Maddow -- Jon Stewart Interview pt.1

[travelingtypist]

Run time: 09:44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu_hEFYDfps   Posted on YouTube: November 12, 2010 By YouTube Member: MOXNEWSd0tCOM Views on YouTube: 101   Posted on DU: November 12, 2010 By DU Member: travelingtypist Views on DU: 2596

 
Part 2 -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UunPJgBlT7U

[suzanner]

1. OMG ...I won't be able to respect him anymore

For a while he's just talking nonsense to make some false point cloaked in word salad quagmire. I hope Rachel takes nothing he says to heart. Or we're all sunk some more. I was half waiting for a metaphor from Moby Dick from Jon.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

4. "Word salad quagmire"

Mercy, but that's a beautifully turned phrase, even if it did sorta turn my stomach, too. Reminded me of that arsenical green jello-y goop we got back in elementary school, the stuff with fruit cocktail and marshmallows in it.

[Grassy Knoll]

2. That was very weird...

but then again he said he was under the weather.

[EFerrari]

29. Comedians should avoid being on for more than 15 minutes

if they can possibly help it.

lol

[GrpCaptMandrake]

3. Absolutely fascinating!

I don't think Jon gets it yet. I *do* think he still maintains that there's some level of equivalence between the eliminationist urges of the right and a woman screaming "War criminal!" There isn't.

[cynatnite]

5. I'm not sure if he does either...

It almost seemed like Jon was working too hard to disabuse Rachel of the notion that's what he was doing. I didn't fully understand everything he was saying either. It may just be over my head. Jon and Rachel both are very intelligent.

[wtmusic]

6. I suppose to Jon and Neville Chamberlain "war criminal" *is* a conversation-stopper.

Maybe that's a conversation that's not worth having anyway.

[rocktivity]

24. "alleged" or "possible" war criminal, then.

Presumption of innocence and all that.

:evilgrin:
rocktivity

[tomm2thumbs]

7. pundits interviewing pundits - 'news' today looks so strange to me

I guess it IS all about the ratings

makes me think TV is all but done for, when news chasers become subject of the news itself

Perhaps the hosts of Entertainment Tonight should interview the hosts of EXTRA, and after that we can have the folks from TMZ interview Perez Hilton and see what comes of it.

[fishwax]

8. I think Jon has some good points, but I don't think he understands Rachel's point about

how Code Pink is different from the Town Hall protestors because Code Pink is a handful of activists behaving disruptively because they feel shut out of the process, while the tea partiers activists are, by and large, bankrolled by right-wing organizations to make it appear like they're shut out of the process. So it's only natural that a news organization would not treat those two groups identically.

[rocktivity]

23. But, ironically, it was Rachel who EXPOSED the teabaggers

as the phony grass-roots organization that they were. The rest of the MSM seemed to be too busy taking their ad revenues to notice.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[herbm]

9. As incoherent as Jon's ever been. Civility is one thing and caving in is another. Just because a

screaming teabagger may have logical or popular opinion - "the rents just too damn high" - doesn't mean the screaming teabagger should be tolerated.

[pezDispenser]

10. I am a liberal, it doesn't mean I think of Democrats as being on my team

boy ain't that the truth.

[JonLP24]

11. Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jql0OinUiQ

[travelingtypist]

13. Thanks for posting this.

I didn't realize there was a Part 3.

[JonLP24]

15. I haven't finished watching

but at the end of Pt 2, it looked like they were going to get into waterboarding but they haven't mentioned it and I'm over half way through. I wonder if there is footage in the middle of pt 2 & 3 that is missing. Maybe they will talk about it later on.

Edit-Nevermind. They are talking about it. Spoke too soon.

[travelingtypist]

16. And here's part 4.

http://www.youtube.com/user/MOXNEWSd0tCOM#p/u/0/PgvVMlQbSMU

[DonCoquixote]

12. OK..

When he says that there is a left and right way of "shutting down debate", there is SOME, operative word term some, truth to that. We showed this in the primary where you cannot talk about Obama Vs. Clinton without race or sex being mentioned, thereby making sure that all the attention was paid to Obama and Clinton (as opposed to John Edwards or anyone else that actually was to the left of both of them.) Yes, the fight is between "corruption" and "not corruption", OK, I can dig that, after all, there has sadly been plenty of corruption to go all around. However, if he really believes there is an equivalence between the left and right in terms of distortion, he is truly ignorant. It is not a matter of political science, it is a mater of what some of the posters here call "thermodynamics", there is simply a LOT more energy and fuel on the right, supplied by the richest inside the nation, and those outside the nation who want to keep John and Jane Yank angry, stupid, and gullible.

You simply cannot compare the amount of money that is spent by the likes of Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, The Bushes, and that is just the domestic group. We will not even get into the nation that produced 15 out of 19 9-11 bombers (but has never been called out for it) nor the Chinese and Indians.

Let's say we waved a magic wand, and turned all the centre-left, mid-left, far-left, and yes, even Barack O. himself into raging bloodthirsty Maoists ready to torture, kill and eat their own mothers to bring about the sort of Red revolution that would make Che Guevara, Ted Rall and Noam Chomsky say "Hey guys, Chill out, I think you are going a bit too far to the left." They would still be seriously out-gunned and out-manned (and out-womaned) by the forces that outspend them 2 to 1: you might as well put a Poodle against a Pit Bull.

There is no way you can pretend there is a balance when Joe Scarborough is, in effect, getting a free chance to advertise any 2012 campaign he has, yet Keith O. gets slapped down for making 5 grand of contributions. There is now way you can say there is a balance when Rupert Murdoch is close to buying MSNBC, which means, for all of her bravery, Rachel has a target on her chest.

Sorry Jon. If you came in and said "look, I started wanting to be a comedian, but found myself in such absurd situations that I felt I had to use the attention I got to shine light towards the craziness" then you would be accepted. You would be still be praised as one of the people saying "hey Journalists, why are you acting like comedians?" However, the bottom line is Jon, to quote Batman, "when you looked into the darkness, you blinked", in other words, you freaked out and ran home. You looked for a comfort zone. And when you compounded that by saying Bush is not a war criminal, you might as well have ground a cigarette butt into the faces of people who admired you because, when journalist freaked out, you were the only one who had the guts to say it. You do this knowing that the great whitewash of W. is in full swing, just in time so that Jeb can get that presidential run has parents promised him since birth.

You know, Barry O. had the Blue Dogs, and a lot of deceptive people who lied to him, you however, should have seen through the Bullshit. I will tell you this much, the next time you throw stones, expect to have a few pitched at your head. Dante said the Hottest Places in Hell were reserved for those who, in time of great conflict, sough to cover their own ass (my paraphrase). If you are scared because you are over your head, admit it, and accept the help of the Michael Moores and others that will help you. I hate to say it, but for someone who has said some genuinely true things about Barry O., you are beginning to imitate his mistakes.

OH, one last caveat, yes Rachel went to Oxford, but let's be fair, she would still be smarter than most even if she were self-educated at a Public Library. We cannot get many silver linings here, but if nothing else, The GOP has proven that you could get a ton of degrees and still be a damn idiot.

[Karenina]

25. LOVE your post!

:*

[Merlot]

32. Well said, DonCoquixote

[midnight]

14. What are the similarities between Bush and Pol Pot?

[MrMickeysMom]

18. I'm gonna guess...

Pol Pot enjoyed seeing people die and Bush just tee'd up and ignored the mass killings.

[MrMickeysMom]

17. I think W already admitted it... Bush is a war criminal

Furthermore, for Stewart to admit that his show "gives amnesty to people they believe in and demonizes people they don't" puts no credibility behind him for reminding MSNBC that MSNBC assumes wrongly to defend Olbermann's, Ed's, view on politics. They are reviving and excelling at NEWS AND COMMENTARY.

We've been dealing with crimes of the highest degree and unconstitutional executive orders, along with amnesia of knowing what the State Dept does versus the Pentagon under Bush. So, who does Jon think he's fooling? He didn't convince me, or my husband. He's wrong. George W Bush and Richard Cheney should be in jail right along with the team who enabled these crimes over 8 years.

Me thinks Jon takes his position as chief bottle washer of popular comedy a little too seriously. He's not my conscience, I just laugh at his jokes. When he takes it out of hand or says some stupid shit at an otherwise great rally, well, he should try to understand the response. I believe he got a big dose of it and it hurts him. You can see it clearly in this interview.

He should act like someone who has balls, please. Apparently Jon wants to put his kids through college, so, we're supposed to understand that he can be right about politics and how to parse "each side". When we disagree with him, it doesn't mean we won't continue to laugh at his show and excellent writing and satire, it just means that he has a few things to understand. But, no. he seems to be willing to sit on the fence about what's going on in this country because he's as out of touch with it as anyone might be.

[UndauntedD]

19. lol, he said "seminal thrust" to a lesbian...

[Karenina]

26. He took on several MaleSpeak, ManTone voices in addressing her.

I think he made a grave mistake by not postponing the interview (is there ANYONE who would not forgive him when he's prolly spewing from both ends? Boyfriend did NOT look or sound good. WHAT A TROOPER! THE SHOW MUST GO ON!) However, he may also have confirmed Keith's "jumped A shark" tweet. PLEASE pay special attention to the capitalized article.

My subjective take...

Jon: Rachel, I LIKE you!

Rachel: That's very white of you, Jon!

:rofl:

[MrMickeysMom]

31. Yeppers!

He sure seemed to do that!

[EFerrari]

28. I know. Oh, geeze.

LOL

[TheeHazelnut]

20. It doesn't matter if Bush meant well

He committed crimes that led to thousands of deaths of innocent people. Jon Stewart is getting wrapped up in mind games. Of course people like Bush think they are doing the right thing for somebody on some level. Stewart's pointing out that no one is a "pure evil" is completely unhelpful in dealing with the reality of evil actions in the world.

[Dyler Turden]

21. After watching part 4 (the last part)

I was thoroughly happy with both Rachel and Jon. It ended as sort of a mutual admiration fest which served me well because I think so highly of the both of them.

[TEXASYANKEE]

22. This interview depressed me.

Not Rachel (who was brilliant as always) but Jon. He says that Bush thinking that Saddam was wanting to get WMD is equivalent to his son saying that he wants a car. Well, Jon, your son wanting a car will not result in the death of untold hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and US military personnel. This false equivalency is driving me crazy. He was continually giving Bush the benefit of the doubt, but he doesn't realize that those of us with a conscience and a BS meter DO NOT CARE what Bush's mindset was. His actions (based largely on firmly held beliefs that turned out to be false) resulted in death and destruction. And THAT has to be acknowledged and justice given. I heard a soft-hearted Jon Stewart trying again and again to give Bush a pass for his debackle of a Presidency. If we on the left can't get mad about the war in Iraq, just what the heck can we get mad about?

This interview left me disillusioned with Jon.

[Merlot]

33. You give bushco more benefit of the doubt than I do

"His actions (based largely on firmly held beliefs that turned out to be false)"

I don't believe he had firmly held beliefs that turned out to be false. I believe he wanted to go to war at any cost and found ways to justify it.

".. resulted in death and destruction. And THAT has to be acknowledged and justice given." Agreed.

[CrawlingChaos]

27. A clearer picture emerges of what a douche Jon Stewart truly is

This is not the first time I've seen him try to maintain that neocons are not bad people, and we shouldn't yell mean things at them. Look at the way he fawningly kissed Condi Rice's ass shortly before the rally. Forget this stomach flu business - his comments make me want to VOMIT.

Give me the Code Pink ladies any day. It is NOT SANE to have little or no emotional reaction to atrocities. Jon Stewart needs to have his sanity restored, IMO.

This interview confirms that there were no admirable convictions behind his recent stunt. I still harbor my suspicions that the real point of the rally was to convince the Daily Show demographic that protesting in an unruly manner (over, say, austerity cuts, like, oh, for instance, the French and British have recently done) is not what cool kids do. They stay home and watch TV and don't raise their voices.

[EFerrari]

30. This is so much worse than I thought it would be.

What in the WORLD was he thinking. Shallow relativistic nonsense.

Holy crwp. Rachel was so much nicer to him that I could ever possibly be.