Jon Stewart's put down of 'Baracknophobia'

jonny72

And I for one worship our new Tyrannical overlord with his secret prison camps and wiretapping programs...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=baracknophobia-obey

"Re-education camps"?? Is this what the Republicans are reduced to now? its actually quite amusing.

The Mad Hatter

jonny72 wrote: »

And I for one worship our new Tyrannical overlord with his secret prison camps and wiretapping programs...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=baracknophobia-obey

"Re-education camps"?? Is this what the Republicans are reduced to now? its actually quite amusing.

CrazywomanCongresswoman Michelle Bachmann seems opposed to even first-time education (being as she is a creationist), so re-education can only be more horrifying to her.

She's representative (albeit an extreme example) of a lunatic fringe of the republican party which has gained an unnerving amount of power in the last few years, and she and others like her represent the best reason to vote democrat, no matter how much you disagree with their policies. (At least they live in the real world.)

Edit: Also, let's not forget that mass wiretapping of US citizens was G. W. Bush's (or, more likely, Dick Cheney's) idea.

Ho_hum

Stewart's 'Baracknophobia' piece was quite magnificent, the man is a legend. And the Republicans are the most uproarious of laughing stocks. I'm looking forward to their Rush/Newt dream ticket next time around. Or will it be Palin/Jindal? Excuse me, I have to go, my sides are splitting.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

stewart is managing his transition from anti establishment media commentator to pro administration cheerleader well, good luck to him.

Overheal

I think he's owed a little gloat period after what he had to report the last 8 years.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

well I'll come back to him next year and hope for the best, even bill maher has taken a serious turn. Describes himself as a liberal now, no longer a libertarian...I guess everyone likes to be on the winning team. Maher at least does get a few digs in, and they're even funnier when his audience refuses to laugh.

Ho_hum

Captain Mords Spiced Bum wrote: »

stewart is managing his transition from anti establishment media commentator to pro administration cheerleader well, good luck to him.

Your boy lost. Get over it, pet.

Captain Mords Spiced Bum wrote: »

even bill maher has taken a serious turn. Describes himself as a liberal now, no longer a libertarian...I guess everyone likes to be on the winning team. Maher at least does get a few digs in, and they're even funnier when his audience refuses to laugh.

You're a Bill Maher cheerleader? So Palestinians deserve to fry? :rolleyes:

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

gods damnit, I don't want to get banned from this forum for a third time please don't bait me.

john mccain was not, and never will be "my boy". I don't think I had a boy in this race, although ron paul was certainly the best of a bad lot.

You're a Bill Maher cheerleader? So Palestinians deserve to fry?

I can't really say anything to this that won't get me banned, but I dind't want you to think I was ignoring it.

lostexpectation

like i said elsewhere it amazing to see these guys complaining about civil rights they ignored under bush, but now obama here its all change.

banquo

Ron Paul ftw.

I like to get that in when I can.

Nodin

Captain Mords Spiced Bum wrote: »

stewart is managing his transition from anti establishment media commentator to pro administration cheerleader well, good luck to him.

The thing is, when you come out with nonsense like the re-education camps, 'tyranny' and the like, its not only easy to be laughed at, its unavoidable that you will be. Alternative fiscal and social policies, not so much so. Somewhere in America, somebody will be paid large amounts of money for pointing that out to the Republicans, when they are ready to listen.

banquo

It's impossible to deny that the major media - Fox excepted - fawn over Obama. But imo the Daily Show has been pretty balanced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5mwW13WLqw

silverharp

This was one of the quick clips from Jon's piece

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG_-0iqXb1w

Nodin

This morning on Fox at 10 AM they had "Who is Jesus?"...I just imagined the start being a picture of Obama with a red line through it....

norbert64

Breitbart has repsonded.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/abreitbart/2009/04/12/jon-stewart-and-kumar-go-to-white-house/

his premise seems to be that TPTB are being politically correct by sticking it to the White Man, in this case, the Irish one.

Pocono Joe

I dunno... Pretty sad state of affairs in my opinion when we rely on the Comedy Channel and the likes of Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert to base our political views. What’s next... SpongeBob Political Rants?

Never trust anyone under 40!

The Mad Hatter

Pocono Joe wrote: »

I dunno... Pretty sad state of affairs in my opinion when we rely on the Comedy Channel and the likes of Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert to base our political views.

It does indeed reflect badly on the journalism of the nation when the most even-handed and intelligent reporting is provided by political satirists. For that you can probably blame the polarising effect of Fox news (the real Comedy Channel) over the last decade or so.

jank

Pocono Joe wrote: »

I dunno... Pretty sad state of affairs in my opinion when we rely on the Comedy Channel and the likes of Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert to base our political views. What’s next... SpongeBob Political Rants?

Never trust anyone under 40!

Well id prefer someone like that any day before watching the likes of Sean "Tyranny" Hannity.

Fox is becoming a joke these days. Everything they lead with is the "government is bad". Yet when Bush & co were in power you were un-American if you didnt support the "government". It's like a sitcom at this stage.

SteveS

lostexpectation wrote: »

like i said elsewhere it amazing to see these guys complaining about civil rights they ignored under bush, but now obama here its all change.

Those people are idiots, but there are/were many in the middle and the right that were disgusted with Bush's war on the Constitution and did complain. Obama was not my ideal candidate, but I held out hope that he would be good for civil liberties and eliminate some of the more offensive Bush policies. Unfortunately, in regards to illegal wiretapping and denial of habeas to detainees, he has vigorously defended these abuses and conitunued these programs.

LostinKildare

SteveS wrote: »

there are/were many in the middle and the right that were disgusted with Bush's war on the Constitution and did complain.

Hmm, help me out. I can't think of anyone on the Right who made much effort to fight the Bush administration's gutting of the Constitution. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc) was the ONLY one of 100 senators with balls enough to vote against the PATRIOT Act in 2001. When it was renewed in 2006 his attempts to add limits to its sweeping powers attracted just 10 votes -- none of them Republican.
As I recall it, leaders from both the Right and the Center (including centrist Dems) either genuinely supported Bush or just went along with it for cynical reasons. As for the general population, those who spoke out against the govt's methods in its "war on terror" -- you know, the "America haters" -- were almost exclusively progressive liberals, especially just after 9/11.

SteveS

When I meant we, I meant the general public, not the spineless sycophants in Congress. Ron Paul (R) also consistently railed against the abuses of Bush.

Respectfully, I disagree that the only opposition to the GWOT was from the progressive left. Libertarians and some conservatives opposed methods used in the GWOT. Check out the Volokh Conspiracy, a popular blog that is mostly staffed by conservatives. They have been consistently critical of Bush Era policies. To suggest that the only opposition to Bush policies was from the progressive left is just simply not true.

As an aside, I am happy that a significant number on the left are being equally critical of the Obama Administration continuing some of Bush's policies and not ignoring it.

LostinKildare

Okay, while I still do not accept your assertion that there were "many" from the Right and Center that opposed Bush, I concede that there were some, including the constitutionalist/libertarian Republican Paul. Sadly they were just as ineffectual as the larger numbers from the Left.

Re the Volokh Conspiracy weblog, perhaps if I were to dig way down in I'd see why you recommend it, but with a glance at the list of its contributors who write on this issue, I recognise Orin Kerr, who has defended the constitutionality of Bush's warrantless electronic spying; Michelle Boardman, OLC defender of Bush signing statements; and Eric Posner, coauthor of Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty and the Courts, apologia for torture and executive absolutism.
From its flap copy:
"In Terror in the Balance, Posner and Vermeule take on civil libertarians of both the left and the right, arguing that the government should be given wide latitude to adjust policy and liberties in the times of emergency. They emphasize the virtues of unilateral executive actions and argue for making extensive powers available to the executive as warranted. The judiciary should neither second-guess security policy nor interfere on constitutional grounds. In order to protect citizens, government can and should use any legal instrument that is warranted under ordinary cost-benefit analysis. The value gained from the increase in security will exceed the losses from the decrease in liberty."

I do have respect for, say, Andrew Sullivan, though I don't agree with him on many issues (and ya gotta wonder about anyone who thinks Dick Cheney is sexy). Sullivan by the way thinks that Obama is playing a long game on transparency/accountability:
"Obama understands he is the president, which means that he understands, unlike his overwhelmed predecessor, that he is the president of all Americans.
He knows that indictment and prosecution of the war criminals at the heart of the last administration would appear to those cocooned from the reality of what happened as an assault on American unity and stability. That proper concern has to be balanced against the gravity of the crimes, the profound nature of the constitutional claims that underpinned them, and the necessity to uphold the rule of law. And so a process whereby the president hangs back a little, allows the evidence to slowly filter out, releases memos that help prove to Americans that what was done was unequivocally torture and indisputably illegal ... is not to be despised.
I think Obama knows what happened; and he knows that, in the end, America will have to face it. He will not defend it, but he will not be the prosecutor either. It's the long game he knows. And it's the long game that will bring these people to justice."

I'd like to believe that . . . .

SteveS

Volokh has a worthless search engine, so it is very hard to find stuff. They certainly don't agree on everything, which is one reason I like the blog, as both sides tend to make intelligent arguments. The founder, Eugene Volokh has blogged on FISA and the NSA. See this post. As for torture, I'll let you look if you want, but the vast majority of posts on torture at Volokh discuss the immorality and illegality of torture.

I'd like to believe Obama, too, but he has continued several Bush policies that are simply wrong, so I am rapidly moving from cautious optimist to angry cynicism.

elshambo

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

It does indeed reflect badly on the journalism of the nation when the most even-handed and intelligent reporting is provided by political satirists. For that you can probably blame the polarising effect of Fox news (the real Comedy Channel) over the last decade or so.

how messed up is a country's media when actually reporting the news in a semi rational way is seen as a satire on the news broadcasters:eek:

He has a hard life, stuff handed to him on a plater by fox and their ilk everyday and all he has to do is run it :)

banquo

MSNBC and Fox are as bad as each other. CNN is the closest thing to objective you'll get inside the States. I think that since people started getting their news from the internet - see www.newspaperdeathwatch.com - that papers and news stations now have to be more magazine like - one big editorial - to get the ratings.

@lostinkildare, +1 on Andrew Sullivan. 1st class writer.

lostexpectation

stewart regularly points out how obama has continued bush policies, ok so he's still mention bush but he has criticised him, apparently msnnbc is the 'house' network now.

Overheal

lostexpectation wrote: »

stewart regularly points out how obama has continued bush policies, ok so he's still mention bush but he has criticised him, apparently msnnbc is the 'house' network now.

Actually as you will find when the video is posted tomorrow, Jon Stewart has concluded that FOX is the new CNN, CNN is the New FOX, and MSNBC is now Comedy Central. And he makes a fair point...

banquo

I look forward to this video.

Anyone got a [perfectly legal] link for non-US viewers?