John stewart vs Rachel Maddow vs. John Stewart vs. Barack Obama

[JAbuchan08]

Just a funny thought, but am I the only one who thought that John Stewart being interviewed by Rachel Maddow sounded a tiny bit like Barack Obama being interviewed by John Stewart? or vice versa?

[ZombieHorde]

1. President Obama's performance in the JS interview was excellent.

I can't blame anyone for taking notes. I would love to hear a rhetoric lecture by President Obama.

[JAbuchan08]

2. I'm not sure what your point is,

no offense. Maybe I'm missing something. I also think Obama conducted himself quite well in the JS interview, but you don't seem to have addressed my point.

It seems to me that Maddow was giving voice to a frustration with John Stewart that was quite similar to the frustration that John Stewart was trying to address to Obama. I just think it's funny that he would spend so much time trying to pin Obama down on his working with Republicans, when he himself adopts the same "can't we all just get along" attitude.

[ZombieHorde]

9. I missed the point of you OP, but I think I understand now.

The the two interviews were on two different subjects.

BO v JS was about bipartisanship.

JS v RM was about debate.

[JAbuchan08]

10. I feel as if that's a distinction without a difference

you can't really have a debate without partisanship in the sense that "partisanship" involves a strong adherence to one point of view, kind of like taking a side in a debate.

[ZombieHorde]

11. I actually used the word "bipartisanship."

But I will elaborate...

BO v JS was about bipartisanship in Washington. Politicians working with other politicians.

JS v RM was about debates on TV. Tone, word choice, fairness, and honesty.

[JAbuchan08]

12. true enough, but again

having a debate about the merits of bipartisanship kind of fundamentally implies a debate on partisanship as well, you see where I'm going with this? They are kind of yin and yan to one another. The absence of one implies the presence of the other.

[ZombieHorde]

13. I agree, the absence of one implies the presence of the other in this context. nt

[PBS Poll-435]

3. His name is Jon.

And the interview was an exchange of ideas.

That is all.


Plus Mr. Stewart was still ill.

[JAbuchan08]

8. forgive me please!

I hadn't realized I had commited such an egrigious faux pas in adding an extraneous "h" to Mr. Stewart's name. :sarcasm: (just a little though)

In sall seriousness, certainly an exchange of ideas, in fact two seperate exchanges, but I just observed that they were strangely similar.

[VMI Dem]

4. Stewart is completely over matched by both of those people.

I mean completely.

[fishwax]

5. I didn't see either of those interviews as a "vs" situation

I thought both were pretty interesting discussions between two people who clearly have a great deal of respect for one another.

When Jon went on billo's show--that was a vs.

[JAbuchan08]

7. I was aiming for brevity, that's all. n/t

[Barack_America]

6. The media does love to talk about itself. nt