My cup runneth over.
Watching it was like having multiple orgasms while eating bacon, drinking scotch, and talking about the glory that is the Oxford comma.
Watch it:
I’m sure I’ll think of something more eloquent than that, but I’m tired and this beer isn’t going to drink itself, y’know. My quick thoughts, however, are as follows: People think that The Daily Show has far more influence than it actually does. I love the show, and if you read my blog, I suspect you do too. I went to the rally. So did about 215,000 other people. You probably did too–or at least, you watched it on television. And you probably know all about the Conan, Stewart, Colbert-athon, and about Jon Stewart calling Tucker Carlson a dick, and about Colbert’s White House Correspondent’s Dinner speech.
I love that stuff. I tend to get so caught up in it that I forget that not a lot of people really watch The Daily Show. (Sorry Jon!) In fact, it isn’t the highest rated show on Comedy Central. Do you know what is? Tosh.0.1
I’m fairly certain that anyone who takes the time to watch this video will likely agree that it isn’t “fair” that Jon Stewart gets to fall back on “but I’m a comedian!” Still, the fact remains that he is a comedian. The Daily Show‘s take on political issues focuses on funny first. The “reporting” is satire and parody. Those who receive it as something other than that have good reason to — it’s damn good satire, and ever since it got the fancy new set with all the doohickeys, it really does seem like a legit news show. But it isn’t.
Sure, Jon Stewart says what so many of you are thinking, and what so many of you wish the “lamestream” media would say. And he’s in a suit behind a desk, so we start to believe it is a news show, and that everybody is watching and what the hell, why is no one paying attention to what Fox News is doing, with the lying and the bullshit and the other stuff, and OHMIGOD why doesn’t everyone know what I know and have my vision of how awesome this country could be!!?! Why isn’t CNN all over this? Because The Daily Show is on Comedy Central and it’s not like CNN is going to start Daily Showifying its broadcast or anything. They’re going to keep on doing weird shit with holographs and digital maps. Wolf Blitzer will keep growing his beard, and I’ll keep wondering if that’s even his real name.
No network is going to enter the ring with Fox News. They can’t. The networks have to keep their ratings up, and Fox News is crushing them. CRUSHING.THEM. Besides, pissing matches between media juggernauts are yawnsville.
As a result, the networks take the easy route: the OH MAH GAWL THIS IS SO IMPORTANT! route and the HEAVENS TO BETSY THIS THING I’M TALKING ABOUT IS GOING TO KILL YOU NOW! route — because if they don’t, no one will watch. It has to be stupid kids in balloons, and social-climbing fuckwits crashing White House dinners, because apparently that’s what the people want. The people who want real news read British news and blogs. That’s how it goes.
There are diamonds in the rough, of course. Maddow is number one on my list. I get why she was frustrated. She’s more reasonable and level-headed and fact-based than any of the other MSNBC talking heads, and it was nice that Stewart recognized that. Still, nothing really got resolved in the interview. It was just a chat between people who respect each other. He likes her, she likes him. Time marches on. It was sort of like the rally, actually. I’m surprised they didn’t smoke a doobie.2
So, in conclusion:
I have no conclusion. I love Rachel Maddow, I love Jon Stewart, and cake. I really love cake.
1 Don’t ask me how I know. Just know that I know. That’s all you need to know.
2 People should say “doobie” more. But not “Doobie Brothers.” I hate them.
JPL
A friend called this morning and mentioned that it was worth watching the entire unedited version on line. I haven’t had time yet but will do so.
SiubhanDuinne
I wish Jon had been feeling better last night. Apparently he was pretty sick (and probably medicated), and a couple of times Rachel congratulated him for not throwing up. If he had been feeling primo, the interview would have kicked even more ass.
Sportello
Not a lot of people watch The Daily Show, but more people watch the Daily Show than Leno or Letterman.
http://www.deadline.com/2010/11/change-of-the-guard-daily-show-tops-all-late-night-shows-for-the-first-time/
OK, there are different metrics for network and cable shows, but still.
matoko_chan
Angry, do you know what is wrong with conservatism?
its humorless.
‘conservative’ comics are not funnie.
if self-deprecating humor is the pinnacle of human evolution, then conservatives are devolving.
Raise your glass, Angry, raise your glass.
Anya
Drinking beer in the morning? ABL, should worry about you?
Like you, I love both Jon and Rachel. I have not watched the interview yet, so say one way or another if it was good or not.
cathyx
How could you hate the Doobie Brothers? You must be under 40.
Trakker
What set my heart aflutter was this: we got to see two talented and very smart persons talking about serious problems, intelligently…ON TELEVISION! On cable no less.
WereBear
This is how pathetic we have become; we look to our comedians to save us!
Even my generation was starting to get that one could not believe everything one saw on television. I do believe the generation ten years before me still has not gotten it; the Golden Years are so for con artists. And the religious. Put them together and you have the most gullible demographic in the world.
Fox is in a unique position right now; one that is eroding and will not be duplicated.
Somewhat like Uncle Miltie at the dawn of television.
debit
@cathyx: One of the best driving songs ever is Rocking Down the Highway. However, that’s the only Doobie Brothers song I can stomach. And I am over 40.
Tattoosydney
La la la la la la la.
I’m drunk posting.
It’s my birthday on Sunday and I just had dinner here.
Wheeeee!
TS + 8 (no wait, + 9)
El Cid
Although Fox News has higher ratings than other individual channels (CNN, MSNBC, the Big 3), people are still watching much more of those others than Fox News. And Fox News waaaaaaay skews old and white.
For example, regarding election night coverage, if you don’t add Fox News and Fox separately, you have about 22 million viewers for CNN, MSNBC, and ABC / CBS / NBC.
If you add Fox separately, then it’s 22 million versus 14 million.
So, yes, in terms of individual channels being compared, Fox News is killing any other of the big 3 + the cable 2, far more people watched everybody else than Fox News — a 3 to 1 ratio. If you include the Fox network — which is just relaying Fox News via local channels (which is why I don’t care to count them together, but fine), the rest had 8 million more viewers than Fox News + Fox.
They’re incredibly significant for a propaganda agency, but it isn’t like more people watch it than other sources.
SteveinSC
ABL you must have been really drunk. That interview of pompous, self-satisfied mealy-mouthed bullshit was more than I could take. Rachel got fucked by that “all-centrist and shit” asshole. Stewart’s transparently selfserving defense of water-boarding and Rachel’s tepid response caused the only real impulse for ballistic vomiting. Stewart’s popularity was built on his ridiculing of Bush and gang. Now that the republicans are in, he’s getting all “both sides do it.” “George Bush is not a bad man…” Jesus fucking Christ.
geg6
Meh. I think Stewart is just his generation’s Broder, but with a sense of humor. I much prefer Colbert and much, much prefer Lewis Black. They don’t cross the line between comedian and commentator and Stewart does and does it regularly. I like much of what he does, but Stewart is not and never was a hero of mine and I don’t accept his “I’m just a comedian” garbage. He has, too many times, inserted himself into the debates, not by being funny but by being the guy who wants to be taken seriously in a very centrist wishy washy way. In some ways, I have more respect for Maher in that he doesn’t run away from his forays into political commentary by saying he’s just a comedian. He accepts that, when he gets off a serious argument (though perhaps wrong-headed) with no comedy in the mix, he’s going to have to take the heat. Stewart is a coward, comparatively, IMHO.
cleek
imagine there are five stores selling ice cream. four sell vanilla only, and the other one sells chocolate. the store that sells chocolate will crush the other four stores (individually) in sales because those four stores have to split the vanilla market, while the chocolate store isn’t competing with anyone for the chocolate ice cream market.
that is how Fox “crushes” everyone else. it’s market happens to be larger than: (market for generic news / the number of generic news channels). if it was CNN vs Fox, with no MSNBC, CNBC, or HLN, the ratings for CNN v Fox would be essentially tied.
debit
@Tattoosydney: Happy Advance Birthday! And yum! I looked at the regular menu and now have a hankering for the Roast Spatchcock with Sweet Corn Polenta, Pistachio & Asparagus.
@ thread: What I loved about this interview was two people who disagreed about some things, but were not only civil about it, they tried to find common ground. I also loved how Stewart very sincerely told Rachel he liked her. He’s thoughtful, funny and smart and I would like to see him go beyond his current role as a comedian. Also, I want to have dinner with him.
Bnut
Daniel Tosh is is pretty funny…
JPL
@Tattoosydney: The menu sounds good. Besides the wine, what else did you have?
Mary
I love the Oxford comma (although I prefer to think of it as a serial comma – more descriptive that way).
Tattoosydney
@debit:
Thanks. There are a few things Australians do well (soc1alised medicine, getting over gays in our armed forces) and fabulous restaurants at not hugely exorbitant prices are among them.
Corner Stone
The interview was pretty meh. Stewart seems like a huge dick, not in the “jerk” way that he mistreated Rachel but more like his worldview is really incompatible with reality. And he kept saying the same kind of false equivalencies as examples.
It was pretty bullshit. IMO, you should watch it, just to see how fucked Stewart really is. Don’t expect anything valuable from it.
brantl
Stewart makes an interesting point, that is lost on people who have gone all “my team” on the opposition. He didn’t make it as well as he should have.
It’s this (I think):
George Bush isn’t trying to do evil.
He’s trying to do what he feels is right, in what is functionally a near vacuum of knowledge, with no real idea how to succeed at anything. All the rest is collateral damage between his feeling that his side should control all the levers of power, and absolutely no real ability to do what is appropriate for the good of himself, his country and the world.
Jon Stewart believes in rhetorical judo, and he’s not wrong. Do you know, in judo, they don’t typically call the other person, contestant, what-have-you, an ‘opponent’? No, they call him a ‘player’.
If you want to actually convince people (and think about this, we’re not going to “vanquish” and “exile” right-wingers, are we?) then you have to work from empathy and persuasion, not obdurate challenge.
Think about it.
And Madow is actually pretty fair proof of Stewart’s point. She doesn’t get real loud, she points at facts, she isn’t particularly shrill. And she’s getting a bigger following, every day. Why? Because she’s (fairly gently) banging on the common sense of the issue.
jwb
@El Cid: The ratings for Fox really aren’t that high from a historical perspective either. The real story over the past two decades has been the fragmentation of the media. What Fox has that the other media outlets are envious of is a stable demographic, which has allowed them to weather the fragmented mediascape better than the others. But, as you point out, that stability has come at the cost of age, and the demographic is entering the dying years; like the Republican party, they are likely to be facing a demographic reckoning in the not too distant future.
Tattoosydney
@JPL:
We had the tasting menu with matching wines… the venison, the duck, the stilton and the milk cake were all world class.
There was also an absolutely amazing Italian red called an Occhipinti SP68 that smelled of dried apricots and sultanas that I would marry if I could.
El Cid
@Tattoosydney: I’m completely addicted to the Masterchef Aust. and Junior Masterchef Australia series. And through those I’ve been introduced to many of the major elite restaurants throughout. If I had the time off and the money, and visited Australia, those would be at least one of the places to go.
El Cid
@jwb: No doubt. But an added legitimacy is lent to this Republican right wing propaganda agency because it’s a right wing source catering to older whites.
Unlike those crazy kids watching the extreme MSNBC and the silly Comedy Central’s two news-related programs.
nepat
@SteveinSC:
Exactly my take, too. Stewart couldn’t have come across as more smug and hectoring. His rally went straight to his head, and he’s on the fast track to becoming a fatuous, tiresome bore, lecturing the rubes on their “partisanship” – which he flies airily above pretending to symbolize our better angels. Ironically, it was Rachel who came across as “sane” (“sane” now being the operative euphemism for “better than…”) and grounded. Stewart, not so much.
Pass the remote.
Cris
The Michael McDonald Doobie Brothers or the “China Grove” Doobie Brothers? Never mind, I can’t really listen to either incarnation any more.
Corner Stone
@jwb: No doubt why they employ so many beautiful young blondes.
adolphus
And since there are over 300 million Americans I could rewrite this to say “If you add Fox separately, then it’s 7.3% of Americans versus 4.6% of Americans.”
Let’s be honest here, we are talking about a very small number of people here. (And this is on election night. On your average day the viewership of cable news even less than that.) What continues to anger me is how programs which less than 10% of Americans bother to watch have such an over sized effect on our discourse. If you count by actual viewers almost no one cares what Glen Beck has to say. Why must the rest of us, over 90% of the American people, keep talking about him?
Violet
@brantl:
Is this true? I haven’t looked at her ratings. Are they steadily increasing.
Why did Jon Stewart do the interview if he was that sick? That’s stupid.
Someone should figure out that there is a marketplace for factual news. Instead of having the news “anchors” play referee and just allow pundits to blather on unchecked, they should design a show so that can’t happen. It would feature a smart anchor who doesn’t let them get away with crap. So when a pundit says, “Obama is a sekirt Muslin” the anchor says “Prove it. Cite your sources.” Heck, that would be a great name for the show: “Cite Your Sources.” If they can’t cite their sources, they get buzzed off the show.
If they made it entertaining, people would watch and pundits would clamor to be on it. And the viewers would be a lot more educated.
Corner Stone
@adolphus: I get your point, but to McArgle you a little here, I think it’s 99% of us don’t care what he says. I’ve read where he gets under 3 million viewers for the prime time broadcast, which I think is about less than 1% of all Americans. If you say 150 million possible viewers then he gets 2% of those.
So I agree with your point, he reaches 1% of people in America.
Dennis SGMM
I don’t watch either of them. That’s not a knock. I’ve just found that over the past few years that “news” and “nausea” have become one and the same thing for me.
Corner Stone
@Violet: I think brantl was spoofing us. I couldn’t make sense of the comment in any other context.
Southern Beale
Maybe I need more coffee but watching these two carry on a conversation was painful for me. Waaaaay too cerebral for 8:30 am.
SteveinSC
I couldn’t catch all the dialog related to water-boarding drug lords, which was possibly tongue-in-cheek. I was already starting to heave so I didn’t hear the exact context except it was follow-on to the bush water-boarding. But Stewart went to fucking William and Mary and he somehow missed Magna Carta and the whole development of English and thence American law regarding extorted confessions? That is not “serious people can differ” That shit is the basis of the whole American Experiment. There is only one side to that discussion. W&M should be ashamed of this money-grubbing fraud.
Tattoosydney
@El Cid:
Quay, which I linked above, is home to the Guava Snow Egg, which I had in its previous incarnation, and which featured as the ultimate test in the second series. Yum.
I’m not a fan of the Masterchef… I suspect it could be edited into a very good half hour show, but the constant vox pops shit me.
“We knew if was time for one of us to go.”… “It was definitely time for one of us to get voted off”, “Now guys, it’s time for one of you to go”. Fuck off.
Southern Beale
@SteveinSC:
No, Stewart said if Bush is, legally speaking, a war criminal for torture then so is Barack Obama because Obama has continued with those same Bush policies. Extraordinary rendition still goes on, GITMO is still open, etc. And then he says, what about Franklin Roosevelt who interred the Japanese in WWII? Was he a war criminal? etc. etc.
He’s not saying Bush is not a war criminal; he’s saying when we discuss it we need more context and we need to consider the entire issue, not just look at it from the point of view of, “my guy is right your guy is wrong, end of discussion.”
Folks might want to sit and watch the whole thing. I see Stewart’s point, and Rachel doesn’t really refute him.
As I said it’s way wonky and cerebral. Cerebral doesn’t play in American politics too well these days.
Bill E Pilgrim
@geg6:
I think so too.
Not when he’s doing his comedy, oddly enough, but watching this interview I just kept thinking “Don’t give up your day job, Jon”. It seemed a lot of dissembling to try to justify his “both sides do it” message that he was being called out about, and all in a meandering and ultimately pointless sort of way.
At one point after a long and ponderous passage, Rachael conceded “Okay, I can see the logic of some of that” and he smiled and interjected “You can?? Because I don’t think I can!” and I found it the most honest thing he said. He was vamping and he knew it, and so did I.
SteveinSC
@Southern Beale:Whatever my current feelings about Obama on the wars, domestic spinelessness, etc., I have felt that he is sincere about the torture stuff. Gitmo, extraordinary renditions, I actually don’t have too much problem with unless what’s done with these people is to enable torture and abuse. I don’t think that internment of Japanese-Americans, outrageous though it was, is not a war crime. The Japanese-Americans were not abused or mistreated in any intentional way. Also, I am not aware of any Japanese-Americans sent to internment camps from the east coast, though I might be wrong. In this case George Bush (and by extension, that affront to humanity, cheney) are self-confessed war criminals. “…end of discussion”? Right, indeed.
bmchcgo
Sorry, I quit watching half way thru because Stewart was parsing and evasive. He did not want to refute the false equivalence charge and kept trying to evade Rachel’s pointed repsonses.
And Angry Black Lady, ‘hate’ is too strong of a word for the Doobie Brothers. Try ‘don’t care for’. Really, it’s more appropriate.
Corner Stone
@Bill E Pilgrim: Like when he said the whole “teabagging joke” he found funny for a day, for a day, for about a day.
Fuck you Jon Stewart. I had stopped watching his show anyway but if I had not, this interview would’ve done it.
master c
I’m so happy I have these two in my life….[my so called tv life]
Love ’em!
monkeyboy
Everybody lives in a make-believe world. This is not to say there is no real world – but the real world is just too complicated and the make-believe can be a simplified and rationalized version of the real.
Many people can share the make-believe in which they live – this is where Gods, elves, and most conspiracy theories exist. Some even believe in consensual reality where if something is repeated often it can become truly real. TV and radio pundits often succeed by how good they are at constructing simplified make-believe, not by how well their construction corresponds to reality.
Modern TV strongly advances make-believe. People often know more about and are more concerned with invented characters in TV shows and celebrities (with whom they have 0 to little chance of ever interacting) than they do with actual people with whom they can interact and where this interaction can make a difference in their lives.
I see TDS as mainly reporting on make-believe as make-believe.
Allan
We learned that Jon Stewart has really good writers.
SteveinSC
@Allan: This
Fr33d0m
I turned it off part way through, though maybe I should watch it again just to be sure. My feelings were that John was way too vested in false equivalences. Perhaps being sick made him sound smug as well. Either way I hate the message that says MSNBC is as bad as Fox and that seemed to be his point.
Probably will stop watching the Daily Show, not that I watch it all that much anymore.
Oh and don’t be a hater. The Doobie Brothers are classic.
Mickey Dugan
I stopped watching after Jon Stewart’s apologia for Bush and his, welll, either ignorant or bald-faced lie that Bush didn’t have rape rooms. For a guy that purports to be on top of things and decode the media, he seems utterly naive and subservient, willing to assume Saddam’s rape rooms make the mustached villain the worst monster in the world, but the “rape rooms” belonging to the smilin’ good ol’ boy wearing a white cowboy hat is no big deal, ‘cos, welll, he’s a smilin’ good ol’ boy wearing a white cowboy hat. And hey! Don’t you dare go calling him a war criminal! Ri-iii-ight.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Corner Stone:
Why do you have to be so bitchy? Seriously. Its not like Stewart is a conservative Republican. He’s a moderate. Plus, he’s done far more to point out GOP BS to younger voters than most have. Certainly, he’s done more to undermine the GOP cause than you have. I swear, you complain about everything and everyone.
timb
@WereBear: Will Rogers is on the phone for you. He apparently would like to read Jonathon Smith and, for a lark, Voltaire. Satire and comedy, when done properly, hold up a mirror to a society and to Truth. We need them
deweynet
I’m complaining about something on the internets that i didn’t have to watch…ooops there’s my waahbulance gotta go
timb
@geg6: So, his “the problem is not about which team a person is on, but how the system is corrupt” is lost on you and SteveinSC who want more partisan game-playing?
I’ll stick with him on this. Neither team has a monopoly on truth
timb
@brantl: This is so perfect. That is the distillation, brantl. Good job
enplaned
I’m somewhat disappointed in Stewart’s interview.
I take his point about how the need to fill 24-hours of air time has resulted in the media hyping everything and ginning up a false sense of permanent outrage.
But there are things that are worth getting outraged over, and perhaps the bigger issue about the permanent outrage perpetrated by the cable networks is that it diminishes/reduces/overshadows the outrage we should feel for those truly ugly things. Things, for instance, like govt sanctioned torture.
Yet he gives the Bush administration somewhat of a pass on that — not accepting that torture is right, but saying, well, you need to examine their motives.
But there are some things that aren’t excused by motives. You kill someone, the only defense is if they were engaged, at that moment, in trying to kill you or someone else. Isn’t otherwise acceptable — or shouldn’t be, and if someone gets away with it, well, that is an outrage.
I think Stewart muddies this. To some extent I think he’s really engaged in a “higher level false equivalence”, in a desperate attempt to, perhaps, retain some level of plausible denial about being partisan. I think he feels like he needs to have some level of plausible (if still highly unlikely) denial of partisanship to retain comedic credibility or perhaps to reduce fire from the right. But that’s leading him to tie himself into pretzels, logically.
He’s not wrong about the corrosive effects of the 24-hour news cycle. But while there’s no question that the media are corrupt as the day is long, it’s also true that there’s a false equivalence between left and right. And Stewart’s feeding into this at the moment.
matoko_chan
@brantl: violet and stone are wrong….you are right.
the really horrible thing is that a lack of compassion for the out-group and an absolute certainty that you are doing the right thing is a selective advantage.
that is why christianity succeeded in the Age of Colonialsim.
When killing people is saving them for Jeebus then god IS on your side.
which is why Vietnam, Iraq, and A-stan.
Bush is evil…but its the evil of stupidity.
people don’t like to hear this…but america began as a wholly protestant nation. the protestant tradition is distinctly anti-intellectual.
Selection for stupid.
timb
@SteveinSC: Yeah, he wasn’t argiung it was right or justified. He was arguing that when you step into someone on the other team’s face and start yelling about how Bush is torturer, it sort of stops the dialogue which MIGHT be used to stop further torture.
Further, his point about Obama and Bagram and a still-open Gitmo is damn right on.
In case you missed it, his contempt for people who aren’t ashamed that “their guy” water-boarded people was pretty evident.
El Cid
@Tattoosydney:
That doesn’t bother me at all.
I guess you have to compare it to the US competition shows, which are loud, tacky, focused on personality, often really shouty, and vastly inferior overall.
The US Masterchef was a really good effort, and I know Gordon Ramsay’s a big name, but it was a tacky annoying game compared to Masterchef. The UK versions I’ve seen
I watched every single episode of both seasons (well, I didn’t come across it until like 20 or so episodes into the 1st).
I’ve since shown episodes of the Junior Masterchef to friends and family, and to a one they were blown away by the quality, as well as being astonished by these freakily good very, very young chefs.
After one viewing they demanded to see more episodes, and if we’ve got friends over who have seen it and there’s no big game on or movie we’ve been wanting to see, that’s probably what we will choose to watch.
(That, or David Cross’ US/UK series “The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret”.)
Different strokes for different folks.
timb
@SteveinSC: You know people lost everything in those camps? Their businesses and homes were looted and robbed; they suffered from inadequate medical care and died in those concentration camps! For you to act like that is not a crime is just silly.
Hell, Stewart didn’t even talk about the injustice associated with Ex parte Quirin, where FDR threatened the Court and shot potentially “innocent” men (some of them American citizens). The caselaw created it by is so terrible, Yoo and Bybee and Haynes and friends used it to create the egregious military commission system.
There is no pure actor, Steve. Stop downplaying politicians’ crimes just because they are your side
Malron
Stewart has always irked me with his fake equivalence. His rally was empty bullshit, also.
matoko_chan
@enplaned:
bullshytt.
he is not partisan– he is just not absolutely convicted he is right.
he is enough of an empath to consider alternatives….he is BRIGHT enough to consider alternatives.
that is why liberals argue while conservatives go in lockstep.
its an IQ gap.
elftx
I donnow..felt like he was looking at it from the view of hearing someone in the playground accuse his two brothers of pulling the fire alarm in the school again…not to say that they have not possibly been involved in something like this previously.
Then later on that day, after school, he walks into the house to hear the two of them arguing..and all he wants to do is keep the argument from escalating as he chooses not to decide for himself if one or the other brother truly does have a problem.
A little too rose colored glasses.
oh and also too, Bush broke the law (possibly)..but cuz he was “comin from da heart, man” this made it ok.
matoko_chan
the problem i have with Stewart…..is that we. are. not. the. same.
both sides are simply not the same anymore.
Of course George Bush had rape rooms.
They were in Iraq, they were classified, and our Iraqi allies did the raping…. where Jon Stewart couldn’t see them and Rachel couldnt report them..
Rape by proxy is still rape.
MaximusNYC
I’m a bit mystified by the loathing for Stewart a few people are expressing above. I think you’re wanting him, and his rally, to be something they aren’t — and because he won’t unequivocally declare himself on your side, and on board with your approach, you’re condemning him as worthless.
Here’s an idea for you: Someone can make many valuable contributions without agreeing with you 100%. Stewart’s point about tribalism is precisely relevant here.
I think the “false equivalence” accusation against Stewart has been vastly exaggerated. The extent of that at the rally, from what I saw, was a couple of references to Keith Olbermann. Most of the rally was actually a satire of Colbert’s personification of right-wing paranoia.
I think Stewart is a lot like Obama in being extremely invested in the idea of defusing the polarization in society as an approach to solving problems. I happen to feel that both of them are a bit naive about the ultimate power of this approach. Nonetheless, I appreciate that they are out there trying to make it work.
That doesn’t mean their approach should be the only one. I happen to think that being more confrontational about the insanity of the right is also useful. That’s why I come to this site and other like-minded sites on the web.
We don’t all have to agree about everything all the time in order to find common ground. Stewart is not a loathsome tool of the right wing just because his approach differs from yours. It’s not a binary world. And if you can’t see that, then maybe you’re part of the problem that Stewart is talking about.
LT
The “technically true” war criminal thing is so incredibly weak. “Not at the table! We’re having a conversation!” God, what moral cowardice. And then to say that in “his world” you’re only a war criminal if you’re like Pol Pot or the Nazis. I mean there’s nothing to say to that but Fuck you. What a dick. Bush was only a little bit of a war criminal, so please stop saying it. Jesus, what fuckery. does he even know that people have been convicted of war crimes who were nothing at all like Pol Pot of Eichmann? Can he not know that?
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
I saw the last three quarters of the interview and my reaction is not quite yours. I enjoy The Daily Show and find Stewart very funny and perceptive, but regarding the question, “what was the rally about,” I still have no idea. And I consider myself a reasonably intelligent individual with a better than average ability to follow meta discussions of this sort, but quite honestly found most of what he was saying on this score to be mealy-mouthed and political rather than enlightening. Maybe it’s because he had the flu or because I missed the first few minutes.
The one part that did sort of come through loud and clear for me was his insistence that he’s a comedian first and foremost, and that’s both good and a trifle disingenuous. Good because we need to keep his job description in mind whenever he sneaks a little false equivalence into his schtick (and the vast majority of his barbs are still directed at “the other side”, after all). Disingenuous in the case of something like the Rick Sanchez situation, where you push his buttons and push his buttons and push his buttons and when he finally flips out and says something stupid you then pretend you’re only a comedian and above it all.
Aaron
@matoko_chan:
I am not going to disagree, but I think Stewart’s larger point is that looking at the contemporary environment as being a contest of “two sides” is one of the more ridiculous and self-destructive ideas we could possibly have. Corruption and idiocy are exclusive to no party.
The issue of “false equivalencies” makes sense on a case by case basis. The left can not possibly keep up with the crazy of the right. But even this statement gives the game away – as it naturalizes a political tribalism that both a) distracts us from larger social, cultural, and economic problems and b) prevent meaningful social change as we begin to assume the worst about our political opponents.
MattR
@MaximusNYC: Well said, especially this bit:
If you want to solve issue X in the near future, the Obama-Stewart approach is not gonna get you there. But at the same time, if you’d like to see our country get back onto a better path without enduring a violent civil war the the Obama-Stewart approach is probably the best way to accomplish that. It is not a perfect analogy, but I don’t think a comparison to Muhammad Ali’s rope-a-dope strategy is completely unfounded either.
Corner Stone
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: Mainly because I don’t care for the fucking bullshit false equivalencies he continues to push because he’s got nothing else these days. Last time I checked it was ok to put an opinion on this blog.
And I can’t help it if I complain about the Texans and how horribly they’ve played the last few weeks. I had much higher hopes for them this year.
LTMidnight
@SteveinSC:
This has got to be the most brain-dead bullshit I’ve ever heard.
LTMidnight
Is anybody else noticing that it’s only the ideologically extreme people complaining about Jon Stewart in this interview?
Had you guys actually “listened” to the interview instead of having a “he’s telling me I’m wrong” knee-jerk reaction, you’d know and understand what he was talking about.
LTMidnight
@matoko_chan:
The only true difference between you guys are ideology. That’s it.
LTMidnight
@MaximusNYC: What we’re seeing is the “Obamafication” of Jon Stewart by liberals. In the same way that most liberals saw what they wanted to see in Obama they did the same for Stewart. The Daily Show is not a “liberal show”. Never has been. But because so many lefties so wanted a liberal version of Fox, they decided to co-op the Daily Show as “theirs”.
When people say things like “Whether he likes it or not he’s in the so called “game” its only because liberals “drafted” him into the game. he never volunteered.
LTMidnight
@Malron: because it wasn’t moonbatty enough, right?
LTMidnight
@Allan:
TRANSLATION: “I just found out that Stewart is not the moonbat I thought he was, so let me take a cowardly dig at his intelligence.”
keyboard brigades always fascinate me.
DanF
I very much enjoyed the interview and thought both made excellent points. The one issue I take with Stewart was his repeated denial that he “wasn’t in the game like Rachael.” No – not exactly like Rachael, but he interviewed the President about policy. Heads of state come on his show. He interviews Senators and Congressmen in leadership positions of both parties about policy. He regularly has on political pundits of all stripes and in every case, he asks harder questions than most news interviewers. He doesn’t do investigative journalism, and isn’t a news program, but he does affect the political culture as much, if not more, than a “Face the Nation” or “Meet the Press” type show. Perhaps he doesn’t own it because he worries it will make him less funny, or he truly believes he is just a bomb-thrower, but when he has a guest like Eric Cantor on and he says things like, “I think we’ve found some common ground,” it always sounds like the royal “we”.
EvolutionaryDesign
@SteveinSC: Dude, calm the fuck down.
ocean man
I agree with a just a few commenter here. Regarding false equivalence his response would be that TDS lambasts fox news 95% of the time. Or fox news is a cycloon covering a nation and msnbc “every now and again” is a tropical depresssion. Dont fight fox news with fox news. Which reminds very much of the rapture enthusiasts. How do we defeat evil. Not with jesus/lamb power but with a bigger, badder anti-christ, an anti-antichrist.
His point is that amplifying the fight bt red/blue is not the right fight. There only a few truly evil people. He tries to understand where people are coming from rather than just dismissing them. He states that fox news brilliance is deligitimizing “editorial authority while exercising incredible editorial authority” and that critique is persecution Its very cerebral as one commenter stated. He has given this a lot of thought. I think this is fundamentally something leftys do- question and examine, be skeptical. I do believe some on the right do this. But as one commenter noted the right seems to love doing the lockstep. I rebel against authority, many embrace it. Ok so now what is the answer? What is the right fight? Whats the next step after understanding where people are coming from?
jinxtigr
Heh. Someone needs to tell Stewart that he is NOT the President, and as not-such, does not have a responsibility to try to represent and empathize with ALL the people of the United States…
So much is explained by this. He honestly wants all the teabaggers and all the 9/11truthers to lay down their arguments and come together, if only for some TV comedy and 22 minutes of the funny. He honestly cares about wingnut feelings. He honestly cares about W’s feelings. It’s kind of disturbing, because if he takes the wrong tack he’s one of the people who could literally be killed by a demented wingnut with a gun, and then what good will his compassion have been?
I think part of the reason his smugness makes people ballistic is that you want to shake him and yell, you’re in the mud here with all the rest of us, quit pretending some sort of stupid higher perspective from which you can satirize. It’s a fake perspective. Here in reality, things are happening, and if there’s unbearable bullshit from all directions and no real recourse, it’s time for desperate measures, not for extra sneering.
Of course what he’s saying is, the teabaggers feel exactly that way and think it’s time for desperate measures involving shooting politicians, blacks, and God knows who else (literally- praying for instruction on which people to shoot will seem like a wise move to these guys), curbstomping women, what have you. It all seems like desperate measures in desperate times to these guys, just dialing back the damage they themselves caused is seen as an attack.
Feelings and taking sides is proving to be a crappy guide to actions these days. It’s a pity we don’t have a set of rules outlining what is and isn’t acceptable, oh like for instance WESTERN FUCKING CIVILIZATION or something…
Bruce (formerly Steve S.)
@ocean man:
Good question and I don’t think Jon Stewart knows the answer any better than we do. As a for instance, let’s go back to something else he said in the interview, that using the term “teabagger” is disrespectful. I agree and try to avoid using it myself, though I may have slipped up every now and then. So I’ve made this small gesture to “the other side”, now what? This morning I went to the post office and a couple of fellows had set up their “Impeach Obama” table, with the photo of him sporting the Hitler mustache, and were gathering signatures. Now, by the standards of this blog I’m an Obama critic myself, but stuff like that is so utterly incoherent to me that it might as well be in Klingon. Simply put, there is no possibility of finding common ground with some of my fellow citizens on some issues, and there is no value in trying to do the impossible. The best I can do is acknowledge that they are fellow citizens and entitled to their opinions.
Allan
@LTMidnight: I think it lost something in the translation. Like a sense of humor. And proportion.
EvolutionaryDesign
The angriest in this thread sound like jilted lovers. There is a real sense of “YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO CARRY THE TORCH FOR US!”. Jon is liberal but not partisan. I think the thing that is going over a lot of heads is that he is trying to examine a larger problem than left/right. Those of you who are so mad at him seem to be mad that he doesn’t deal directly in labels – labels you are dying by the sword for. I understand the argument that the right is shameless in their tactics in this fight, but I believe Jon is trying to say it’s time to stop engaging in this fight. Even though the “other side” is loud, stupid, and infuriating, as people who recognize this, we have to take the frustrating path of chainging the game into something better. Do I know what the answer is? No. But that’s the point.
MattR
@Bruce (formerly Steve S.): I think Jon would agree that folks like that you are never going to reach. You might even get him to admit that there are more unreachable folks on the right than the left. But I think he believes the unreachable are still in the minority and that we should tolerate them so that the rest of us can try and have a conversation above the din of their yammerings. Which leads me to think his complaint with Keith et al is that they start screaming in response which doesn’t change minds even if it is completely truthful. I also think that one of the reason this (EDIT: meaning Jon’s) approach does not go over well in the blogosphere is that he is essentially asking us to respond with calm and reason to trolls no matter how trollish they get.
Resident Firebagger
As one who’s been very frustrated by Stewart’s regular (and, it seems, more frequent) false equivalencies — to the point where I’ve gone from being a religious to an occasional TDS viewer — I liked the interview. It gave me an idea of why Stewart is the way he is. Certainly I disagree with some of his points, and while he seemed defensive at times, I don’t know where some of you are getting the smug from.
Stewart’s main flaw, I think, is that he seems to genuinely believe that people like George W. Bush have good intentions. I don’t choose to believe this, but then, Stewart doesn’t exist to agree with everything I (or you) believe.
And really, some of the responses here underscore Stewart’s point about tribalism going both ways. For instance, I think most of us here agree that Bush is a war criminal. But will anyone here say Obama is a war criminal? He is, you know…
Tracy
Watching it was like having multiple orgasms while eating bacon, drinking scotch, and talking about the glory that is the Oxford comma.
That, right there is a reason I read this blog. LOL made my morning!
timb
I guess I’m not too far into tribalism (and trust me I loathe the Southern conservatism which controls the GOP as much as Olberman does) to believe that George Bush was and is a member of Team Stupid, rather than Team Stupid. I believe he always wanted to invade Iraq and 9/11 was a helpful pretext, but he wanted to do it because he thought it made the world a better place: safer Israel, re-open vast fields of oil, take out an implacable enemy of the US, etc. I considered then and now that he was crazy and stupid, but I never believe he wanted to do it because he was “evil.”
I imagine the very few evil people in the world are just not THAT incompetent. If they were, good would have won and eradicated evil several generations ago.
When you can’t be Atticus Finch anymore, then you lost the ability to be a liberal and all you are is a partisan. Doesn’t matter which side you’re a partisan of, you will always demand the perfect rather than the good and you will always (like the Tea Partiers who claim Bush was not a real conservative) lose in the long run
Onkel Fritze
The ‘Daily Show Global Edition’ (a weekly summary) is actually on CNN International ;-)
Keith G
@SteveinSC: Thank god you wrote that. I was getting scared that I was the only one.
@Corner Stone: You were too kind.
@nepat: Yes.
Okay I’ll stop now that I see others get it.
Tourian
The criticism that’s being thrown at Jon from the Left is pretty astounding and validates a lot of his views on tribalism. The irony here is that Jon and his show has done more to expose the crimes and nonsense of the right-wing than almost anyone in the media and yet because he doesn’t pass some strict liberal “purity” test, he is to be denounced.
This is the flip-side of the same coin where conservatives purge the members of their groups they don’t deem pure enough.
It’s clear to me now that the more invested you are in your ideology, whether left or right, the more likely you are to eat your own.
Chris
One thing Stewart pointed out, but never quite in the right terms I think, is that comedians, unlike “serious” news people, are allowed to tell the truth. The “serious” people have to bury the truth deeply, because speaking truth to power is dangerous. By pretending to be “only kidding”, comedians can tell the actual, unvarnished truth.
maus
@matoko_chan: Well, it’s about people being horrible to each other, while liberal “smug snark” is about parodying the people being horrible to each other with dry, acerbic wit. The others are just shallow and face-value, self loathing Howard Sternisms.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Corner Stone:
How about attacking what he says, instead sending out a spew of bitchy personal attacks? Please tell me you understand the difference.
Mike E
Late again, sorry. JS was a classic fence-sitter, reserving the right to say whatever kept him positioned on his unique perch of… uhh, what was he talking about again?
His going out of his way to not nail GWB was deliberately annoying. I dunno, mebbe he’s a neolibertarian or sumptin.
Triassic Sands
@Corner Stone:
That was pretty much my response to the interview. I think Stewart is in over his head — he really doesn’t have the intellect or knowledge to back up a role as spokesperson for anyone or anything (including sanity).
I’ve watched The Daily Show occasionally (online), and I don’t find Stewart funny. His humor strikes me as largely sophomoric and is more annoying than anything else. Some of his supporting cast are hilarious and as far as I can see they make the show, .
His performance as an interviewer is mixed. Sometimes (as with Chris Mathews) he does a splendid job*, but often he’s really nothing more than a cog in the machine designed to sell products — in this case usually books.
I really didn’t see anything in this interview that struck me as worth recommending to others. As always, tastes vary.
* I don’t think Stewart’s treatment of Matthews would be appropriate for every guest, but Matthews is such a creep he deserved everything Stewart gave him and more.
SpaceSquid
Just for the record, don’t read just any British blog. Mine’s all about the X-Men and mathematics.
Corner Stone
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: How about I don’t care if you like it or not.
JDBee
I’m all about TDS and lurves me some Jon Stewart. I really appreciated the interview. I disagreed with him about a few things in the interview, but that’s to be expected.
The thing that truly irked me was the “war criminal” exchange. The thing about torture is that it is bad policy, making our country more unsafe in the process, and it hurts America’s moral authority (if you believe we have or had any, and I think we do) in a deep and unfathomable manner. When the brief debate about torture unfolded in this country, none of this was addressed. Instead, the discourse was about whether it is morally and ethically appropriate to do so, rather than there being a discussion about the existence of actual laws and treaties that deal with the torture. It’s akin to running a red light, getting pulled over, and then proceeding to debate about the ethics of penalizing red-light runners. So yes, certain folks responded to this by saying “It doesn’t matter what your views are on torture, the law says XYZ, and because Bush violated these laws, he is a war criminal.”
That’s why I don’t think calling Bush a war criminal was ever meant to be a debate stopper, and since Stewart cares about intent, it’s relevant. It was, I think, meant to reframe the debate from being about people’s individual predilections about torture to the question of whether there was an actual violation of laws.
Corner Stone
I’m not sure why people keep referring to tribalism to explain away the critique of Stewart.
Speaking only for myself, I’ve never considered Stewart “on my side” or particularly liberal at all. IIRC he did a pretty good hit job on ACORN that was much discussed on this blog. Along with lots of other markers that indicated he was doing his job, not pushing an ideology. He has never been a “MY side, right or wrong!” type of guy, IMO. Comedians can’t cut out half the potential for material.
IMO, the interview was poor for the reasons I mention above. His responses seem shallow and unrealistic, and he plays the “outsider” card when it suits him and gives him a built in defense to not really looking right at the issues and problems. He pushed false equivalence after false equivalence and Rachel let a lot of it go past because she was doing her best to be “civil” about it, which is her natural style I think. I also think Stewart took advantage of that to some degree.
I watched the interview on TV, then I watched at clips online, and then after some said the interview was deeper than some gave it credit for I reviewed it again.
And concluded my initial take was correct. It was meh.
LTMidnight
@Corner Stone:
I just find it funny that a lot of moonbats act as if Jon Stewart’s position is something that just showed up a few months ago, when if they were paying attention for the past 5 years Stewart has always held this position.
Paula
@Tourian:
It’s human nature, I suppose, to cling to names because the names give you a form of existence, as it were.
My uncle is a classic parrot of Fox News values — I say parrot because everything is literally a partisan game with him. Like, I was supposed to be somehow affected when “Democrats” lost something. He’s never actually considered the ramification or conservative ideology at all.
I am, in all honestly, the real-life incarnation of the young student indoctrinated by a Socialists that Beck warned about (sophmore yr of HS, I literally had to memorize and then summarize Karl Marx’s fundamental theories in an 11-page handwritten essay), and because of this the Democrats are fucking annoying (though, yeah, I vote for them in federal office just the same). But he wouldn’t be able to understand what I’d say if I tried to explain that differences in ideology are not always reducible to bourgeois party partisanship.
But yeah, I’m a crude, unreconstructed Marxist who votes for corporatist Democrats. I sometimes vote for the Greens, but their strategy sucks so I feel self-indulgent voting for them. I also think that some liberals’ ideas about the evils of globalization are overly simplistic and needs to contend more with the reality of a global economy.
I’m not an activist trying to promote anything, I’m just trying to do shit that makes the most sense to me on a case by case basis. Which by itself is a lot of effort without being asked to commit to a label and a pre-determined set of beliefs. I don’t want to be parrot, like my uncle; I am left-leaning, but I don’t want it to be in a knee-jerk way.
matoko_chan
@LTMidnight:
nope.
Its IQ.
my leaving the republican party is a direct result of Salam-Douthat stratification on cognitive ability.
I understand both evolution and climate change.
and i can read.
:)
techno
I am pretty sure, based on this interview, that Jon Stewart in his old age is going to be a lot more like Dennis Miller and almost nothing like George Carlin.
techno
I am pretty sure, based on this interview, that Jon Stewart in his old age is going to be a lot more like Dennis Miller and almost nothing like George Carlin.
matoko_chan
@maus: but you see…..they are horrible to us because they want to tell us what to do. we are horrible to them because we aren’t going to it.
its like christianity and islam.
muslims dont give a shit if xians wanna believe in the jesusgodhead.
we are all people of the book.
we do give a shit that xians want to MAKE us believe it too.
you see, maus….we know homosexuals are not evil, we know diploid oocytes are not humans, we know god didnt make the earth in seven days. we arent stupid.
but the other side wants to MAKE us believe what they believe, even if it is stupid.
because they ARE stupid.
Paula
Hmmm. I forgot the alt spelling, which is why I am in mod:
@Tourian:
It’s human nature, I suppose, to cling to names because the names give you a form of existence, as it were.
My uncle is a classic parrot of Fox News values—I say parrot because everything is literally a partisan game with him. Like, I was supposed to be somehow affected when “Democrats” lost something. He’s never actually considered the ramification or conservative ideology at all.
I am, in all honestly, the real-life incarnation of the young student indoctrinated by a Soci.ama.lists that Beck warned about (sophmore yr of HS, I literally had to memorize and then summarize Karl M@rx’s fundamental theories in an 11-page handwritten essay), and because of this the Democrats are fucking annoying (though, yeah, I vote for them in federal office just the same). But my uncle wouldn’t be able to understand what I’d say if I tried to explain that differences in ideology are not always reducible to bourgeois party partisanship.
But yeah, I’m a crude, unreconstructed M@rxist who votes for corporatist Democrats. I sometimes vote for the Greens, but their strategy sucks and they have a limited constituency, so I feel self-indulgent voting for them. I also think that some liberals’ ideas about the evils of globalization are overly simplistic and needs to contend more with the reality of a global economy.
I’m not an activist trying to promote anything, I’m just trying to do shit that makes the most sense to me on a case by case basis. Which by itself is a lot of effort without being asked to commit to a label and a pre-determined set of beliefs. I don’t want to be parrot, like my uncle; I am left-leaning, but I don’t want it to be in a knee-jerk way.
mouth
As has been said, Stewart made his name on the Bush admininstration. No-one else in the media would take on the flagrant lies — and so flagrant were they that it makes sense that a comedy show would be the only one to draw attention to their tragic preposterousness.
Then: all the polls talking about how so many got their news from his comedy show, so many pundits saying his show was more penetrating than the news outlets. Then: he got CNN to take Crossfire off the air by ambushing its hosts on live TV.
It was the outrageous corruption and villainy of Bush that gave Stewart his fame. He has always backed off the serious implications of his work by saying ‘I’m jest a comedian’ — except when it suits him not to — i.e. his smackdown of Tucker Carlson & Crossfire, and in his incoherent ‘sincere’ speech at the end of his rally. Wasn’t too much humor there, and speaking of comedians, when’s he last time Carrot Top got a show taken off of CNN?
Thus: his ‘I’m only a comedian’ schtick is operative only when he wants it to be — i.e., when he actually has to defend the moral stance on which his celebrity – and his paycheck – rests.
His stance his hypocritical and cowardly. And incoherent and dishonest: he makes his impassioned speech about how ‘both sides’ must tone it down while at the side of his spin-off buddy Colbert, the basis of whose show is that right-wing pundits are so self-evidently dishonest and absurd that all one has to is present their views with a twinge of irony for big laughs.
Now Stewart views himself as a patron saint for a point of view which exists nowhere in our world: a centrism of such purity that it means literally nothing. Where you’re a hyper-partisan and the leftist equivalent of Glenn Beck of you think Bush shouldn’t have wiped his ass with the Geneva Convention, and if you don’t close your eyes and forget that Bush and Rice didn’t travel the country aggressively trying to convince the populace that Saddam was going to set off a new Hiroshima in the heartland, why, the good centrist fairies won’t leave a nice present in your stocking tomorrow morning.
It can now be seen without a doubt that Stewart’s purpose was to give liberals something to do while Bush was torturing and waging illegal wars in their name – by sitting at home and watching Jon make funny faces they felt they were actually making some sort of show of resistance while Bush/Cheney merrily continued on their way. The Daily Show: a harmless release valve for liberals. Thanks, Jon!
mark
It’s spelled “funny”, idiot. Jesus, can anyone on the internet SPELL?