Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Jon Stewart Slam Dunk

By

Jon Stewart nails it.  The two heads of Karl Rove.  Watch it if you dare.  (and embed it in the comments if you can!) Thx Ryan for the working embed code!

And on a related note, I wanna know why JoeTS isn’t loudly blaming Bristol’s parents for her pregnancy.  When a gay or trans kid is killed, he’s all over the parents.  Let’s hear you stand by your convictions JoeTS.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. <

    p>I don’t think I’ve ever seen the Republicans so thoroughly owned. But the truth is they own themselves. Any member of the media that puts these people on TV or quotes them in the papers, without seriously questioning them and preferably referencing these sorts of consistencies they’ve had in the past, isn’t being a true journalist.  

  2. ironically enough, has actually become one of the most trusted names in news.  No other news outlet will do what they regularly do on The Daily Show because they don’t have the courage or the integrity.  And it doesn’t even require any “journalism,” as Stewart will tell you himself.  You’d think the “professionals” wouldn’t like getting upstaged and/or shamed by a bunch of comedy writers.  Sheesh.

    • When Obama has made bone-headed comments, Stewart has skewered him – recently, he did a segment where he opened with Bush saying he wished he could wave a magic wand and make gas prices come down.  The crowd, of course, loved it, since he laced into Bush with his typical snark – but then he showed a clip of Obama saying the same thing!  He does keep them honest…

        • is that the little dial on the electric flat-headed dragon that has words like “rayon” and “heavy cotton” on it?

        • so – “That is why Jon Stewart, (5.57 / 7)
          ironically enough, has actually become one of the most trusted names in news.  No other news outlet will do what they regularly do on The Daily Show because they don’t have the courage or the integrity.  And it doesn’t even require any “journalism,” as Stewart will tell you himself.  You’d think the “professionals” wouldn’t like getting upstaged and/or shamed by a bunch of comedy writers.  Sheesh”

          <

          p>LOL

          <

          p>Where is the irony when you actually believe John Stewart and his comedy writers?

          <

          p>How can it have integrity if its comedy

          <

          p>which is it?

          <

          p>Comedy or news?

          • Mark Twain said it best:

            <

            p>

            Irreverence is the champion of liberty, and its only sure defense

            <

            p>When Jon Stewart reports on a story, he doesn’t use any “balance” (read:  present the truth and a lie and let the public make up their mind which is true).  He lays it out and eviscerates the point of view that’s in the wrong – and he does it with humor, with irreverence, such that it sticks in a person’s mind because it’s so funny.  Unfortunately for you, your party is frequently on the downside of that, since virtually all of their positions are based on lies that you continue to swallow.

            <

            p>If you’re pissed off about that, I can’t help you – tell your leaders that they should stop playing the “straight man” to the people who can whallop them with their own hypocrisy.  For someone as talented as Stewart, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel.  And when Obama wins the presidency, I look foraward to Jon Stewart keeping him honest as well – I’ve already seen him skewering Obama, but then again, I watch the show…

        • I think it’s in the Washington Post – they ask people to add or subtract one letter from a word such that it utterly changes its meaning, yet retains the original meaning.  Such as:

          <

          p>Innoculatte – to take coffee intravenously when running late.

          <

          p>This thread reminds me of one of my favorite definitions:

          <

          p>sarchasm – the gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn’t get it

          <

          p>…for what I hope would be obvious reasons.  

  3. denizens now?  They’ll trash the diary of a 22-year-old teacher doing work they wouldn’t dream of doing in a million years for Teach For America but are nowhere to be found when the pointy reckoning hits a little too close to home.  Big surprise.

  4. That would be the sound of hair growing.  

    <

    p>C’mon, where are our Republican compadres?  Surely they have something to say on this post about these, um, inconsistencies?  No timely comeback with something about Obama flipflopping on something?  Anything?  

  5. Party operatives and politicians spin facts in favor of their candidate or position.  I never knew. Thank you

    <

    p>

    • What I thought would be interesting was to see if any of you and yours would actually acknowledge that no one believes the bullshit around Sarah Palin’s qualifications or cries of sexism.  Your own party knows it’s bullshit, so I was just wondering if you guys would own up to that.

      • So many prepositions.   I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about, or how Rove’s comments are any different from Biden’s or Clinton’s.  Seems that all are equally hypocritical to me as they’re opposed to their candidate before they were for him.

        <

        p>But oooo, a tagline I hadn’t noticed, and poker too.  I love poker.

        <

        p>

        I’ll see your Negro and raise you a vagina.

        <

        p>And I’ll see your vagina, … eeek

        • So many prepositions.

          <

          p>Sort of like Mozart’s music has too many notes?

          <

          p>Can’t believe, too, you missed the tag.  Caused quite the stir the other day.  lol.  

          • Sort of like Mozart’s music has too many notes?

            <

            p>Yeah, sorta like a kid attempting Mozart and too many wrong notes.  Good comparison.

            <

            p>But your original question is kinda trite, and your description appropriate: disingenous.

            <

            p>Was Clinton/Rove/Binden lying then, or now or neither?  You ask the question with disingenuity, and you know that.

    • …You have a talent for missing the point. I never knew… Thank you…

      <

      p>

      *[new] Oh my God! (0.00 / 0)

      Party operatives and politicians spin facts in favor of their candidate or position.  I never knew. Thank you

      <

      p>The only way McCain/Palin can win in November is because of people like you who, defying all logic, persist in spinning in two (opposite) directions at once.   Some might consider spinning apart a form of disintegration (dare I say dementia?) and retool their perspective accordingly.  Not you.  No, you soldier on retooling the world to your perspective.  

      <

      p>Don’t worry, when you and McCain and Palin succumb to the centrifugal tensions of your inconsistancies and mendacities, we liberals will be here to pick up the pieces and help you re-integrate.    We’ll probably even forgive you…  

  6. He said with such a slim record, Kaine would be political pick, and indeed, Palin is a political pick.  Of course he’s forced to defend the same kind of resume he had just been saying was too slim, that is a given.  His consistent point is that would have to be some compelling positive political value to nominate such a green governor – Palin has it, Kaine doesn’t.  

Archives