Jon Stewart and the US media
Fri, 2006-09-22 08:33
#1
Jon Stewart and the US media
Fri, 2006-09-22 08:33
#2
Aww - Michelle closed this just before I was able to comment - but I have a feeling that babblers weren't quite done.
The previous posts I think pretty much summed it up - Stewart doesn't want to land up like Bill Maher. True.
But re: Maher. Although he's 'back' in a sense he gets invites now, I was distressed to hear him a few weeks ago on Larry King spouting such uber Zionist crap you had to hear it to believe it, i.e. 'so sorry Lebanon that your cities had to be razed and so many killed, but that's what happens when you let the nuts run loose in your country.'
I'm paraphrasing but that was his essential thrust - make peace with Israel or be annihilated. It was very jarring to see this 'funny man' with literally blood dripping fangs.
EVERY American humorist or TV show host knows by now or should that they operate under certain parameters beyond which they cannot stray. It turns a lot of them into cowards, yes, but at least to quote Phil Donahue, they aren't "dead heroes."
I guess the lure of being in the public eye and making all that cash overrides concerns over teling it like it is which is why I can't work in radio or the media in the US anymore.
Yesterday as I recount in my blog (http://frontrowseat.motime.com/) there was a genuine hate-on against Chavez in the US media - CNN and MSNBC - you had to see it and hear it to beleive it. i didn't watch Fox since I was already going hoarse and didn't want to risk a stroke.
At one point I had made dinner for my son and invited him to watch Lou Dobbs saying "you've got to hear the propaganda being fed to people as news."
At one point UN Ambassador John Bolton was introduced as one of the sane and level headed voices in the UN by Dobbs. Luckily my dinner didn't hit the wall at that point but I needed a break from it all.
The ghosts of Goebbels are alive and well and writing news copy for the major US news networks. The crazy thing is that most Americans either applaud it ('finally the liberal media is dead') or the changes have gone right over their head.
Only Keith Olbermann seems to stand apart, but its also doubtful you're going to get an honest assessment of the history of American foreign policy in Latin America even from him.
Everyone is running scared. Can you IMAGINE a Walter Cronkite getting on the CBS Evening News today and saying the war in Iraq is unwinnable??
Anyway, I've strayed a bit from the topic but even using humour as a vehicle, one has to be careful and know the rules in the US.
I have to say though, that the most jarring comedy routine I ever heard on TV was from RICK MERCER who told a Canadian audience that they had to toe the line with the Americans because 'they can give us an old school whipping.'
It was on some kind of comedy award or tribute show I saw when I was in BC. It was very discouraging to see Mercer telling Canadians - hey, don't piss off the US too much or they'll thump us.
So the street can run your way as well, unfortunately.
[ 22 September 2006: Message edited by: Amйricain Йgalitaire ]
Fri, 2006-09-22 17:55
#3
I've pretty much given up on Jon Stewart. He is just another typical Democrat.
It's rather discouraging. He can be just as xenophobic and Amero-supremecist as Limbaugh if he wants to be. Note how the show patronizes and belittles pretty much any other country on Earth. If it isn't American, it's quaint, comical, ridiculous, inferior, or just stupid.
The show's coverage of the UN is a prime example. Not only did they give GW a pass on his most insulting and fascist behaviour, they dutifully fall into the "Iran is an evil empire run by a lunatic who wants nukes" line peddled by the worst of the far right. Chavez's speech was ignored save for a insulting remark about his sanity (just like Fox). If it comes to a choice between the rest of humanity on one hand and a lunatic genocidal tyrant American President on the other, the Loyal Democrat opposition will always buy American.
They even had Clinton on the show. I'm sure they really took him to task over his Iraq war. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
Fri, 2006-09-22 18:29
#4
Jingles wrote:
quote:
It's rather discouraging. He can be just as xenophobic and Amero-supremecist as Limbaugh if he wants to be. Note how the show patronizes and belittles pretty much any other country on Earth. If it isn't American, it's quaint, comical, ridiculous, inferior, or just stupid.
THANK YOU! Succinct and well-put this has really irritated me about his show as well. With Colbert, you figure its lampooning the way the right views the non-American world. With Stewart its pandering to the yahoos.
Fri, 2006-09-22 20:48
#5
Nobody's perfect.
Fri, 2006-09-22 20:54
#6
It's a sign of the times that people are criticizing a comedian for not reporting the news properly.
Sat, 2006-09-23 05:33
#7
jon stewart is jewish, and that does impact his approach to news and humour, sort of like dennis miller and ben stein etc.....israel and fears for israel (to all intents/purposes, israel is 100 percent dependent upon US support, and if that means pandering to the whitewing racist boors, well goldwyn and warner and even spielberg etc have been doing exactly that for generations!)
remember, patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels, and phony patriotism is easy to play at....see dubia bush
Sat, 2006-09-23 06:59
#8
remind
quote:
Originally posted by clandestiny:
[b]jon stewart is jewish, and that does impact his approach to news and humour, sort of like dennis miller and ben stein etc.....israel and fears for israel (to all intents/purposes, israel is 100 percent dependent upon US support, and if that means pandering to the whitewing racist boors[/b]
I don't know about his Jewishnesss impacting his approach to the "comic news", as the other night
I was watching him and at first, in the beginning of his skit, I would've thought that too. As he started out mocking those currently protesting against the Pope, but he went on to mock/bash [b]all[/b] religions equally, including the Jewish one, his own so to speak.
Perhaps some want to silence even this little voice of moderate integrity?
[ 23 September 2006: Message edited by: remind ]
Sat, 2006-09-23 07:10
#9
clandestiny, I really don't like the way you phrased that post. You're generalizing and drawing conclusions about the motive for Stewart's behaviour based on the fact that he's Jewish and that's really not appropriate. All Jews do not think the same or react the same to world events or even events in Israel.
Sat, 2006-09-23 17:14
#10
it seems dichotomous that a liberal, like jon stewart, who's so astute in framing criticism of the bush types, and how the bush types affect everything else in politics, yet when it comes to iran, or chavez, or castro etc, jon stewart acts...well he acts dense, like it's too much bother to understand the logic of vast swaths of humanity, so a bugs bunny-ish approach will have to do, hahaha....i too realize bringing stewart's jewishness into it strays onto very chary grounds, but didn't know how to phrase it...and probably shouldn't have made the effort. racism is truly poisonous; but it does grow in the dark...which still doesn't justify using it, i admit....
Sat, 2006-09-23 17:21
#11
quote:
Originally posted by clandestiny:
[b]i too realize bringing stewart's jewishness into it strays onto very chary grounds, but didn't know how to phrase it.[/b]
Perhaps I can make a helpful suggestion? Keep your mouth shut about celebrities' alleged religious affiliation, and you'll sleep better at night.
Sorry for the harsh words, but just think what I might have said...
Mon, 2006-09-25 08:20
#12
Never did like Jon Stewart's comedy. I find him to be neither hip, nor irreverant. Of course he plays to all sides of the spectrum, with something in his routine for everyone, even if one doesn't agree with his target of convienience for the moment. Essentially he's a product of a mainstream network. They allow him to sound like a breath of fresh air what with the occasional bleeping out of obscenities and his odd facial contortions. His tongue-in-cheek demeanor when talking about other countries populations panders exactly to the mindset of his viewers. He gives them what they want and expect to hear, while making his handlers happy with ratings and sponsors.
Mon, 2006-09-25 11:42
#13
remind
quote:
Originally posted by Slumberjack:
[b] Of course he plays to all sides of the spectrum, with something in his routine for everyone...[/b]
Oh for the days when people used to appreciate balance!
[img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
Tue, 2006-09-26 21:16
#14
Say what we will about Stewart, his guest list continues to astound.
quote:
Kevin Bleyer09.26.2006
[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-bleyer/pervez-has-left-the-build_b_3... Has Left the Building [/url]I'm not kidding. Just a few minutes ago. I saw him leave.
Before he departed, however, Pervez Musharraf, President of Pakistan, knower of Osama's whereabouts, launcher of coups, target of six assassination attempts, appeared as a guest on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."
And now here it is: your moment of "whaaa?!"
Hasn't aired in my part of the world yet but I will definitely tune in.
Fri, 2006-10-13 18:21
#15
Stewart is pretty funny when attacking Bush gaffes and absurdities but if a Democrat comes to power I think his show will lose its appeal. He also isn't that much of an interviewer. The best thing on Stewart's show is Lewis Black's segment. Black is a self-described socialist and dislikes both parties.
The Colbert Report which follows will also survive since it mocks the Fox News format. Fox News won't disappear when Democrats control the White House and Congress.
Tue, 2007-02-20 20:08
#16
M. Spector
quote:
[T]he court jesters of our dark times translate into far more than chit-chat.First, the quality political satire of comedians and parodists such as Stewart and Colbert give airtime - and often longer segments of airtime - to topics largely unmentioned by any other media. On February 12, for example, Colbert devoted The Word to a story buried or unreported by almost all other news: the latest Defense Department report that evidences Defense Undersecretary Douglas Feith's "pre-war report fabricating a link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda Putting AlQaeda in Iraq may have taken some imagination back then, but thanks to inappropriateness [Feith] made it a reality." Colbert provided three-plus minutes of time to a crucial story of precisely how and who manipulated intelligence. Trust me: go google this report, and you find the briefest of coverage, beginning with a confusing and mealy-mouthed AP version, with most stories headlining Feith's self-defense rather than the critical report.
Second, because of the fair-use shield of parody, these court jesters can report on politician's lies and corruption, as well as launch major critiques of media and press failures to hold politician's accountable.
Third, as my research shows, significant counterpublics have formed through web-based communities around such political material as TDS which do translate into action.
[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/boler02202007.html]Megan Boler, University of Toronto[/url]
Wed, 2007-02-21 17:24
#17
I think Stewart performs a wonderful function. he's not as radical as I might like, but by being gentle he sometimes gets neocon guests who he gently but devastatingly skewers. The number he did on the global warming is a myth guy a couple of weeks back was terrific. He managed to destroy the gentleman's logic, make the gentleman look like an angry ignoramus, and come off reasonable and funny all at the same time. Like a Beatles song, if it's so easy, then give it a whirl.
I think we can't underestimate the impact he has had by his technique of playing the latest neocon buzzphrase in quick succession 30 times in a row. "Slow bleed" is one of the latest. Now if you watch CNN they ape that every week. Except for Olbermann who else makes fun of Bush and co on a regular basis on national US TV?
Fri, 2008-10-31 11:36
#18
Exactly a typical democrat. I think the problem in the states is the BS they are fed growing up, like the NEP in Alberta or that all of Atlantic canada are nothing but welfare recipients(or so I am told). It is to keep the masses from using critical thought. Example, If I have people that are homeless or unemployed, or even on our shitty welfare system it is because the system we have wouldn't even allow these people a decent job, a failure of capitalism.
Not that they are lazy. Most people want to work(maybe not a lot) but don't want to earn 200 a week working very hard. While the managers and worse the executives get a big fat million dollar paycheck, benefits (something a lot of these jobs don't have)stock options, business meeting in exotic locations, and the 'prestige' that the job gives them for self confidence. "I am better than you because I don't have to make decisions and make more money"
With all these things is it any wonder people don't want to work at macdonalds. To make matters even worse, many jobs only offer part time hours.This means having to get at least 2 jobs to make a regular 40 hour pay check.
While having 2 jobs doesn't sound two bad if you only work 40 hours it really means working a lot more. Consider transit time to the job, if you have jobs in different directions from your home, you would spend literally hours in traffic, even worse if you live rural or take a lot of public transit with transfers. Add to this the lack of pension and or benefits and one can easily see why someone would actually prefer 537 a month(thats right a month!!) to live on welfare. My aunt is on disability and my cousins deride her, I try to point out the problems of her getting a job(for one being disabled) and they think I am the one that is wrong. We have almost 11% unemployment, how does one go find a job when the people who haven't left(estimated at several thousand) still can't find meaningful employment.
Fri, 2008-10-31 11:42
#19
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Tonight he told Bill Kristol he would have voted for John McCain in 2000 if he had won the Republican nomination.[/b]
The interesting thing about that interview is Kristol admitted that Obama is neither a socialist nor a radical but as President would simply be a "typical liberal Democrat". Stewart picked up on this saying that he's admitting that the GOP are just accusing Obama of being a socialist and a radical in order to scare people and Kristol basically just shrugged.
Earlier this week, Colbert rebutted the accusations that Obama is a socialist by having the Socialist Party's presidential candidate explain how that isn't so (Obama is a capitalist and doesn't want the workers to own the means of production).
Fri, 2008-10-31 12:01
#20
What I find bizarre is that progressives are looking to TV humorists for statements truly critical of politicians and the State. Compare the time we spend reading the likes of Chomsky, Zinn or Albert to the time expended on Stewart and Colbert. Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
[ 31 October 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
Fri, 2008-10-31 12:28
#21
N.Beltov
quote:
martin dufresne: Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
Political entertainment, politics [b]as[/b] entertainment, is just one more product marketed to flat-brained consumers. The market is a God that will have no other Gods beside it.
Fri, 2008-10-31 12:33
#22
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b]Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
[/b]
Yes. "The better to eat you with, my dear."
Sun, 2008-11-02 18:45
#23
Michael Hardner
quote:
Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
Entertainment is possibly the only good use for politics in America these days.
Sun, 2008-11-02 19:38
#24
Frustrated Mess
quote:
Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
To the extent that entertainment even masquerades as political analysis, yes. One of the most shocking aspects of the success of the Stewart and Colbert shows is that viewers often look to them for a more honest analysis than what is available the usual suspects paraded before cable and network news.
Sun, 2008-11-02 19:53
#25
Malcolm
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
[b]
One of the most shocking aspects of the success of the Stewart and Colbert shows is that viewers often look to them for a more honest analysis than what is available the usual suspects paraded before cable and network news.[/b]
Even more shocking is that they are right to do so.
Sun, 2008-11-02 23:24
#26
quote:
Originally posted by Malcolm:
[b]Even more shocking is that they are right to do so.[/b]
Still more shocking is their viewers are the most informed on policy. Despite what, 4 all news channels over there.
Tue, 2008-11-04 07:09
#27
quote:
Originally posted by thorin_bane:
[b]Still more shocking is their viewers are the most informed on policy. Despite what, 4 all news channels over there.[/b]
Where else but on these type of shows, such as Real time With Bill Maher, can the voters find insight as to the motivations of the Religious right in America.
[ 04 November 2008: Message edited by: Slumberjack ]
Tue, 2008-11-04 07:20
#28
quote:
What I find bizarre is that progressives are looking to TV humorists for statements truly critical of politicians and the State. Compare the time we spend reading the likes of Chomsky, Zinn or Albert to the time expended on Stewart and Colbert. Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
So the medium is the message then? I guess we should be glad TV is on the way out... I hope Chomsky, Zinn and Albert are familiar with the net because I don't see printed books making a comeback; unless the internet is also an "entertainment" medium rather than an "analysis" medium.
Tue, 2008-11-04 08:13
#29
quote:
Originally posted by It's Me D:
[b]So the medium is the message then? I guess we should be glad TV is on the way out... I hope Chomsky, Zinn and Albert are familiar with the net because I don't see printed books making a comeback; unless the internet is also an "entertainment" medium rather than an "analysis" medium.[/b]
Book consumption is actually up.
[url=http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/salle-presse/communiq/2008/juin/juin0818_an.h... here[/url] I think people are spending more time reading on the web which of course leads to the need to read something more substancial than a lot of articles or forum posts. Plus Opra nevermind what I think of the books she promotes, at least she is getting her followers reading.
My young friends and I agree that there is just something about holding a book in your hand, a permanance about it. The ability to dog ear it, bookmark it, fold it back...I don't know I can get a lot of my books from torrents but I prefer to have a physical one in front of me. To be sure a lot of ebook will also be used, but regular books aren't going anywhere IMO.
Sorry about the drift
Daily Show and Colbert report are suppose to be on live at 10:00 est tonight for election coverage. Don't know if that applies to comedy network here though.
Tue, 2008-11-04 08:26
#30
quote:
Originally posted by thorin_bane:
[b]Still more shocking is their viewers are the most informed on policy. Despite what, 4 all news channels over there.[/b]
One should take a stop watch to any news broadcast and keep time what is actually "news". When you strip the witty reparte between the nicely coiffed hair stands, the bumpers, the health news about research that is a decade from actually affecting anyone's lives, there's not much steak amoungst all that sizzle.
There's a few constants in American culture. One of them-- and you can check de Toqueville out, is that while they cellebrate freedom of expression, they also cellebrate freedom of expression to dissagree with someone else's freedom of expression.
So, you gotta be tough.
Another is the role of the satirist and humourist illustrating the awful truths, which predates American itself in Franklin's "Poor Richard's Almanac.", and seems to surface around or at the result of social crisis.
I think Franklin and Stewart would like and understand each other, while Thomas Paine and Bill Maher are a natural fit.
Tue, 2008-11-04 08:28
#31
ElizaQ
quote:
Originally posted by thorin_bane:
[QB]Book consumption is actually up.
[url=http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/salle-presse/communiq/2008/juin/juin0818_an.h... here[/url] I think people are spending more time reading on the web which of course leads to the need to read something more substancial than a lot of articles or forum posts. Plus Opra nevermind what I think of the books she promotes, at least she is getting her followers reading.
Many of Stewarts and Colberts guests are promoting books as well, it's one of the main reasons they come on.
I've actually got a few after I've seen them on the show because it's the first I heard of them.
quote:
Sorry about the drift
Daily Show and Colbert report are suppose to be on live at 10:00 est tonight for election coverage. Don't know if that applies to comedy network here though.
It's on CTV. I just saw a commercial for it. Pretty funny actually. Stewart and Colbert standing there...Colbert holding a paper and says generally, "Well I'm ready to call it, I have the result as pre-released by the administration, which they always give out to real news reporters. Stewart 'um well I didn't get them yet' and Colbert giving him a smug shruggy look, "Well what can I say John..."
Tue, 2008-11-04 09:30
#32
quote:
Many of Stewarts and Colberts guests are promoting books as well, it's one of the main reasons they come on.
I've actually got a few after I've seen them on the show because it's the first I heard of them.
Shhh Eliza [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] You are in danger of bluring martin's clear lines between entertainment and analysis...
quote:
Has entertainment preempted political analysis?
Apparently not [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Mon, 2009-03-16 00:47
#33
America cheers as satirist delivers knockout blow to TV finance gurus
For the past 10 days the US has been gripped. Even President Obama tuned in as the country's foremost TV comic, Jon Stewart, unleashed an extraordinary broadside against TV's top financial commentators for their part in the unfolding economic crisis.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/15/usa-tv-jon-stewart-economy
His assault on Wall Street began in earnest with a classic Daily Show technique: a series of juxtaposed clips revealing incompetence and hypocrisy. First there was Rick Santelli, a CNBC reporter who tried to strike a populist chord by launching a sudden rant on a trading floor. Stewart, unimpressed, forensically dissected the channel's past mistakes, in which it made exuberantly bullish statements about the market and various investment banks shortly before they collapsed. Stewart added: "If I only followed CNBC's advice. I'd have a million dollars today – provided I'd started with $100m."
Such is his influence, in the next days ratings for Mad Money went down 10 per cent in the 25-to-54 demographic. But Cramer, a former hedge fund manager, is not one to take barbs lying down. He declared war with the sarcastic riposte: "Oh, oh, a comedian is attacking me! Wow! He runs a variety show!"
Stewart aired still more clips of Cramer advising his viewers to pile into Bear Stearns shares in the weeks before the bank collapsed, rendering them worthless. As the media stoked up the row, the date was set for a "facedown" last Thursday. Stewart showed the attack-dog interviewing instincts of a Humphrys or Paxman. He charged that people at CNBC knew what was going on behind the scenes on Wall Street but failed to tell the public. He accused CNBC hosts and pundits of abandoning their journalistic duties and acting like cheerleaders for the market.
Cramer proffered feeble mea culpas and acknowledged that they could do better. But the merciless Stewart produced damning footage of a 2006 interview with TheStreet.com, in which Cramer described, in a positive way, certain barely legal things a hedge fund manager might do to work the market to his advantage. Stewart pressed: "I understand you want to make finance entertaining. But it's not a game. And when I watch that, I can't tell you how angry that makes me."
He launched an eloquent assault that struck at the very foundations of American financial press and television. "You knew what the banks were doing, yet were touting it for months and months – the entire network was," he said. "For now to pretend that this was some sort of crazy, once-in-a-lifetime tsunami that nobody could have seen coming is disingenuous at best, and criminal at worst."
The interview became an online sensation that reached the White House. Press secretary Robert Gibbs said he has spoken to President Obama about watching the Stewart-Cramer showdown. "Despite, even as Mr Stewart said, that it may have been uncomfortable to conduct and uncomfortable to watch - I thought somebody asked a lot of tough questions," the spokesman said.
Insiders at CNBC have acknowledged the episode was a public relations disaster. A day after his public thrashing, Cramer declared that, "although I was clearly outside of my safety zone, I have the utmost respect for this
person and the work that they do, no matter how uncomfortable it was".
Now the media has finally been forced into introspection. Andrew Leckey, a former CNBC host and now president of the Donald W Reynolds National Center for Business Journalism at Arizona State University, said: "In a tremendous boom period, they covered the boom and people wanted to believe in the boom. They didn't uncover the lies that were told to them. Nobody did. But they should be held to a higher responsibility.
Mon, 2009-03-16 04:25
#34
It's kind of sad though that it takes a comedy program to do that. Serious questions need to be asked about the business media who with few exceptions acted like corporate cheerleaders rather than journalists.
Mon, 2009-03-16 10:44
#35
remind
Stewart was excellent last week in his taking on Cramer, and the news networks!
Mon, 2009-03-16 11:03
#36
It's kind of sad though that it takes a comedy program to do that. Serious questions need to be asked about the business media who with few exceptions acted like corporate cheerleaders rather than journalists.
"This Hour has 22 Minutes" really dropped the ball on that one, as did "The Rick Mercer Report." These shows can't really compete in the marketplace of gags that the invisible banana peel fosters south of the border . Oh, for the pre-cutback days of biting fake journalism like that of "The Royal Canadian Air Farce."
Mon, 2009-03-16 17:36
#37
This hour has gone down his a lot. And mercer is terrible compared to when he was on 22 minutes. How many time will mercer be shown with the troops? Colbert is great and daily show hits the mark in the stewart segments. I like watching them online, even if I have to go through CTV to do it.
Thu, 2009-03-19 19:36
#38
Thu, 2009-03-19 21:20
#39
Yeah, The Comedy Network has a bigger news budget than Fox and MSNBC put together.
It's the law of supply and demand: humourless automatons want mainstream infotainment while the cheekier demographic wants a belly laugh or two to complement its disaster reports.
Thu, 2009-03-19 21:41
#40
But if it HAS to elicit a belly laugh or two to get on the air, that kind of shuts out an in-earnest type of political comment. Does any commentary have to lead to a punchline or to cynicism to become acceptable to TV addicts? I use humour a lot, but I don't want it to leave the realm of conviction and alternative values to President Obama's or Mr. Ignatieff's speechwriters.
Fri, 2009-10-30 01:12
#41
I thought it was good of Stewart to have Mustapha Barghouti on last night. Unfortunately Stewart's approach to Barghouti was right out of the AIPAC manual. He could have allowed that Jewish woman a word or two as well.
The Angry Arab wasn't impressed with anything about the interview:
First, it was interesting that he came accompanied with a (nice) Jewish woman activist for peace. But it came across as awkward: as if the Palestinian could not be brought before the audience without the approval and blessing of an American Jewish person. As if to say: he is OK. This one is a human being. Secondly, the tension was felt as soon as Barghuti began to speak: when a member of the audience yelled: liar. And Jon Stewart, who repudiated and mocked Rep. Wilson for yelling "liar" to Obama, treated the yelling but the audience member as a healthy or normal expression of the intensity of passions on both sides. He almost sounded: as if the words of Barghuti are equal to the rude yelling but that dude.
Sun, 2009-11-01 01:30
#42
Last night Dr. Barghouti and I were on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart talking about Palestine.The show was overwhelmed with angry emails and phone calls prior to the appearance, and up until the last minute it seemed like they might cancel. During the taping the show had its only heckler in 11 years.The entire staff were very nervous and may come to regret the monumental decision (and not make it again) as they will surely be inundated now that the show has aired.
Anna Baltzer
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/
Tue, 2010-05-04 14:41
#43
Since Bill Maher is a close comedic cousin to Jon Stewart, I'll mention this here rather than start a new thread.
I used to watch Politically Incorrect back around 2001, not because I liked much of what Maher was saying (he said he was a "real" Republican back then) , but to get some kind of angle on what yanquis thought about the world. Usually I'd end up fairly angry, but that was part of the entertainment for me.
I recently started watching Maher again on his HBO show (whatever it's called) and thought he had come around to being almost as leftist as a yanqui could be.
He shot that idea down last week. At one point he made a comment on how the price of gasoline is artificially low, because the cost of "defending the Middle East" isn't taken into account. That comment was no accident, as he repeated it a few times.
Then he went on a rant about those threats against the South Park cartoonists, telling Muslims that his culture is better than their culture.
Sarah Palin probably wouldn't have anything to argue about with him over what he said last week.
Tue, 2010-05-04 16:23
#44
Open letter to Jon Stewart, Bring back Leibowitz http://www.slate.com/id/2223034
Wed, 2010-05-12 17:17
#45
I still don't think Bill Maher deserves his own thread...
However, Maher’s bigoted rant didn’t stop there, it also included his preaching about how “our culture” is better than their “culture.” I thought Maher would have realized by now that NOT ALL MUSLIMS are alike. Not all Muslims speak Arabic, live in caves, beat their wives 24-7, etc. It’s a point that As’ad Abu Khalil made painfully obvious to Maher and his guests ten years ago when Maher hosted Politically Incorrect (video at bottom). Did Maher just forget that convenient fact or is he just fulfilling the buffoonish American caricature he so often loves to lampoon?
Wed, 2010-05-12 17:37
#46
Catchfire
I watched a segment of Dr. As'ad's appearance on Politically Incorrect a decade ago. Maher is a monster while As'ad (as usual) distinguishes himself as an impressive prognosticator and thoughtful critic.
Wed, 2010-05-12 22:06
#47
Frustrated Mess
What has to be fully appreciated, is the US liberals are as supportive of US foreign policy as the most rabid Republicans. Why? Because as Obama states, the US lifestyle is non-negotiable. A nation representing a fraction of the global population but consuming the lion's share of the globe's resources can only maintain its "lifestyle" through the liberal application of raw, industrial strenghth, organized violence. Therefore, there is a political consensus in the US that any government that resists US demands for unconditional surrender of sovereignty and resources is an enemy that must be demonized, debased, and ridiculed and, ultimately, the entire nation must be subjected to a brutal violence that serves the same purpose as heads placed on stakes in public squares in an earlier era.
Remember, Iraq was not just about stealing oil but about "shock and awe"; to stand as an abject lesson to Iran, Venezuela, and any other nation resisting hegemony. Throughout US history, since the Spanish-American war, US foreign policy has been consistently and violently applied by every administration regardless of party. The US is the War State.
Wed, 2010-05-12 22:15
#48
remind
Stewart had a great show on last night trying to inform the youth about the lying liars at Faux News, pretty damn funnt actually too.
Tue, 2010-06-01 23:58
#49
Whichever rightwing loon (Mike Stafford or Charles Adler) who had airtime on AM640 following Leafs Lunch the other day said that Bill Maher is a racist for saying that Barack Obama isn't really black. The guy was quite giddy about the whole thing, y'know, because Bill Maher is a liberal and a leftist and all.
I don't doubt that Maher is a racist - he's been making anti-Arab and anti-Muslim comments for years - but it's funny that the right-wingers have seized upon this apostate Republican to score points against someone whom they see as representing "The Left."
The comic Corus isn't singing solo either. This "story" is all over the interwebs.
Wed, 2010-06-02 07:20
#50
a world w/out news. that's what it is now. so the place is silent as a toom until evening, when ray romano and 'office' come on....the news is nonsense. They lie.Everything they put on is a lie. The Rightwing Agenda with $250/year public servant steve pakin is so utterly revolting only violence does it justice, but then again, who ccares. The kids, even the starving littles in refugee camps, are all rightwingers in diapers anyway, it seems. Truth is too hard, too unpleasant. It's over
Wed, 2010-10-27 13:36
#51
So there we were, four "crazies" being quizzed by Samantha Bee for over two hours. She started out with softballs -- what did we stand for, what activities did we engage in. Then the questions and the antics got sillier and sillier. By the end we found ourselves spinning a blind-folded Samantha Bee around, then watching her swing a baseball bat at Ahmadinejad's head to see if it was really a pinata.
I'm sure that with over two hours of tape, there will be plenty of footage to turn into a four-minute segment showing us as a bunch of nutcases. After all, it is a comedy show.
But it's too bad that Jon Stewart, the liberal comedian, is putting anti-war activists, tea partiers and black bloc anarchists in the same bag. And it's sad that he's telling his audience -- many of whom are young progressive thinkers -- that activism is crazy.