PDA

View Full Version : Jon Stewart is the Man!



eomrat
06-23-2012, 11:27 AM
aFQFB5YpDZE

SP1966
06-23-2012, 11:51 AM
aFQFB5YpDZE

I think it is an exceptionally accurate description of our media today, and very enjoyable watching them squirm. However, to claim that his own show is simply comedy and that he himself isn't partisan is ridiculous.

eomrat
06-23-2012, 11:58 AM
to claim that his own show is simply comedy and that he himself isn't partisan is ridiculous.

Agreed. The point I think he was trying to make is that it is ridiculous to justify your shows absolute wretchedness by comparing or contrasting it to any show on Comedy Central, especially when you are stupidly pretending to be an actual news show.

Also, I strongly suspect that he is much closer to my party than he is to the Democrat party. Of course, I also suspect that you are closer to my party than you are to the Republican Party!

SP1966
06-23-2012, 12:05 PM
Agreed. The point I think he was trying to make is that it is ridiculous to justify your shows absolute wretchedness by comparing or contrasting it to any show on Comedy Central, especially when you are stupidly pretending to be an actual news show.

But the only real difference between the shows is one pretends its a comedy about news, and not in fact news, which is dishonest. They are both propaganda machines, its just how they deliver their message that differs.


Also, I strongly suspect that he is much closer to my party than he is to the Democrat party. Of course, I also suspect that you are closer to my party than you are to the Republican Party!

Well I get further from the Republican party every day, all the while not moving myself. And if Stewart actually voted for Kerry then I don't know how he and I can be remotely closer to the same end party.

eomrat
06-23-2012, 12:16 PM
Well, I get further from the Republican party every day, all the while not moving myself.

Of course you do. The Republican Party are a bunch of Liberal ass clowns. Why not just embrace the party that embraces you? The whole house of cards is going to come crashing down anyway so why not, at least, ride this doomed ship into the abyss with like minded friends? Because really, that is the best you can hope for at this point.

Karl_Hungus
06-23-2012, 12:18 PM
But the only real difference between the shows is one pretends its a comedy about news, and not in fact news, which is dishonest. They are both propaganda machines, its just how they deliver their message that differs.


^^ This is an excellent description -- I think Jon Stewart's drama was a little over the top though. I mean, are these news shows really "hurting America"? People aren't stupid -- They recognize these shows for what they are (entertainment). The reality is that people want to be entertained -- If CNN had some stilted daily debate show, nobody would watch.

eomrat
06-23-2012, 12:27 PM
^^ This is an excellent description -- I think Jon Stewart's drama was a little over the top though. I mean, are these news shows really "hurting America"? People aren't stupid -- They recognize these shows for what they are (entertainment). The reality is that people want to be entertained -- If CNN had some stilted daily debate show, nobody would watch.

I strongly disagree.

A great number of people are stupid. And they are getting ALL of their ideas from television personalities. And they are voting.

Karl_Hungus
06-23-2012, 12:35 PM
I strongly disagree.

A great number of people are stupid. And they are getting ALL of their ideas from television personalities. And they are voting.

If, as you suggest, they are stupid enough to get all of their ideas from heated TV "debate" shows, then I suspect they would make uninformed voting choices even without shows like crossfire.

SP1966
06-23-2012, 12:38 PM
^^ This is an excellent description -- I think Jon Stewart's drama was a little over the top though. I mean, are these news shows really "hurting America"? People aren't stupid -- They recognize these shows for what they are (entertainment). The reality is that people want to be entertained -- If CNN had some stilted daily debate show, nobody would watch.

I would say absolutely, yes they are. Back when all we had were the three major networks the evening news competed by actually delivering the news. Yes there was partisan views among those shows, but when the entirety of the American news market was divided amongst only three networks they could not afford to reject half of that potential market by being overtly partisan. With todays 24 hour a day news on cable and the internet they have divided themselves, and us, we're no longer Red, White, and Blue, now we're only Red or Blue. Together we stand, divided we fall.

The condition of our country is not the fault of politicians. Yes they have passed the laws that have ruined the country, but then the founding fathers understood the inherent evil of men when in power so this was expected. It was the free press that was supposed to hold the crooked politicians feet to the fire, and it has been the free press that has allowed our country to deteriorate to its present condition by picking sides and only seeing the wrong in the other side while turning a blind eye to the wrong on their side. The ends justify the means to these people.

So yes, some of us are smart enough to see through todays news based propaganda, but I'm sure we all see in sickening numbers in those around us people who buy into it hook, line, and sinker.


Finally, yes, Stewart was over the top in his accusations, it was a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

eomrat
06-23-2012, 12:41 PM
If, as you suggest, they are stupid enough to get all of their ideas from heated TV "debate" shows, then I suspect they would make uninformed voting choices even without shows like crossfire.

Well, not just "debate shows". Many people get their opinions from people like Bono or that jackass from Oceans Eleven, or the guy from 30Rock, or that Sex in the City etc etc.

SP1966
06-23-2012, 12:43 PM
Of course you do. The Republican Party are bunch of Liberal ass clowns. Why not just embrace the party that embraces you? The whole house of cards is going to come crashing down anyway so why not, at least, ride this doomed ship into the abyss with like minded friends? Because really, that is the best you can hope for at this point.

I see to possible outcomes:

1. True conservatives retake the Republican party after seeing the damage the current liberals within it have done not only the to party, but the country.

2. The complete collapse of the United States, after which yes, conservatives will rally around the third, and truly conservative party.

I hope for the first, expect the second.


If, as you suggest, they are stupid enough to get all of their ideas from heated TV "debate" shows, then I suspect they would make uninformed voting choices even without shows like crossfire.

Of course stupid people will make stupid decisions, but give stupid people bad advice and they can be led in whatever direction those who have their ear choose.

Karl_Hungus
06-23-2012, 12:58 PM
I would say absolutely, yes they are. Back when all we had were the three major networks the evening news competed by actually delivering the news. Yes there was partisan views among those shows, but when the entirety of the American news market was divided amongst only three networks they could not afford to reject half of that potential market by being overtly partisan. With todays 24 hour a day news on cable and the internet they have divided themselves, and us, we're no longer Red, White, and Blue, now we're only Red or Blue. Together we stand, divided we fall.

The condition of our country is not the fault of politicians. Yes they have passed the laws that have ruined the country, but then the founding fathers understood the inherent evil of men when in power so this was expected. It was the free press that was supposed to hold the crooked politicians feet to the fire, and it has been the free press that has allowed our country to deteriorate to its present condition by picking sides and only seeing the wrong in the other side while turning a blind eye to the wrong on their side. The ends justify the means to these people.


I don't view it in such bleak terms. I don't really see shows like crossfire, or Hannity, or O'reilly, etc. as "news" shows. I see them as a guy giving an opinion about news events. It is up to the viewer to decide whether that opinion is valid or not. If they are too stupid (I don't think most are) to evaluate a political argument, then their voting choices will be capricious at best, and subject to influence from unsavory sources at worst -- many of which exist outside the world of news entertainment. To me, these shows don't seem like a big deal -- and the argument that they are hurting America seems overblown IMO.

eomrat
06-23-2012, 01:05 PM
I see to possible outcomes:

1. True conservatives retake the Republican party after seeing the damage the current liberals within it have done not only the to party, but the country.



Or, true conservatives finally realize that the Republican party hates and fears them. Then they switch, in mass, to their true home. Then, instead of trying to influence that corrupt, disgusting political whorehouse called the Republican Party they embrace and energize a true conservative movement.

Of course, in order to do that they will have to unlatch their partison jaws off of the irrelevant issue like Gay Marriage, Marijuana legalization, American Imperialism etc etc.


Think that is going to happen?

BillReilly
06-23-2012, 03:44 PM
Jon Stewart and the Colbert guy practice "flatire". That's flattery masquerading as satire. Greg Gutfeld nailed it, I think, when he called the Daily Show a mirror that claps.

BillReilly
06-23-2012, 03:48 PM
Or, true conservatives finally realize that the Republican party hates and fears them. Then they switch, in mass, to their true home. Then, instead of trying to influence that corrupt, disgusting political whorehouse called the Republican Party they embrace and energize a true conservative movement.

Of course, in order to do that they will have to unlatch their partison jaws off of the irrelevant issue like [b]Gay Marriage. Marijuana legalization, American Imperialism etc etc.[/b/


Think that is going to happen?

Hold the phone there. If we let the queers marry, what's next? A pot smoking Muslim with a dodgy self-history in the White House?

eomrat
06-23-2012, 09:52 PM
If, as you suggest, they are stupid enough to get all of their ideas from heated TV "debate" shows, then I suspect they would make uninformed voting choices even without shows like crossfire.

Good point.

Mogambo
06-24-2012, 02:04 AM
I don't view it in such bleak terms. I don't really see shows like crossfire, or Hannity, or O'reilly, etc. as "news" shows. I see them as a guy giving an opinion about news events. It is up to the viewer to decide whether that opinion is valid or not. If they are too stupid (I don't think most are) to evaluate a political argument, then their voting choices will be capricious at best, and subject to influence from unsavory sources at worst -- many of which exist outside the world of news entertainment. To me, these shows don't seem like a big deal -- and the argument that they are hurting America seems overblown IMO.

You give the voting public a lot of credit ITT, more than I would. The problem with what you are saying is that many Americans don't have the time or capacity to vet what they see on the news. They have to trust that news programs are genuine. How would one 'evaluate a political argument' in today's media world and get to the truth of the matter? Who do you trust to give you an honest assessment of things and not opinions? Not everyone can go through pages of source documents in order to get their vote 'right'. The media has a duty to do this. One that is not being met right now.

So no, to argue that the media is hurting America is not an overblown statement.

mslman71
06-24-2012, 07:38 AM
I think people seek out news sources that reinforce their beliefs and then interpret the stories in the same manner. I don't think this is unique to Americans (at all), and I don't think anyone, smart or dumb, is immune to it. If you want to get to the truth of something you're best off by considering and researching the reasons why your opinions are wrong, not why they are right.

As for Stewart, I find him boorish, just like the rest of the politically rooted comedians.

crupiea
06-24-2012, 07:47 AM
Herman Cain had an interesting point on the radio the other day.

he said that of course there are the 2 parties and those people cant be swayed who to vote for.

Said the real people to work on are the typical disinterested types. They never watch the news and dont keep up with what is going on.

he said its a fairly small group because most of them wont vote in the first place, so if you can sway that small group in your favor then you will win.

BillReilly
06-24-2012, 09:52 AM
I think people seek out news sources that reinforce their beliefs and then interpret the stories in the same manner.

I think people who seek out agreeable news sources think everyone else seeks out news outlets that confirm their biases. ;-)

People who study these things come up with some interesting results. MSNBC, which is designed to preach to the moonbats has a fair number of non-moonbats in their audience. I suspect they are there for laughs, but they are watching nonetheless. I know I tune in once in a while for some laughs. FNC has the broadest audience, despite the claims of the left. My bet is the biggest audience will be the broadest audience, but they have a lot of liberals watching.

TV news is a different animal than newspapers or internet sites. TV is passive. You have to put some effort into getting the paper or tracking down your news site. TV people claim most of their audience is casual. They stumble past something and stick for the evening. That's why popular shows boost the rating of shows before and after. It sounds reasonable.

I think you are right on when it comes to newspaper and the Internet. People self-segregate when it some to those sources.


As for Stewart, I find him boorish, just like the rest of the politically rooted comedians.

I never got into him because I don't think he is funny. The exaggerated irony face schtick was done to death in the 80's and 90's with Letterman and a number of standup acts. Stewart's jokes are like trains. You hear the whistle long before they get to you. I suspect that's the appeal. The audience wants confirmation. The fact that they see the joke coming is flattering.

SP1966
06-24-2012, 12:16 PM
Herman Cain had an interesting point on the radio the other day.

he said that of course there are the 2 parties and those people cant be swayed who to vote for.

And that right there is the problem with this country, people are what they are, they don't even bother to look to see if their party is still what they think it is. If they did the vast majority would be shocked to find the answer is hell no.



Said the real people to work on are the typical disinterested types. They never watch the news and dont keep up with what is going on.

he said its a fairly small group because most of them wont vote in the first place, so if you can sway that small group in your favor then you will win.

So Cain's grand plan is to pursue those who don't vote? Nothing new with that idea, the Dem's through their celebrity support group have been chasing the MTV generation for years and while it makes for lousy television, it makes for even lousier results. You cannot make people care, you can only hope to make those who already care, think.

SP1966
06-24-2012, 12:24 PM
People who study these things come up with some interesting results. MSNBC, which is designed to preach to the moonbats has a fair number of non-moonbats in their audience. I suspect they are there for laughs, but they are watching nonetheless. I know I tune in once in a while for some laughs. FNC has the broadest audience, despite the claims of the left. My bet is the biggest audience will be the broadest audience, but they have a lot of liberals watching.

I agree completely, MSNBC makes for far more laughs then Stewart on a good day! I can find humor where its not intended. I cannot however see humor in something so obviously meant to hide partisan opinion.



I think you are right on when it comes to newspaper and the Internet. People self-segregate when it some to those sources.


You cannot help but self segregate on the internet. If you are conservative you will not be able to take the emotional hysteria presented by the loony left, if you are a liberal (meant in its worst possible definition) you will not like those evil facts messing with your world view.