alice67 said:
This makes no sense. One would need to be on top of the news in order to get the jokes. Which, come to think of it, is why righties probably don’t find him funny.

You like him….that’s all the proof ‘we’ need.

Glackin,
The fact that you think the ONLY place I could get info is from the corrupt liberal media pretty much proves the point. The outlets to find info are vast, IF you choose to look for them.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Alice,Shouldn’t you be making out with your cardboard cutout of Barack? You’re so drunk on the kook-aid you can’t see straight.

Alice seems to feel that we are too dumb to understand Stewart. Yes, the turning pecker was way beyond my understanding. High brow at its finest. Got Alice all bent.

All demented Liberals like Stewart try to discredit those who they disagree with…..nothing new here!!!

The fact is the masses don’t by into the Liberal agenda full of lies and that is why they prefer to watch Fox News.
Sad thing is most Liberals get their news from so called comedians like Stewart and Letterman!

Alice67 said:
Oh, guess.

The same reason people point out that Michael Savage’s last name isn’t really “Savage”?

Colorado_Conservative said:
All demented Liberals like Stewart try to discredit those who they disagree with…..nothing new here!!! The fact is the masses don’t by into the Liberal agenda full of lies and that is why they prefer to watch Fox News.Sad thing is most Liberals get their news from so called comedians like Stewart and Letterman!

that’s why they have no idea of what the “truth” is. eg. Palin seeing Russia – convinced she said what she didn’t say and too stupid to look it up. They got their education from Tina.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Alice,
Shouldn’t you be making out with your cardboard cutout of Barack? You’re so drunk on the kook-aid you can’t see straight.

Thanks for sharing. :)

mcstokes said:
Thank God for FOX News

Murdoch is not god. But he is a good man to have around, because otherwise we’d be getting our news from the monolithically left-leaning MSM.

Gallup has been asking since 1992, do you consider yourself liberal, moderate, or conservative? And every year the results are pretty much the same: about 20-22% liberal, about 39-42% conservative, and the rest moderate.

Instead of competing with the broadcast channels and the other cable networks for a share of the tiny liberal audience, FNC has gone after the otherwise-ignored conservative voters.

It is easy to see why FNC gets far more viewers than the other cable networks combined. But I still think FNC underperforms. Its ratings ought to be much better than they actually are, so it should not be satisfied with its current performance.

Paul G said:
You like him….that’s all the proof ‘we’ need.

More personal attacks and nothing of substance. You righties ARE consistent.

ImNotBlue said:
The same reason people point out that Michael Savage’s last name isn’t really “Savage”?

I guess my point would be … who cares?

Alice67 said:
Thanks for sharing. :)

And thank you for the daily laughs at your expense. Put down the kool-aid and get educated and you wouldn ‘t constantly be embarrassing yourself.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Glackin,
The fact that you think the ONLY place I could get info is from the corrupt liberal media pretty much proves the point. The outlets to find info are vast, IF you choose to look for them.

That sounds like Sarah’s “all of them”, neh?
Name a couple-three. Ones you TRUST AND BELIEVE.
Of course, if you are FOS, just let it go.

Alice67 said:
More personal attacks and nothing of substance. You righties ARE consistent.

are you insane? Who the hell attacked who? God Alice, there is something dreadfully wrong with you. You attack and then deny? Remember, we are too stupid to get Stewart. Did you already forget you said that?

Glackin,
When I want to get educated on a subject, I google it, find thousands of sources, read several and then MAKE MY OWN DETERMINATION. I don’t go to one that I trust and just tow the line. That’s what liberals do.

well stewart pointed out that diane sawyer was lazy not lying, so i hope no one gets their information from her

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
NBC Cuts ‘Under God’ From Pledge of Allegiance

Wow, they really did edit “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. They chose to make a political statement during the introduction to the broadcast of a golf tournament. NBC actually did that — it’s simply unbelievable.

Barack will be so pleased.

seek said:
are you insane? Who the hell attacked who? God Alice, there is something dreadfully wrong with you. You attack and then deny? Remember, we are too stupid to get Stewart. Did you already forget you said that?

Ah, not what I said. But just so you know, I don’t read most of what you write and I don’t talk to you. I find you’re way to dishonest to spend any time on. Get lost.

Watching the long interview, and I reiterate, when Wallace makes great points, Stewart would respond angrily. Another examples, when he showed him imitating Cain, and asked him about Amos and Andy.

Alice67 said:
Ah, not what I said. But just so you know, I don’t read most of what you write and I don’t talk to you. I find you’re way to dishonest to spend any time on. Get lost.

good one doofus. Your memory is so bad you can’t even remember what you said a page ago.

is he really that blind or is he just lying?

LETMEBECLEAR said:
is he really that blind or is he just lying?

lazy, stewarts even says the MSM lie because they are lazy,

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Alice,
Shouldn’t you be making out with your cardboard cutout of Barack? You’re so drunk on the kook-aid you can’t see straight.

It’s called her glory hole. Ha!

LETMEBECLEAR said:
is he really that blind or is he just lying?

he’s lying – with the truth being shown – he still had to lie and side step and then had the cajones to say Fox audience……

blatant liar and Wallace played him like a Stradivarius.

lackin said:
That sounds like Sarah’s “all of them”, neh?
Name a couple-three. Ones you TRUST AND BELIEVE.
Of course, if you are FOS, just let it go.

Thanks patsy!

HaHa.. Stewart was absolutely right. Notice how Wallace did say a world about that? Props to Stewart!

glenn113 said:
HaHa.. Stewart was absolutely right. Notice how Wallace did say a world about that? Props to Stewart!

could be, stewart did admit the MSM lie, but his excuse is because they are lazy , not bias

obsessedwithglennbeck113 said:
Notice how Wallace did say a world about that?

Huh?

And here’s the proof Stewart is right. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/john-farrell/2010/12/22/university-study-fox-viewers-more-misinformed facts don’t lie.

Jaurez said:
Huh?

another libturd here changing their name…

glenn113 said:
HaHa.. Stewart was absolutely right. Notice how Wallace did say a world about that? Props to Stewart!

what? Somewhere the rest of your thought disappeared.

ha,ha I sure hope all the baggers and the plutos were watching.

p.s. glen113 – that study you’re so proud of, has been blown to smithereens. When the right answer is the “wrong” answer, somehow it became suspect. lol

BatBoy said:
I heard that huge sigh of relief from you East Coast Lefty Media all the way out here in the West. That sign was saying “John Stewart just covered our butt’s- see we aren’t Liberal, we are just lazy!” I say, you are not only lazy, but you drink the Liberal Kool Aid and don’t mind telling us about it on a daily basis! Hint – “We NO longer listen to you!”

Judging by the comments on this forum I’d say your wrong.

glenn113 said:
HaHa.. Stewart was absolutely right. Notice how Wallace did say a world about that? Props to Stewart!

didn’t not did. (typo) but I’m sure all the baggers and plutos know what I mean..

glenn113 said:
HaHa.. Stewart was absolutely right. Notice how Wallace did say a world about that? Props to Stewart!

cjd ohio 1 said:
could be, stewart did admit the MSM lie, but his excuse is because they are lazy , not bias

well i knew what you meant, what do you say to a guy that says yes they lie, but this is the reason why…………….lazy lol

seek said:
p.s. glen113 – that study you’re so proud of, has been blown to smithereens. When the right answer is the “wrong” answer, somehow it became suspect. lol

No, I think your getting confused with the wmds in Iraq…lol

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Glackin,
When I want to get educated on a subject, I google it, find thousands of sources, read several and then MAKE MY OWN DETERMINATION. I don’t go to one that I trust and just tow the line. That’s what liberals do.

Next time you are googling away, google “toe the line,” and learn something for a change.
I can find proof on line that the earth is flat.
Which one of the Flintstone’s are you descended from?

What I find strange is if it’s true that Fox News viewers are the most Misinformed and most of the right-wing commenters on this site are regular Fox News viewers, my question is, how come a typical right-wing commenter will intellectually run over a typical left-wing commenter? Especially if the right-wing commenter is supposedly misinformed?

Second question, If the Fox watcher is misinformed but is factually correct 95% of the time, what does that make the supposedly informed left-wing commenter who is only right 5% of the time?

It’s funny that you think one study is needed to prove that people that rely on FoxNews to get their news because they don’t trust anyone else are in fact the most misinformed and uniformed viewers.

Stewart didn’t even refer to “the study.”

illusive man said:
What I find strange is if it’s true that Fox News viewers are the most Misinformed and most of the right-wing commenters on this site are regular Fox News viewers, my question is, how come a typical right-wing commenter will intellectually run over a typical left-wing commenter? Especially if the right-wing commenter is supposedly misinformed?

I would say it’s the other way around.

sarainitaly said:
Watching the long interview, and I reiterate, when Wallace makes great points, Stewart would respond angrily. Another examples, when he showed him imitating Cain, and asked him about Amos and Andy.

TY Sara, I dont even need to bother watching it now…..It’s fathers day and I have better things to do!! And I have 100% trust in your assessment of what actually occurred!!!! Cheers!!

Fox viewers are mostly misinformed when they have guests like Stewart.

Yoda002: You could say it’s the other way around but of course that would just make you a republican.

Wrong about everything for 50 years.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/study-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-of-all-news-consumers/

Colorado_Conservative said:
TY Sara, I dont even need to bother watching it now…..It’s fathers day and I have better things to do!! And I have 100% trust in your assessment of what actually occurred!!!! Cheers!!

Another independent thinker looking for the facts.

Yoda002 said:
I would say it’s the other way around.

You didn’t answer my question. Why are the right-wing commenters on this site factually correct 95% of the time while the left-wing commenters are factually correct 5% of the time? Especially if the right-wing commenter is “misinformed” and the left-wing commenter is “informed”?
Yoda, how can you and every other leftie be “informed” and yet be factually wrong most of the time?

illusive man said:
You didn’t answer my question. Why are the right-wing commenters on this site factually correct 95% of the time while the left-wing commenters are factually correct 5% of the time? Especially if the right-wing commenter is “misinformed” and the left-wing commenter is “informed”?
Yoda, how can you and every other leftie be “informed” and yet be factually wrong most of the time?

Ironically, YOU are 100% incorrect here, kid.

illusive: That’s because your misinformed and only think the Fox viewer is right. When the poll has already shown they are the most misinformed.

So from your little scientific poll where you think the Fox viewer is running all over the liberal is just wrong.

Fox viewers are the most misinformed. So when you think they are kicking the liberal’s butt 99% of the time. They just aren’t. You think they are because they are repeating the same misinformed information you received.

Take the deficit. In the Republicans world you think all the deficit was created by Obama. You would be wrong. The reason the deficit shot up in 2009 is because all the things Bush wasn’t counting. Started to be counted. Like the wars.

Take tax cuts for the rich. If conservatives were right their wouldn’t be 9% unemployment and the debt and deficit would have been reduced under Bush.

The exact opposite happened.

Sucks to be you.

illusive man said:
Why are the right-wing commenters on this site factually correct 95% of the time while the left-wing commenters are factually correct 5% of the time?

That study has been debunked.

Sorry Yoda. That was for illusive.

illusive man said:
You didn’t answer my question. Why are the right-wing commenters on this site factually correct 95% of the time while the left-wing commenters are factually correct 5% of the time? Especially if the right-wing commenter is “misinformed” and the left-wing commenter is “informed”?
Yoda, how can you and every other leftie be “informed” and yet be factually wrong most of the time?

Liberals are always wrong. Conservatives are always right. You’re not a complete partisan are you? Do yourself a favor and entertain different political perspectives. You will find that very often there are two legitimate sides to an issue.

Clown nose on…clown nose off.

What Stewart fails to realize (or admit) is that Fox News operates in the open, while the rest of the media deceitfully pushes their agenda…much like Stewart himself.

Colorado_Conservative said:
TY Sara, I dont even need to bother watching it now…..It’s fathers day and I have better things to do!! And I have 100% trust in your assessment of what actually occurred!!!! Cheers!!

Like a typical RepubliCon have to have someone tell you how to think.

This is a funny argument because BOTH Wallace and Stewart are right:

Yes the Media is lazy and gravitates toward sensationalism.

But that being true doesn’t mean its not biased too- it just means its lazy AND biased. It isnt a zero-sum game Jon.

Being lazy and going after tabloid-ish stories certainly doesn’t disqualify the FACT that there is a systemic liberal bias, and it is dishonest for Stewart to disavow that.

The mainstream media is monolithic in how they think, where they live, and how they vote- even Stewart agrees this is “probably” true.

FOX on the other hand is NOT monolithic. Just the fact that Stewart can repeatedly come on the network and bash them is indicative of how FOX allows all points of view, even at their own detriment.

I’d like to see an example of someone coming on an MSNBC (or CBSABCNBC etc) show and bashing the network they are on. It doesn’t happen.

illusive man said:
You didn’t answer my question. Why are the right-wing commenters on this site factually correct 95% of the time while the left-wing commenters are factually correct 5% of the time? Especially if the right-wing commenter is “misinformed” and the left-wing commenter is “informed”?
Yoda, how can you and every other leftie be “informed” and yet be factually wrong most of the time?

I would say their right wing commenters are wrong most of the time. I do think you make my case by in fact making up numbers out of thin air.

Yoda002 said:
I would say their right wing commenters are wrong most of the time. I do think you make my case by in fact making up numbers out of thin air.

“the”

Watching the vid now, and Stewart really comes off as a giant a-hole.
He can rip rip conservatives to shreds every night but don’t you dare challenge him! His motives are as pure as the driven snow!

sharksbreath said:
illusive: That’s because your misinformed and only think the Fox viewer is right. When the poll has already shown they are the most misinformed. So from your little scientific poll where you think the Fox viewer is running all over the liberal is just wrong. Fox viewers are the most misinformed. So when you think they are kicking the liberal’s butt 99% of the time. They just aren’t. You think they are because they are repeating the same misinformed information you received. Take the deficit. In the Republicans world you think all the deficit was created by Obama. You would be wrong. The reason the deficit shot up in 2009 is because all the things Bush wasn’t counting. Started to be counted. Like the wars. Take tax cuts for the rich. If conservatives were right their wouldn’t be 9% unemployment and the debt and deficit would have been reduced under Bush. The exact opposite happened. Sucks to be you.

You just showed yourself to be misinformed.
1, i’m not a regular Fox viewer.
2, the poll you’re talking about was proven to be deceptive to the people who where taking it.
3, If the left really cared about the deficit then why did the dem’s,who had control of both houses starting in Jan of 2007, allow Bush to continue spending for the last two years? The answer is, Dems are just as bad as Repub’s. You’re just to blind to see it.

it is funny, liberal stewart says yes the MSM lie, but fox viewers are misinformed

Since Fox never allows opposing voices, how’d Stewart get on there in the first place? Security!

The only way to know BOTH sides on any issue is to watch FNC. That’s why liberals are furious that FNC exists.

illusive man said:
What I find strange is if it’s true that Fox News viewers are the most Misinformed and most of the right-wing commenters on this site are regular Fox News viewers, my question is, how come a typical right-wing commenter will intellectually run over a typical left-wing commenter? Especially if the right-wing commenter is supposedly misinformed?

Second question, If the Fox watcher is misinformed but is factually correct 95% of the time, what does that make the supposedly informed left-wing commenter who is only right 5% of the time?

hahahahaha…….

You are one funny dude aren’t you?
I’m gonna joyfully agree with my master Yoda here and say that you..like a twit I shall add….made our point by making up facts to help your narrative….
Just like Fixed News does…..and just like a FN viewer would do to make a point maybe?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yea you’re illusive allright………….

hahahahahahhahahaha……………..

hey mediaite. don’t you get it?

your headline for this story – “stewart angrily tells chris wallace..”

yes, stewart was forceful with that comment about misinformed viewers, but he and wallace had a genuine, calm, and in-depth conversation about media bias. but yet mediaite instead hypes the angry confrontation.

stewart’s point about the failure of american media because of its shallow and sensational focus is exemplified by this very wesbite, a so-called ‘media watchdog.’ god help us. the media in our country is a cancer.

Why do some farts smell like poop and some don’t

Yoda002 said:
I would say their right wing commenters are wrong most of the time. I do think you make my case by in fact making up numbers out of thin air.

I would say you are incorrect. One example, you think Thomas Jefferson would make a good “liberal”.
Despite the fact that he hated big government and believed taxation is theft
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall retrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”
Thomas Jefferson

baruch said:
hey mediaite. don’t you get it?

your headline for this story – “stewart angrily tells chris wallace..”

yes, stewart was forceful with that comment about misinformed viewers, but he and wallace had a genuine, calm, and in-depth conversation about media bias. but yet mediaite instead hypes the angry confrontation.

stewart’s point about the failure of american media because of its shallow and sensational focus is exemplified by this very wesbite, a so-called ‘media watchdog.’ god help us. the media in our country is a cancer.

I agree so very very much dude….nice to meet you.

Miljana Mandich said:
The only way to know BOTH sides on any issue is to watch FNC. That’s why liberals are furious that FNC exists.

This is where the misinformed part comes into to play.

Haven’t you been paying attention? even the right wingnuts here aren’t denying that FoxNews leans to the hard right, and that means they control the message and don’t actually give BOTH sides of the issue, that’s just a slogan.

You’re one of the fools that people talk about.

Nacho said:
This is where the misinformed part comes into to play. Haven’t you been paying attention? even the right wingnuts here aren’t denying that FoxNews leans to the hard right, and that means they control the message and don’t actually give BOTH sides of the issue, that’s just a slogan. You’re one of the fools that people talk about.

but not one lib here has admitted the MSM lies, well except jon stewart

Nacho, Fox does give their detractors a voice, as Stewart’s appearance proves. And while you’re offended that Fox leans right, you’re not offended that all the others lean left.

Oh,but Nacho, you don’t know me at all. I am all for free marketplace of ideas. I watch other networks and switch to Fox just before I puke. Before Fox,the land of tv news and commentary was the land of Pravda.

cjd ohio 1 said:
but not one lib here has admitted the MSM lies, well except jon stewart

“MSM” is is just another all encompassing boogeyman used by victims incorporated.

GuessWhoSuka said:
hahahahaha……. You are one funny dude aren’t you?I’m gonna joyfully agree with my master Yoda here and say that you..like a twit I shall add….made our point by making up facts to help your narrative….Just like Fixed News does…..and just like a FN viewer would do to make a point maybe? HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yea you’re illusive allright…………. hahahahahahhahahaha……………..

You just proved my point.
You can’t prove me wrong and you just fall back on “Fixed News”, bravo little clown, bravo.

But that’s what makes Nacho so angry. Before Fox, it was all left all the time. They don’t want any of this free speech crap upsetting the apple cart.

Nacho said:
“MSM” is is just another all encompassing boogeyman used by victims incorporated.

diane sawyer lied, stewart admitted it because she was lazy lol

writer said:
Nacho, Fox does give their detractors a voice, as Stewart’s appearance proves. And while you’re offended that Fox leans right, you’re not offended that all the others lean left.

Well that settles it, fair and balanced, case closed.

Come on, Nacho. You’ve got all the rest. Can’t we have just one?

cjd ohio 1 said:
diane sawyer lied, stewart admitted it because she was lazy lol

lol msm totally nailed, case closed

Apparently not.

writer said:
Come on, Nacho. You’ve got all the rest. Can’t we have just one?

no soup for you

Glackin said:
Next time you are googling away, google “toe the line,” and learn something for a change.
I can find proof on line that the earth is flat.
Which one of the Flintstone’s are you descended from?

Watch out… Glackin doesn’t like it when you just go with the personal attacks, Glackin. I’m just waiting for you to start arguing with yourself.

Nacho said:
Haven’t you been paying attention? even the right wingnuts here aren’t denying that FoxNews leans to the hard right, and that means they control the message and don’t actually give BOTH sides of the issue, that’s just a slogan.

Since Nacho is known for not being able to address a coherent point for very long, let’s try a different avenue with this.

You say FNC doesn’t actually give both sides of an issue. Now, ignoring the irony of you saying this in regards to comments made of Jon Stewart on FOX, can you name a network or news source that DOES give both sides? In other words, who does it better than FOX? Who’s getting it right?

Watching Wallace argue this crap is sad. Equating Fox News with Comedy Central? Pathetic. One has an accurate title, and one doesn’t.

ImNotBlue said:
You say FNC doesn’t actually give both sides of an issue. Now, ignoring the irony of you saying this in regards to comments made of Jon Stewart on FOX, can you name a network or news source that DOES give both sides? In other words, who does it better than FOX? Who’s getting it right?

National Public Radio

When FoxNews trots out an opposing view, it doesn’t really count for much when the host has a company agenda. That does not equal fair and balanced and giving both sides of the issue.

As Stweart pointing out, Wallace is the exception.

Right, conservatives and Fox News viewers less informed. And the people who are informed are the ones that don’t mind telling the world that they get a thrill up their leg whenever Barack Obama shows his face. BULLLLLLLLLLLLL

You lose, lefties. It is easily proven (because I just did) that left-wing media (which is most of the MSM) is vastly biased. Your claims of being more informed and smarter than us are simply laughable. And also, spare me the “consider other points of view” crap. I have considered your point of view, and found it to be wrong. See, if two weathermen have an argument over whether or not it’s raining, only one of them is going to be right when they step outside to check. In the same way, I’ve found lefty ideology, especially with the most left-wing President of all time in the White House, to be a complete and utter failure. In the over two years lefties had to prove they knew what the the hell they were doing they have failed miserably and our country is in a bigger mess than before, with climbing debt and unemployment, fascist laws and regulations rammed down our throats, and one embarrassment in foreign policy after another.

I know about the grand spectacle that is the left’s failure because I turn to conservative outlets for news. Maybe you can say they’re biased, but you can’t say they’re lying or wrong. All you can do is smear without a factual basis. You poor lefties probably turn to the MSM and get reassured when they say, “Oh, unemployment’s not that bad, even though it’s about 9.1% or so, and it’s getting better if you squint at the numbers… though it really isn’t. Yeah…” Misinformed? Speak for yourselves. You don’t have a clue what’s really going on and it’s hurting the rest of us.

Oh, yeah, and Jon Stewart IS an activist… and a bad liar.

rdubayoo said:
Right, conservatives and Fox News viewers less informed. And the people who are informed are the ones that don’t mind telling the world that they get a thrill up their leg whenever Barack Obama shows his face. BULLLLLLLLLLLLL

You lose, lefties. It is easily proven (because I just did) that left-wing media (which is most of the MSM) is vastly biased. Your claims of being more informed and smarter than us are simply laughable. And also, spare me the “consider other points of view” crap. I have considered your point of view, and found it to be wrong. See, if two weathermen have an argument over whether or not it’s raining, only one of them is going to be right when they step outside to check. In the same way, I’ve found lefty ideology, especially with the most left-wing President of all time in the White House, to be a complete and utter failure. In the over two years lefties had to prove they knew what the the hell they were doing they have failed miserably and our country is in a bigger mess than before, with climbing debt and unemployment, fascist laws and regulations rammed down our throats, and one embarrassment in foreign policy after another.

I know about the grand spectacle that is the left’s failure because I turn to conservative outlets for news. Maybe you can say they’re biased, but you can’t say they’re lying or wrong. All you can do is smear without a factual basis. You poor lefties probably turn to the MSM and get reassured when they say, “Oh, unemployment’s not that bad, even though it’s about 9.1% or so, and it’s getting better if you squint at the numbers… though it really isn’t. Yeah…” Misinformed? Speak for yourselves. You don’t have a clue what’s really going on and it’s hurting the rest of us.

Oh, yeah, and Jon Stewart IS an activist… and a bad liar.

Come back when you’ve sobered up and are making some sense, kid.

Publius219 said:
Watching Wallace argue this crap is sad. Equating Fox News with Comedy Central? Pathetic. One has an accurate title, and one doesn’t.

diane sawyer is on comedy central? wow did not know that

Gee, if only the King would show up now, America Sucks and the King could do a tag team.

Not that this new far left poster is the King, or anything.

uhoh….it’s a Sunday…the libturd cubicle diaper wearing babies are getting double time for posting….have fun with your dime….

The main point I’m trying to make is this, how can left-wing commenters say that it’s only Fox News viewers that are misinformed when for example Rachel Maddow, who is revered on the left for some reason, will say ” Paul Ryan’s bill will kill Medicare” when all thinking people know that to be BS.
When the left saw the propaganda video of a guy pushing grandma over a cliff the left started bleating in unison by saying “The Republican’s want to kill grandma” when we all knew that to be BS.
When Rep. Giffords got shot the left immediately blamed the right with no proof what so ever. (the very definition of misinformed BTW)
The fact that all leftists say that FNC viewers are misinformed even after the poll saying so was proven to be bias and deceptive only proves that it is the leftists who are in fact misinformed.

But oh no, don’t let thought and reflection of oneself get between the left and baseless accusation. That would be a tragedy.

Sunday’s are the King’s favorite day to do this. Humor him, and no one let on.

cjd ohio 1 said:
diane sawyer is on comedy central? wow did not know that

you haven’t watched the interview

Nacho said:
you haven’t watched the interview

on tv today, clip shown by wallace

AmericaSucks said:
Ironically, YOU

I won’t even write your nom de plume, you pathetic SOB. There are people, like me, who devote a portion of their lives so you can choose a vile “handle” like yours. I suppose you derive gratification from burning flags too?

Texas v Johnson was the Supreme Court decision that gave Tape Worms such as yourself, the right to Burn flags and have offensive names, like yours. I agree with the decision, BUT, I don’t have to like or respect you!

If Burning a flag or choosing a name like yours is meant to send a message, first off, the message is lost before it is even sent, and secondly, it can’t be much of a message.

Fortunately for you “Tape Worm,” there will always be men such as I, to protect and defend your cowardly backside.

PURVEYOR OF RHETORIC

Nacho said:
you haven’t watched the interview

it would seem you did not pay attention

cjd ohio 1 said:
on tv today, clip shown by wallace

so you saw the midnight roast clip from comedy central that wallace used to try to make some kind of point

Jon Stewart Angrily Tells Chris Wallace: Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers

Jon Stewart is a bigger fool than I thought.

Jon has it exactly backwards, whoda thunk it?

A liberal who claims the only biased network on television is the one that allows republicans on the air.

Bwahahahaha

poor Jon, just another liberal loon who thinks that NBCCBSABCCNN tell the truth!

oh so funny, oh so ignorant, oh so typical.

purveyor, it’s RRK. He does this on Sundays.

Nacho said:
National Public Radio

When FoxNews trots out an opposing view, it doesn’t really count for much when the host has a company agenda. That does not equal fair and balanced and giving both sides of the issue.

As Stweart pointing out, Wallace is the exception.

Right… so Wallace is the exception. So is O’Reilly, Smith, Cavuto, the morning and afternoon programs, Greta, and Baier. Those are the exceptions to the standard, uninformed, needlessly negative left-wing talking point.

Got it.

writer said:
Gee, if only the King would show up now, America Sucks and the King could do a tag team.

Nah, Royal would be upset that the “k” wasn’t there in “Amerika.”

INB, he changes things just enough so we’ll never guess it’s him.

Shouldn’t that be Amerika Sucks ?

BREAKING NEWS…

Rory McElroy has won the US Open by 8 strokes.

And I thought that Prom Night Dumpster name was bad .

If America sucks , go back to Austin .

Hahaha @ Stewart. A Leftist media hack on the verge of self immolation. Nothing is going right for them. Seething rage everywhere you look. As they say in Boston, ‘Cue the Duckboats!’

Great day. Great seppeches/ Great jazz. Great food. Great company. Great heat and great sun. Great holiday.

Great checking in here to see the conspiracy theorists, WrLter, the Philistine and LOT are having an happy ending to their weekend.

Great to see the Stewart clip, and I couldn’t agree more. American media, particularly cable “news” stinks up the place, not because of ideological slant, but because they are lazy and sensationalist. With you 100% there, Jon.

ChrisNH said:
Hahaha @ Stewart. A Leftist media hack on the verge of self immolation. Nothing is going right for them. Seething rage everywhere you look. As they say in Boston, ‘Cue the Duckboats!’

You don’t know what rage is, do you? Nothing wrong with a sheltered life.

Dem4Ever said:
BREAKING NEWS… Rory McElroy has won the US Open by 8 strokes.

A great win for a great kid .

Miljana Mandich said:
The only way to know BOTH sides on any issue is to watch FNC. That’s why liberals are furious that FNC exists.

I didn’t realize that Conservatives took drugs. Oh, wait a minute that’s wrong, “Oxycotin” Rush is a huge druggie. But I didn’t know you did drugs. Either that or you are just plain delusional. If you want to hear ONE side of the story, the Conservative side, watch Fox. However if you are Conservative then you’ve been
‘Brain washed” and you don’t think there is another side to an issue. Let me give you a quick example. Liberals are willing to cut spending and raise taxes to battle the debt problem, in this country. Conservatives are ONLY willing to cut spending. You will never here BOTH sides of that issue from Fox, because Fox is in the “Brain washing” business. They are neither fair nor balanced when it comes to pushing their agenda.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
Great seppeches

Did they let you make a seppech ?

I bet that cleared the place out .

America doesn’t suck , Robert .

purveyor said:
I won’t even write your nom de plume, you pathetic SOB. There are people, like me, who devote a portion of their lives so you can choose a vile “handle” like yours. I suppose you derive gratification from burning flags too?

Texas v Johnson was the Supreme Court decision that gave Tape Worms such as yourself, the right to Burn flags and have offensive names, like yours. I agree with the decision, BUT, I don’t have to like or respect you!

If Burning a flag or choosing a name like yours is meant to send a message, first off, the message is lost before it is even sent, and secondly, it can’t be much of a message.

Fortunately for you “Tape Worm,” there will always be men such as I, to protect and defend your cowardly backside.

PURVEYOR OF RHETORIC

Yawn. Go and flit about somewhere else, little fly. You bore me.

If Fox News and Fox Business only allow one point of view, why do both have “The Skeletor” Alan Colmes, a committed socialist by his own definition, but a Marxist by my definition appear daily and opine on multiple subjects?

Oh yea, The Skeletor is the token liberal scumbag? SE Cupp could kick his butt with ease.

It isn’t uncharacteristic at all for Stewart to get angry. He does it whenever he is actually challenged. He is VERY thin skinned.

WOW!! I saw this hit this morning and didn’t have time to watch and comment before work. Now at page 12 I see what ya’ll have been doing this afternoon. personally I thought it was very good, and JS was just as consistent as I’ve always seen him to be. Chris W. did a very good interview. I can really appreciate the way there two guys respectfully disagree.

kit9 said:
It isn’t uncharacteristic at all for Stewart to get angry. He does it whenever he is actually challenged. He is VERY thin skinned.

Everybody’s a comedian.

Comics=Journalists, Journalists=Comics.. so what’s new? Tabloid News, Political Humor, both with a means to an end. which boils down to, believe nothing you hear/read and only half what you see.

Follow votes from all elected and then you voice your vote on how they vote. The rest is Media Morons doing the politico thing for ratings..

illusive man said:
I would say you are incorrect. One example, you think Thomas Jefferson would make a good “liberal”.
Despite the fact that he hated big government and believed taxation is theft
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall retrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”
Thomas Jefferson

After reading Jefferson’s papers I would have to say he was a liberal. He feared that corporations and banks would have too much power over the government. He feared that we will have lead to wealthy lobbyists controlling the government. Liberals don’t want big government but better government and feel certain things need to be run by the government.

Yoda002 said:
Liberals don’t want big government

Please moron. Everybody knows that is a lie.

Azarkhan said:
Please moron. Everybody knows that is a lie.

That’s the propaganda that the right like to push. The right doesn’t want to hear about how Bush expanded government and how Reagan expanded government.

writer said:
purveyor, it’s RRK. He does this on Sundays.

WRITER,

Thank you for the information, I think? Truthfully, are Royal King and TAPE WORM alter egos? (By the way, do you know what a “scolex” is? A Tape Worm’s mouth, no shitt! LOL)

You know, if people had the kind of passion I do about our Nation, Democrat or Republican, it might be an improvement?

Anyway, Thank YOU

ImNotBlue said:
This is something that really bothers me about Stewart. He uses his “comedian” status as a defense, but recognizes that it’s simply not true. He SHOULD be seen as just a comedian, and treated as such… but he’s not. As because he’s not, and because he knows he’s not, he has a greater responsibility towards his audience.

This is exactly what Jon got testy about. It’s a repeated mistake that his critics make. His specific job is political satire. That’s his job description. The first priority is to make people laugh. Not just by random jokes but by political commentary. Of course, since it’s his show his own views will have some effect on what jokes he uses. What absurdity and corruption he puts on his half hour. Fox has “Fair and Balanced” as it’s slogan. Any news organization has an ethical obligation to report the facts in an unbiased manner.{as much as possible} That’s their job description, NOT Jon’s. Because the job descriptions are vastly different you can’t hold a political satirist
to the same standards as you do a news organization.

He calls himself a comedian as it suits him, but has no problem speaking out on political topics, interviewing political figures, and writing political books. He rather apparently wants to have it both ways. He wants to be a political player, but doesn’t want the seriousness or the responsibility that comes along with it. I find this to be the lest respectable thing about Stewart. He should make a decision to go one way or the other, and stop hiding behind his “comedian” status.

Well, what political books has he written?

Again, people seem to have a real hard time understanding his role even though political satire has been around for generations. His job is political satire on a fake news show. Of course he comments on politics and interviews political figures. There is no conflict and he doesn’t want it both ways. He’s doing his job. In fact I think he’s done a good job of not letting his popularity distort his job description, and keeping things in perspective. He’s doing his job. It’s the media and the news organizations that are failing to do theirs because of the competition of 24 hour networks and the desire for ratings. The people who should be doing news are becoming more like super market tabloids , with a little news sprinkled in.

Wallace was a fool for going after what Jon does and even dumber for going after what Comedy Central does.
He would have made more headway if he directed his questions at MSNBC, who is the flip side of the same coin.

Other news media might show bias occasionally but only those two organizations are devoted to it.

There is a big difference between Diane Sawyer leaving out the full details of a new law in her intro to the story and Fox using KILL CRACKER BABIES! as a 24/7 promo for a month.

Yoda002 said:
After reading Jefferson’s papers I would have to say he was a liberal. He feared that corporations and banks would have too much power over the government. He feared that we will have lead to wealthy lobbyists controlling the government. Liberals don’t want big government but better government and feel certain things need to be run by the government.

Jefferson was no corporatist thats for sure. But the one thing he feared more than corporations and a central bank was a government that has grown too powerful, like the one we have today. Do not fool yourself into thinking that the left dosen’t want big government. The lefts entire system is based on the foolish belief that the government should take care of us and the only way it can is if it’s very powerful. Your gut feeling that the goverment can run things is a slipperyt slope that historically lead to oppression. A corporation has never enslaved a population, powerful government has every time.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

Lantern, a huge coincidence. On another thread, the King showed up right after the ‘new guy’. And of course, the two of them are in complete agreement. Go figure.

purveyor said:

You know, if people had the kind of passion I do about our Nation, Democrat or Republican, it might be an improvement?

Keep dreaming, kid.

Yet the most surprising moment may have been when Stewart got uncharacteristically really angry, declaring that viewers of Fox News are the “most consistently misinformed.”

So, is Stewart misinforming, or just misinformed? The basis of his argument is an absolute load of crap. So, where does that leave us, funny man?

AmericaSucks said:
Keep dreaming, kid.

I hear Cuba’s nice this time of year.

Nacho said:
That study has been debunked.

No, that’s settled science.

Bruce Kennedy said:
They are neither fair nor balanced when it comes to pushing their agenda.

Out of curiosity, how have your formed this view? Do you watch a lot of FOX, so you know how they cover the issues… or are you repeating what a third party told you? Or are you making it up?

CosmosDan said:
Because the job descriptions are vastly different you can’t hold a political satirist to the same standards as you do a news organization.

Yeah, i don’t think you can hold them to the same standard. But by the same token, just because he’s a satirist, it doesn’t mean you can hold him to ANY standard. And at what point does a satirist become a serious commentator? I don’t see many other comedians interviewing Presidents, and heads of states on their programs.

Well, what political books has he written?

I was thinking mostly about his recent “Earth” book, and the “America” book before that. They both “humor” books, but politics plays a heavy role in the humor. Again, just because it’s a “humor” book, or he’s a comedian, it doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be held to any kind of standard.

Again, people seem to have a real hard time understanding his role even though political satire has been around for generations. His job is political satire on a fake news show. Of course he comments on politics and interviews political figures. There is no conflict and he doesn’t want it both ways.

I disagree. At the point when poll after poll lists you as a respected “journalist,” it’s time to accept that a wide segment of the population isn’t getting the joke. They see him as a real source for news. Let us also not forget he (as well as Colbert) has won the Peabody award. Does that not strike you as odd? A journalism award going to a supposed comedian on a “fake news show.” That just goes to show how the journalism establishment views his program.

His status as a comedian, and his presence on Comedy Central, does not mean that he is without standard or complaint.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
How long are you libs gonna cite this long DEBUNKED story. There’s an example of bias right there. Repeating things you know are lies. Thanks for proving the point, Jon!

By all means , please show me the debunkation. Are the polls that show otherwise being hidden?

writer said:
Lantern, a huge coincidence. On another thread, the King showed up right after the ‘new guy’. And of course, the two of them are in complete agreement. Go figure.

I have faith you’ll get to the bottom of this, one line comment at a time.

Robert is predictable for sure .
He just brought in Sarah Palin on a Herman Cain thread .

As far as the study being debunked, find me serious professionals in the field who are qualified to evaluate the study’s methodology and find it lacking and make a good case, and then I’ll consider it debunked. Attacks on the Internets by people who don’t like the study’s findings does not mean it was debunked.

ImNotBlue said:
Common sense, logic, and honesty isn’t enough for you? You need an “expert” to tell you that stuff? Yikes.

Yep. In order to know whether an academic study about media consumers being misinformed is flawed, I actually need information from someone who is qualified to evaluate whether or not an academic study is flawed. I’m not going to believe it’s flawed based on “common sense” posted on the Internet. Call me crazy.

I would say that picking the name America Sucks is low even for you, King. But I know that it’s not.

Yoda002 said:
After reading Jefferson’s papers I would have to say he was a liberal. He feared that corporations and banks would have too much power over the government. He feared that we will have lead to wealthy lobbyists controlling the government. Liberals don’t want big government but better government and feel certain things need to be run by the government.

Sorry to interrupt YODA and Illusive Man. Yes, Jefferson was a Liberal agrarian, Simply put, he recognized the people need the basics such as food. But the term Liberal is not quite the same. LOL

Have either of you read the “Federalist Papers”? That is the argument for a strong central govmt. Also, “Common Sense,” the real one, by Thomas Payne. You will gain insight into what our founders envisioned for America.

The Lantern of Truth said:
Robert is predictable for sure .He just brought in Sarah Palin on a Herman Cain thread .

Using his latest offensive name ,that is .

What a coincidence .

Nacho, was your comment one line?

writer said:
I would say that picking the name America Sucks is low even for you, King. But I know that it’s not.

Well, at least my username is a factual statement; nothing you’ve posted thus far suggests that YOURS is, kid.

Yoda002 said:
Liberals don’t want big government

Of course they don’t. The fact that the Left’s new entitlement program Obamacare will require a massive new government bureaucracy to implement and support it is purely coincidental.

Seen it all before………kid.

Of course this guy isn’t political! Or an activist. You don’t see him out holding rallies, do ya?

Oh, wait.

On the bright side, Stewart has more staying power than the Coffee Party or No Labels.

AmericaSucks said:
Well, at least my username is a factual statement; nothing you’ve posted thus far suggests that YOURS is, kid.

Have you seen what America looks like if you’re not here? It’s worth a try, amirite?

AmericaSucks said:
Keep dreaming, kid.

You hide under a blanket of anonymity while being provocative and insulting. You sir, are a coward.

In fact, the very quintessence!

writer said:
Seen it all before………kid.

Sorry, son, not all of us have been around here as long as you.

CosmosDan said:
Any news organization has an ethical obligation to report the facts in an unbiased manner.{as much as possible}

Yeah, I’ve posted a link to it being debunked on probably 5 different stories because you libs still cite it. And if you’d read the comments, someone else posted it on this thread. Search and ye shall find. The problem is, you don’t really want the truth, so you won’t.

AmericaSucks says: blah, blah, blah

Move to Iran if you hate it, liberal hippie.

Okay, King. I don’t know it’s you. Wouldn’t want you to get furious, like you did when you were using the name ‘Reganesque’.

da-wdc said:
Yep. In order to know whether an academic study about media consumers being misinformed is flawed, I actually need information from someone who is qualified to evaluate whether or not an academic study is flawed.

The study is absolutely shredded right here, in great detail.

If you disagree with that, argue with it. Tell us where Lee Doren has gotten it wrong.

Writer,
If he uses the terms Kart o Krap or reacationaries, he’s nailed!!

purveyor said:
Sorry to interrupt YODA and Illusive Man. Yes, Jefferson was a Liberal agrarian, Simply put, he recognized the people need the basics such as food. But the term Liberal is not quite the same. LOL Have either of you read the “Federalist Papers”? That is the argument for a strong central govmt. Also, “Common Sense,” the real one, by Thomas Payne. You will gain insight into what our founders envisioned for America.

It is true that the definition of liberal has changed over time and the modern definition is a perversion.
A couple good examples of true liberalism would be Thomas Hobbes and Adam Smith.

Who is this far left newcomer? I have no idea. Who could it be?

illusive man said:
Jefferson was no corporatist thats for sure. But the one thing he feared more than corporations and a central bank was a government that has grown too powerful, like the one we have today. Do not fool yourself into thinking that the left dosen’t want big government. The lefts entire system is based on the foolish belief that the government should take care of us and the only way it can is if it’s very powerful. Your gut feeling that the goverment can run things is a slipperyt slope that historically lead to oppression. A corporation has never enslaved a population, powerful government has every time.

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

He was afraid of having a big government and didn’t want to have a standing military and pushed to have public education. If the corporation takes over the government, which basically turns it into Fascist state, which will lead to a few oligarchs controlling the government.

Corporations with the help of the government will enslave a population. This happens in China and to some extent happens here too. Look at the Massy mine? Was that enslavement? no, but safety standards were bypassed for profits. Most of the those miners had lung disease. The government can not look the other way when this happens and they were bought off.

ILLUSIVEMAN,

Nice to make your acquaintance.

writer said:
I would say that picking the name America Sucks is low even for you, King

Writer, I don’t think he is the Real Royal A-hole. I think he is just your garden-variety a-hole. Ignore him, and maybe he’ll buzz back to the pile of sh*t he came from.

writer said:
Nacho, was your comment one line?

Aren’t the majority of yours? troll.

Azarkhan said:
Of course they don’t. The fact that the Left’s new entitlement program Obamacare will require a massive new government bureaucracy to implement and support it is purely coincidental.

Which will save money. You have been mislead again.

sarainitaly said:
And Stewart himself explains why the need for *activism* on the part of Conservatives – to correct the negative image that has been repeated and perpetuated by the liberal media, spreading lies and misinformation about them, and disregarding and stifling the beliefs of the majority of the country.

Activism in getting the conservative view out should still be centered around facts. What are the lies perpetuated by the liberal media in your opinion. Is it acceptable to counter them with other lies? My objection to Fox is not that it offers the conservative view. I think the public needs that for balance. My objection is the blurring of lines between agenda driven opinion, sensationalism, and actual informed news.

Robert mentioned he was rereading Moby Dick and then started using the name ” Call Me Ishmael” .

He must keep a chart of names , or he has BFD keep it for him in their apartment .

Aren’t the majority of yours? troll.

Why thanks, Nacho. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

By the way, Nacho. Temper, temper. (That’s another one liner.)

CosmosDan said:
By all means , please show me the debunkation. Are the polls that show otherwise being hidden?

It’s been linked to already. But more importantly, if you read the methodology of the study, you’ll see why it’s a joke.

da-wdc said:
Yep. In order to know whether an academic study about media consumers being misinformed is flawed, I actually need information from someone who is qualified to evaluate whether or not an academic study is flawed. I’m not going to believe it’s flawed based on “common sense” posted on the Internet. Call me crazy.

So my study (which I mentioned before, as showing that 100% of the people I talked to think the same thing) is valid, and until you find an expert to debunk it, you’ll just believe it… because you believe all “studies?” Is that what you’re telling me?

purveyor said:
ILLUSIVEMAN, Nice to make your acquaintance.

Likewise.

Notice how the ‘new guy’s’ name has raised no objection from our left wing posters? Shocking!

Yoda002 said:
Corporations with the help of the government will enslave a population. This happens in China

So communism and the Chinese Communist Party have nothing to do with enslaving the Chinese people? Really? So by your logic, the period from the Communist takeover in 1949 until to the introduction of capitalism under Deng Xiaoping in the 1980′s was one of blissful freedom in China. That will come as news to 1 billion Chinese.

BatBoy said:
I heard that huge sigh of relief from you East Coast Lefty Media all the way out here in the West.

That sign was saying “John Stewart just covered our butt’s- see we aren’t Liberal, we are just lazy!”

I say, you are not only lazy, but you drink the Liberal Kool Aid and don’t mind telling us about it on a daily basis!

Hint – “We NO longer listen to you!”

I’m sure Jon is all broken up that you’ve decided to remain misinformed.

Jon Stewart Angrily Tells Chris Wallace: Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers

As opposed to the highly informed , mouthbreathing Ed Schultz viewers or the audience of The View .

The problem with the cons is they miss the point that Jon proved by stating that Fox viewers consistently poll as less informed. It’s not just one study or poll it’s consistent on several polls and several issues. But of course since it didn’t come from Faux news it can’t be true so they are trapped in a cycle of perpetual ignorance.

over 500 posts in a few hours — I do believe Mr. Stewart has struck a nerve.

How could that be? I’ll give you one theory: He speaks the truth as he sees it, because he can.

Stewart and Glenn Beck are not so different: entertainers who make shit up based on socio-political issues of the day.

The major differences being that Stewart is funny while Beck is just weird, and Stewart rings true without even trying and Beck rings false despite all his efforts to be credible.

The Lantern of Truth said:
Jon Stewart Angrily Tells Chris Wallace: Fox News Has the Most Misinformed Viewers

As opposed to the highly informed , mouthbreathing Ed Schultz viewers or the audience of The View .

About which you know jack shit.

Azarkhan said:
So communism and the Chinese Communist Party have nothing to do with enslaving the Chinese people? Really? So by your logic, the period from the Communist takeover in 1949 until to the introduction of capitalism under Deng Xiaoping in the 1980’s was one of blissful freedom in China. That will come as news to 1 billion Chinese.

You took my words out of context. This is the only way righties can win an argument. Because of China’s policy towards its workers American Corporations are able to get away with treating people badly an enslaving them.

Things like this can happen here. Look up Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire.

m_mayhem said:
The problem with the cons is they miss the point that Jon proved by stating that Fox viewers consistently poll as less informed. It’s not just one study or poll it’s consistent on several polls and several issues.

Cite, please.

See, here’s an example of where the thinking breaks down completely:

the point that Jon proved by stating

They think that chain of events is actually possible. It’s not, Bunky. It simply doesn’t work that way.

Jon Stewart, like Letterman, is a lefty at heart. His meal ticket is comedy, like Bill Maher. Politicians and pundits should be in another league from the likes of Stewart and Maher. I think Chris Wallace made that point pretty well with Stewart. (I.e., how he runs to the protection of being merely a comedian when the debate starts going against him.) I really like Stewart, and like Maher when he is not being a misogynist, but after what he called Palin, I have trouble letting him out of the dog house. I’ve always felt sorry for Wallace. He followed in his dad’s footsteps and can never equal him.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
AmericaSucks says: blah, blah, blah

Move to Iran if you hate it, liberal hippie.

How quaint.

mediadoubt said:
About which you know

I know you look like a serial killer .

And an onoxious idiot .

Yoda002 said:
Which will save money. You have been mislead again.

What a complete fool you are. The Democrats had to lie to get the initial cost estimates by the CBO under 1 trillion dollars. But putting aside the lies and chicanery used by the Democrats to force through the nationalization of the health care industry, how can you sit there and predict that there will be a cost savings from Obamacare? Can you see into the future over the next 10 years? Or 50?

Since you are so sure that Obamacare will save money, it should be easy for you to point out other government entitlement programs that have saved the taxpayer money. So show us one government entitlement program created in the last 50 years that has come in under budget, that has not had an exponential cost increase. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies, take your pick. Show us the initial estimates and then show us the cost savings.

Because, it appears we’ve been “mislead”.

writer said:
You do have to appreciate the irony when Fox repeatedly has Stewart on, so he can tell them they don’t allow opposing viewpoints.

When did Stewart say that? Got the quote?

mediadoubt said:
over 500 posts in a few hours

367 in 10 hours .

You lying, stupid son of a bitch .

The Lantern of Truth said:
367 in 10 hours .

You lying, stupid son of a bitch .

Look who cares about facts all of a sudden…

AmericaSucks said:
Look who cares

Put on your traveling toupee and beat it across the border , Robert , where it doesn’t “suck ” .

The Lantern of Truth said:
Put on your traveling toupee and beat it across the border , Robert , where it doesn’t “suck ” .

No spaces before punctuation marks, please. I know you can’t do much to improve the content of your poor posts, but you could at least make them more presentable, son.

Thanks, Pops.

writer said:
The left needs to start being more specific. What are all these lies that are being told on the news broadcasts? And I’m not talking about the opinion shows where O’Reilly or Hannity say something the left disagrees with, and thus considers a lie. I’m talking about the actual news broadcasts, like with Shep Smith. What are some of these lies we’re being told?

Fortunately Jon is here to help.

http://www.aoltv.com/2009/10/30/jon-stewart-explains-fox-news/

note that he slams the WH in this clip while explaining Fox.

Azarkhan said:
What a complete fool you are. The Democrats had to lie to get the initial cost estimates by the CBO under 1 trillion dollars. But putting aside the lies and chicanery used by the Democrats to force through the nationalization of the health care industry, how can you sit there and predict that there will be a cost savings from Obamacare? Can you see into the future over the next 10 years? Or 50?

Since you are so sure that Obamacare will save money, it should be easy for you to point out other government entitlement programs that have saved the taxpayer money. So show us one government entitlement program created in the last 50 years that has come in under budget, that has not had an exponential cost increase. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies, take your pick. Show us the initial estimates and then show us the cost savings.

Because, it appears we’ve been “mislead”.

Being that the uninsured/pre-existing has been going up at a very high rate something needed to be done to slow down costs. With more people getting healthcare instead of ER care it will help cut cost.

Every program you stated has changed over the years, but I would say social security continuously brings in more than it give out and has around a 2.4 trillion dollar surplus and will still be able to pay out in full until 2037.

Over the years the Daily Show has become more like media matters, and less like a true media critique show with impartial integrity. Its like if msnbc, and media matters are having a slow day whining about the other side, I can tune in to the Daily show and get my fringe partisan sheep fix there. He’s just become a dime in a dozen, and that is unfortunate.

m_mayhem said:
The problem with the cons is they miss the point that Jon proved by stating that Fox viewers consistently poll as less informed. It’s not just one study or poll it’s consistent on several polls and several issues. But of course since it didn’t come from Faux news it can’t be true so they are trapped in a cycle of perpetual ignorance.

And I’m sure you can support that statement, right?

mediadoubt said:
over 500 posts in a few hours — I do believe Mr. Stewart has struck a nerve.

How could that be? I’ll give you one theory: He speaks the truth as he sees it, because he can.

Stewart and Glenn Beck are not so different: entertainers who make shit up based on socio-political issues of the day.

The major differences being that Stewart is funny while Beck is just weird, and Stewart rings true without even trying and Beck rings false despite all his efforts to be credible.

Riiight. So the only reason we’re responding is because he’s “told the truth.” And by that logic, all the FNC haters, and the numerous websites devoted to hating and attacking FNC do so because FNC “tells the truth.” Somehow I doubt you’re trying to say that, but your theory does.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Jon, IF you had any credibility (and that’s highly debatable), you lost it when you said that FOX is biased but that ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, A-MESS-NBC, NYT, WA post, etc, aren’t.

He never said that so I think it’s your credibility that’s really in question. Not to me though.

BFD said:
Wallace was a fool for going after what Jon does and even dumber for going after what Comedy Central does.

So true. He said it as if it discredits Jon’s show in some way and Jon’s response was right on. Jon knows why his comedy show is on comedy central and what it’s about. It’s the whole fair and balanced thing that is a problem for Fox.

I remember Jon taking a shot at ORielly that he didn’t like to watch msnbc; could anyone imagine him saying that to a msnbc host?

Yoda002 said:
Being that the uninsured/pre-existing has been going up at a very high rate something needed to be done to slow down costs.

85% of Americans were insured before Obamacare. So, typically, ignorant Democrats decided to ruin the health care of 85% to help the 15%.

People with pre-existing conditions “going up at a very high rate”? Then why have only 18,313 people nationwide signed up for the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan as of April? Some crisis, huh?

And again, you are assuming costs will go down. You have absolutely no basis for that assumption.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/05/06/136063570/enrollment-in-high-risk-insurance-pools-inches-up-but-remains-low

love the way the left has trouble with one itty bitty channel that according to them is watched only by fools. I know, they hate to see us waste our time – they only want what’s best for us. They are trying to save us from ourselves. Who knew?

It’s amazing how they all get bent by Fox – an unimportant, uninformative network that they get worked up about more than we do about CBS, NBC, ABC etc. I really don’t give a damn what they say or show – don’t watch and don’t care. lol (what I know about them I learn on mediate – lol)

mediadoubt said:
over 500 posts in a few hours

500?? As of this point I only see 381, outcome based education strikes again!

puck30 said:
500?? As of this point I only see 381, outcome based education strikes again!

As does basic grammar and composition, if your doozy of a “sentence” is any indication.

Yoda002 said:
Every program you stated has changed over the years, but I would say social security continuously brings in more than it give out…

You’d be wrong. But that happens a lot when you get your news from Media Mutters.

seek said:
love the way the left has trouble with one itty bitty channel that according to them is watched only by fools. I know, they hate to see us waste our time – they only want what’s best for us. They are trying to save us from ourselves. Who knew?

It’s amazing how they all get bent by Fox – an unimportant, uninformative network that they get worked up about more than we do about CBS, NBC, ABC etc. I really don’t give a damn what they say or show – don’t watch and don’t care. lol (what I know about them I learn on mediate – lol)

Yet you care about what anonymous lefties on an Internet site have to say about an unimportant network?

Jon tells jokes to get you to laugh at certain things.

Fox tells news to get you to vote for certain things.

That ain’t news, that’s propaganda.

CosmosDan said:
He never said that so I think it’s your credibility that’s really in question. Not to me though.

You obviously didn’t listen to the clip because he most certainly did.

Azarkhan said:
85% of Americans were insured before Obamacare. So, typically, ignorant Democrats decided to ruin the health care of 85% to help the 15%.

People with pre-existing conditions “going up at a very high rate”? Then why have only 18,313 people nationwide signed up for the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan as of April? Some crisis, huh?

And again, you are assuming costs will go down. You have absolutely no basis for that assumption.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/05/06/136063570/enrollment-in-high-risk-insurance-pools-inches-up-but-remains-low

Again, you miss the argument it isn’t going to ruin the 85% that have health insurance it will let others get health care. I would say that its more like 80%- 20%. But the 80% are paying for the other 20% and the government being uninsured.

The full plan hasn’t gone into effect yet. Medicare started this way too.

AmericaSucks said:
Yet you care about what anonymous lefties on an Internet site have to say about an unimportant network?

I’m fascinated by the unabashed hatred.

Ailes should just put Breitbart on at 5 PM.

Pablo said:
You’d be wrong. But that happens a lot when you get your news from Media Mutters.

I was trying to look up media mutters and couldn’t find anything, so I would say you’re wrong again.

Breitbart at 5 would be AWESOME!!!

Pablo said:
I’m fascinated by the unabashed hatred.

Ailes should just put Breitbart on at 5 PM.

Why? To see if he can beat Beck’s land speed record for flaming out?

That does have a kind of appeal, now that you say it…

Krusty the Clown once said “K” words are the funniest. It’s just the funniest sound. Like Kumquat (2 K sounds!)

That’s what Republicans are. K words.

It’s not Jon’s fault you guys are hysterical.

Yoda002 said:
Again, you miss the argument it isn’t going to ruin the 85% that have health insurance it will let others get health care. I would say that its more like 80%- 20%. But the 80% are paying for the other 20% and the government being uninsured. The full plan hasn’t gone into effect yet. Medicare started this way too.

And it won’t because the next President will be a Republican who repeals it.

Jon does comedy from a left wing, selective and hypocritical perspective. He is what he complains about, with a few jokes to pander to a side against another. He is entertaining, but pandering to a specific audience doesn’t help his credibility as a media critic at all.

AmericaSucks said:
Why? To see if he can beat Beck’s land speed record for flaming out? That does have a kind of appeal, now that you say it…

Do you realize how stupid you sound? Beck CRUSHED even the primetime lineups of the non-competition.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
And it won’t because the next President will be a Republican who repeals it.

Look who’s doing comedy now. You go, girl!!

Yoda002 said:
Again, you miss the argument it isn’t going to ruin the 85% that have health insurance it will let others get health care.

Wrong again. I know that was the lie you were told, but it is a lie and they damned well knew it.

Again, why aren’t all these uninsured people signing up for the state pools? There should be millions of people where we’ve got a grand total of 18K.

Do you suppose the government plan will start filling up when 30% of employers drop coverage? Is that you thought would happen if we passed this?

AmericaSucks said:
Look who’s doing comedy now. You go, girl!!

Maybe you haven’t heard, but Ozero is losing to a non-specific Republican at this point. You’re delusional.

m_mayhem said:
The problem with the cons is they miss the point that Jon proved by stating that Fox viewers consistently poll as less informed. It’s not just one study or poll it’s consistent on several polls and several issues. But of course since it didn’t come from Faux news it can’t be true so they are trapped in a cycle of perpetual ignorance.

How the hell does one “prove by stating” something?

The Voice of Reason said:
Jon does comedy from a left wing,

Jon is a liberal so naturally he finds conservatives funny.
You laugh at what you think is funny.
Comedy isn’t fair and balanced. That’s called forced comedy and it’s rarely funny.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
And it won’t because the next President will be a Republican who repeals it.

There not going to repeal it. Its just like Abortion they will never repeal it. That would be suicide for them and they know it. They talk the talk but they can’t walk the walk.

welcome to our website:

=== http://globalsell.org/ ===-

shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.
if you like to order anything you like.
More details,
please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity;
Service is our Lift.
enjoy yourself.
thank you!!

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Do you realize how stupid you sound? Beck CRUSHED even the primetime lineups of the non-competition.

His flameout had more to do with advertising revenue (or lack thereof) than with viewership. (Droolership?)

Do you realize how stupid you sound? If you can’t do any better than that, you should rethink your nickname. Perhaps “Mild Annoyance to Liberals”?

Yoda002 said:
There not going to repeal it. Its just like Abortion they will never repeal it. That would be suicide for them and they know it. They talk the talk but they can’t walk the walk.

Why would it be suicide when a majority of American’s do NOT want it? Nice try though.

The blind leading the blind.. Pat each other on the back and say how great you are to each other..

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Maybe you haven’t heard, but Ozero is losing to a non-specific Republican at this point. You’re delusional.

Losing what, exactly? Wakey-wakey, dummy–it’s only 2011.

Pablo said:
Wrong again. I know that was the lie you were told, but it is a lie and they damned well knew it.

Again, why aren’t all these uninsured people signing up for the state pools? There should be millions of people where we’ve got a grand total of 18K.

Do you suppose the government plan will start filling up when 30% of employers drop coverage? Is that you thought would happen if we passed this?

The full bill hasn’t gone into effect yet. It was to give insurance companies time to put this pools into place.

Yoda002 said:
Again, you miss the argument it isn’t going to ruin the 85% that have health insurance it will let others get health care. I would say that its more like 80%- 20%. But the 80% are paying for the other 20% and the government being uninsured.

The full plan hasn’t gone into effect yet. Medicare started this way too.

Pollyanna, go ahead and load up another bowl.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Maybe you haven’t heard, but Ozero is losing to a non-specific Republican at this point.

lol…all republicans are non-specific.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Why would it be suicide when a majority of American’s do NOT want it? Nice try though.

You asked them if they want to go back to pre-existing condition and higher rates and most Americans don’t want that to happen.

Rates aren’t declining moron.

BFD said:
lol…all republicans are non-specific.

In other words, people couldn’t care less who is elected as long as it ain’t OZero.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Rates aren’t declining moron.

Under Republic Party rule, infant mortality rates wouldn’t be declining either.

Yoda002 said:
The full bill hasn’t gone into effect yet. It was to give insurance companies time to put this pools into place.

Don’t you mean it’s giving all of Ozero’s buddies time to get their waivers? If Obamacare is SO great, why do all his buddies want to be exempt from it? Face it, it has no support and people do NOT want it. The more they learn about it, the less the like it.

david r said:
How the hell does one “prove by stating” something?

You’ve gotta have faith.

BFD said:
Jon is a liberal so naturally he finds conservatives funny.You laugh at what you think is funny.Comedy isn’t fair and balanced. That’s called forced comedy and it’s rarely funny.

I laugh at what I find funny. I am not a fascist like you might be who laughs at ‘the other side’ regardless of it the joke was funny, or has any merit whatsoever. The humor you are into is just partisan pandering to fascist tendencies. It doesn’t have to be funny to give the desired audience a hard on. Real comedy for me thank you very much.

AmericaSucks said:
Under Republic Party rule, infant mortality rates wouldn’t be declining either.

Hey, more to Cuba if you hate it here so much. I have a feeling you’d love it there.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Rates aren’t declining moron.

The full bill isn’t in effect yet. Once you get competition it should slow the rise in rates, but not as much as if there was a public option in place.

Yoda002 said:
The full bill hasn’t gone into effect yet. It was to give insurance companies time to put this pools into place.

The pools are up and running. They’re not drawing customers. Why?

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Don’t you mean it’s giving all of Ozero’s buddies time to get their waivers? If Obamacare is SO great, why do all his buddies want to be exempt from it? Face it, it has no support and people do NOT want it. The more they learn about it, the less the like it.

I’m not sure who Ozero is or who is buddies are?

AmericaSucks said:
Yet you care about what anonymous lefties on an Internet site have to say about an unimportant network?

you betcha. I taught my kids not to lie also. Seemed to work for me and them. You flunked.

Pablo said:
Wrong again. I know that was the lie you were told, but it is a lie and they damned well knew it.

Again, why aren’t all these uninsured people signing up for the state pools? There should be millions of people where we’ve got a grand total of 18K.

Do you suppose the government plan will start filling up when 30% of employers drop coverage? Is that you thought would happen if we passed this?

Pablo, I’m about ready to propose that you be Supreme Military Dictator.

Yoda002 said:
The full bill isn’t in effect yet. Once you get competition it should slow the rise in rates, but not as much as if there was a public option in place.

We already had competition. The only barrier to competition wasn’t addressed in the bill, which is interstate insurance. We still don’t have that, even though Republicans wanted it.

Where are we getting an increase in competition with this bill? How?

The Voice of Reason said:
I laugh at what I find funny.

We are not talking about laughing, brainiac, we are talking about WRITING jokes.

I guarantee that if you were assigned to write political jokes you would come up with more liberal jokes than conservative jokes because you take your beliefs pretty seriously and it’s hard to write serious jokes.
That’s human nature.

Take for instance you calling me a fascist. That was pretty funny.

david r said:
Pablo, I’m about ready to propose that you be Supreme Military Dictator.

Thank you, but I’d be duty bound to shoot myself if that happened. :)

AmericaSucks said:
His flameout had more to do with advertising revenue (or lack thereof) than with viewership. (Droolership?)

Do you realize how stupid you sound? If you can’t do any better than that, you should rethink your nickname. Perhaps “Mild Annoyance to Liberals”?

I’m sure you are a disgrace to both the left and right with your upside down flag. Who exactly are you representing, Van Jones?

ImNotBlue said:
And at what point does a satirist become a serious commentator? I don’t see many other comedians interviewing Presidents, and heads of states on their programs.

Obviously because of his show, it’s to his benefit to get real political players on the show, as well as authors and people promoting movies etc. Satire can make insightful comments on politics and other things. It’;s the nature of that art form, that branch of comedy. It’s like Bill Cosby getting laughs because we identify with the element of truth in his jokes. Jon is good at what he does because he wants the truth element to be there so the jokes work. People ap[appreciate what he does because he calls bullshit on the bullshit that occurs, by our elected officials and by the media. In several interviews he’s noted that actual reporters keep telling him they wish they could say what he says. They can’t say ” That’s a load of crap” but Jon can.

Again, just because it’s a “humor” book, or he’s a comedian, it doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be held to any kind of standard.

Have you read either one? I haven’t but I have a copy of Earth handy and was planning on checking it out. What kind of standard do you propose for satire. I think Jon’s complaint is that people who don’t seem to get satire try to impose journalistic standards on him. That’s not his job description, and often it is the job description of his critics. The problem is, IMO, he’s doing his job far more correctly than they are doing theirs. Him pointing out that they aren’t doing theirs pisses them off. That doesn’t make it less true.

I disagree. At the point when poll after poll lists you as a respected “journalist,” it’s time to accept that a wide segment of the population isn’t getting the joke.

Maybe the professional NEWS organizations should be asking why the comic is more trusted than they are. Is it the comic’s failure or theirs?I believe Jon spoke to that in the interview. You seem to be implying that Jon ought to alter his job because the public, in longing for truth, trusts the comic more than so called journalists. I think that’s ass backwards and what Jon was saying. We ought to demand that the NEWS do the job that fits it’s job description and allow the political satirist to do his.

Let us also not forget he (as well as Colbert) has won the Peabody award. Does that not strike you as odd? A journalism award going to a supposed comedian on a “fake news show.” That just goes to show how the journalism establishment views his program.

The Peabody is not just for journalism. JS won his award for comedy. You’re mistaken on this point.

ImNotBlue said:
His status as a comedian, and his presence on Comedy Central, does not mean that he is without standard or complaint.

But the standard or complaint has to be about his specific job rather than a job description that doesn’t apply to him. That’s what his critics just can’t seem to understand. His personal opinion about things is another matter.

Yoda002 said:
There not going to repeal it. Its just like Abortion they will never repeal it.

They never legalized abortion. How could they repeal it?

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Hey, more to Cuba if you hate it here so much. I have a feeling you’d love it there.

Heard that one already. But nah, no reason–Cuba’s only about half a dead baby better than the good ol’ USA.

Dead babies. Has a rice ring to it.

The Voice of Reason said:
I am not a fascist like you might be who laughs at ‘the other side’ regardless of it the joke was funny

And yeah, liberals love to laugh at themselves. They don’t pull an Obama impersonator off their stage once he starts making jokes against them like you tealiban do.

Pablo said:
Thank you, but I’d be duty bound to shoot myself if that happened. :)

And ruin it for those who volunteered for the firing squad? That’s pretty selfish. ;-}

ImNotBlue said:
It’s been linked to already. But more importantly, if you read the methodology of the study, you’ll see why it’s a joke.

I saw it earlier in the thread and will watch it tomorrow. All polls are suspect but I believe there’s been more than one on that subject.

The Lantern of Truth said:
A great win for a great kid .

Ah that crazy Irishman. Will he be the next Tiger, sans the scandal?

seek said:
I’m sure you are a disgrace to both the left and right with your upside down flag. Who exactly are you representing, Van Jones?

I’m representing a nation in distress, you ignoramus.

Pablo said:
The pools are up and running. They’re not drawing customers. Why?

Because it hasn’t gone into effect yet.

CosmosDan said:
But the standard or complaint has to be about his specific job rather than a job description that doesn’t apply to him. That’s what his critics just can’t seem to understand. His personal opinion about things is another matter.

What Stewart is doing is more than his “job description”, and he knows it.

Republicans finally had a funny comedian and they yanked him off stage.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/obama-impersonator-tells-racial-jokes-at-gop-conference-but-yanked-for-mocking-republicans/

It’s hard to laugh when you have a stick up your ass.

Pablo said:
They never legalized abortion. How could they repeal it?

They could of overturned it if they wanted to by passing a bill.

Yoda002 said:
Because it hasn’t gone into effect yet.

That part of it has. The pools are running and they have been for months. This is the awesome coverage of the uninsured we were all breathlessly anticipating. The uninsured don’t seem to care.

Are you talking about how the mandate isn’t in effect yet? Maybe people aren’t signing up because we haven’t forced them to yet? Is that what you mean?

The Voice of Reason said:
I remember Jon taking a shot at ORielly that he didn’t like to watch msnbc; could anyone imagine him saying that to a msnbc host?

He watches the networks all the time as part of his job. He’s obviously thinks they are not doing a very good job, in general. I doubt he watches much just for fun or information.

I bet half the Fox viewers denying the results of that study from Univ. of Maryland are all ones who answered the questions..

CosmosDan said:
And ruin it for those who volunteered for the firing squad? That’s pretty selfish. ;-}

Well, no, because I’d be in charge of the firing squad if I were Supreme Military Dictator. That’s sorta how that whole thing works. But I’m an American and that’s not how we roll. Yet.

kit9 said:
It isn’t uncharacteristic at all for Stewart to get angry. He does it whenever he is actually challenged. He is VERY thin skinned.

You mean like “Palin” thin skinned? Oh wait, Stewart actually appeared on Fox, Sarah ONLY appears on Fox. So Stewart probably isn’t probably that thin skinned.

Pablo said:
Well, no, because I’d be in charge of the firing squad if I were Supreme Military Dictator. That’s sorta how that whole thing works. But I’m an American and that’s not how we roll. Yet.

Cheney better get moving, then. He’s running low on time.

CosmosDan said:
I saw it earlier in the thread and will watch it tomorrow. All polls are suspect but I believe there’s been more than one on that subject.

id
There are and all of the studies showed almost the exact same results…just the Fox viewers have a hard time believing good entertainment when they see it.

I really enjoyed the Stewart/Wallace interview. It’s hard to believe that Wallace is Mike Wallace’s son. Like his father he’s a very skilled ‘journalist’, and he’s also Aile’s #1 figleaf. While I don’t feel sorry for the willful ignorance of rightwingers, it is kind of sad to see them in a steady downward trajectory. Obamacare is not going away nor is it going to be repealed. A lot more people are beginning to understand why we’re going to eventually get Medicaire for all. It was the same story with Social Security and Bank Reform in the 1930′s.The rightwing was vehemently against it. It was socialism, communism, fascism, whatever, and Social Security turns out to be one of the great gifts from a humane government, and the bank reform from the 1930′s that allowed us 40 years of great prosperity was dismantled by Bush and Clinton right before our most recent crash. If we can get our priorities straightened out and stop sucking up to the rich and powerful, we can get our economy going and afford to have the best human and social services in the world, or, at least as good as Germany, France, Canada or Scandinavia.
Also, many years from now they will play clips from Stewart and Colbert in order to find out what was really going on behind much of the phony news we get on television.

Pablo said:
What Stewart is doing is more than his “job description”, and he knows it.

I have no idea what you think that demonstrates. I give Jon credit for doing his job and making jokes about an old friend, and even including his feelings of being torn as part of the human and humorist context. Before Weiner confessed he said point blank on the DS,” if you lied and have been doing this you need to go.” but just tell the truth.

Pablo said:
Well, no, because I’d be in charge of the firing squad if I were Supreme Military Dictator. That’s sorta how that whole thing works. But I’m an American and that’s not how we roll. Yet.

Well fine, but still, if you shot yourself rather than let us volunteers shoot you that’s still pretty selfish.

Just imagine how your amazing legend would live on if you gave the commands “Ready Aim Fire” standing in front of your own firing squad. Pretty impressive right?

450 comments. Shows how much we like Jon.

mediadoubt said:
I’m sure Jon is all broken up that you’ve decided to remain misinformed.

id

Jon Stewart definately struck a nerve with all the baggers and plutos who believe Fox. Funny thing is, is that he said it right on Fox’s channel and Wallace didn’t deny it either…that’s one for the archives. The only comedian better than Stewart is Bill Maher.

CosmosDan said:
Maybe the professional NEWS organizations should be asking why the comic is more trusted than they are. Is it the comic’s failure or theirs?

I’m going to skip to this point, because this is where I think it gets interesting.

I don’t think it’s the failure of either. It’s certainly not Jon’s fault that people like his show. But it’s also not the news network’s fault that their content is more dry than the “Daily Show.” Jon is “trust” because he makes people laugh, and in general people seem to like him. But “trust” and “accurate” are not necessarily one in the same.

I believe Jon spoke to that in the interview. You seem to be implying that Jon ought to alter his job because the public, in longing for truth, trusts the comic more than so called journalists. I think that’s ass backwards and what Jon was saying.

When a comedian reaches the level of Jon Stewart, and it become apparent that people are depending on him for news, and his program startles the line between satire and hard news (how many times have you seen him do a very dry interview that wasn’t intended to be funny, but was actually a real news interview… I’ve seen it a number of times), he must make an adjustment. I’m not suggesting that he go all hard news, or all comedy… but that he make it more apparent to his audience what he’s intentions are, or do a better job of playing things down the middle.

We ought to demand that the NEWS do the job that fits it’s job description and allow the political satirist to do his.

And for the most part, they do… don’t they? But when the satirist starts crossing over into the “news” portion, he should be called on it, and own up to it.

The Peabody is not just for journalism. JS won his award for comedy. You’re mistaken on this point.

You may be right, I’m not sure.

But the standard or complaint has to be about his specific job rather than a job description that doesn’t apply to him. That’s what his critics just can’t seem to understand. His personal opinion about things is another matter.

I still think that as a result of the job Stewart has done, and the popularity and importance his show has, he has a responsibility to his audience to do a better job of informing, not propagandizing… and playing things a little more down the middle, or at least making it clear that his program is not news, and should be taken as a joke.

liberals just ignore the lying part, yeah we lie but its ok because of fox lol

ganymede said:
I really enjoyed the Stewart/Wallace interview. It’s hard to believe that Wallace is Mike Wallace’s son. Like his father he’s a very skilled ‘journalist’, and he’s also Aile’s #1 figleaf. While I don’t feel sorry for the willful ignorance of rightwingers, it is kind of sad to see them in a steady downward trajectory. Obamacare is not going away nor is it going to be repealed. A lot more people are beginning to understand why we’re going to eventually get Medicaire for all. It was the same story with Social Security and Bank Reform in the 1930’s.The rightwing was vehemently against it. It was socialism, communism, fascism, whatever, and Social Security turns out to be one of the great gifts from a humane government, and the bank reform from the 1930’s that allowed us 40 years of great prosperity was dismantled by Bush and Clinton right before our most recent crash. If we can get our priorities straightened out and stop sucking up to the rich and powerful, we can get our economy going and afford to have the best human and social services in the world, or, at least as good as Germany, France, Canada or Scandinavia.Also, many years from now they will play clips from Stewart and Colbert in order to find out what was really going on behind much of the phony news we get on television.

id
Couldn’t have been said better my friend.

Pablo said:
That part of it has. The pools are running and they have been for months. This is the awesome coverage of the uninsured we were all breathlessly anticipating. The uninsured don’t seem to care.

Are you talking about how the mandate isn’t in effect yet? Maybe people aren’t signing up because we haven’t forced them to yet? Is that what you mean?

The low income won’t be able to receive tax credits until 2014.

seek said:
I’m sure you are a disgrace to both the left and right with your upside down flag. Who exactly are you representing, Van Jones?

Well I haven’t heard anyone on the left call him out. Anyone, Bueller?

CosmosDan said:

The comment by ganymede (and approval by glenn113) illustrate the point I’ve been making about Stewart. They apparently see Stewart as a source of legitimate news. That’s a problem. And as the guy in front of the camera, I believe he has a responsibility to address that.

we lie but it is for the greater good, and people defend this

glenn113 said:
id
There are and all of the studies showed almost the exact same results…just the Fox viewers have a hard time believing good entertainment when they see it.

Yup. According to this article referencing the exchange between Wallace and Stewart there are 4 mentioned that all show the same thing. So one video challenging the University of Maryland study may not be enough to qualify as debunked.

I was wondering why Stewart was so angry from the get go. In a “discussion” anger indicates that you are not comfortable with your position and feel that anger will help you cover your discomfort. It usually indicates that you are losing. Strange, very strange.

Pablo said:
The study is absolutely shredded right here, in great detail. If you disagree with that, argue with it. Tell us where Lee Doren has gotten it wrong.

id
Five (5) different studies by five different polling organisations all came up with very close to the same results. And all were done in different years. So your claim that the study was fixed doesn’t hold water. If it was just one I’d say you might have something. But 5 independent organisations come up with the same results.. That’s science my friend. Just take your lumps. That’s all you can do…don’t worry, it should blow over in a few weeks.

CosmosDan said:
Yup. According to this article referencing the exchange between Wallace and Stewart there are 4 mentioned that all show the same thing. So one video challenging the University of Maryland study may not be enough to qualify as debunked.

what four are you referring to?

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
You obviously didn’t listen to the clip because he most certainly did.

What I heard him say in listening to the unedited clip was that there’s a difference between some bias, and being an activist. He explicitly said he that since people in the industry tended to be more liberal there probably was bias and that he didn’t claim there wasn’t any bias, just that there wasn’t an equivalency between the activism of Fox , and the other networks. If you want to give me a time point in the video to listen to , I’ll check it out but I maintain that your assertion is dead wrong.

seek said:
I was wondering why Stewart was so angry from the get go. In a “discussion” anger indicates that you are not comfortable with your position and feel that anger will help you cover your discomfort. It usually indicates that you are losing. Strange, very strange.

He wasn’t angry at all.

Cosmo, Chris said to him, “so you think FOX is biased, do you think that ABC, CBS, NBC, WA Post, NYT are also biased” and he said “NO I DO NOT”.

seek said:
what four are you referring to?

My apologies, I posted without including the link
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/the_most_consistently_misinfor030360.php

The University of Maryland one. Two different ones by Pew and an NBC wall Street Journal one.

Admittedly, Polls are flawed by nature but Jon’s statement to Wallace was accurate. Do we have one poll showing otherwise?

Pablo said:
You’ve gotta have faith.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9214137110844447824#

Wow. 468 posts.

I don’t suppose anyone’s already made the point that Stewart is actually a progressive comedian more than he is a comedian with progressive leanings and not exactly the most unbiased person to offer a critique on what every poll indicates is the most balanced news outlet?

matter of fact here is the PDF file on the study which has every question asked with every stat. So there is not one thing misleading in the pole.. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/dec10/Misinformation_Dec10_rpt.pdf

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Cosmo, Chris said to him, “so you think FOX is biased, do you think that ABC, CBS, NBC, WA Post, NYT are also biased” and he said “NO I DO NOT”.

I’ll watch it again. What I watched seemed to be that he meant they were not agenda driven activist as he sees Fox. Their so called bias is more an indication of their desire for ratings using sensationalism , rather than working a specific agenda. You have to take his comment in the context of the entire interview rather than lift out one sentence.
That’s why he used Weinergate as an example. If they were liberal agenda driven why not limit the coverage of Weiner. Instead they led with it day after day.

CosmosDan said:
My apologies, I posted without including the linkhttp://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/the_most_consistently_misinfor030360.php The University of Maryland one. Two different ones by Pew and an NBC wall Street Journal one. Admittedly, Polls are flawed by nature but Jon’s statement to Wallace was accurate. Do we have one poll showing otherwise?

id

nada… check out the exact pdf file . Every question and anwer is documented. There is not one thing flawed about it if you read it…. ( I wonder if Hannity will mention this on his propoganda show tomorrow night, haha)

Paleoconservatarian said:
Wow. 468 posts.

I don’t suppose anyone’s already made the point that Stewart is actually a progressive comedian more than he is a comedian with progressive leanings and not exactly the most unbiased person to offer a critique on what every poll indicates is the most balanced news outlet?

Is it a matter of opinion as to what the polls indicate. I know polls on complex subjects can be interpreted but is anyone interpreting the polls differently?

glenn113 said:
id

nada… check out the exact pdf file . Every question and anwer is documented. There is not one thing flawed about it if you read it…. ( I wonder if Hannity will mention this on his propoganda show tomorrow night, haha)

All polls are flawed, period. There are so many variables concerned group asked to how the question is phrased that there is room for doubt. That said, repeated polls indicating a similar outcome can give a somewhat reliable overview. Jon said all the polls indicated Fox viewers were the most misinformed. That seems to be factual, even if you disagree with the polls. One video hardly debunks all polls. Sara posted several links that I’ll check out tomorrow.

CosmosDan said:
Jon said all the polls indicated Fox viewers were the most misinformed. That seems to be factual, even if you disagree with the polls.

What polls? Where?

Fox viewers are more misinformed on good thing about Democrats and their initiatives, while msnbc viewers are misinformed on the negatives, and the republicans. I see objectivity and thought isn’t a strong suit for many. Its just common sense that one side would be less informed about arguably good things included in a proposal by the other. It comes down to what are the questions being asked. If they asked about the Ryan plan or the Tucson shooting; msnbc viewers would be the most uninformed of them all. Asking about the merit in something from one side that the pollsters like; is bias on the part of the people doing the poll. Thoughtless fools will site it regardless.

Logic and objectivity ftw!

Yoda002 said:
He wasn’t angry at all.

At the beginning he was – towards the end of the interview (which I found the most interesting) he wasn’t so much.
Look at the headline here – I’m not the only one who felt the “anger”.

Did you catch the end. Stewart basically said that yes, the republicans have been maligned by the left.
Hmmm that was enlightening to hear.

CosmosDan said:
Is it a matter of opinion as to what the polls indicate. I know polls on complex subjects can be interpreted but is anyone interpreting the polls differently?

I actually misstated what I was trying to get at in a rush to post. The bit about ‘most balanced’ was based on several studies on the breakdown of positive/negative stories from various news outlets. Fox also wins polls indicating trustworthiness, but wasn’t to my point.

Azarkhan said:
Please moron. Everybody knows that is a lie.

See this is what “Brain washing”, by Conservatives has done. This idiot can not accept anything that countermands the Conservative Propaganda machine. Conservatives are very simple minded individuals. Everything is “Black and “White” to them They cannot grasp the complexities of humans. It is inconceivable, to them, that “Liberals” could share even one iota of their ideas, on anything. This is why they are so baffled when a Democratic President, in essence, adopts a basically Conservative approach to Healthcare. Just 20 years ago the Conservatives were arguing for basically, “Obamneycare”. But as soon as a Democrat proposed the same idea, mass confusion set in. The Conservatives reacted as they always do when a Liberal puts forth a plan, they denounced it. Even though they had originally proposed it. If you want to confuse Conservatives, agree with them. Look at the most obvious example of a confused Conservative there is, Newt Gingrich. Newt has no opinion on any issues until he has seen what the President has said, that day. And his opinion one day will not necessarily be his opinion the next day. Poor Newt has attempted to speak his own mind, much to the dismay of Conservatives everywhere. He tried to say Paul Ryan’s budget proposal was unworkable and radical. But the Conservatives went into full “major damage control” mode. And the next day Newt had to retract everything he said the previous day. Newt was forced to call himself a liar. What happened? When he said he BELIEVED radical social engineering from the “Right” and the “Left” was wrong. Was he lying? Why do you think the Conservatives hit the Weiner scandal so hard. They wanted to avoid answering for Newt everyday. The Weiner scandal was a Godsend for them. Fellow Liberals go easy on our Conservative brethren, they are easily confused if you express ideas and beliefs similar to theirs.

The Voice of Reason said:
Logic and objectivity ftw!

Show me people here that defend MSNBC as their home team and their main source of news.

Look at the people defending FoxNews, it’s pathetic how these people define themselves by a connection to a teevee channel on cable.

Bruce Kennedy said:
See this is what “Brain washing”, by Conservatives has done. This idiot can not accept anything that countermands the Conservative Propaganda machine. Conservatives are very simple minded individuals. Everything is “Black and “White” to them They cannot grasp the complexities of humans. It is inconceivable, to them, that “Liberals” could share even one iota of their ideas, on anything. This is why they are so baffled when a Democratic President, in essence, adopts a basically Conservative approach to Healthcare. Just 20 years ago the Conservatives were arguing for basically, “Obamneycare”. But as soon as a Democrat proposed the same idea, mass confusion set in. The Conservatives reacted as they always do when a Liberal puts forth a plan, they denounced it. Even though they had originally proposed it. If you want to confuse Conservatives, agree with them. Look at the most obvious example of a confused Conservative there is, Newt Gingrich. Newt has no opinion on any issues until he has seen what the President has said, that day. And his opinion one day will not necessarily be his opinion the next day. Poor Newt has attempted to speak his own mind, much to the dismay of Conservatives everywhere. He tried to say Paul Ryan’s budget proposal was unworkable and radical. But the Conservatives went into full “major damage control” mode. And the next day Newt had to retract everything he said the previous day. Newt was forced to call himself a liar. What happened? When he said he BELIEVED radical social engineering from the “Right” and the “Left” was wrong. Was he lying? Why do you think the Conservatives hit the Weiner scandal so hard. They wanted to avoid answering for Newt everyday. The Weiner scandal was a Godsend for them. Fellow Liberals go easy on our Conservative brethren, they are easily confused if you express ideas and beliefs similar to theirs.

If they gave out awards for smugness, you would get the gold medal.

seek said:
At the beginning he was – towards the end of the interview (which I found the most interesting) he wasn’t so much.Look at the headline here – I’m not the only one who felt the “anger”. Did you catch the end. Stewart basically said that yes, the republicans have been maligned by the left.Hmmm that was enlightening to hear.

and then went ont to say it doesn’t excuse their actions.

seek said:
At the beginning he was – towards the end of the interview (which I found the most interesting) he wasn’t so much.Look at the headline here – I’m not the only one who felt the “anger”. Did you catch the end. Stewart basically said that yes, the republicans have been maligned by the left.Hmmm that was enlightening to hear.

it’s also nothing new, he’s been calling for proper discourse for awhile. You just need to go to his interview on crossfire to find that out.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Cosmo, Chris said to him, “so you think FOX is biased, do you think that ABC, CBS, NBC, WA Post, NYT are also biased” and he said “NO I DO NOT”.

yeah, he said they were lazy and jumped on controversy.

Nacho said:
Show me people here that defend MSNBC as their home team and their main source of news. Look at the people defending FoxNews, it’s pathetic how these people define themselves by a connection to a teevee channel on cable.

um go to articles about msnbc and the sides are flipped.People on both sides love, and gravitate around what tells them what they want to hear… You know non of that is relevant to my post, or the point I was making…

I watch both msnbc and fox shows you how goofy I am:) I think all the posts on this topic shows how popular stewart is almost 500 post holy crap. Now I watched the interview and didn’t think it was a very good interview except for the fact the wallace got under stewarts skin which I have not seen often. I don’t think John had any patience with this guy today and there was some heavy editing done for sure. Watch how Bill O and Hannity cover this interview all week. Once again the media loves to cover themselves more than cover real news.

The Voice of Reason said:
um go to articles about msnbc and the sides are flipped.People on both sides love, and gravitate around what tells them what they want to hear…

Sure it’s relevant, you are trying to put MSNBC on the same level of FoxNews. I agree that they are the same, but the FoxNews viewrs don’t.

Show proof here that this issue is flipped, nobody even watches MSNBC, rite? how could they claim it as their main news source. You will not find people defending that channel like FoxNews groupies do.

MSNBC is a novelty, not a news source that is used to make political decisions.

insideguy said:
there was some heavy editing done for sure.

The unedited version is on this page, top clip.

Nationman said:
yeah, he said they were lazy and jumped on controversy.

Weasel words that permits him to avoid having to say the words “institutionally biased against conservative ideas and personalities.”

Bias is best shown in what isn’t covered, and what wasn’t touched upon in Stewart’s glib catchall was how his statement could be rectified with the reality that the Weiner story broke nationally only after several days of non-coverage. They didn’t jump all over it – Brian Williams was the last holdout, famously touching on a Christie story that broke negative while studiously ignoring the building Weiner story altogether.

ImNotBlue said:
I don’t think it’s the failure of either. It’s certainly not Jon’s fault that people like his show. But it’s also not the news network’s fault that their content is more dry than the “Daily Show.” Jon is “trust” because he makes people laugh, and in general people seem to like him. But “trust” and “accurate” are not necessarily one in the same

I don’t believe it’s because they are more dry. I think if news organizations spent their time and money on real investigative journalism, exposing for the public things that are relevant and affect their lives, they would at least have the respect for journalism and it’s role. The problem is IMO that the “news” has abandoned most of it’s responsibility to handle quick and sensational stories, that are superficial. I think the public can tell the difference between a laugh and truly relevant important information. The problem is they are not getting enough of the latter from the “news” so they prefer the laughs of a comedy news show that at least entertains along with it’s superficial coverage and gets to call bullshit on our elected officials and media failures.

ImNotBlue said:
When a comedian reaches the level of Jon Stewart, and it become apparent that people are depending on him for news, and his program startles the line between satire and hard news (how many times have you seen him do a very dry interview that wasn’t intended to be funny, but was actually a real news interview… I’ve seen it a number of times), he must make an adjustment.

I think there’s a real misunderstanding of how many people look to him for “hard news” I’m a big fan of the Daily show but I understand what it’s about and realize he is making broad comments about the larger picture. {that’s what satire does} I don’t rely on TV for hard news because I don;’t feel that’s a reliable source anymore, so I do some research online to learn more details. Getting a picture from several sources seems wiser to me.
Sure Jon does a number of fairly serious interviews. More than one conservative has said they appreciate his interviews simply because he gives them an opportunity to really voice their position. That’s something Jon has established with his audience. The political interviews are more serious. He’s not out to mock or deride his guests for ratings. I don’t think he owes anything to those members of his audience who may take him too seriously. He expressed that in the Wallace interview. His popularity, and his level of being a “trusted journalist” speaks more of the media’s failure than any problem on his part.

ImNotBlue said:
And for the most part, they do… don’t they?

No, which is the point Jon has been making for years now. That’s the problem. Because the news fails to do their job properly, Jon gets blamed because his show is popular. He remains true to his job description, and is somehow responsible for the failure of the other networks to do their job properly. It’s bogus.

Paleoconservatarian said:
They didn’t jump all over it – Brian Williams was the last holdout, famously touching on a Christie story that broke negative while studiously ignoring the building Weiner story altogether.

Didn’t he cover Palin’s Revere comments too?

Nacho said:
Sure it’s relevant, you are trying to put MSNBC on the same level of FoxNews. I agree that they are the same, but the FoxNews viewrs don’t. Show proof here that this issue is flipped, nobody even watches MSNBC, rite? how could they claim it as their main news source. You will not find people defending that channel like FoxNews groupies do. MSNBC is a novelty, not a news source that is used to make political decisions.

People praise it all the time and repeat their rhetoric just fine. Just because you make a claim that its ‘not the same’, it doesn’t make your assertion true. Fox and its pundits are brought up(or repeated) all the time to counter examples of absurd bias on msnbc. They are just not able to rhetoricize numbers like the other side is.

If you want to address my completely reasonable, and merit filled post, then go ahead. Enough of the red herrings, and backless claims.

Oh thanks calvin didn’t see that!

The look on Wallace’s face when Stewart announced he’d voted for George H.W. Bush was worth a thousand words. The smugness of Wallace’s question deserved the pie in the face it got from Stewart. That was definitely a case of the lawyer’s rule: never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to. Wallace got punk’d, and I am laughing my ass off.

insideguy said:
insideguy says:
June 20, 2011 at 12:21 am  (Quote)

Thank you for that thought.
I wish for the next week we could watch news reports about our three wars, jobs for the unemployed, plans for Medicare and Social Security from both sides, and no schlongs, boobs or tucheses in the wrong place.
And no “non”candidates. Just for one week.

ImNotBlue said:
The comment by ganymede (and approval by glenn113) illustrate the point I’ve been making about Stewart. They apparently see Stewart as a source of legitimate news. That’s a problem. And as the guy in front of the camera, I believe he has a responsibility to address that.

I’m not going through 400 posts find those you mention. Jon addresses that all the time by constantly reminding people he is a fake news show and that he shouldn’t be taken to seriously.

If some viewers are still taking him to seriously, and preferring the DS to the nightly news, that’s not his fault.

Paleoconservatarian said:
Fox also wins polls indicating trustworthiness, but wasn’t to my point.

If you trust them, and they happen to feed you false information, that’s a problem right?

WOW! This article might beat a Beck or Palin article…….Ha!

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Breitbart at 5 would be AWESOME!!!

OMFG!!! That WOULD be awesome!!! Hahahaha…..God, would the libturds get their panties in an uproar…HA!

Paul G said:
OMFG!!! That WOULD be awesome!!! Hahahaha…..God, would the libturds get their panties in an uproar…HA!

Would Breitbart even have sobered up by then, though?

The Lantern of Truth said:
I know you look like a serial killer .

And an onoxious idiot .

Spot-on insulting my avatar. A high-water mark for you! Keep up the good work.

The Voice of Reason said:
People praise it all the time and repeat their rhetoric just fine. Just because you make a claim that its ‘not the same’, it doesn’t make your assertion true. Fox and its pundits are brought up(or repeated) all the time to counter examples of absurd bias on msnbc.

Not even close, people don’t bring up MSNBC to defend it, People here bring up MSNBC to attempt to defend FoxNews.

I agree that they are the same, but the passion and faith that their individual viewers have are not. FoxNews is a religion, MSNBC is not.

puck30 said:
500?? As of this point I only see 381, outcome based education strikes again!

It’s over 500. Typical Republic Party liar.

Or, to be charitable: some here could see the “outcome” that eluded you.

The Lantern of Truth said:
367 in 10 hours .

You lying, stupid son of a bitch .

I see that counting on your fingers strategy isn’t working so well. I understand there’s a special on calculators at Target: 5 bucks for a pair.

You’re welcome, insideguy.

The Voice of Reason said:
Over the years the Daily Show has become more like media matters, and less like a true media critique show with impartial integrity. Its like if msnbc, and media matters are having a slow day whining about the other side, I can tune in to the Daily show and get my fringe partisan sheep fix there. He’s just become a dime in a dozen, and that is unfortunate.

In what universe has “The Daily Show” ever been a “media critque show?”

That’s very much like calling a tree a cow and complaining when it doesn’t give milk.

I’m guessing you’re phoning this in from Bizarro World, which — thankfully — only exists in rightwingers’ imaginations. Careful: sleepwalking can be dangerous.

ImNotBlue said:
And I’m sure you can support that statement, right?

Riiight. So the only reason we’re responding is because he’s “told the truth.” And by that logic, all the FNC haters, and the numerous websites devoted to hating and attacking FNC do so because FNC “tells the truth.” Somehow I doubt you’re trying to say that, but your theory does.

Well, theories are generally intended to explain general phenomena, while Stewart is very specific and unique.

You’re right that he’s a lightning rod for wingnut attention, though.

Nacho said:
Not even close, people don’t bring up MSNBC to defend it, People here bring up MSNBC to attempt to defend FoxNews. I agree that they are the same, but the passion and faith that their individual viewers have are not. FoxNews is a religion, MSNBC is not.

Not from what I’ve seen. Also the anti fox sentiment is far greater on the internet in general than it is for msnbc. From what I’ve seen anyway.

It was a bad idea to bring Stewart onto the show. Fox News is such an easy target, and there’s no one there that can match wits with Stewart. He just gave them another black eye that will forever be enshrined on Youtube, which will remind young people stay away from FNC if they want real news.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Do you realize how stupid you sound? Beck CRUSHED even the primetime lineups of the non-competition.

Yes, and his inner loon has since overwhelmed the entertainer he started out as, and his warehouse of red herrings has begun to stink, and he’s had to be shown the door.

Flaming out? Check.

I was speaking with a friend who’s a conservative about this today. What I was explaining to him is that the FOX news haters don’t hate fox news because they have a conservative bias, they hate them because they claim they don’t, and use the Fair and Balanced thing as their logo. As biased as MSNBC is they have never claimed they are fair and balanced or are not pushing and ideology. He seemed to understand that.

This whole “nobody on the left gives MSNBC any credibility” meme reminds me of this classic exchange:

LUKE RUSSERT: But you are not worried about losing your job?

CHARLES RANGEL: What are you talking about? Are you just trying to make copy? What job? The one I got?

RUSSERT: Yeah, these are potentially very serious violations.

RANGEL: How do you think I got my job? I was elected. How do you think I lose it?

RUSSERT: Well, there’s two ways, you can lose it if your colleagues voted you out of here because of ethics violations or if your constituents don’t support you.

RANGEL: What station are you from?

RUSSERT: NBC, MSNBC.

RANGEL: Well, you’re young. I guess you do need to make a name for yourself, but basically you know it’s a dumb question and I’m not going to answer it.

RUSSERT: How is it a dumb question?

RANGEL: It’s allegations made by some people.

RUSSERT: Sir, sir, you did not file taxes on your properties in the Dominican Republic allegedly. If that comes to be true, is that not a problem?

RANGEL: It doesn’t really sound like NBC asking these dumb questions. It just shows what has really happened to a channel that did have some respect.

Notice how Russert makes sure to add that he’s also with MSNBC, to show that he’s a friend. You need to see and hear that part, the video is here.

Ol’ Jon really has himself in a tizzy about not having the ratings of Fox News–that’s the FAIR & BALANCED news network with the TRUTH.

Nacho said:
Not even close, people don’t bring up MSNBC to defend it, People here bring up MSNBC to attempt to defend FoxNews.

I agree that they are the same, but the passion and faith that their individual viewers have are not. FoxNews is a religion, MSNBC is not.

That’s an interesting point….FNC is like a religion…..
Or more like a sect maybe?
Like people within the sect will believe anything that comes from the leader…very interesting point,and kinda very scary too I guess…remember the “celebrate the tea-party with Fox” thing? that was odd for what’s suppose to be a “fair and balance news organization” to say the least….

Bruce Kennedy said:
See this is what “Brain washing”, by Conservatives has done. This idiot can not accept anything that countermands the Conservative Propaganda machine. Conservatives are very simple minded individuals. Everything is “Black and “White” to them They cannot grasp the complexities of humans. It is inconceivable, to them, that “Liberals” could share even one iota of their ideas, on anything. This is why they are so baffled when a Democratic President, in essence, adopts a basically Conservative approach to Healthcare. Just 20 years ago the Conservatives were arguing for basically, “Obamneycare”. But as soon as a Democrat proposed the same idea, mass confusion set in. The Conservatives reacted as they always do when a Liberal puts forth a plan, they denounced it. Even though they had originally proposed it. If you want to confuse Conservatives, agree with them. Look at the most obvious example of a confused Conservative there is, Newt Gingrich. Newt has no opinion on any issues until he has seen what the President has said, that day. And his opinion one day will not necessarily be his opinion the next day. Poor Newt has attempted to speak his own mind, much to the dismay of Conservatives everywhere. He tried to say Paul Ryan’s budget proposal was unworkable and radical. But the Conservatives went into full “major damage control” mode. And the next day Newt had to retract everything he said the previous day. Newt was forced to call himself a liar. What happened? When he said he BELIEVED radical social engineering from the “Right” and the “Left” was wrong. Was he lying? Why do you think the Conservatives hit the Weiner scandal so hard. They wanted to avoid answering for Newt everyday. The Weiner scandal was a Godsend for them. Fellow Liberals go easy on our Conservative brethren, they are easily confused if you express ideas and beliefs similar to theirs.

The right did not hit the Weiner scandal hard – the left did. The healthcare plan as presented is a no go. Nobody can afford it – the government can’t afford it and the private citizen can’t afford it. Property values have taken a huge hit – in some markets over 50% drop. Unemployment is high, people are hurting and the health care as it stands cannot work. Not enough bodies – no body willing to cut the costs and the public not willing to suddenly have to have it rationed (like other countries have to do). So, it’s back to the drawing board. The novelty of healthcare for all would require a lot more hospitals, doctors, nurses and huge costs. With the system in place now, it couldn’t possibly work. People who have never had the luxury of a health care plan would suddenly deem a cold worthy of a visit. Superficial visits would clog the system and raise the costs further. Right now, in case of emergency the uninsured go to the hospital and the rest of the public pays. What are the millions of unemployed going to do? Who’s going to pay? Doctors and Hospitals don’t run on empty.

I don’t know the answer and I feel the pain of people who can’t afford it now. They are not going to afford it any more under Obamacare. The costs are going to skyrocket and who’s going to cover it? The costs right now are the highest in the free world. What’s going to cause them to drop? A company suddenly “forced” to cover a pre
existing condition is going to pass that cost on – otherwise they’d soon go out of business.

Allowing healthcare purchase across State lines might help to break up the monopoly in certain areas. It would force the markets that are out of line to bring their premiums down in order to match other areas, in order to keep business.

Tort reform would decrease the horrific load on some medical specialties that pay exorbitant fees for malpractice insurance and in some instances have to quit practicing or go into other less law suit happy specialties. That would not necessarily lower the cost of a Drs. visit but it might stop the rapid yearly increase.

It’s a problem that has no easy answers that wouldn’t greatly increase what the public who is paying now would be paying later. A lot of people have already seen their premiums take a huge leap with the companies getting prepared for having to cover people who they know will be costing them a lot more than they will ever pay into the system.

X-3 said:
Ol’ Jon really has himself in a tizzy about not having the ratings of Fox News–that’s the FAIR & BALANCED news network with the TRUTH.

hahahaha!!!!!!

Wow dude….that was hilarious really…don’t let reality hit you in the face on your way out…..

hehehe……

billyweeds said:
The look on Wallace’s face when Stewart announced he’d voted for George H.W. Bush was worth a thousand words. The smugness of Wallace’s question deserved the pie in the face it got from Stewart. That was definitely a case of the lawyer’s rule: never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to. Wallace got punk’d, and I am laughing my ass off.

I didn’t get that at all. They had a good conversation and basically Stewart did the two-step by saying the other networks were “lazy” and went for the “sensational” instead of admitting they have bias and display it with every story. Wallace got Stewart on Diane Sawyer and I’m sure she wasn’t happy to hear Stewart admit that yes – but even that he sidestepped as to their not sharing the entire story. That was b.s. They shared the entire story dishonestly. What was Sawyer going to say after she lied about the law in Arizona – oh yah, I lied, you have to be breaking the law for you to be stopped. No, so Stewart failed dreadfully there. He did a lot of double talk and Wallace was not letting him get away with it. In the end Stewart let his guard down and admitted that the left used “words” dishonestly against the right.

Calvin said:
This whole “nobody on the left gives MSNBC any credibility” meme reminds me of this classic exchange:

LUKE RUSSERT: But you are not worried about losing your job?

CHARLES RANGEL: What are you talking about? Are you just trying to make copy? What job? The one I got?

RUSSERT: Yeah, these are potentially very serious violations.

RANGEL: How do you think I got my job? I was elected. How do you think I lose it?

RUSSERT: Well, there’s two ways, you can lose it if your colleagues voted you out of here because of ethics violations or if your constituents don’t support you.

RANGEL: What station are you from?

RUSSERT: NBC, MSNBC.

RANGEL: Well, you’re young. I guess you do need to make a name for yourself, but basically you know it’s a dumb question and I’m not going to answer it.

RUSSERT: How is it a dumb question?

RANGEL: It’s allegations made by some people.

RUSSERT: Sir, sir, you did not file taxes on your properties in the Dominican Republic allegedly. If that comes to be true, is that not a problem?

RANGEL: It doesn’t really sound like NBC asking these dumb questions. It just shows what has really happened to a channel that did have some respect.

Notice how Russert makes sure to add that he’s also with MSNBC, to show that he’s a friend. You need to see and hear that part, the video is here.

So . . . you *like* MSNBC?

ImNotBlue said:
I’m going to skip to this point, because this is where I think it gets interesting.

I don’t think it’s the failure of either. It’s certainly not Jon’s fault that people like his show. But it’s also not the news network’s fault that their content is more dry than the “Daily Show.” Jon is “trust” because he makes people laugh, and in general people seem to like him. But “trust” and “accurate” are not necessarily one in the same.

When a comedian reaches the level of Jon Stewart, and it become apparent that people are depending on him for news, and his program startles the line between satire and hard news (how many times have you seen him do a very dry interview that wasn’t intended to be funny, but was actually a real news interview… I’ve seen it a number of times), he must make an adjustment. I’m not suggesting that he go all hard news, or all comedy… but that he make it more apparent to his audience what he’s intentions are, or do a better job of playing things down the middle.

And for the most part, they do… don’t they? But when the satirist starts crossing over into the “news” portion, he should be called on it, and own up to it.

You may be right, I’m not sure.

I still think that as a result of the job Stewart has done, and the popularity and importance his show has, he has a responsibility to his audience to do a better job of informing, not propagandizing… and playing things a little more down the middle, or at least making it clear that his program is not news, and should be taken as a joke.

Bottom line, you’re trying to impose on Stewart standards that make sense to you, but that obviously don’t to him — and he said why in the Wallace interview.

I’m not sure I agree with you why people like to get their news from Stewart (and I doubt that those who “get their news from Stewart” actually regard him as their sole source rather than as a validator and evaluator of what they learn through other means — but I haven’t seen any metrics that quantify that).

As for me, I appreciate Stewart’s take on the news primarily because he’s so absurd — and absurdity is (oddly enough) a very reassuring way to put the madness of real life into a palatable context. Yes, he sees much more absurdity on the right than on the left, but so does his audience.

I don’t think I’m alone in my appreciation.

Stewart is what he is, and being a satirist really, really *does* give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s the nature of the art. Right-leaning comics are welcome to do the same, but at present there aren’t any very good ones on the scene.

AmericaSucks said:
So . . . you *like* MSNBC?

No, I don’t know how you came to that conclusion. I like Tim Russert, or at least what I’ve seen of him, that questioning of Rangel being the only time I’ve seen him.

Paleoconservatarian said:
Wow. 468 posts.

I don’t suppose anyone’s already made the point that Stewart is actually a progressive comedian more than he is a comedian with progressive leanings and not exactly the most unbiased person to offer a critique on what every poll indicates is the most balanced news outlet?

“Every poll indicates is the most balanced news outlet?” Was it painful pulling that out of your ass? Try Preparation H.

Let his guard down seek? How about that he was openminded and admitted that wallace was right? See the difference is that wallace cant admit that his network is biased and showing Diane Sawyer do that story did show a liberal biased. But when stewart has a righty on his show like brett bair and shows clips about how fox distorts stories Brett cant even admit that they do have a bias. One thing I felt was funny about the interview was that Wallace shows pamela anderson and that comedian talking about tommy lee then talks about south park ect. I think his point was “look your show is surrounded by clownish dumb shows and so is mine”. Of course he didn’t say that but If I was stewart I would have jumped all over it.

Bruce Kennedy said:
See this is what “Brain washing”, by Conservatives has done. This idiot can not accept anything that countermands the Conservative Propaganda machine. Conservatives are very simple minded individuals. Everything is “Black and “White” to them They cannot grasp the complexities of humans. It is inconceivable, to them, that “Liberals” could share even one iota of their ideas, on anything. This is why they are so baffled when a Democratic President, in essence, adopts a basically Conservative approach to Healthcare. Just 20 years ago the Conservatives were arguing for basically, “Obamneycare”. But as soon as a Democrat proposed the same idea, mass confusion set in. The Conservatives reacted as they always do when a Liberal puts forth a plan, they denounced it. Even though they had originally proposed it. If you want to confuse Conservatives, agree with them. Look at the most obvious example of a confused Conservative there is, Newt Gingrich. Newt has no opinion on any issues until he has seen what the President has said, that day. And his opinion one day will not necessarily be his opinion the next day. Poor Newt has attempted to speak his own mind, much to the dismay of Conservatives everywhere. He tried to say Paul Ryan’s budget proposal was unworkable and radical. But the Conservatives went into full “major damage control” mode. And the next day Newt had to retract everything he said the previous day. Newt was forced to call himself a liar. What happened? When he said he BELIEVED radical social engineering from the “Right” and the “Left” was wrong. Was he lying? Why do you think the Conservatives hit the Weiner scandal so hard. They wanted to avoid answering for Newt everyday. The Weiner scandal was a Godsend for them. Fellow Liberals go easy on our Conservative brethren, they are easily confused if you express ideas and beliefs similar to theirs.

Can we declare a moratorium on “All Conservatives Are . . .” and “All Liberals Are . . .”?

It ain’t so and saying so just makes the poster look like a putz. Issues and nuance, folks, issues and nuance.

So insideguy, you don’t think that you don’t get to hear from both sides on Fox News? I think you do hear both sides on Fox. As a conservative, Fox sometimes ticks me off because of the things they don’t cover. I mean stuff that is based on facts, not crazy conspiratorial stuff. I believe Fox News is not the only news channel that claims fair and balanced coverage. I remember seeing a commercial where CNN said how FNC and MSNBC take sides, but CNN doesn’t.

Stewart is what he is, and being a satirist really, really *does* give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s the nature of the art. Right-leaning comics are welcome to do the same, but at present there aren’t any very good ones on the scene.

Which brings up and interesting point mediadoubt has there ever been any good right wing comics?

Calvin said:
No, I don’t know how you came to that conclusion. I like Tim Russert, or at least what I’ve seen of him, that questioning of Rangel being the only time I’ve seen him.

Well, I remember that interview quite well, and I recall thinking that young Luke was going after Rangel pretty hard. Just seems an odd example to use to put down MSNBC. Maybe I just didn’t understand your context.

mediadoubt said:
“Every poll indicates is the most balanced news outlet?” Was it painful pulling that out of your ass? Try Preparation H.

was that necessary? Did it further your agenda? Do you think we look at you with a lot more respect?
Sorry – it was childish and uncalled for.

You do hear both sides on Fox Calvin but stewatrs point is fox is a right wing talking point machine. Read the latest rolling stone article on FOX(of course a totally biased magazine) but it outlines how they start conservative talking points at the beginning of the day and work them through the whole news day into all of their interviews and hosts. With the exception of shep smith. Now that being said I will say that Bill O who drives me nuts on some days does a better job than most as far as debating and having fair and balanced interviews(even if he tends to take over the interviews). But at least he doesn’t sit there and agree with everything a conservative on his show says. Only one at MSNBC who can approach that is Mathews when he’s on his medication. When he’s off his meds he becomes a blathering fool for the left lol.

insideguy said:
Stewart is what he is, and being a satirist really, really *does* give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s the nature of the art. Right-leaning comics are welcome to do the same, but at present there aren’t any very good ones on the scene.

Which brings up and interesting point mediadoubt has there ever been any good right wing comics?

There’s very good ‘right’ leaning comics…you ever watch “Red Eye”?….outside of 3am you never see them.

AmericaSucks said:
Well, I remember that interview quite well, and I recall thinking that young Luke was going after Rangel pretty hard. Just seems an odd example to use to put down MSNBC. Maybe I just didn’t understand your context.

Whoops, I mixed them up, didn’t I? Anyways, I was showing how MSNBC does have credibility with the left. Luke Russert (got it right this time) makes sure to mention that he’s with MSNBC as well, to show that he has liberal credentials. Rangel then says it doesn’t sound like NBC asking these questions, which goes to show that the left does have an understanding with NBC/MSNBC.

insideguy said:
Stewart is what he is, and being a satirist really, really *does* give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s the nature of the art. Right-leaning comics are welcome to do the same, but at present there aren’t any very good ones on the scene.

Which brings up and interesting point mediadoubt has there ever been any good right wing comics?

A right wing “comic” who is brilliant is Miller. You have to be on your toes to catch all he’s saying and to understand him at times. I’m sure when he goes on the road with O’Reilly they will do well, although Miller is not a light weight and he takes his craft very seriously.

Calvin said:
Whoops, I mixed them up, didn’t I? Anyways, I was showing how MSNBC does have credibility with the left. Luke Russert (got it right this time) makes sure to mention that he’s with MSNBC as well, to show that he has liberal credentials. Rangel then says it doesn’t sound like NBC asking these questions, which goes to show that the left does have an understanding with NBC/MSNBC.

I don’t agree with your interpretation, but fair enough.

seek said:
A right wing “comic” who is brilliant is Miller. You have to be on your toes to catch all he’s saying and to understand him at times. I’m sure when he goes on the road with O’Reilly they will do well, although Miller is not a light weight and he takes his craft very seriously.

And he USED to be a ‘lefty”…

seek said:
A right wing “comic” who is brilliant is Miller. You have to be on your toes to catch all he’s saying and to understand him at times. I’m sure when he goes on the road with O’Reilly they will do well, although Miller is not a light weight and he takes his craft very seriously.

Miller is washed up. Don’t get me wrong–I LOVED his Weekend Update work. But the further right he went the less funny he got. Coincidence?

How about Nick DiPaolo? At least he’s doing fresh material these days…

Miller is ok I actually think he was funnier years ago, but I do kinda like him even though my wife hates him. But Miller is kind of like stewart in the fact that I don’t think either of them are blind followers of their respective parties.

And your point about CNN calvin I know you think they have a liberal bias and they probably do to some extent. But do you feel they are as biased as MSNBC or FOX?

Paleoconservatarian said:
Weasel words that permits him to avoid having to say the words “institutionally biased against conservative ideas and personalities.”

Bias is best shown in what isn’t covered, and what wasn’t touched upon in Stewart’s glib catchall was how his statement could be rectified with the reality that the Weiner story broke nationally only after several days of non-coverage. They didn’t jump all over it – Brian Williams was the last holdout, famously touching on a Christie story that broke negative while studiously ignoring the building Weiner story altogether.

bullshit, they barely covered the john ensign scandal and mark souder scandals. They were hesitant about weiner because it seemed to be just another politician in a sex scandal. Then they jumped on it as soon as they knew they could exploit it. The explanation jon gave holds.

insideguy said:
Miller is ok I actually think he was funnier years ago, but I do kinda like him even though my wife hates him. But Miller is kind of like stewart in the fact that I don’t think either of them are blind followers of their respective parties.

Agreed. I also think that Miller is a very educated man and his humour is over the heads of many who have not read or heard of what he is ridiculing or just talking about. Hell even O’Reilly has admitted a time or two that he had to look up what Miller was talking about. I enjoy him but must admit that many times I get more out of him when I’ve listened to the O’Reilly show twice in one night.

The truth about comics is that most of them are not the “happy” people we see and hear. They are usually intense and take their craft very seriously. I remember reading an article about David Feherty and a more troubled soul would be hard to find.

There’s very good ‘right’ leaning comics…you ever watch “Red Eye”?….outside of 3am you never see them.

Yea ive watched them mostly for whatever hot women they have in the leg chair:) I think the host leans right but im not sure about his goofy side kick lol. That show is ok but has a very strange vibe to it that i have never quite got. But thats just me. I think George Carlin was a genius and others don’t but thats what makes the world go round.

Paul G said:
And he USED to be a ‘lefty”…

he’s always been right wing…just with some socially libertarian views.

seek said:
The truth about comics is that most of them are not the “happy” people we see and hear. They are usually intense and take their craft very seriously. I remember reading an article about David Feherty and a more troubled soul would be hard to find.

You are aware that Feherty isn’t a comic, right? He was a pro golfer, is now a broadcaster & golf writer.

Goodnight all. For a change I truly enjoyed a lot of the posts this evening. Less knee jerk and more thoughtful.
Maybe all the goodies you got for Father’s Day put you all in a better mood.

AmericaSucks said:
You are aware that Feherty isn’t a comic, right? He was a pro golfer, is now a broadcaster & golf writer.

I’m well aware of David Feherty as to who and what he is, but thanks. He’s now going to have his own show on the Golf Channel. Read his “books” lol

Insideguy, I’ll look into what you’re talking about, but from what I’ve seen from all of the news outlets, FNC does a much better job at being fair and balanced. Hands down. It’s not even comparable to MSNBC. There are scattered showers of journalism here and there from liberal outlets, but it’s my opinion that Fox does a much better job at being journalistic. I’m not saying that Fox is perfect, though. I don’t know what Stewart’s beef is with Baier. Whenever Baier is mentioned in an article, like from ABC, or whatever, he’s most always described as a non partisan host. He’s the best guy on Fox, IMO. Cavuto does a good job. Van Sustren does a good job. I don’t think that Fox’s good reporters are limited to O’Reilly and Smith. I think the only people who are really promoting their “right wing agenda” are Hannity, that morning show trio, and Beck, though I think Beck really isn’t that partisan. But Beck and Hannity make it clear that they are conservatives, and Hannity usually has liberals on. Though I really hate it when Fox lets Hannity say “this is a Fox News Alert.” I know he’s not a journalist, and so should everybody else, but do you think that the commentator guy should be doing news alerts? Also, I really don’t care for the morning show. Or Hannity for that matter.

Anyways, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

insideguy said:
And your point about CNN calvin I know you think they have a liberal bias and they probably do to some extent. But do you feel they are as biased as MSNBC or FOX?

Yes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6xWGvdRQ9Q

Calvin said:
Insideguy, I’ll look into what you’re talking about, but from what I’ve seen from all of the news outlets, FNC does a much better job at being fair and balanced. Hands down. It’s not even comparable to MSNBC. There are scattered showers of journalism here and there from liberal outlets, but it’s my opinion that Fox does a much better job at being journalistic. I’m not saying that Fox is perfect, though. I don’t know what Stewart’s beef is with Baier. Whenever Baier is mentioned in an article, like from ABC, or whatever, he’s most always described as a non partisan host. He’s the best guy on Fox, IMO. Cavuto does a good job. Van Sustren does a good job. I don’t think that Fox’s good reporters are limited to O’Reilly and Smith. I think the only people who are really promoting their “right wing agenda” are Hannity, that morning show trio, and Beck, though I think Beck really isn’t that partisan. But Beck and Hannity make it clear that they are conservatives, and Hannity usually has liberals on. Though I really hate it when Fox lets Hannity say “this is a Fox News Alert.” I know he’s not a journalist, and so should everybody else, but do you think that the commentator guy should be doing news alerts? Also, I really don’t care for the morning show. Or Hannity for that matter.

Anyways, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.

I find it’s kind of hard to have any journalistic intergrity in politics when you have an online tea party event on your website and have a guy in charge who called the president a socialist.

The Voice of Reason said:
Not from what I’ve seen. Also the anti fox sentiment is far greater on the internet in general than it is for msnbc. From what I’ve seen anyway.

Once again, show proof on this website that people stand up for MSNBC. And I agree about MSNBC not having more anti sentiment because far fewer people take MSNBC seriously compared to FoxNews. They are both partisan jokes but mostly of for sure the most vocal, the FoxNews viewers take their propaganda more seriously.

Do you get it that the “Libs” don’t live and die by MSNBC but “right wingnut conservatives” do live and die by FoxNews?

Stewart had Baier on his show check it out. He complemented Baier on his journalism but showed many clips of Fox distorting things and some of them involved Brett. Sort of what Wallace tried to do with stewart during this interview. I think what Stewart wants whether its from msnbc fox cnn or whomever is true journalism. He doesn’t see that from any of the outlets and thats his main beef. He hits on FOX more because they are the most watched so they are an easier target for him. But to say that he is just a right wing basher is wrong. I mean the guy practically destroyed that Sanchez guy from CNNs career single handily. He ripped on that dude all the time and Sanchez went down in flames. He did a great Oberman impression on par with his Beck impression and Obermans response was that stewards criticism on him was correct. Ive seen him tear CNN apart in some of his shows as well as MSNBC. He does tear FOX apart more but from his point of view the are the most watched so they should be the most responsible.

Gotta go to bed. Night all.

AmericaSucks said:
Would Breitbart even have sobered up by then, though?

Sooo you love gays over ppl that MAYBE( I don’t know) that drink? ? ….very telling……Hmmmmm….Equal rights?
You libturds make me sick.

Does Breitbart drink alot? I don’t know but the man doesn’t look healthy to me.

ImNotBlue said:
Well, that’s not true. The media held off as long as they could on the story… it was only after Wiener started attacking the media for covering it, and his lies became more apparent that they “jumped” in. Compare that to how the NYTimes reported the McCain affair story… which no evidence, and was forced to retract it later. This is something that really bothers me about Stewart. He uses his “comedian” status as a defense, but recognizes that it’s simply not true. He SHOULD be seen as just a comedian, and treated as such… but he’s not. As because he’s not, and because he knows he’s not, he has a greater responsibility towards his audience. He calls himself a comedian as it suits him, but has no problem speaking out on political topics, interviewing political figures, and writing political books. He rather apparently wants to have it both ways. He wants to be a political player, but doesn’t want the seriousness or the responsibility that comes along with it. I find this to be the lest respectable thing about Stewart. He should make a decision to go one way or the other, and stop hiding behind his “comedian” status.

Completely agree, and your point about his wanting it both ways is genius, even showing by his own words how his position betrays his real feelings. And too bad Wallace couldn’t think fast enough to call him on it. It’s just like when Whoopie was saying on The View that no white man had to prove his birth certificate. Uh, yes m’am, there sure was…the other candidate, hello? McCain handled it right then and asked the Senate to certify his (and Obama could have joined him right then, and why didn’t the media push him to do it?). I was screaming at the tv that day alright. hehe

seek said:
The right did not hit the Weiner scandal hard – the left did. The healthcare plan as presented is a no go. Nobody can afford it – the government can’t afford it and the private citizen can’t afford it. Property values have taken a huge hit – in some markets over 50% drop. Unemployment is high, people are hurting and the health care as it stands cannot work. Not enough bodies – no body willing to cut the costs and the public not willing to suddenly have to have it rationed (like other countries have to do). So, it’s back to the drawing board. The novelty of healthcare for all would require a lot more hospitals, doctors, nurses and huge costs. With the system in place now, it couldn’t possibly work. People who have never had the luxury of a health care plan would suddenly deem a cold worthy of a visit. Superficial visits would clog the system and raise the costs further. Right now, in case of emergency the uninsured go to the hospital and the rest of the public pays. What are the millions of unemployed going to do? Who’s going to pay? Doctors and Hospitals don’t run on empty.

I don’t know the answer and I feel the pain of people who can’t afford it now. They are not going to afford it any more under Obamacare. The costs are going to skyrocket and who’s going to cover it? The costs right now are the highest in the free world. What’s going to cause them to drop? A company suddenly “forced” to cover a pre
existing condition is going to pass that cost on – otherwise they’d soon go out of business.

Allowing healthcare purchase across State lines might help to break up the monopoly in certain areas. It would force the markets that are out of line to bring their premiums down in order to match other areas, in order to keep business.

Tort reform would decrease the horrific load on some medical specialties that pay exorbitant fees for malpractice insurance and in some instances have to quit practicing or go into other less law suit happy specialties. That would not necessarily lower the cost of a Drs. visit but it might stop the rapid yearly increase.

It’s a problem that has no easy answers that wouldn’t greatly increase what the public who is paying now would be paying later. A lot of people have already seen their premiums take a huge leap with the companies getting prepared for having to cover people who they know will be costing them a lot more than they will ever pay into the system.

Seeing how your post had very little to do with my post I thought I would reciprocate. Seek you are a true Conservative, you offer your opinions as fact. When in reality you have no more insight to the success or failure of a government program than the average man on the street. Oh sure I’m sure you think you are making an educated guess and it is backed with all sorts of facts and numbers, but in reality experts who get paid to ascertain whether certain government programs will succeed or fail, have no idea what the outcome of those particular programs will be. Statements you make, in your post, are offered as fact, as if to sway the reader into believing you, above all, knows the outcome of each particular program you comment on. I know you believe in what you say, but considering your lack of credentials to comment, on any government programs, you’ll find that many may be too skeptical to just take your word for it. The key word is opinion. We all have them and we must all remember that is exactly what they are, opinions. It is my opinion if the economy were running at a five percent, annual growth rate, this economy could easily handle any overruns the current Healthcare program may encounter. Now where did I get that number, five percent? From Republican Presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty. That’s right he says if he is elected President, he will have the American economy running at a five percent annual growth rate. I don’t want to tell you how unrealistic that is. But like all good little citizens, if a Conservative says it, it must be true, so we should believe it.. Now we all have opinions and we can all believe in those opinions, but the intelligent people will leave room for the possibility that their opinion could be wrong. Many people had an opinion about Mr. Campings. And many believed in his phrophecy, that the world would end May 28, 2011. They were entitled to their opinions, but the intelligent ones went ahead an paid the water bill, anyways. Seek, one could only hope you are a person of importance within the structure of government. But it is clear from the nature of your posts, that is simply not the case.

Paul G said:
There’s very good ‘right’ leaning comics…you ever watch “Red Eye”?….outside of 3am you never see them.

This is a joke in itself, that anything on “Red Eye” is even remotely funny. There’s a reason this crap is on at 3am. They are hoping to catch some stoned cons with insomnia, which is the only chance they have of making anyone laugh.

mediadoubt said:
Can we declare a moratorium on “All Conservatives Are . . .” and “All Liberals Are . . .”?

It ain’t so and saying so just makes the poster look like a putz. Issues and nuance, folks, issues and nuance.

Actually you are correct, unfortunately I have not seen any of them disagree with each other on any subject. Now obviously I have not read every post on every site, and I am rather selective. But I’m sure that there must be some disagreement among Conservatives and Liberals, so you are right not “All”, I will try to use “Most” from now on. And not to worry I’ve been a putz all my life, so I’m simply living up to my billing.

insideguy said:
Stewart is what he is, and being a satirist really, really *does* give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. It’s the nature of the art. Right-leaning comics are welcome to do the same, but at present there aren’t any very good ones on the scene.

Which brings up and interesting point mediadoubt has there ever been any good right wing comics?

Perhaps. I can’t think of any off the top of my head though.

The closest thing I can think of is what I’d call the “redneck” comics (Jeff Foxworthy, et al), whose comedy comes from a kind of southern, good old boy point of view that one typically associates with conservatives — but their humor (and I’ve probably only watched a few hours of it in my life) doesn’t seem to be at all political.

seek said:
was that necessary? Did it further your agenda? Do you think we look at you with a lot more respect?
Sorry – it was childish and uncalled for.

Bald-faced nonsense and those who trot it out deserve to be scorned.

Paul G said:
There’s very good ‘right’ leaning comics…you ever watch “Red Eye”?….outside of 3am you never see them.

Seen it (about three times, plus miscellaneous clips). Mean, crude, unfunny.

seek said:
A right wing “comic” who is brilliant is Miller. You have to be on your toes to catch all he’s saying and to understand him at times. I’m sure when he goes on the road with O’Reilly they will do well, although Miller is not a light weight and he takes his craft very seriously.

Miller was funny-ish years ago when he wasn’t so political. Now . . . just bitter and sad. Weak material, labored, and he’s lost his timing (perhaps because his jokes are either ponderous or straight-up misfires).

Calvin said:
Yes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6xWGvdRQ9Q

Was that meant to show CNN’s liberal bias because their reporter inteviewed a guy who thought Lincoln saved the union — from taxes? Or that the producer of the longer youtube video thought the incredibly hostile lady who considers taxation to be robbery and that every elected official should be thrown out of office was unfairly *not* included on the broadcast?

What I saw was a bunch of angry and ill-informed protestors who couldn’t articulate sensibly what they were protesting. Is that what you wanted us to see?

I will give Chris Wallace his due on one argument he made.

Namely, the herpes commercial was a stretch and could be argued as inappropriate.

But Wallace’s other examples were weak IMO.
To wit:
Diane Sawyer, Herman Caine, Palin emails, Comedy Central Roast, MW’s claim that there are no no marching orders at FNC. I am not saying they were baseless … just that they are comparatively weak and better examples are out there.

The notion that FNC bias = ABC bias is ludicrous.

Finally, I don’t think too many FNC loyalists are able to put their blinders aside to recognize that Fox News has a
relentlessly activist agenda. So does MSNBC … why not admit it?

Seems like if Fox was that biased, they wouldn’t be inviting Stewart to appear so frequently :)

Cheers

Kent
http://københavnsrestauranter.dk/

Put on a tie, Stewart, you’re on a real network.

I think given their trade, comics tend to be more in tune with society and the way the majority thinks so they’re always liberal in many ways. If not outright liberal. Hell I’m a big fan of comedy and the closest thing I can think of as a “conservative comedian” is Adam Corolla. And he only has very general conservative opinions on a handful of subjects.

Remember, the majority do not vote. The majority that does trend older and tend to be of specific social classes. And they aren’t huge purveyors of comedy unless the troupe has “redneck” or some other banal term associated with it. And of course Jay Leno.

And the reason you don’t see many comedians on Fox isn’t due to the comics. Fox calculates what their viewers want to see and filters their guest through that spectrum. Even the most liberal of comedians would love to make guest spots on Fox as often as possible for the money and exposure, but Fox just isn’t actively seeking them. Even more conservative comedians might (probably would) slip in a joke or two that reflects badly on the Republican party and therefore Fox, so they won’t have them.

But don’t worry, you can always watch Dennis Miller on Fox now that he is no longer funny and rides that party line hard as hell.

AmericaSucks said:
Miller is washed up. Don’t get me wrong–I LOVED his Weekend Update work. But the further right he went the less funny he got. Coincidence?

How about Nick DiPaolo? At least he’s doing fresh material these days…

Miller hasn’t been funny since SNL. And even then he was known as a huge dickhead.

The Lantern of Truth said:
Put on a tie, Stewart, you’re on a real network.

What a moronic comment.

mediadoubt said:
Miller was funny-ish years ago when he wasn’t so political. Now . . . just bitter and sad. Weak material, labored, and he’s lost his timing (perhaps because his jokes are either ponderous or straight-up misfires).

Word to the mother ship.

Michael_T said:
I will give Chris Wallace his due on one argument he made.

Namely, the herpes commercial was a stretch and could be argued as inappropriate.

But Wallace’s other examples were weak IMO.
To wit:
Diane Sawyer, Herman Caine, Palin emails, Comedy Central Roast, MW’s claim that there are no no marching orders at FNC. I am not saying they were baseless … just that they are comparatively weak and better examples are out there.

The notion that FNC bias = ABC bias is ludicrous.

Finally, I don’t think too many FNC loyalists are able to put their blinders aside to recognize that Fox News has a
relentlessly activist agenda. So does MSNBC … why not admit it?

Agree with every syllable of this post.

billyweeds said:
Miller hasn’t been funny since SNL. And even then he was known as a huge dickhead.

Miller was great afterward during his HBO years, IMO. He was once a terrific satirist that made the funniest heady analogies when no one else appeared to be doing that.

I used to enjoy Miller as much as I did Carlin. Blasphemy, I know, I’ll do my Hail Marys later. But he was one funny conservative comedian. Now he is just a pundit. It’s really disappointing to me.

Well welcome Stewart, 6 months later.

Just about everything Stewart says is wrong but thats not surprising, as he admits he’s just a comedian. That Fox viewers are the most misinformed is just comical. How’s that poll work? Fox, while being quite annoying and not always right, is still by far the most fair and balanced. I cant see a segment without a lib screaming the lefts case so just how is Fox biased?

It’s simply and obviously not.

Thats why it’s thrown out there that Fox viewers are the most misinformed and of course the children run with it, because there is nothing else. It’s just like any republican candidate, they attack the individual. If an individual or a network has no credibility then of course it cant win a debate or be on the right sde of issue. It’s just liberalism 101, attack impugn demean and lie your way to the top or in charge. Pathetic.

CNN and MSNBC are simply hard to watch. If you can put them on at any moment of the day and NOT hear the bias then your just to busy being a proud lib thats deaf from cheering them on.

Stewart is just a lib himself so why we would care about his opinion that Fox is “relentlessly activist” just baffles me. If he wasnt, it wouldn’t be news that he voted for Bush in 88, it would be news that he voted for losers Gore Kerry and Obama! For further proof we can look at Stewarts assertion that Wallace is a “counter weight” to Hannity. Yes Hannity is a proud conservative that doesn’t hesitate to push a right wing agenda but he also stocks his show’s with libs and is always polite as can be.

This whole topic, that a liberal comdian has any credibilty on calling out a real news network is just absurd. As a fellow American he has his opinion, but we know how that goes.

billyweeds said:
Miller hasn’t been funny since SNL. And even then he was known as a huge dickhead.

billyweeds said:
What a moronic comment.

billyweeds said:
Word to the mother ship.

billyweeds said:
Agree with every syllable of this post.

Put your stupid crap together , jackass .

The Lantern of Truth said:
Put your stupid crap together , jackass .

Thank you for sharing.

Well DUH! There is a reason that Fox “News” viewers are misinformed: Fox is a propaganda channel! Nothing on that misinformation source proves that assertion better than the last 30 months of Glenn Beck. Forget the fact that Beck is a cult of personality for the time being, Glenn Beck’s is an ignorant genius of reactionary, yellow propaganda! That’s “great” for re-enforcing the visceral hatred many Fox viewers have toward the President, but it doesn’t explain reality accurately.

Someone commented on The Review why I felt Fox was lying, so I offered just a few examples of lies, falsehoods, distortions, etc. there have been documented by Media Matters for America. Now Mr. Beck has made them bad guys and undermined their credibility in his gullible viewer’s minds because they got some funding from liberal billionaire, George Soros. They do accurately show some of the many falsehoods put forth; that’s a fact, THE FACT, that re-enforces what Stewart is telling Wallace. None of Beck’s supporters care about this, of course, because they have been brainwashed to believe that Media Matters only “smears” Beck and others on Fox. That is just one small but effective example of Beck’s genius for reactionary propaganda.

Glenn Beck’s 30 months on Fox proves that Fox is willing to let someone come on their channel and misinform with propaganda instead of doing anything even close to news commentary.

There needs to be balance in the media and most of the media is quite liberal. Therefore, there is FOX News which provides a little balance by presenting the right wing view as its point of reference.

valkyrie101 said:
There needs to be balance in the media and most of the media is quite liberal. Therefore, there is FOX News which provides a little balance by presenting the right wing view as its point of reference.

VALKYRIE? Is that you?

GlennBeckReview said:
Well DUH! There is a reason that Fox “News” viewers are misinformed: Fox is a propaganda channel! Nothing on that misinformation source proves that assertion better than the last 30 months of Glenn Beck. Forget the fact that Beck is a cult of personality for the time being, Glenn Beck’s is an ignorant genius of reactionary, yellow propaganda! That’s “great” for re-enforcing the visceral hatred many Fox viewers have toward the President, but it doesn’t explain reality accurately. Someone commented on The Review why I felt Fox was lying, so I offered just a few examples of lies, falsehoods, distortions, etc. there have been documented by Media Matters for America. Now Mr. Beck has made them bad guys and undermined their credibility in his gullible viewer’s minds because they got some funding from liberal billionaire, George Soros. They do accurately show some of the many falsehoods put forth; that’s a fact, THE FACT, that re-enforces what Stewart is telling Wallace. None of Beck’s supporters care about this, of course, because they have been brainwashed to believe that Media Matters only “smears” Beck and others on Fox. That is just one small but effective example of Beck’s genius for reactionary propaganda. Glenn Beck’s 30 months on Fox proves that Fox is willing to let someone come on their channel and misinform with propaganda instead of doing anything even close to news commentary.

At the very least, if Fox viewers are misinformed because Fox is a propaganda channel, then CNN and MSNBC viewers must also be misinformed for the same reason. No?

valkyrie101 said:
There needs to be balance in the media and most of the media is quite liberal. Therefore, there is FOX News which provides a little balance by presenting the right wing view as its point of reference.

That’s the RATIONAL explanation, but then Obama, the Democratic Left – and THEIR MEDIA – wouldn’t be able to attempt their SMEAR & DISCREDIT campaign against FOX!

Do you rational Americans really want this country led by the likes of a house speaker who says we have to pass a multi-trillion dollar health bill FIRST, so we can see what’s in it!?

2012 – END THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION!

Michael_T said:
I . Finally, I don’t think too many FNC loyalists are able to put their blinders aside to recognize that Fox News has arelentlessly activist agenda. So does MSNBC … why not admit it?

the same reason MSNBC does not admit it, we have no political agenda

Steve_27 said:
valkyrie101 said:
There needs to be balance in the media and most of the media is quite liberal. Therefore, there is FOX News which provides a little balance by presenting the right wing view as its point of reference.

VALKYRIE? Is that you?

I think we can all agree with that. I question whether FOX “News” is really capable of providing the balance. It seem a bit amateurish to me, but balance is needed.

More primary complaint about FOX “News” is that it won’t admit that is provides rightist news. Now, Wallace did that to some extent yesterday, but the overall FOX “News” approach is that it provides some sort of objective news coverage. It doesn’t. It doesn’t even try. Why the pretense. Nothing wrong with news with an admitted rightist slant. Why be ashamed of that?

NORBIT Jr. said:
That’s the RATIONAL explanation, but then Obama, the Democratic Left – and THEIR MEDIA – wouldn’t be able to attempt their SMEAR & DISCREDIT campaign against FOX!

Do you rational Americans really want this country led by the likes of a house speaker who says we have to pass a multi-trillion dollar health bill FIRST, so we can see what’s in it!?

2012 – END THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION!

But, is it wrong to point out FOX “News” errors? The doctored photos O’Hannity used to inflate Tea Party size? The misinformation Il Douchey spread about the madrasas our President allegedly attended? The countless errors in the news crawls?

I have to hand it to Stewart. He seems to have really excited the easily excitable.

THE REAL RABID KOOK said:
I have to hand it to Stewart. He seems to have really excited the easily excitable.

Are you telling us you’re aroused this fine morning, Kook? TMI.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I have to hand it to Stewart. He seems to have really excited the easily excitable.

I see alot of people commenting on a highly viewed show, business as usual. I dont really feel any “excitement” about it.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I think we can all agree with that. I question whether FOX “News” is really capable of providing the balance. It seem a bit amateurish to me, but balance is needed.

More primary complaint about FOX “News” is that it won’t admit that is provides rightist news. Now, Wallace did that to some extent yesterday, but the overall FOX “News” approach is that it provides some sort of objective news coverage. It doesn’t. It doesn’t even try. Why the pretense. Nothing wrong with news with an admitted rightist slant. Why be ashamed of that?

because their “news” does not have an agenda – either right or left. Their “news” is news in the truest sense of the word. You’d be hard pressed to listen and figure out any agenda. The glaring example of Diane Sawyer was just sad. She broke the cardinal rule and she got a pass till last night.

Stewart’s problem was that he came with a bias and refused to admit it. He plays to his audience because he knows what they want and he wants to be liked. There he is bashing Fox and Fox gave him the freedom to do so. He couldn’t even see the irony of his statements. Wallace didn’t verbally point that out but had gone to great lengths with the clips to show it but Stewart being Stewart was reiterating all the left talking points.

I recall a while back when Smith went bat shit nuts because some political item had a republican talking head on to state his response to the story and there wasn’t a left winger on. His news person stated that they attempted to contact a great # of lefties for their view and none would do so. Smith was very angry and stated so. At the time I thought that he carried it too far because obviously the left did not know what to say about the story at that point and none were willing to just say how they really felt.

Steve_27 said:
VALKYRIE? Is that you?

No, that is my alias.

The Lantern of Truth said:
Put your stupid crap together , jackass .

Thanks Lantern – I figured out who billy is/was. lol

seek said:
because their “news” does not have an agenda – either right or left. Their “news” is news in the truest sense of the word. You’d be hard pressed to listen and figure out any agenda. The glaring example of Diane Sawyer was just sad. She broke the cardinal rule and she got a pass till last night.

Stewart’s problem was that he came with a bias and refused to admit it. He plays to his audience because he knows what they want and he wants to be liked. There he is bashing Fox and Fox gave him the freedom to do so. He couldn’t even see the irony of his statements. Wallace didn’t verbally point that out but had gone to great lengths with the clips to show it but Stewart being Stewart was reiterating all the left talking points.

I recall a while back when Smith went bat shit nuts because some political item had a republican talking head on to state his response to the story and there wasn’t a left winger on. His news person stated that they attempted to contact a great # of lefties for their view and none would do so. Smith was very angry and stated so. At the time I thought that he carried it too far because obviously the left did not know what to say about the story at that point and none were willing to just say how they really felt.

Good post.

I’m amused reading this thread and listening to “Morning Joe” pontificate over the Wallace interview. Certainly no one on MSNBC wants to comment on Stewart’s contention regarding journalists today- “bias of the mainstream media is towards sensationalism, conflict and laziness.” Morning Joe is avoiding that comment like the plague!

They did, however, mention that every time Stewart cannot refute Wallace’s claims he resorts to his default position of “I am a comedian.”

When the Left’s bias is exposed, they run like cockroaches.

WOW, 24 pages of liberals denying there is a liberal media bias! HAHA, good stuff!! What a bunch of delusional liars. Not a great combo.

In standard form, Jon goes after Fox because it is the one network that allows a conservative voice on the air. It is the one and only network that gives conservatives a fair shot and thus, is the one cable network with actual, real, and more viewers that the other two cablers who lean left…well, one leans the other is obsessed by leftism.

Andnow, NBC was caught leaving “under God” out of the Pledge, edited out, cut out, and they were forced to apologize for it, and Jon claims Fox viewers are the ones who are uninformed, when I would bet that Fox is the ONLY network who actually told the truth about that story….clearly NBC lied about it.

Disgusting and sick as they are.

i still love stewart’s defense…..fox is bias……everyone else is just lazy

As an aside, Mika, Joe and Halpern are all over Rick Perry’s speech in New Orleans, with Joe saying he thought he was watching Will Ferrell’s one-man show on Broadway, mocking Bush. Halpern said Perry was dropping all his “g”s. Mika said she felt like an alien (now that’s a true statement!). What pompous and arrogance Lefties they are! Too bad there’s a lot of country between NY, Chicago and SF- and lots of votes.

BTW, Axelrod, Obama’s NOT cool any more- ask any twenty-something with lots of degrees who can’t find a job! NOT COOL!

JS likes to hide behind that clown nose…

cjd ohio 1 said:
i still love stewart’s defense…..fox is bias……everyone else is just lazy

Well he knows they are biased, so he had to come up with a “plausibile” explanation that the dead-brained liberals could grab on to. He just created their new talking point.

Wallace handed “it” to Stewart…

terrific!

Paul G said:
Sooo you love gays over ppl that MAYBE( I don’t know) that drink? ? ….very telling……Hmmmmm….Equal rights?
You libturds make me sick.

Wow, you are making absolutely NO sense.

And you’re a cretin.

seek said:
Stewart’s problem was that he came with a bias and refused to admit it.

He did admit his bias. He also expressed a personal opinion about the differences between Fox and other networks and Wallace was unable to change his mind. Chris tried to do what Jon has done successfully for years and didn’t quite get there but it was a good show and a good attempt.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
But, is it wrong to point out FOX “News” errors? The doctored photos O’Hannity used to inflate Tea Party size? The misinformation Il Douchey spread about the madrasas our President allegedly attended? The countless errors in the news crawls?

LOL!

Consider context in any given report – or non-report (the Democratic Media didn’t report the ACORN SCANDAL until they were FORCED TO) – and the Bias on behalf of the Democratic Media is DEMONSTRABLY OVERWHELMING when compared to the occassional faux pas on FOX!

NORBIT Jr. said:
That’s the RATIONAL explanation, but then Obama, the Democratic Left – and THEIR MEDIA – wouldn’t be able to attempt their SMEAR & DISCREDIT campaign against FOX! Do you rational Americans really want this country led by the likes of a house speaker who says we have to pass a multi-trillion dollar health bill FIRST, so we can see what’s in it!? 2012 – END THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION!

This is all old stuff, norbit, like going through your drawer. Its just politics to blame Obama for the two main things he is now blamed for, the economy and the middle east wars, since both were fully in crisis long before Obama came in. Obama ceased being primarily responsible for the economy on the day that the Republicans in the Senate invented the notion of a 60 vote majority to pass any and all legislation proposed by the President. And now, with no House, there is really nothing he can do.

As for healthcare, our’s is the costliest in the world and the overall standard of care for our citizens is below many other countries. And your plan (besides draining every last cent from America’s elderly to medical bills), is what?

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
He just created their new talking point.

There’s nothing new about it. Jon has been saying it for some time, and people who have turned away from TV for anything but superficial news have known about it for some time. There is a difference between agenda driven activism, and networks that no longer want to do investigative journalism but would rather the the cheaper route of exploiting the scandal of the day, even if they have to create a story.

It’s takes more money and effort to do real investigative journalism. Networks are getting away from that to become more like supermarket tabloids.

That’s okay, King. As you’re always reminding us, virtually no one watches Fox anyway. It’d be silly to even worry about it.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
But, is it wrong to point out FOX “News” errors? The doctored photos O’Hannity used to inflate Tea Party size? The misinformation Il Douchey spread about the madrasas our President allegedly attended? The countless errors in the news crawls?

You forget that Hannity apologized for the photo mixup. The countless errors? Hello? I don’t know, but did Dianne ever apologize – and how many people now believe what Dianne said? So, mistakes are made – Fox always owns up to it when it happens. The rest – never.

p.s. the “tea party” size – huge

CosmosDan said:
There’s nothing new about it. Jon has been saying it for some time, and people who have turned away from TV for anything but superficial news have known about it for some time. There is a difference between agenda driven activism, and networks that no longer want to do investigative journalism but would rather the the cheaper route of exploiting the scandal of the day, even if they have to create a story.

It’s takes more money and effort to do real investigative journalism. Networks are getting away from that to become more like supermarket tabloids.

Its shows like 60 minutes and O’Reilly Factor that get the high ratings and bigger budgets that seem most likely to actually investigate what they talk about, and at least in the case of O’Reilly its usually after the story has been developing from other sources – but they run with it and give it a larger audience. I’d noticed the original Acorn scandal (financial, not the pimp sting) came from Glenn Beck and O’Reilly picked it up about 3-weeks later. It took non-Fox outlets a lot longer to begin talking about it – and it was a fairly obvious and straightforward story.

Of course, being on the constant look-out for stuff to ridicule, Stewart may not always be one hundred percent fair, but that just comes with the territory. Stewart is a worthy guilty pleasure. And sometimes he’s more fun to watch when he’s shooting from the hip. As for Fox, I don’t watch a lot, but I think Wallace, like many conservatives, is a little too condescending for my taste. I feel the same way about some liberals. As for Stewart, I pretty much agree with everything he said in the segment. President Obama… at least he did something about healthcare. Thankyou Mr. President, at least there’s still a glimmer of hope. I just hope it’s not completely concelled out by some of his other domestic policies (yeah, change? what change?). As for the elder Bush, his great politcal mistake was being a competent, responsible statesman when he had promised that he wouldn’t be one.

CosmosDan said:
There’s nothing new about it. Jon has been saying it for some time, and people who have turned away from TV for anything but superficial news have known about it for some time. There is a difference between agenda driven activism, and networks that no longer want to do investigative journalism but would rather the the cheaper route of exploiting the scandal of the day, even if they have to create a story. It’s takes more money and effort to do real investigative journalism. Networks are getting away from that to become more like supermarket tabloids.

its just stewart thinks that fox is the only “activist”

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
I question whether FOX “News” is really capable of providing the balance.

They provide balance by being right wing partisan because there is a lot of media on the left which is left wing partisan. I mean Stewart is correct that FOX is partisan right, but that may be a good thing? Otherwise, extremists on the left would be too powerful.

valkyrie101 said:
This is all old stuff, norbit, like going through your drawer. Its just politics to blame Obama for the two main things he is now blamed for, the economy and the middle east wars, since both were fully in crisis long before Obama came in. Obama ceased being primarily responsible for the economy on the day that the Republicans in the Senate invented the notion of a 60 vote majority to pass any and all legislation proposed by the President. And now, with no House, there is really nothing he can do. As for healthcare, our’s is the costliest in the world and the overall standard of care for our citizens is below many other countries. And your plan (besides draining every last cent from America’s elderly to medical bills), is what?

And I thought DENIAL was a river in Egypt!

The LIAR-IN-CHIEF attempted a textbook Marxist – yes, I said Marxist – coup.
It’s accomplished through consolidation & control by a Federal or Central Authority.

Obama, Progressive Democrats, and THEIR MEDIA attempted, through legislation, regulation and intimidation to consolidate power and control, from Washington, over these entities, and more:

Big Bank – FinReg
Big Industry – GE, Auto
PUBLIC Unions
Health Care
EPA
Illegal Immigration
on & on…

Think of the REGIMES being overthrown during the “Arab Spring” as precisely the type of REGIME Obama, the Democrats, and THEIR MEDIA attempted to create!! That multi-faceted effort exacerbated a recession, and gave us THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION!THE COUP HAS BEEN THWARTED!

2012 – END THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION.

seek said:
I didn’t get that at all. They had a good conversation and basically Stewart did the two-step by saying the other networks were “lazy” and went for the “sensational” instead of admitting they have bias and display it with every story. Wallace got Stewart on Diane Sawyer and I’m sure she wasn’t happy to hear Stewart admit that yes – but even that he sidestepped as to their not sharing the entire story. That was b.s. They shared the entire story dishonestly. What was Sawyer going to say after she lied about the law in Arizona – oh yah, I lied, you have to be breaking the law for you to be stopped. No, so Stewart failed dreadfully there. He did a lot of double talk and Wallace was not letting him get away with it. In the end Stewart let his guard down and admitted that the left used “words” dishonestly against the right.

Did we watch the same interview? It’s possible that Jon gave Chris his honest opinion based on years of doing his job which requires him to watch a lot of clips from other networks. I doubt Chris and Fox could or would want to do the research necessary to make their argument complete. JS has spent years demonstrating Fox’s activism. It takes a lot more than a clip of Diane Sawyer to prove anything. There was no double talk from Jon.
I’ll say it again. Jon’s position is far more analytical and nuanced than bias or no bias.
In case you missed here’s a classic of Jon explaining Fox and how they purposely blur the lines of opinion and factual reporting.
http://www.aoltv.com/2009/10/30/jon-stewart-explains-fox-news/

NORBIT Jr. said:
2012 – END THE OBAMA-DEMOCRATIC DEPRESSION

I agree, they have been depressed for a long time. Perhaps Sarah will help them out.

NORBIT Jr. said:
And I thought DENIAL was a river in Egypt!

Come on norbit, that was Hennie Youngman. How old are you, anyway?

valkyrie101 said:
They provide balance by being right wing partisan because there is a lot of media on the left which is left wing partisan. I mean Stewart is correct that FOX is partisan right, but that may be a good thing? Otherwise, extremists on the left would be too powerful.

That didn’t seem to be the case before Fox was around. Jon’s position , agree or not , is that Fox is claiming to be Fair and balanced News while being a political activist and propaganda. Then you have the exceptions like Wallace, and Shep Smith. I’m actually surprised and a little disappointed that Jon didn’t mention Shep.
It’s a matter of degrees. According to Jon the other networks may have their bias because of the personal views of those who do the work, but they are not nearly the political activists that Fox is. Their failing is that they do what’s cheap and expedient for ratings. Sensationalism and conflict , rather than real informative journalism.

It’s kinda funny to notice when the libturd diaper wearing babies mothers wake them up….

Paul G said:
It’s kinda funny to notice when the libturd diaper wearing babies mothers wake them up….

and then they go to their cubicle and make a nickel or dime a post…..They have no idea who is the President….They just post bullshit

CosmosDan said:
That didn’t seem to be the case before Fox was around. Jon’s position , agree or not , is that Fox is claiming to be Fair and balanced News while being a political activist and propaganda. Then you have the exceptions like Wallace, and Shep Smith. I’m actually surprised and a little disappointed that Jon didn’t mention Shep.It’s a matter of degrees. According to Jon the other networks may have their bias because of the personal views of those who do the work, but they are not nearly the political activists that Fox is. Their failing is that they do what’s cheap and expedient for ratings. Sensationalism and conflict , rather than real informative journalism.

Come on, what, you liked that Rory Mac runaway? Fox News hardly balances the rest of the Fox network, let alone the massive left wing media apparatus.

Wallace …has lowered himself again …what is so f n new(:-(

CosmosDan said:
Did we watch the same interview? It’s possible that Jon gave Chris his honest opinion based on years of doing his job which requires him to watch a lot of clips from other networks. I doubt Chris and Fox could or would want to do the research necessary to make their argument complete. JS has spent years demonstrating Fox’s activism. It takes a lot more than a clip of Diane Sawyer to prove anything. There was no double talk from Jon.
I’ll say it again. Jon’s position is far more analytical and nuanced than bias or no bias.
In case you missed here’s a classic of Jon explaining Fox and how they purposely blur the lines of opinion and factual reporting.
http://www.aoltv.com/2009/10/30/jon-stewart-explains-fox-news/

It just proves that we see what we want to see. I didn’t see what you saw and you didn’t see what I saw. We were both looking for different “points” obviously. I never watch Stewart because that type of humor I find taxing most of the time. I’m sure it appeals to the younger set. What I know about Stewart these days is the clips that I find covered by other programs. So, I get the “cliff notes”. Enough for me. I have seen Stewart on with O’Reilly and Stewart has his agenda, like everyone else.

As for Fox, their research teams are known in the industry as the best. One of the best groups is Beck’s. Strange isn’t it? When you think about it Fox has a very small stable of people with face time and a very large group backing them up and providing the research. They started that format and it appears to work for them.

I found Stewart dismissing all criticism about the other organizations as being either lazy or going for the sensational as disingenuous. I’m sure some of them are lazy but you can’t dismiss it all with a wave and a smile. I recall Meghan Kelly ripping into Kirsten Powers one day for not being prepared. I don’t know if Meghan will ever have Powers on her show again because she proved that Kirsten figured she could just “wing it” and Meghan was majorly p.o.’d. She felt Kirsten was not representing the issue as well as she could and called her on it on the spot.

So, let’s agree to disagree and obviously we both take from any information provided exactly what suits our mindset. I know that there are some issues which I found so intriguing that I’ve done a lot more research on it on my own. To me, that is a good thing and more people should go and find and check and verify instead of blindly believing whatever they hear.

Paul G said:
and then they go to their cubicle and make a nickel or dime a post…..They have no idea who is the President….They just post bullshit

lol wut.

seek said:

As for Fox, their research teams are known in the industry as the best. One of the best groups is Beck’s. Strange isn’t it? When you think about it Fox has a very small stable of people with face time and a very large group backing them up and providing the research. They started that format and it appears to work for them.

according to whom?

seek said:
.

I found Stewart dismissing all criticism about the other organizations as being either lazy or going for the sensational as disingenuous. I’m sure some of them are lazy but you can’t dismiss it all with a wave and a smile. I recall Meghan Kelly ripping into Kirsten Powers one day for not being prepared. I don’t know if Meghan will ever have Powers on her show again because she proved that Kirsten figured she could just “wing it” and Meghan was majorly p.o.’d. She felt Kirsten was not representing the issue as well as she could and called her on it on the spot.

foxnews as an organization is admittedly a reaction to a perceived liberal bias, therefore it’s pretty obvious they are an activist organization. They perceive other media as being some sort of gigantic sprawling activist group when in fact other media groups aren’t connected at all, they have very little connection to each other and are in fact in competition. Therefore while the liberal bias in media is pretty self-evident, it seems more likely that it’s due to laziness and incompetence.

valkyrie101 said:
Come on, what, you liked that Rory Mac runaway? Fox News hardly balances the rest of the Fox network, let alone the massive left wing media apparatus.

Sorry, I really don’t get this how this post relates to what I said.

Nationman said:
according to whom?

I’ve heard that from many sources over the years. I’ve even heard it maligned by “other” outlets by saying “even though Fox has a crack research team blah blah….”

I’m sure I could go find info. but to be honest, I figure you can too so I won’t bother.

622 comments and growing. Methinks somebody has touched a nerve.

seek said:
I’ve heard that from many sources over the years. I’ve even heard it maligned by “other” outlets by saying “even though Fox has a crack research team blah blah….”

I’m sure I could go find info. but to be honest, I figure you can too so I won’t bother.

probably, I was just wondering where you got the info. But yeah, if it is true that they have such a great research staff then it’s kind of sad when they get involved with things like doctored photos.

Nationman said:
foxnews as an organization is admittedly a reaction to a perceived liberal bias, therefore it’s pretty obvious they are an activist organization.

How does that make them activist? If you see a market space and decide to fill it with a product that says “We’re going to give you the part of the story that you won’t get anywhere else.” (be it as it may that this fact is due to bias), how is that activist?

They perceive other media as being some sort of gigantic sprawling activist group when in fact other media groups aren’t connected at all, they have very little connection to each other and are in fact in competition.

Ahem.

The thing is there’s a media culture that is decidedly liberal and is not receptive to its common wisdom being challenged. In fact, they get rather ornery when that happens. So, when they all start calling the same people racists at the same time, objective people tend to understand that there’s a bit of hivemind going on there. Many will seek an alternative to that. Roger Ailes has built it and he’s succeeded enormously in doing it. How is that activist?

Therefore while the liberal bias in media is pretty self-evident, it seems more likely that it’s due to laziness and incompetence.

The lazy and incompetent go along to get along. They parrot the accepted wisdom and don’t rock the boat. Also, it’s what they were taught in J School, so they can merrily muddle along with an empty head and a clear conscience. Like Dana Milbank.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
622 comments and growing. Methinks somebody has touched a nerve.

My money’s on skyfet.

gottosay said:
Wallace …has lowered himself again …what is so f n new(:-(

Really? How?

seek said:
I found Stewart dismissing all criticism about the other organizations as being either lazy or going for the sensational as disingenuous.

I just watched the unedited interview again. Basically Jon disagreed with Wallace. I didn’t see a dodge or a side step , just an explanation. He doesn’t see an equivalency in what Fox does and what the other networks do, although he mentioned that MSNBC is trying to use the Fox business model of activism. I’ve been a fan of the Daily show for years and have watched several JS interviews and read several articles about what makes him tick and the behind the scenes work that goes on. One thing I’ve appreciated is that he always seems consistent in his work and his general view.
There is a difference between a network that seems to be an aggressive political activist for an ideology, and networks that may exhibit a slant, or just have taken the cheap route to fill time instead of the real work required for journalism.
There’s no doubt in my mind that we could look at other clips like the Diane Sawyer one and interpret it as “bashing” the right but I think when it comes to degrees, Fox has dishonestly created story after story and intentionally spun things away from anything like fair and balanced. Jon has demonstrated it for years now.
Wallace making some comment about Jon’s network is ridiculous. That’s actually the point Jon was trying to make. He does comedic political satire. It’s an entirely different job description. Jon’s job is to be funny about politics and the news. That’s his primary goal, and he’s successful at it. Part of the reason he is successful is because it rings true to his viewers. He points out the bullshit that occurs in politics and in recent years, the failure of media outlets to actually inform the public in an honest relevant way. Fox, OTOH, is a NEWS network that chose it’s own slogan, Fair and balanced. That’s in THEIR job description, not Jon’s. It’s their job to inform the public, and to do it as factually as possible. Instead they skew the facts all the time to appeal to their target audience.

Pablo said:
=
Ahem.

The thing is there’s a media culture that is decidedly liberal and is not receptive to its common wisdom being challenged. In fact, they get rather ornery when that happens. So, when they all start calling the same people racists at the same time, objective people tend to understand that there’s a bit of hivemind going on there. Many will seek an alternative to that. Roger Ailes has built it and he’s succeeded enormously in doing it. How is that activist?
=.

so i guess before that site, journalist existed the journalists were having secret meetings behind closed doors to discuss how to destroy america.

Pablo said:
How does that make them activist? If you see a market space and decide to fill it with a product that says “We’re going to give you the part of the story that you won’t get anywhere else.” (be it as it may that this fact is due to bias), how is that activist?

=.

it makes them activist in the way that they will go out of their way, say like hosting an online tea party event, using the term obamcare instead of healthcare etc., to get their conservative message out. You can’t tell me hosting an online tea party event is not at least a little bit activist.

Paul G said:
You sir, are a moron…..When Wallace SHOWED him bias Stewart called it “laziness”
But FNC is “activism”.
Get your head out of your azz….

wow what a child. The left leaning media organizations don’t exist as a block organization they exist independantly and have for some time. Foxnews is a full on organization dedicated to countering liberal bias. what part of that isn’t activist on their part? what a moron.

cjd ohio 1 said:
i still love stewart’s defense…..fox is bias……everyone else is just lazy

I’m ashamed at myself for not noticing this sooner. What a phenominaly moronic thought. Stewart is an idiot.

angrily? Kind of shows right wing bias right there. There was no anger.

TillieGlockenspiel said:
They did, however, mention that every time Stewart cannot refute Wallace’s claims he resorts to his default position of “I am a comedian.”

That’s not a dodge in anyway.Jon’s frustration expressed quite well in the interview is that the people who don’t like his criticism have a hard time understanding the very nature of his job , either sincerely, or just defensively. You’ll notice in the interview he tells Wallace. I didn’t say “I’m just a comedian” but the comedy is his top priority. Not informing , or reporting, or trying to affect partisan change.

I like Wallace , but it sure seemed to me that it was an attempt to try and discredit JS in some way , although, I don’t see anything wrong with asking Jon to answer some of his criticisms. A lot of it boils down to a difference of opinion, which is kind of a “so what” So Wallace thinks Jon is more of an ideologue activist than Jon considers himself. So what? I don’t believe Wallace demonstrated anything , and Jon explained his position pretty clearly. Political satirist and Journalist, are two vastly different job descriptions. That’s simply a fact.

I agree with Jon, the fact that he gets so much attention and credibility is more of a comment on the failure of the other outlets to do their primary job of informing the public in a meaningful way.

Nationman said:
it makes them activist in the way that they will go out of their way, say like hosting an online tea party event, using the term obamcare instead of healthcare etc., to get their conservative message out. You can’t tell me hosting an online tea party event is not at least a little bit activist.

Is this activist, nationman? We’re going to have to settle on a definition.

Steve_27 said:
I’m ashamed at myself for not noticing this sooner. What a phenominaly moronic thought. Stewart is an idiot.

Hey, it is their best defense. What else is going to say?

Nationman said:
Foxnews is a full on organization dedicated to countering liberal bias. what part of that isn’t activist on their part?

Fox offers a competing news product, one of the many, many, many, many products Fox offers. How is that activist?

Steve_27 said:
I’m ashamed at myself for not noticing this sooner. What a phenominaly moronic thought. Stewart is an idiot.

sarcasism

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
WOW, 24 pages of liberals denying there is a liberal media bias! HAHA, good stuff!! What a bunch of delusional liars. Not a great combo.

I just can’t take you seriously when you consistently misrepresent what’s being said. FTR; I watched the unedited interview again. Jon does not claim there is no left leaning media bias. At around the three minute mark, Wallace asks Jon if the other outlets are propaganda driven outlets for a liberal agenda. Jon answers No. This is not Jon claiming there is no bias. He’s talking about degrees of activism.
At the 11:30 point, he says “I’m NOT suggesting there is no liberal bias in the media,” again he talks about degrees of activism.
at the 23 minute mark he says , “There probably is a liberal bias that exists within the media”
talking of the fact that most of the people who work in the news have more liberal views. but they are not as relentlessly activist as Fox.
So, your previous statement about Jon saying there is no left media bias is completely false.

What Jon is saying , as a matter of his personal opinion based on years of doing his job, is that Fox is far more an agenda driven propaganda mill, than the other networks. It’s a matter of degrees.
I’m pretty much disgusted with most TV news, except my local news in the morning. Few of them seem concerned about informing the public about relevant issues. They become more and more like super market tabloids.
Personally I welcome an honest informed conservative voice. That’s why I like Ron Paul, and Senator Tom Coburn. The problem is the networks don’t seem to want reasonable informed voices. It’s not sensational or emotional enough to drive up ratings.

CosmosDan said:”….
Personally I welcome an honest informed conservative voice. That’s why I like Ron Paul, and Senator Tom Coburn. The problem is the networks don’t seem to want reasonable informed voices. It’s not sensational or emotional enough to drive up ratings.

Nuff said…Ron Paul? Coburn? ……..

CosmosDan said:
Their failing is that they do what’s cheap and expedient for ratings. Sensationalism and conflict , rather than real informative journalism.

I mean’t that in order to have anything that resembles balance, with so much left wing media, FOX essentially needs to be quite biased to the right, which they are.

teccec said:
#
I’d noticed the original Acorn scandal (financial, not the pimp sting) came from Glenn Beck and O’Reilly picked it up about 3-weeks later. It took non-Fox outlets a lot longer to begin talking about it – and it was a fairly obvious and straightforward story.
#
hgarner2000

That’s fine. My question is often, how important a story is that and how much coverage does it need? Corruption in a large organization, especially a charity or one that receives public funds , should be covered and exposed, but the failings of a few in high positions doesn’t necessarily negate all the work of that desalinization.
Part of the job and responsibility of news networks is to decide what stories to cover and how much coverage to give them. IMO, with the Pimp thing and the Voter fraud stories, there was an partisan agenda driven motive to attack ACORN, because they had been effective in helping to elect Obama. I watched both stories evolve on Fox and found them to be a long long way from fair and balanced.

What does Jon Stewart know?

He’s so liberal he can’t even think straight.

cjd ohio 1 said:
i still love stewart’s defense…..fox is bias……everyone else is just lazy

Do you not get the difference he was talking about? it’s important to note that he didn’t say Fox was just bias, or that the other networks weren’t bias. There’s a significant relevant difference between bias, and relentlessly activist.

One brief complaint. Jon Stewart did not “declare” that Fox News viewers were the most consistently misinformed. Rather, he cited, and accurately, that every POLL taken on the subject finds that Fox News viewers are consistently misinformed.

That’s not a distinction without a difference. In fact, whether on purpose or by dint of lazy writing, it seems like an attempt to turn uncomfortable fact (the polls) into untrustworthy opinion (he only declared).

How very Foxy of you, Matt.

CosmosDan said:
Do you not get the difference he was talking about? it’s important to note that he didn’t say Fox was just bias, or that the other networks weren’t bias. There’s a significant relevant difference between bias, and relentlessly activist.

yes, i understood, but that is his person opinion, not a fact. A left wing guy sees fox as a “activist” but no one else, wow what a shocker

cjd ohio 1 said:
its just stewart thinks that fox is the only “activist”

correct, or at least that they are far far more the agenda driven activist than the other networks. there is a signifiant difference between bias and activism. That’s his opinion based on years of doing his show and watching a crap load of clips from everyone. I happen to agree. Every time I decide to tune n to Fox it reminds me off a campaign add for the GOP, with to many factual distortions , too much that is neither fair nor balanced.

CosmosDan said:
correct, or at least that they are far far more the agenda driven activist than the other networks. there is a signifiant difference between bias and activism. That’s his opinion based on years of doing his show and watching a crap load of clips from everyone. I happen to agree. Every time I decide to tune n to Fox it reminds me off a campaign add for the GOP, with to many factual distortions , too much that is neither fair nor balanced.

and that is fine, but based on years of his left wing views, it not like he is objective…….so i take his opinion with a grain of salt

cjd ohio 1 said:
yes, i understood, but that is his person opinion, not a fact. A left wing guy sees fox as a “activist” but no one else, wow what a shocker

Fine. It’s relevant to see the difference in a political activist, and just bias.

It’s also only the opinion of Jon’s critiques that he “hides” behind being a comedian, or that he is driven by a liberal agenda. Fox doesn’t like being hammered by Jon. What a shocker. He does it so well.

CosmosDan said:
Fine. It’s relevant to see the difference in a political activist, and just bias. It’s also only the opinion of Jon’s critiques that he “hides” behind being a comedian, or that he is driven by a liberal agenda. Fox doesn’t like being hammered by Jon. What a shocker. He does it so well.

his opinion is fox is a activist network is fine , but not a fact, just his opinion, and like i said, its not like he is objective

cjd ohio 1 said:
and that is fine, but based on years of his left wing views, it not like he is objective…….so i take his opinion with a grain of salt

Which is the wise thing to do. He said a couple of times in the interview that there was no doubt his personal ideology informed {which I took to mean influenced} his comedy. He’s also been consistent in his view that people should not be taking him seriously as any kind of journalist. That’s simply not his job.

CosmosDan said:
Fine. It’s relevant to see the difference in a political activist, and just bias.

It’s also only the opinion of Jon’s critiques that he “hides” behind being a comedian, or that he is driven by a liberal agenda. Fox doesn’t like being hammered by Jon. What a shocker. He does it so well.

That would be, His CRITICS, not critiques. Duh!!

valkyrie101 said:
I mean’t that in order to have anything that resembles balance, with so much left wing media, FOX essentially needs to be quite biased to the right, which they are.

I see. I wonder why they use Fair and Balanced then , or We report you decide. AS I’ve said before, I welcome an informed conservative voice. My issue with Fox is that they appeal to viewers on an emotional level and often distort the facts to do so. I don’t respect that in any organization that claims to be news.

Then Cosmos, I guess you’re upset with all of them.

Yup Cosmos thinks he’s got all the answers, as long as they suit his “bias”. Absolute rubbish. He has all the left talking points down and offers nothing in the way of “proof”. Lazy or going for sensationalism? What do you think?

The Liberal-Press jumped on Weiner because there was absolutely no way of justifying his sexual psychosis. And like all news-sharks, when there’s blood in the water and the prey has no chance of being saved, they go after it.
Wallace nailed Stewart time after time. Stewart may be trying to put his examples in a humors light but, his humor was always been about putting Conservatism in a negative light. His one-sided humor attacks are getting a little old and transparent.

CosmosDan said:
I see. I wonder why they use Fair and Balanced then , or We report you decide. AS I’ve said before, I welcome an informed conservative voice. My issue with Fox is that they appeal to viewers on an emotional level and often distort the facts to do so. I don’t respect that in any organization that claims to be news.

You are correct. Fox News is for those, a few million people mostly, primarily older, and southern, who seek what Fox offers, as you describe. But I do not want to give the impression that I do not appreciate Fox News, because it is awesome at confronting sensitive issues. It may be for ratings, or motivated by partisan purposes, but our national dialogue is greatly improved with Fox News around. IMHO.

writer said:
Then Cosmos, I guess you’re upset with all of them.

All the TV news media? Yep. I’ve said that several times. They’ve moved away from informing the public of really relevant issues that affect the lives of a lot of Americans, to doing sensationalism, scandal, and contrived conflict.
Jon points it out and it pisses them off.

I don’t mind an informed opinion that is based on fact. Whether someone is left or right, if they are upfront about where they are coming from and show they place some importance on accurate facts and being reasonably fair, I think they have something to offer. That’s why I prefer Maddow or Wallace, and have no use for Schultz or Beck.

seek said:
Yup Cosmos thinks he’s got all the answers, as long as they suit his “bias”. Absolute rubbish. He has all the left talking points down and offers nothing in the way of “proof”. Lazy or going for sensationalism? What do you think?

Actually I’m positive I don’t have all the answers. Like you I have an opinion and am free to express it on a public board. What kind of “proof” were you looking for? Often a personal opinion is not about proof. It’s a personal interpretation of available information. All you can show or explain is the basis for an opinion.

Yep. It’s anyone’s guess where Rachel stands. Always plays it straight down the middle. As she’s said, MSNBC has no political agenda. And I believe her.

CosmosDan said:
My issue with Fox is that they appeal to viewers on an emotional level and often distort the facts to do so. I don’t respect that in any organization that claims to be news.

According to Stewart, that’s all of them.

“The bias of the mainstream media is toward sensationalism, conflict and laziness,” Stewart said. “The embarrassment is that I’m given credibility in this world because of the disappointment that the public has in what the news media does.”

So, shouldn’t you have an issue with all of them, and not a particular problem with Fox?

valkyrie101 said:
You are correct. Fox News is for those, a few million people mostly, primarily older, and southern, who seek what Fox offers, as you describe. But I do not want to give the impression that I do not appreciate Fox News, because it is awesome at confronting sensitive issues. It may be for ratings, or motivated by partisan purposes, but our national dialogue is greatly improved with Fox News around. IMHO.

Know what. As much as I dislike Fox I’ll say you may be correct. I think all news organizations ought to try harder to inform the public of relevant issues and leave the sensationalism to the Enquirer or the opinutainment shows. Still, we may need the conflict being generated to get to where we’re going.

CAconservative said:
The Liberal-Press jumped on Weiner because there was absolutely no way of justifying his sexual psychosis. And like all news-sharks, when there’s blood in the water and the prey has no chance of being saved, they go after it.
Wallace nailed Stewart time after time. Stewart may be trying to put his examples in a humors light but, his humor was always been about putting Conservatism in a negative light. His one-sided humor attacks are getting a little old and transparent.

Wallace nailed Stewart? Not even once. If anything, he played straight man to Stewart’s informed analysis. But of course, you’ll dismiss that as liberal bias. It doesn’t really matter, because you’re very target audience that Fox appeals was looking for — the one that, even devoid of facts, will defend their opinions to the end and who would never dream of using a mix of inputs to form a REAL “fair and balanced” opinion.

I’ll give up on convincing you, of course, because what’s the point? But to the others who might be reading this reply, what’s really ironic here is that the headline to this article is the very same kind of lazy, sensationalist media that Stewart tries to make an example of in his comedy. I watched the video all the way through: Stewart was no more “angry” than any other guest and, frankly, Wallace wasn’t nearly as unreasonable as I expected him to be. Both held what seemed like a normal conversation, despite fundamental disagreement.

What’s tragic is that we DON’T push media — liberal or conservative — to be thoroughly informative anymore. So many want to decry Stewart the entertainer for daring to inform. Yet, here are those hired and paid to inform, who instead think it’s easier and better for their careers to pretend to entertain. Sadly for them, not one does it even half as well as Stewart does. Even more tragic, not one does it with half as much intelligence.

So… thank God we’ve got smart comics. They’ve always been among the best social commentators and always will be. But now, what do we do to get some smart journalists again?

Pablo said:
According to Stewart, that’s all of them.

So, shouldn’t you have an issue with all of them, and not a particular problem with Fox?

I’ve said more than once that I think TV news is doing a generally poor job. All networks. Fox just seems a lot closer to a campaign add than the others.

Stewart is a media creation, nothing more. The MSM loves him because he is extremely liberal and somewhat funny. Stewart hides behind his comedian face when things get difficult for him but proudly wears his commentator face when things are easy. If not for the fawning MSM, few would know who Stewart is. The MSM elected us a president so creating Stewart the messiah is not that difficult.

jackster12 said:
So… thank God we’ve got smart comics. They’ve always been among the best social commentators and always will be. But now, what do we do to get some smart journalists again?

Excellent post , I agree. Of course it would help if the general public knew the difference and placed a higher value on being informed , rather than entertained or told what we like to hear. That goes for the whole political spectrum.

BTW; someone commented about Stewart having a younger audience. There are a lot of 30, 40, and 50 somethings that enjoy his show. I was at the rally last October and met a lot of them.

Brief anecdotal evidence…

Recently visiting family in small town Michigan, my grandfather (a man who consumes all of his political content via FNC) told me of his trip to the gun range a week prior. Shooting with an old church buddy was winding down, sights had been lined up on multiple guns, a few of the guns packed up… suddenly an error and his friend shot the middle nuckle out of a finger on his left hand. Being a former army medic, he calmly wrapped the finger and they drove to a nearby hospital. The hospital called the police, as is their obligation whenever someone enters with a gun wound and my grandfather received a visit just days later. The officer informed him that he needed to see not only proof of registration for the gun but he also needed to take possession of the gun for a short period.

As I sat in the living room with gramps, he transitioned quickly from the narrative to a worried editorial voice. “You know Obama’s trying to take all our guns. They got the UN in on it I hear… why did they need to take my gun… it was an accident you know, I bet they are hoping I forget it about it… thats how they start to take em back you know…”

He was imagining a common sense and long standing process as evidence of a global conspiracy, as it had been modeled for him time and again. For me that is the tragedy of FNC, converting good people into conspiracy prone critics of their own rightfully elected leaders.

Yoda002 said:
The full plan hasn’t gone into effect yet. Medicare started this way too.

Yes, and in case you haven’t heard, Medicare is going bankrupt. In the future, please mouth your Obama/Democratic Party talking points to someone stupid enough to believe them.

That is ridiculous and Stewart knows it. He must believe lies like that or his whole world view falls apart.

That charge is right out of Alinsky’s playbook. A giant sensational lie which is obviously untrue but immediately makes Fox News fans, guilty until proven innocent of the charge.

Stewart is a smug douche but frighteningly witty. He is a typical liberal in the sense that he is not nearly as intelligent as he thinks but quick to call everyone else stupid.

At least he felt the need to admit that Obama has been a complete disappointment even to liberals.

Jon Stewart absolutely owns in these interviews. Chris Wallace had nothing to say when he brought up how Fox MSNBC and CNN turned away from Nancy Pelosi to turn to Anthony Weiner, thats our great media of today and Jon Stewart always calls out all the news outlets and how ridiculous the news is today. And how in the world can you compare Fox “NEWS” to a comedy station.

CosmosDan said:
Excellent post , I agree. Of course it would help if the general public knew the difference and placed a higher value on being informed , rather than entertained or told what we like to hear. That goes for the whole political spectrum.

ISn’t that what Stewart does? Entertains you and tells you what you want to hear? Because indeed it is.

Nacho said:
Once again, show proof on this website that people stand up for MSNBC. And I agree about MSNBC not having more anti sentiment because far fewer people take MSNBC seriously compared to FoxNews. They are both partisan jokes but mostly of for sure the most vocal, the FoxNews viewers take their propaganda more seriously. Do you get it that the “Libs” don’t live and die by MSNBC but “right wingnut conservatives” do live and die by FoxNews?

You are the one who made the irrelevant assertion, not me. You are the one who needs to supply proof to your claims. Again, start clicking; it is not my job to get through to the ‘its not teh same’ mentality a certain collective seems to have. They refuse to even look at what shows them to be wrong. Just like on every article here about an msnbc host, the sides are flipped. If you deny that and assume your own assertion as fact than to try to get through to you would be entirely worthless.

seek said:
You forget that Hannity apologized for the photo mixup. The countless errors? Hello? I don’t know, but did Dianne ever apologize – and how many people now believe what Dianne said? So, mistakes are made – Fox always owns up to it when it happens. The rest – never.

p.s. the “tea party” size – huge

Hannity didnt apologize until a comedian named Jon Stewart called him out on it

hehehehe……

PWND.

hahahahahahhaa……..wow…..

The Voice of Reason said:
You are the one who made the irrelevant assertion, not me. You are the one who needs to supply proof to your claims. Again, start clicking; it is not my job to get through to the ‘its not teh same’ mentality a certain collective seems to have. They refuse to even look at what shows them to be wrong. Just like on every article here about an msnbc host, the sides are flipped. If you deny that and assume your own assertion as fact than to try to get through to you would be entirely worthless.

Also its a certain side who wallows at how its not the same, which says it all right there.

I’m going to contact Fox and tell them not to cater to Jon Stewart’s need to be on their network to give credibility to himself, while claiming that everyone’s giving him credibility when he doesn’t deserve it. He’s right about not deserving it. He’s a second rate comedian, but a first rate self promoter. I’m sure that he and his PR firm are shopping him to Fox all the time. He needs them more than they need some ultra liberal/progressive balance on their network. He’s basically gaining “street cred” by appearing on Fox. I loved the way he distanced himself from Weiner by announcing that they’d never been roommates, but that he had “hung out” with him at the “Yentl Beach” house many summers ago.

CosmosDan said:
Know what. As much as I dislike Fox I’ll say you may be correct. I think all news organizations ought to try harder to inform the public of relevant issues and leave the sensationalism to the Enquirer or the opinutainment shows. Still, we may need the conflict being generated to get to where we’re going.

Yes, its part of, I think, the process of national healing, especially with regard to race issues, but also religious, and sexual issues to express feelings that are normally repressed. It takes sometimes a spirited debate and even a little mud throwing to get people to express themselves. And Mediaite is a good example of a place where it happens, among friends.

CLASSIC SEGMENT which is making the rounds on the Internet now at TOP SPEED based upon the number of links I’ve seen on FB/Twitter.

Stewart NAILED his point home and I’m sure Wallace was looking for a different outcome.

STEWART POWER

CosmosDan said:
I see. I wonder why they use Fair and Balanced then

That would be self parody.

sarainitaly said:
And Stewart perpetuates the bs that FOX viewers are less informed, according to a *study*.

http://tinyurl.com/5tczpt8

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=19990

http://tinyurl.com/6ycxugt

I took a look at these because of the claims that “Fox Viewers most misinformed” has been debunked. Thanks for the links Sara. The first two are basically the same argument , one in video form and one in article form, They deal with four question out of the survey, to point out some problems. I think they make valid points. Honestly, everyone should know that surveys and polls should be viewed with skepticism. They don’t qualify as proof, and are affected by lots of variables, some of which these links point out. That said, this hardly qualifies as debunking. For one thing they only deal with the Maryland study that got so much attention at the time. Jon said ‘Every survey”
{Is it odd that Chris W didn’t challenge that statement?}
I gave a link earlier of an article that looked at Jon’s claim and named four other polls that indicated the same thing, five in all. Here’s the link again http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/the_most_consistently_misinfor030360.php

So, while polls are questionable , the fact that five polls indicate the same thing lends it more credibility. Do we have any credible evidence to the contrary?
Basically, Jon was right when he stated “Every Poll says Fox news viewers are more misinformed” The fact that their viewers like them and trust them isn’t really a rebuttal to the spreading of bad information indicated in these polls. Unless there’s a lot more I haven’t seen I think claiming this has been debunked based on the above links is quite a stretch, and whether you agree with 5 polls or not, Jon’s statement was accurate. Maybe that’s why it went unchallenged.
I found it ironic that Wallace used the health care bill in comparison to Palin’s Emails {which was a ridiculous desperate attempt at a story} Jon had the Betsy McCaughey on as a guest and asked her to back up her claim that the HCB promoted death panels. He had a copy of the bill. she showed him the section and he read it alloud to demonstrate that it in no way said what she claimed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/21/betsy-mccaugheys-ideas-ca_n_264970.html
That’s what Jon is talking about when he wonders why the real professional news media aren’t doing more of that kind of thing. If the comic political satirist can do it, shouldn’t we expect that and more from our news organizations? Google Betsy and Fox and see how many times they gave her a platform to spout bullshit, without debunking it?

valkyrie101 said:
That would be self parody.

Well I sure won’t argue with that.

valkyrie101 said:
That would be self parody.

Fox is Loki, the trickster god.

notfooledbythemedia said:
I’m sure that he and his PR firm are shopping him to Fox all the time.

I’m pretty sure you are dead wrong. I’m thinking he gets more invitations for interviews than he cares to do. He doesn’t need to be a guest on Fox to do his show. Fox provides him with a lot of material, without his asking. Chris was on the Daily show last year and invited Jon and he agreed to appear. Jon needs no street creds {whatever you imagine that is} to do his job.

The Voice of Reason said:
ISn’t that what Stewart does? Entertains you and tells you what you want to hear? Because indeed it is.

The very significant difference is that Jon doesn’t pretend to be anything other than what he is. He does his job as a political satirist. The fact that journalists are not following their job description and providing him with material is their failing, not his.

Like Laura Ingraham says, he has a whole lot of writers to make him seem funny. Not that funny when he isn’t reading his own teleprompter.

BTW: when I was on Newsbusters checking out a link I saw a head line;

Jon Stewart says Fox is biased but Others aren’t.

It’s that kind of dishonest sensationalism that gets old so quickly. When misrepresentation of the facts becomes acceptable because “Hey, that’s what everybody does now”

CosmosDan said:
BTW: when I was on Newsbusters checking out a link I saw a head line;

Jon Stewart says Fox is biased but Others aren’t.

It’s that kind of dishonest sensationalism that gets old so quickly. When misrepresentation of the facts becomes acceptable because “Hey, that’s what everybody does now”

That’s just one glaring example of right wing media and how far they’re willing to go to dish out their “fair and balanced” BS to their readers. It merely reinforces the fact that Jon is pointing out that Fox viewers are the most ill-informed. Why this would be a surprise to those on the right is nothing short of astounding. Chris Wallace looked like a fool, and what’s truly sad is that Jon is giving credence to Wallace for being the “fairer” of the broadcasters on Fox when compared to wingnut lunatics like Hannity and Beck, despite the fact that Wallace was doing everything in his power to discredit Stewart by using some of the lamest examples imaginable, and yet Jon wasn’t given the chance to present video evidence to the contrary. Again, Fox”s stellar example of it’s “fair and balance” inaction.

At least Chris was honest in that the sum of his statements clearly reflected Fox’s intense pursuit to be the “conservative,” “right wing” answer to the “liberal” media. And yet Jon was pretty succinct in pointing out that what he does is to expose the LACK of journalistic integrity across the board when it comes to the MSM, be they liberal and/or conservative. The 24 hour news cycle has become a beast feathered with the grime of fluff and circumstance, because it’s really all about ratings. The way Jon dissected how the MSM is corporately driven was brilliant, and the likes of Wallace don’t have a pot to piss in because they’re paid to shill the BS on a daily basis. Stewart and Wallace are two entirely different beasts; one has the freedom to criticize the inanity of the MSM, especially Fox News, and the other is balled and chained to his corporate master. The sum of Wallace’s diatribes aimed at Stewart speak volumes to that glaring reality.

CosmosDan said:
BTW: when I was on Newsbusters checking out a link I saw a head line;

Jon Stewart says Fox is biased but Others aren’t.

It’s that kind of dishonest sensationalism that gets old so quickly. When misrepresentation of the facts becomes acceptable because “Hey, that’s what everybody does now”

Isn’t that what Stewart said?

http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/20/ive-been-denying-the-obvious-but-this-is-the-last-straw-palin-really-is-an-idiot/

The real story from this interview is Wallace’s false smear against Diane Sawyer’s reporting. As he tries to criticize her for being “liberal” / “mainstream media” and getting her story wrong, HE bungles the facts, and actually plays a segment from Ms. Sawyer where her reporting is 100% correct.
The explanation and all the backup details are here: http://foxnewsproblems.wordpress.com
-Wineguider

“Hey, if I squarely aim my ire at the Republicans & conservatives 80 to 90% of time, it’s okay!. I’m a comedian & it’s all a joke! I’m not tainted one way or another at all & I’m not biased!” (Stewart)

seek said:
Isn’t that what Stewart said?

No it clearly isn’t, and anyone who watched the unedited interview ought to know that.

CosmosDan said:
I’m pretty sure you are dead wrong. I’m thinking he gets more invitations for interviews than he cares to do. He doesn’t need to be a guest on Fox to do his show. Fox provides him with a lot of material, without his asking. Chris was on the Daily show last year and invited Jon and he agreed to appear. Jon needs no street creds {whatever you imagine that is} to do his job.

Who are you today? Jon Stewart’s PR flack, or Mediate’s assignee to refute any criticism of Jon Stewart? I doubt if Stewart is getting oodles of invites to be on news shows. Neither of us prove that point, unless you are Stewart’s employee. If you are, it’s sad that you have to do what you’re doing here. Pumping up his reputation…..

CosmosDan said:
No it clearly isn’t, and anyone who watched the unedited interview ought to know that.

Did Stewart claim the other outlets were not biased, just lazy and going for the sensational?
so then what should Newsbuster “headline have said”?
Stewart gives everyone a pass except Fox? lol

or perhaps “Fox the only channel with bright boring people”
“Polls show Fox works harder”
“Left thinks Fox is All Right”

any more?

Jon Stewart Slams Fox Viewers as Most Misinformed, But He’s the Ignorant One

notfooledbythemedia said:
I’m going to contact Fox and tell them not to cater to Jon Stewart’s need to be on their network to give credibility to himself, while claiming that everyone’s giving him credibility when he doesn’t deserve it. He’s right about not deserving it. He’s a second rate comedian, but a first rate self promoter. I’m sure that he and his PR firm are shopping him to Fox all the time. He needs them more than they need some ultra liberal/progressive balance on their network. He’s basically gaining “street cred” by appearing on Fox. I loved the way he distanced himself from Weiner by announcing that they’d never been roommates, but that he had “hung out” with him at the “Yentl Beach” house many summers ago.

You should contact your local insane asylum first and let them know you’re an idiot. You’re assuming everything you just said. How would you know if Stewart “wanted/needs” to be on Fox? If anything, he is invited and goes to the interviews delighted because he knows wtf he’s talking about and nobody ever wins an argument with him. I’d go to interviews if I was being interviewed by cattle too.

“Street cred”? You do know where that term originated right? About a billions miles away from anyone that works at Fox news. It’s kind of ridiculous that you would even use that term. I watched the same video clip as you and I don’t recall him saying anything about “everyone giving him credibility”. He said he makes jokes. Get over it. There’s no hidden agenda. Believe it or not, things are actually funny sometimes and it’s his job to bring it up.

dougx said:
Like Laura Ingraham says, he has a whole lot of writers to make him seem funny. Not that funny when he isn’t reading his own teleprompter.

Funny how he didn’t need his writers yesterday or any time that he appears on FOX. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HILARIOUS when Wallace puts up his “evidence” which Stewart swatted away with the greatest of ease. It’s a wonder that these Fox dudes still greatly underestimate Stewart.

MAKES FOR HILARIOUS TELEVISION THOUGH

CosmosDan said:
BTW; someone commented about Stewart having a younger audience. There are a lot of 30, 40, and 50 somethings that enjoy his show. I was at the rally last October and met a lot of them.

I know a lot of 60+ somethings who watch the show faithfully. Funny is ageless.

So, how many people who watch Jon Steward, or anyone on CBSABCNBCCNNMSNBC know that NBC editied out “under God”fromthePledge during the Open this weekend?

People who watch FNC are INFORMED, much to Jon’s dismay.

For shame, that he is so shallow that hehas to live by the lies he hears on the other networks and can’t get himself to think outside of the box; Jon like the rest of them, stay in the liberal mind set/mind meld of the DNC talker point readers on the broadcast networks along with the cnn and msnbc buddies.

How sad for Jon.

NewsBusters: Jon Stewart Slams FOX Viewers as Most Misinformed, But He’s the Ignorant One
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2011/06/20/jon-stewart-slams-fox-viewers-most-misinformed-hes-ignorant-one

Wineguider said:
The real story from this interview is Wallace’s false smear against Diane Sawyer’s reporting. As he tries to criticize her for being “liberal” / “mainstream media” and getting her story wrong, HE bungles the facts, and actually plays a segment from Ms. Sawyer where her reporting is 100% correct.
The explanation and all the backup details are here: http://foxnewsproblems.wordpress.com
-Wineguider

Perfectly brilliant example of how Fox lies. Thanks!

Did Matt win the pool for most comments, yet?

TfT said:
For shame, that he is so shallow that hehas to live by the lies he hears on the other networks and can’t get himself to think outside of the box; Jon like the rest of them, stay in the liberal mind set/mind meld of the DNC talker point readers on the broadcast networks along with the cnn and msnbc buddies.

In olden days, the court jester was both the only person permitted to laugh at the court, and a frequent scapegoat.

Why does Wallace insinuate that conservatives feel beaten up by people like Stewart? 99% of the comments I read on these media sites bash liberals pretty hard. FN is full of “opinion guys” who snicker and giggle all day long. Who’s beating up who really? Seems pretty even sided. BTW If Jon Stewart is a threat to anyone, they need to have their meds refilled and actually take them.

Jon’s team or Jon’s brains should wade into the muddy waters of group polarization and try to understand how “almost activism” is much more effective than activism. People only need to talk about something and it starts happening already. And the sky of that risky shift is the limit: terrorism pur sang. And that is the msm of today and of the time of all of us.

And no one knows more about being misinformed than Jon Stewart.

CosmosDan said:
The very significant difference is that Jon doesn’t pretend to be anything other than what he is. He does his job as a political satirist. The fact that journalists are not following their job description and providing him with material is their failing, not his.

Wrong. He pretends to be a media critic, while his critiques are partisan pandering. He tells an audience what they want to hear, which compromises his ability to fairly or accurately critique the media. Your previous post was false on the grounds that I mentioned in my last post.

The Voice of Reason said:
Wrong. He pretends to be a media critic, while his critiques are partisan pandering. He tells an audience what they want to hear, which compromises his ability to fairly or accurately critique the media. Your previous post was false on the grounds that I mentioned in my last post.

nah, he’s exposing the media machine for what it is and they just don’t like it. Do you get your talking points from tucker carlson?

Nationman said:
nah, he’s exposing the media machine for what it is and they just don’t like it. Do you get your talking points from tucker carlson?

Don’t get yours from the Daily Kos.

POLTIFACT just called Jon Stewart a liar:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

It’s simply not true that “every poll” shows that result. So we rate his claim False

Jon Stewart says those who watch Fox News are the “most consistently misinformed media viewers”

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

Hehe, sorry struckgld. It’s worth repeating though!

POLTIFACT just called Jon Stewart a liar. Jon, what time will you be apologizing to Fox viewers?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

It’s simply not true that “every poll” shows that result. So we rate his claim False

HILARIOUS the stuff FOX left out of the broadcast interview
Since they couldn’t HANDLE THE SMACKDOWN

hahahahahha……..

The Cons got their panties in a bunch I see…..hehehe………

“Quick,quick….write something damn it!Call him a liar!Quick!!!”

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!….WEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Good times man….good times….

Just watched Keith Olbermann’s debut and the silver went to Fox News for editing out Jon Stewart saying the name of Bill Sammons ( Washington D.C. managing editor, and author of such classics as “Strategery: How George W. Bush Is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats, and Confounding the Mainstream Media”)

I haven’t seen such a great smackdown of Wallace and his Fox talking points since Bill Clinton schooled the little tool.

welcome to our website:

=== http://globalsell.org/ ===-

shirts,bags,hat and the decorations.
if you like to order anything you like.
More details,
please just browse our website Quality is our Dignity;
Service is our Lift.
enjoy yourself.
thank you!!
=== http://globalsell.org/ ===-

I’ve NEVER seen John Stewart like that. He was in a rotten mood, nothing was funny, not even a weak smile.
Must have had one horrible Saturday night.! Chris Wallace did a great job of NOT letting Stewart’s rude comments get to him.

Bill Huggins said:
HILARIOUS the stuff FOX left out of the broadcast interviewSince they couldn’t HANDLE THE SMACKDOWN

And YOU know what was left out? I guess you were in the studio Sunday morning?

struckgld said:
POLTIFACT just called Jon Stewart a liar. Jon, what time will you be apologizing to Fox viewers?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/20/jon-stewart/jon-stewart-says-those-who-watch-fox-news-are-most/

It’s simply not true that “every poll” shows that result. So we rate his claim False

Well, saying so would make you a liar. Color me un-shocked.

What Politifact says — in its nuanced evaluation, an approach clearly foreign to you — is that across a range of polls, Fox viewers are *among* the most mis/uninformed without being always or consistently the most mis/uninformed. And that Americans who follow no news at all are even more misinformed. Hence a rating of “false.”

Which makes Stewart one of several things: 1) Guilty of hyperbole; 2) Correct based on a different weighting of the polls; 3) Needing to qualify his statement more precisely.