WTF was with John Stewart on Rachel Maddow tonight??

[SoCalDemGrrl]

OMG!!! John Stewart was absolutely INSANE tonight in his interview with Rachel Maddow.

He was dancing and skipping around the issues and triangulating so much so that he
was pretty much incomprehensible......

I understand that he's basically a comic and was saying he's not a reporter or a political hacks, but he was an apologist and a WUSS.

Jeez........DISGUSTING!!!!

[MadBadger]

1. Not sure what makes him a wuss....

Seems like an odd thing to call him

And I do wonder if another one of these threads is really necessary.

[fishwax]

2. meh -- like Rachel, I remain as big a fan as ever

I thought he had a few good points, was quite off base in other points, and made clear that the rally wasn't saying (and he in no way believes) that MSNBC and fox are equal.

I also thought that he appeared to be in less-than-top form as a result of either his stomach flu or whatever he might be taking to combat it. I had that impression from watching his show as well.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

4. He has never claimed to be anything except a comedian.

I like Jon, disagree with him sometimes, sometimes I get annoyed, but here...I feel sorry for him. I think he articulated his feelings poorly...

I think one thing he was trying to say was that though Fox and MSNBC aren't equal, they both have the same (in his opinion: wrong) approach. So, basically the same thing as people who push back against "Obama isn't as bad as Bush!" by saying "You shouldn't aim for "not as bad", you should aim for "good".

[Lord Magus]

5. The problem is that his position is factually untrue.

Fox and MSNBC don't have the same approach. Fox's approach is to lie. MSNBC's approach is to tell the truth and call out the lies.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

6. I don't think he was talking about that. He was talking about the bombastic rhetoric.

IMHO

[Lord Magus]

11. If that's the case I think he's missing the point.

The thing that makes Fox Spews so toxic to our society has never been that their rhetoric is bombastic. It's that their rhetoric is false, and deliberately so.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. This false equivalency crap is out of control.

It's the favorite default excuse of right-wingers I know, too, who have to explain themselves to their progressive friends:

"Both sides suck, both sides do it, blah blah blah and so um, as long as that's the case I'm just going to vote my pocketbook yeah, they're both awful... shucks, what can you do? except vote republican You know what I mean?"

There are no "both sides"- just like there are no "both sides" to the global warming "debate". Or the evolution "debate". There is the side with the facts, and the side with the people who are not just bug-fuck crazy, but also, factually, objectively, WRONG.

In terms of "bombastic rhetoric", the false equivalency would have believe that, yes, it's terrible when Michael Savage or Ann Coulter fantasize on-air about beating liberals bloody with baseball bats, and it's just as terrible when Michael Moore says those vile, hateful things about how France provides universal health coverage.

Sorry, I don't see it as "both sides".

[Lord Magus]

21. +1 million

[kysrsoze]

10. Exactly, yet he now treats both the same. What is he trying to be, the Bill-O of comedy?

I was a HUGE fan for about 6 or 7 years, until the last week or two. As far as I'm concerned, he can take his false equivalence and shove it. I'll watch CoCo instead, and be much happier for it. What a sellout.

[grasswire]

7. what he was saying is that the focus is wrong

The focus of the news outlets has become Red v. Blue and it has been hyped. He said the focus of the news outlets should be corruption v. non-corruption.

I buy that.

[glinda]

9. Should be but can't be due to the loudness & airwave control by Repubs

I think MSNBC does a great job being "not whacked out" considering all the BS that they constantly have to try to correct from the Faux lies. And that is just the point. Faux and pals make it so no one can focus upon the crooks. I think Jon needs to think it through a bit more.

[Supersedeas]

22. Well, Stewart did claim this....over and over and over again

He repeated what HE thought HE accomplished at the rally.

He repeated what HE did and that when you DO something, people will misinterpret it.

The rally was HIS creation, HIS baby, HIS message to send.

HIS rally apparently was meant to transcend comedy and POLITICS.

In that sense, Steward was claiming to be much more than a comedian.

[aquart]

3. If he's got the bug I think he has, I'm amazed he could even talk.

That stomach thing is a baaaad bug.

[Rex]

8. He is a comedian and maybe Rachel outclassed him in the area of politics.

Just because he held a rally, doesn't mean he knows jack. Just look at Glenn Beck...

[AndrewP]

18. That's kind of what I thought as well

He's a comedian with a viewpoint.

[global1]

12. He Talked Like A Person Whose Success Has Gone To His Head......nt

[Dawgs]

15. Agree. This was a Jon Stewart we haven't seen before - very disappointing.

:(

[defendandprotect]

13. I'll have to try to catch it ...but lots of controversy over Stewart right now .... has he

revealed himself -- sold out -- or are we all misunderstanding him?

The questions about Stewart seem to be piling up -- !!

That's one thing about Richard Carlin -- he NEVER sold out!!

:)

[shireen]

16. he talked like a person who is sick and sleep-deprived

and not thinking clearly. He should have been home, resting. Cut him some slack, people ....

[Blue Owl]

17. I heard MC Rove has tapped him to be his next back-up dancer

n/t

[Javaman]

19. He's a comedian with a staff of writers...

not a political analyst.

That single thing is what we have to remember.

He just proved to me, that his "voice of reason" is nothing more than just some guy who knows how to tell a good joke, but fails miserably at political critique when he tries to speak off the cuff.

While he is a smart guy, he's no where in the same league as Maddow. She is brilliant.

[LiberalArkie]

20. It seems he can not frame a thought without his writers, does it?