Author Topic: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one  (Read 1174 times)

bahamutofskycon and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 30264
  • Gender: Male
Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« on: June 11, 2019, 12:42:14 PM »
And he is dead right.  It's no wonder many Americans dislike and do not trust politicians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT5FTrIZN-E

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21222
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2019, 12:46:28 PM »
Just came here to post this. Really well said. I don't think he's given enough credit because of his work on The Daily Show. One of the things I like the most is that he isn't reading this word for word off a piece of paper. Sure, maybe he memorized it, but it does seem like it's coming from the heart.

He's dead on when it comes to putting this into other pieces of legislation instead of being a standalone item.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 12:55:29 PM by Chino »

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2019, 01:19:45 PM »
This is everything I dislike about Jon Stewart (I'm not a big fan).   

Let me start with this:  he's fundamentally right.  He's got a good point that needs to be heard.  Congress needs to do it's job.  His emotion and commitment to this cause is admirable, unquestionable, and sincere.  Almost goes without saying.

But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story (this hearing was not in front of the entire committee, but in front of a subcommittee, of whom at least 10 of the 16 members were present.  The reauthorization bill itself has 306 co-sponsers - there are 435 members in Congress - and is expected to pass the House).   

Let's not forget that he's a big part of why we have "fake news" and Sean Hannity and this distrust in our fourth estate. He even conceded this point himself during an interview with Stern not too long ago (about a year or so), so I'm not just making this up. So while I support his cause, and he's doing good work for good people who deserve better, I'm not ready to annoint him as the answer to our broken system.   I can - and will - give him credit for pulling out all the stops for helping his cause and bringing awareness to this tragic issue, but let's not lose sight of the bigger picture here. 

EDIT:  CNN just covered the story, and Brook Baldwin didn't make mention of anything other than the "blistering takedown" - her words - of Congress.   
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 01:27:23 PM by Stadler »

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 581
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2019, 01:23:21 PM »
the cause IS the bigger picture

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2019, 01:31:26 PM »
the cause IS the bigger picture

Of course.  But that implies that the ends justify the means.  If it's your "end" it's easy, but when it's not...   Half, no, 75% of this forum is a discussion about that very point.   Merrick Garland.   National emergency.   Impeachment. 

Online eric42434224

  • Posts: 3473
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2019, 01:31:34 PM »
 
the cause IS the bigger picture

:\Yup. 
The only "bigger picture" here is the straw man someone set up that Stewart is somehow the "answer to our broken system".
What he did was good....no need to shit on it because someone has an unhealthy obsession with him (and everything CNN, and the LESSON we still haven't learned, and DEPLORABLE/RESIST, and the ACA, etc, etc, etc.)
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Kattelox

  • Heart of an Eagle
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8266
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2019, 01:33:51 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career. And again you focus on Brooke Baldwin, of CNN. You're targeting some of the lowest hanging fruit... what is with the obsession over her, and CNN?

If you're going to criticize Jon Stewart and expect to be taken seriously you really need to drop the entire angle about him being a comedian and dismissing him because of that. No need to qualify his statements as "fundamentally" right and then list off why he shouldn't be taken seriously.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 01:39:33 PM by Kattelox »
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Online eric42434224

  • Posts: 3473
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2019, 01:43:07 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career. And again you focus on Brooke Baldwin, of CNN. You're targeting some of the lowest hanging fruit... what is with the obsession over her, and CNN?

If you're going to criticize Jon Stewart and expect to be taken seriously you really need to drop the entire angle about him being a comedian and dismissing him because of that. No need to qualify his statements as "fundamentally" right and then list off why he shouldn't be taken seriously.

And then to say it is about justifying the means....and compare this to what?  Merrick Garland?   National emergency?   Impeachment?
Wow.  There is a very unhealthy obsession going on here....and perhaps the person saying "we all haven't learned our lessons", isn't really learning any lessons themselves.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2019, 01:44:16 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career.

No, not really.  Or at least, if he's "more than a comedian", he's still not at the level of journalist, with all that entails.  He's stepped into the political commentary game without any of the requirements or protections of the field of journalism.  HE'S used the shield "but it's a JOKE!" to cover his inaccuracies or lapses in veracity.   HE'S been widely celebrated as the "most trusted man in NEWS", or at least more trusted than main news outlets (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jon-stewart-more-trusted-msnbc-poll_n_5479859).

You are aware that "satire" is a defense against libel/slander, right?   See the "Falwell v. Hustler" case.   So where if Jim Acosta or Shep Smith or Brook Baldwin or Sandra Smith say something inaccurate about a subject of their story, they can be held accountable.   Stewart can - AND HAS - fallen back on "but it was a joke!" to defend those times he's gone over the line.  He's admitted this.  He's conceded his role (and you can take that both humbly, but also arrogantly, I'm not sure which it is) in the evolution of "hard news" from the stoicism of Walter Cronkite to the more fluid infotainment of people like Sean Hannity. 

You don't have to agree with me, but this isn't made up, and is a legitimate argument.   

Offline Kattelox

  • Heart of an Eagle
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8266
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2019, 01:57:09 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career.

No, not really.  Or at least, if he's "more than a comedian", he's still not at the level of journalist, with all that entails.  He's stepped into the political commentary game without any of the requirements or protections of the field of journalism.  HE'S used the shield "but it's a JOKE!" to cover his inaccuracies or lapses in veracity.   HE'S been widely celebrated as the "most trusted man in NEWS", or at least more trusted than main news outlets (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jon-stewart-more-trusted-msnbc-poll_n_5479859).

You are aware that "satire" is a defense against libel/slander, right?   See the "Falwell v. Hustler" case.   So where if Jim Acosta or Shep Smith or Brook Baldwin or Sandra Smith say something inaccurate about a subject of their story, they can be held accountable.   Stewart can - AND HAS - fallen back on "but it was a joke!" to defend those times he's gone over the line.  He's admitted this.  He's conceded his role (and you can take that both humbly, but also arrogantly, I'm not sure which it is) in the evolution of "hard news" from the stoicism of Walter Cronkite to the more fluid infotainment of people like Sean Hannity. 

You don't have to agree with me, but this isn't made up, and is a legitimate argument.

It is a legitimate argument but you have lost a lot of credibility when it comes to arguing against Jon Stewart because your dismissal is entirely based on the fact that he's made a name for himself as a comedian despite having loads of valid arguments and has presented them reasonably particularly in recent years outside of the 'comedian' lens. Not only that but Jon Stewart himself has admitted regrets for hiding behind the excuse of comedy before. So why then do you always harp on "he's a comedian, stop getting your news from comedians!" even YEARS after he's given up the mantra of 'late night infomedian'? The obsession you have is baffling and you never even address what he actually says because you just go off on a tangent about why he's half-right but then try to discredit him at the same time. You did it in this very thread, using it to go off not on what he even talked about, but to go on about how he's "part of the fake news problem." Jeez Louise, dude. Years of it. YEARS.

I love you, my man - but he admitted he hid behind the excuse of 'it's a joke', and you can't even accept it was a humble admission of fault, you think it might be arrogance that drove him to admit that. The heck?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 02:02:26 PM by Kattelox »
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline Harmony

  • Posts: 555
  • Gender: Female
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2019, 01:57:33 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole.  We should probably start a list of all the horrible things he's done over his career and not forget he's responsible for the likes of Sean Hannity who was hired by Roger Ailes in 1996.  Three whole years before Stewart began hosting The Daily Show. 

 ::)

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #11 on: June 11, 2019, 02:10:18 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole.  We should probably start a list of all the horrible things he's done over his career and not forget he's responsible for the likes of Sean Hannity who was hired by Roger Ailes in 1996.  Three whole years before Stewart began hosting The Daily Show. 

 ::)

If you think that's what I'm saying, unfortunately you've perhaps misunderstood.   I've made very clear that I support and commend his message, and his using of his platform to create wider awareness.  My brother is a first responder, I have several close relatives who serve in the fire department (some as volunteers), and, perhaps not relevantly, I lost a former boss in one of the Towers during 9/11.   None of that is in question.

But the side bar to this is not his standing up for the cause, it's his "ripping Congress a new one", as if he has something to offer Congress.  Kev celebrated this aspect, as did CNN.  Stewart called them out as hypocrites and questioned their dedication and leadership, but in fact his information was not entirely accurate.  The bill in question that he's fighting for has 306 co-sponsors; presumably they would all vote for a bill they co-sponsored.   At 306-129, that bill is not in ANY danger of not passing.  On that point, I stand by everything I wrote, unobsessively, healthily, and in good conscience.   

EDIT:  Hannity was hired by Ailes before Stewart took the air, but his initial time at Fox was as cohost - with liberal Alan Colmes - of a point/counter point show.  He didn't become the polarizing op-ed figure until later in the Bush Presidency, when he became the sole nightly host of "Hannity".  I believe that was 2007, a full three years after Stewart's "award winning coverage" of the 2004 election.   
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 02:25:24 PM by Stadler »

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1151
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2019, 02:31:45 PM »
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

His take on things is as valid as anyone else's; in fact I'd argue more so, because he's an extremely astute person. Labelling people as a means of dismissing them is one of the problems I see in your (American) political discourse now (you always 'reduce' him to "a comedian", Stadler) To me, Stewart is a lot of different things, as we all are, and no one of them accurately sums any of us up (but while I'm on this subject, so what if he were 'only' a "comedian"? Some of the greatest political commentators in America were your comedians, for example Carlin, Pryor, Hicks, Burr). You (Stadler) often bring up things that Dr Phil has said that you liked, or that made you think. I think you'd be rightly annoyed if someone mocked you for this and suggested you receive your entire world view from Dr Phil. In a similar way, I don't think anyone here receives all their information from Jon Stewart. He's just one more voice, an eloquent one, that people incorporate into their opinions. America is very lucky to have someone like him, he's clever, well-spoken, informed and perceptive. I don't understand why you "dislike" him so severely.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2019, 02:34:19 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career.

No, not really.  Or at least, if he's "more than a comedian", he's still not at the level of journalist, with all that entails.  He's stepped into the political commentary game without any of the requirements or protections of the field of journalism.  HE'S used the shield "but it's a JOKE!" to cover his inaccuracies or lapses in veracity.   HE'S been widely celebrated as the "most trusted man in NEWS", or at least more trusted than main news outlets (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jon-stewart-more-trusted-msnbc-poll_n_5479859).

You are aware that "satire" is a defense against libel/slander, right?   See the "Falwell v. Hustler" case.   So where if Jim Acosta or Shep Smith or Brook Baldwin or Sandra Smith say something inaccurate about a subject of their story, they can be held accountable.   Stewart can - AND HAS - fallen back on "but it was a joke!" to defend those times he's gone over the line.  He's admitted this.  He's conceded his role (and you can take that both humbly, but also arrogantly, I'm not sure which it is) in the evolution of "hard news" from the stoicism of Walter Cronkite to the more fluid infotainment of people like Sean Hannity. 

You don't have to agree with me, but this isn't made up, and is a legitimate argument.

It is a legitimate argument but you have lost a lot of credibility when it comes to arguing against Jon Stewart because your dismissal is entirely based on the fact that he's made a name for himself as a comedian despite having loads of valid arguments and has presented them reasonably particularly in recent years outside of the 'comedian' lens. Not only that but Jon Stewart himself has admitted regrets for hiding behind the excuse of comedy before. So why then do you always harp on "he's a comedian, stop getting your news from comedians!" even YEARS after he's given up the mantra of 'late night infomedian'? The obsession you have is baffling and you never even address what he actually says because you just go off on a tangent about why he's half-right but then try to discredit him at the same time. You did it in this very thread, using it to go off not on what he even talked about, but to go on about how he's "part of the fake news problem." Jeez Louise, dude. Years of it. YEARS.

I love you, my man - but he admitted he hid behind the excuse of 'it's a joke', and you can't even accept it was a humble admission of fault, you think it might be arrogance that drove him to admit that. The heck?

I concede all, well, MOST, of that.  Look, things aren't always black and white.  I can agree with his message and not his methods.  I can agree with him on the specific issue at hand, and not support the more general praise for his somehow "schooling" Congress for being hypocrites.   That's all.  I don't think it's unfair to point out that some here are praising Stewart for supposedly speaking truth to power, when it's not all based in truth.

If we want to rename the thread "Jon Stewart brings attention to an issue that is important to all of us", then delete my posts.  The name of the thread is "JON STEWART RIPS CONGRESS A NEW ONE" for not supporting this bill.   The bill will pass, and the committee was at LEAST 10/16 in attendance (and that is only actual participants I can confirm.  For all I know it was 16 out of 16).   What more support can you have than passing the very bill you're fighting for??

Offline portnoy311

  • Posts: 1093
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2019, 02:36:03 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole.  We should probably start a list of all the horrible things he's done over his career and not forget he's responsible for the likes of Sean Hannity who was hired by Roger Ailes in 1996.  Three whole years before Stewart began hosting The Daily Show. 

 ::)

If you think that's what I'm saying, unfortunately you've perhaps misunderstood.   I've made very clear that I support and commend his message, and his using of his platform to create wider awareness.  My brother is a first responder, I have several close relatives who serve in the fire department (some as volunteers), and, perhaps not relevantly, I lost a former boss in one of the Towers during 9/11.   None of that is in question.

But the side bar to this is not his standing up for the cause, it's his "ripping Congress a new one", as if he has something to offer Congress.  Kev celebrated this aspect, as did CNN.  Stewart called them out as hypocrites and questioned their dedication and leadership, but in fact his information was not entirely accurate.  The bill in question that he's fighting for has 306 co-sponsors; presumably they would all vote for a bill they co-sponsored.   At 306-129, that bill is not in ANY danger of not passing.  On that point, I stand by everything I wrote, unobsessively, healthily, and in good conscience.   

EDIT:  Hannity was hired by Ailes before Stewart took the air, but his initial time at Fox was as cohost - with liberal Alan Colmes - of a point/counter point show.  He didn't become the polarizing op-ed figure until later in the Bush Presidency, when he became the sole nightly host of "Hannity".  I believe that was 2007, a full three years after Stewart's "award winning coverage" of the 2004 election.

Hannity's radio show has been running since 9/10/01 (how's that for weird timing), he's been this guy for at least that long. His radio show is peak Hannity, his schtick hasn't changed. He was hired for Hannity and Colmes with this persona to be the Hannity of the radio show. The hardcore conservative on the panel as they 'debate' every issue under the sun. Hannity becoming a cartoon character was not because of the Daily Show.

This issue has been something that Stewart has been publicly advocating for since the attacks. Almost 18 years later a House Bill looks like it will pass, it seems like he has plenty to be annoyed with concerning the process and Congress.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2019, 02:54:47 PM »
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

His take on things is as valid as anyone else's; in fact I'd argue more so, because he's an extremely astute person. Labelling people as a means of dismissing them is one of the problems I see in your (American) politicial discourse now (you always 'reduce' him to "a comedian") To me, Stewart is a lot of different things, as we all are, and no one of them accurately sums any of us up (but while I'm on this subject, so what if he's 'only a "comedian"? Some of the greatest political commentators in America were your comedians, fo example Carlin, Pryor, Hicks, Burr). You (Stadler) often bring up things that Dr Phil has said that made you think. I think you'd be rightly annoyed if someone mocked you and suggested you receive your entire world view from Dr Phil. In a similar way, I don't think anyone here receives all their information from Jon Stewart. He's just one more voice, an eloquent one, that people incorporate into their opinions.

Dave, please don't just address the short hand.  I very clearly said why "comedian" is relevant here; he has license to say and do things that journalists don't, and yet he's enjoyed the credibility and stature of a journalist for years now.  I'll also repeat for the third time, that I am not rejecting his message or saying that he is less relevant because he's a comedian.   I am saying that he's being praised for being trustworthy, credible, and reliable, to the point that we're celebrating his "ripping" of Congress, and yet that "ripping" is based on false information.   

Some of you are making my point for me.  You're all accepting his word, even if all the facts don't line up, because it sounds just and sincere.   That's the very essence of what many of you criticize Trump (and his famed, fabled "Base"TM) on the daily.  It's the essence of the problem with the "Fake News" assault on journalism.  I don't reject Stewart as a COMEDIAN; I reject Stewart for his playing fast and loose with the truth, which, in my opinion (that some here clearly do not support, and unlike some of you, I honor and respect your right to disagree without calling into question your mental health) is based in part on the years he's been credited as being as "trustworthy" as a journalist without being held to the standards of veracity of a "journalist".   

Quote
America is very lucky to have someone like him, he's clever, well-spoken, informed and perceptive. I don't understand why you "dislike" him so severely.

Because he hasn't left it at "clever, well-spoken, informed and perceptive".  In general, I admire people like that.  Bruce Springsteen.  We have very little in common politically, but I admire that man tremendously.  Stewart walked the line between commentator and journalist in a way that - whether intended or not - mislead people.  People understood him to be a TRUSTWORTHY purveyor of the NEWS.   But he wasn't held to the same standard as the REAL purveyors of the news.  Dave, doesn't that bother you?  If you had a... climate scientist, who had to go through peer reviews and what not for her research, and who published information on that subject daily, but was overlooked as "not trustworthy" for no other reason than the message wasn't well received, and instead Bono was deemed the "most trustworthy source for climate change" wouldn't you be at ALL skeptical?   It's one thing if Bono was parroting the climate change scientist; then I'd agree with you that the charisma, charm and perception of Bono would be important.   But we're talking about a situation where Bono is being set in CONTRAST to the scientist, and is purported to be speaking the truth that the scientist is not.   Again, doesn't that bother you at all?  Or at least make you consider the sources?   

To be fair, I don't "dislike" him, at least not after he conceded his role in the devolution (or perhaps "dilution" is a better word) of journalism. He's at least self-aware.  And, more to his credit, as he's gotten more involved in issues and politics, he's distanced himself from comedy, and I think that's both telling and admirable.  He's perhaps implicitly addressing the problem I'm trying to highlight here.  That doesn't give him a pass for making emotional, heartfelt pleas that are not based in actual fact.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 30264
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2019, 02:55:18 PM »
Good grief, I already regret having started this thread.

What should have been a thread where we all agreed that the 9/11 first responders should be taken better care of, quickly turned into "CNN stinks" and "Jon Stewart is only a comedian."  :facepalm: :facepalm:

This is why P/R really blows sometimes.

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22207
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2019, 02:59:19 PM »
Quote
But there's always more to the story, and when you rely on a comedian for your "news" you don't get that full story

Dude, have you like... never heard Jon Stewart talk? He's more than simply a comedian. C'mon, man. Your entire dismissal of Jon Stewart over the years has been based on this one aspect of his career.

No, not really.  Or at least, if he's "more than a comedian", he's still not at the level of journalist, with all that entails.  He's stepped into the political commentary game without any of the requirements or protections of the field of journalism.  HE'S used the shield "but it's a JOKE!" to cover his inaccuracies or lapses in veracity.   HE'S been widely celebrated as the "most trusted man in NEWS", or at least more trusted than main news outlets (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jon-stewart-more-trusted-msnbc-poll_n_5479859).

You are aware that "satire" is a defense against libel/slander, right?   See the "Falwell v. Hustler" case.   So where if Jim Acosta or Shep Smith or Brook Baldwin or Sandra Smith say something inaccurate about a subject of their story, they can be held accountable.   Stewart can - AND HAS - fallen back on "but it was a joke!" to defend those times he's gone over the line.  He's admitted this.  He's conceded his role (and you can take that both humbly, but also arrogantly, I'm not sure which it is) in the evolution of "hard news" from the stoicism of Walter Cronkite to the more fluid infotainment of people like Sean Hannity. 

You don't have to agree with me, but this isn't made up, and is a legitimate argument.

It is a legitimate argument but you have lost a lot of credibility when it comes to arguing against Jon Stewart because your dismissal is entirely based on the fact that he's made a name for himself as a comedian despite having loads of valid arguments and has presented them reasonably particularly in recent years outside of the 'comedian' lens. Not only that but Jon Stewart himself has admitted regrets for hiding behind the excuse of comedy before. So why then do you always harp on "he's a comedian, stop getting your news from comedians!" even YEARS after he's given up the mantra of 'late night infomedian'? The obsession you have is baffling and you never even address what he actually says because you just go off on a tangent about why he's half-right but then try to discredit him at the same time. You did it in this very thread, using it to go off not on what he even talked about, but to go on about how he's "part of the fake news problem." Jeez Louise, dude. Years of it. YEARS.

I love you, my man - but he admitted he hid behind the excuse of 'it's a joke', and you can't even accept it was a humble admission of fault, you think it might be arrogance that drove him to admit that. The heck?

I concede all, well, MOST, of that.  Look, things aren't always black and white.  I can agree with his message and not his methods.  I can agree with him on the specific issue at hand, and not support the more general praise for his somehow "schooling" Congress for being hypocrites.   That's all.  I don't think it's unfair to point out that some here are praising Stewart for supposedly speaking truth to power, when it's not all based in truth.

If we want to rename the thread "Jon Stewart brings attention to an issue that is important to all of us", then delete my posts.  The name of the thread is "JON STEWART RIPS CONGRESS A NEW ONE" for not supporting this bill.   The bill will pass, and the committee was at LEAST 10/16 in attendance (and that is only actual participants I can confirm.  For all I know it was 16 out of 16).   What more support can you have than passing the very bill you're fighting for??
Not having to drag fucking cancer patients to congress every couple of years to beg for money? That they're ready to pass it now is nice, but this isn't the first time he's had to go down there and shame them. Here's an article from 4 months ago where he had to do this. Moreover, this was most certainly directed at the Senate, as well, where Mitch Fucking McConnel might very well find a way to let it die. From what I see it only has the support of 37 senators.

Look, this is very simple. The problem isn't who the first responders selected as their messenger. The problem is that he has to keep going to DC to try and shame these assholes into doing their damn job.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2019, 03:08:19 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole.  We should probably start a list of all the horrible things he's done over his career and not forget he's responsible for the likes of Sean Hannity who was hired by Roger Ailes in 1996.  Three whole years before Stewart began hosting The Daily Show. 

 ::)

If you think that's what I'm saying, unfortunately you've perhaps misunderstood.   I've made very clear that I support and commend his message, and his using of his platform to create wider awareness.  My brother is a first responder, I have several close relatives who serve in the fire department (some as volunteers), and, perhaps not relevantly, I lost a former boss in one of the Towers during 9/11.   None of that is in question.

But the side bar to this is not his standing up for the cause, it's his "ripping Congress a new one", as if he has something to offer Congress.  Kev celebrated this aspect, as did CNN.  Stewart called them out as hypocrites and questioned their dedication and leadership, but in fact his information was not entirely accurate.  The bill in question that he's fighting for has 306 co-sponsors; presumably they would all vote for a bill they co-sponsored.   At 306-129, that bill is not in ANY danger of not passing.  On that point, I stand by everything I wrote, unobsessively, healthily, and in good conscience.   

EDIT:  Hannity was hired by Ailes before Stewart took the air, but his initial time at Fox was as cohost - with liberal Alan Colmes - of a point/counter point show.  He didn't become the polarizing op-ed figure until later in the Bush Presidency, when he became the sole nightly host of "Hannity".  I believe that was 2007, a full three years after Stewart's "award winning coverage" of the 2004 election.

Hannity's radio show has been running since 9/10/01 (how's that for weird timing), he's been this guy for at least that long. His radio show is peak Hannity, his schtick hasn't changed. He was hired for Hannity and Colmes with this persona to be the Hannity of the radio show. The hardcore conservative on the panel as they 'debate' every issue under the sun. Hannity becoming a cartoon character was not because of the Daily Show.

Not incorrect, but not purely accurate either.   His big "scandal" prior to 2007 was his anti-gay comments.  After?  He was an advocate of the birther movement.  The "deep state" nonsense.  Death panels.  His "climategate" nonsense.   He was  CONSERVATIVE then, but he wasn't the opinion peddler and "cable personality" he is now.

Quote
This issue has been something that Stewart has been publicly advocating for since the attacks. Almost 18 years later a House Bill looks like it will pass, it seems like he has plenty to be annoyed with concerning the process and Congress.

The we're referring to is not the first bill.  It's a REAUTHORIZATION.  The funding exists, and has paid out something like $5 BILLION in aid, out of an initial authorization of $7.5 billion. This is all a response to a report that indicated that payouts have exceeded forecast, and that unless there is refunding, future claims would be paid out at a percentage of the claim (depending on the claim, either 30% or 50%). 

Don't misunderstand; the cause is worthy, and they've had to fight more than they ever should have (the guy that Stewart keeps referring to, Ray Pfeifer, has been carrying that torch for a while).  No QUESTION.   I'm just not sure why Stewart had to misrepresent the facts about a committee that has supported them, and a bill that is likely to pass.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2019, 03:09:47 PM »
Good grief, I already regret having started this thread.

What should have been a thread where we all agreed that the 9/11 first responders should be taken better care of, quickly turned into "CNN stinks" and "Jon Stewart is only a comedian."  :facepalm: :facepalm:

This is why P/R really blows sometimes.

Sorry I ruined it for you.   :yeahright

Offline Kattelox

  • Heart of an Eagle
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8266
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2019, 03:46:39 PM »
Good grief, I already regret having started this thread.

What should have been a thread where we all agreed that the 9/11 first responders should be taken better care of, quickly turned into "CNN stinks" and "Jon Stewart is only a comedian."  :facepalm: :facepalm:

This is why P/R really blows sometimes.

Sorry I ruined it for you.   :yeahright

If it's any consolation to either of you, I saw this coming as soon as I saw "Jon Stewart" in the "most recent post" column for this subforum. :) :)
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21222
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2019, 05:17:15 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole. 
 ::)

Stads said nothing of the sort.

Online eric42434224

  • Posts: 3473
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2019, 05:22:38 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole. 
 ::)

Stads said nothing of the sort.

Harmony did not say Stadler said anything.

Funny how Stadler rails about how we all rag on Trump for anything, even if it is good, because its Trump.
Looks like maybe Stewart is Stadler's Trump?  He goes to Congress to advocate for 9/11 First Responders, and from Stadler we get....this thread...... :\
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Harmony

  • Posts: 555
  • Gender: Female
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #23 on: June 11, 2019, 05:30:59 PM »
Yeah, how dare Jon Stewart use his recognizable voice to bring attention to the suffering of national heroes.  What an asshole. 
 ::)

Stads said nothing of the sort.

Where did I say that Stadler said that?  Do you understand about riffing on a vibe?  How about sarcasm?

I really just wanted to post this and be done with it but couldn't post a photo from the computer I was at.


Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #24 on: June 12, 2019, 08:55:13 AM »
Some of you read as well as Trump allegedly does (he doesn't).

Look what happened here.  A thread called "Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one".  No mention of 9/11, First Responders, cancer, funding, no funding, etc.  Just a title that celebrates Stewart, in the vernacular, of teaching Congress a lesson.

I took great pains, several times, to say that I give my FULL support to the First Responders, and never said ONCE that they were wrong, they were out of line, or otherwise undeserving.   

I called out Stewart SPECIFICALLY for accusing Congress of TWO failures, both of which were predicated on FALSE INFORMATION (it's provably false, too).   (The attendance was complete for what it was, and the bill - and therefore the fund - is likely going to be reauthorized.)

In doing so, I never once EVER called Stewart names - "asshole" or otherwise.   I never said ANYTHING about him personally, and in fact COMMENDED him on putting in the effort.   Several times.  I also commended him for being self-aware and insightful.   

And what happened, after I had the TEMERITY to not toe the party line and join the kumbaya?   A lot of sarcasm, personal attacks, and vitriol.  NOT from me.   One childish, petty and, in my view, completely tone deaf poster even questioned my mental health.  Are you fucking kidding me?   

Some of you need to look in the mirror.  I'm allowed to disagree.  I did so carefully, impersonally, and respectfully, to both the posters here and the subject of the initial post.   If you don't like that opinion - and it is your right if you don't - I respect you.  I'd like to hear why, because unlike some of you, I can consider that I might be  wrong about this.  It's an OPINION, formed by my knowledge.  If you know something I don't, offer it constructively, and respectfully.  Like Dave did.   Leave the inappropriate (and possibly illegal; it's called "libel") armchair psychoanalysis and ad hominen attacks out of it, and talk about the issue like adults.   

Ruin the thread?  Honestly, I didn't do that, and I make no apologies. 

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 581
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #25 on: June 12, 2019, 09:11:52 AM »
but why did you feel it was even necessary to call him out in the first place if you agree with his cause? I think thatís the disconnect here

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22207
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #26 on: June 12, 2019, 09:16:37 AM »
I re-skimmed the thread, and while I might have missed something, I didn't see personal attacks or questions regarding your sanity. I saw plenty of people bothered by you making a point that probably didn't need to be made. Moreover, you're basing it on him "predicating it on false information," which I don't see as the case. He said look at all of these empty chairs, and if there are 6 of 16 chairs empty then that's pretty valid. Something like this should be able to garner more than 65% attendance from a committee that's actually paid to be there. As for it being ready to pass in the first place, if it's not going to become law then he's right to be there shaming them into doing better. He was there 4 months ago, doing this same thing, and he's back because the bill got shot down. He's doing something. He's calling into attention that this keeps happening, and that might be the necessary component. Were you aware that Mitch "The Grim Reaper" McConnell oversaw its demise 4 months ago? And might well again? You are now?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Harmony

  • Posts: 555
  • Gender: Female
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #27 on: June 12, 2019, 09:38:49 AM »
Some of you read as well as Trump allegedly does (he doesn't).

Look what happened here.  A thread called "Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one". 

Did Jon Stewart title this thread?  Or make the headlines you've undoubtedly seen on CNN?  Of course not.

So why go on some diatribe against him when you claim you are all in favor of his cause?  Why even suggest that somehow he's responsible for the Sean Hannnities of the world?  That is the GIANT disconnect here.

I know it is difficult to admit mistakes but I hardly think you are the victim here unless it is by your own hand.  People calling out your disconnect may not feel great, but perhaps you could take a few minutes and consider why it is that they did so.

Offline Kattelox

  • Heart of an Eagle
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8266
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #28 on: June 12, 2019, 10:05:47 AM »
Quote from: Stadler
And what happened, after I had the TEMERITY to not toe the party line and join the kumbaya?   A lot of sarcasm, personal attacks, and vitriol.  NOT from me.   One childish, petty and, in my view, completely tone deaf poster even questioned my mental health.  Are you fucking kidding me? 

Stadler, my brother, my dude, my man, it's because you bring this up every single time Jon Stewart gets mentioned. Every. Single. Time. I don't see any personal attacks here, either. You came into this thread and, although you started off just fine, used it as a launchpad to once again go off on Jon Stewart, how he's partially responsible for fake news, how we shouldn't take what he says seriously, yada yada. The usual. Never saw anyone question your mental health either. You are allowed to disagree, no one contested that, but... there's something off here.

EDIT: Someone said you have an 'unhealthy obsession' with Stewart. That is not questioning your mental health, it's observing you take every opportunity to rant about Jon Stewart when he's brought up. Now look, we're discussing this instead of the reason the thread was made.  :lol
« Last Edit: June 12, 2019, 10:11:39 AM by Kattelox »
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #29 on: June 12, 2019, 11:36:49 AM »
but why did you feel it was even necessary to call him out in the first place if you agree with his cause? I think thatís the disconnect here

There are threads and threads here about Trump and his lies.   "Truth" seems to be an important thing for some people - though I'm starting to see it's a very subjective thing - and I found evidence that perhaps Jon Stewart overstated the facts in order to make his case.  I thought someone might be interested in that.   

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 16847
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #30 on: June 12, 2019, 11:39:13 AM »
I made my point.  If you don't agree, I respect you just the same. 

You'll note that I'm not asking you all "why did you say this?  what made you think it was necessary?".   I made the point because I thought the story wasn't complete.  If you do, so be it.  I didn't.


Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21826
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #31 on: June 12, 2019, 12:23:05 PM »
Well besides this thread, seems it got the attention of lots of headline news and it's being talked about, that's the positive here.  Everyone pretty much agrees Congress should be doing better here and I'm cool with the public shaming of our public servants who aren't listening to the public.

Online eric42434224

  • Posts: 3473
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #32 on: June 12, 2019, 05:53:35 PM »
All I see is you saying there is "more to the story", yet reveal nothing "more".  I see you saying you think what Stewart is doing is "great", but in the same post rip him for having what:  ulterior motives?  hiding something? having an agenda?  being less than truthful?  that he is some sort of genesis for fake news?.... as if that is somehow relevant....or even true.  I see you making every effort to conflate a career from years ago (mixed with a large amount of odd, and out of place, emotional dislike), with an effort to effect positive change today.  What I don't see is anything even remotely factual that Stewart did wrong in this instance, unless you count The Daily Show as somehow negating fighting for 9/11 responders (which it seems is what you do).

Either show what he did that is so wrong in fighting for this cause....facts....or it just will continue to come across as you just being a Hater.  Being a hater is the only point you have successfully made in this thread IMO.  But hey, if you have something legitimate he did wrong...we have been all ears....just haven't heard anything yet.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7592
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #33 on: June 12, 2019, 06:01:02 PM »
How does one exactly get to speak in front of Congress like this? Do you get an invite? I'm actually serious, I have no idea.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 581
  • Gender: Male
Re: Jon Stewart rips Congress a new one
« Reply #34 on: June 12, 2019, 06:05:33 PM »
I think Stadler was just #triggered by the thread title.  This is kind of what micro agressions feel like, so this should be a learning moment  ;)