John Stewart: 1 Crossfire: 0

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:12 pm

That was brutal. At least Begala was smart enough to not open his mouth too much. Tucker Carlson (what kind of name is that - and who the F wears bow-ties?) was getting all hot and bothered, and looked like an ass.

Sure, they probably didn't expect Stewart to chew them up - but damn. "Please stop - you're hurting America..."

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:12 pm

malchior wrote:I was impressed by how he came on to pimp his book and basically ignored it to press the issue he thought was more important.

Carlson was totally outmatched by Stewart. Begala at least had the good sense to shut up because Stewart was just beating the crap out of them.

I could see how someone could see how he came across as a dick. I was a little shocked to see someone step out of spin bullshit mode and lay the smackdown on them. We see it so infrequently that it is a little shocking. No one in the media usually has the guts to challenge anything anymore. The unwritten code is that they need to be nice to each other because that'll help them make more money, and Stewart pissed all over the code because he thought it was the RIGHT thing to do. It's honestly a little unusual these days.

Maybe my problem with him was that like you said, I just didnt expect him to come out and speak like he did. Hey, he made his point, and I respect his view on it, but for me, when people have to resort to calling the hosts of shows "dicks", and attack their clothes or appearance, it turns me off, and I lose interest in their message. Stewart is too smart of a man to have to resort to comments like he made, when he is trying to get his point across.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:17 pm

jblank wrote:
malchior wrote:I was impressed by how he came on to pimp his book and basically ignored it to press the issue he thought was more important.

Carlson was totally outmatched by Stewart. Begala at least had the good sense to shut up because Stewart was just beating the crap out of them.

I could see how someone could see how he came across as a dick. I was a little shocked to see someone step out of spin bullshit mode and lay the smackdown on them. We see it so infrequently that it is a little shocking. No one in the media usually has the guts to challenge anything anymore. The unwritten code is that they need to be nice to each other because that'll help them make more money, and Stewart pissed all over the code because he thought it was the RIGHT thing to do. It's honestly a little unusual these days.
Maybe my problem with him was that like you said, I just didnt expect him to come out and speak like he did. Hey, he made his point, and I respect his view on it, but for me, when people have to resort to calling the hosts of shows "dicks", and attack their clothes or appearance, it turns me off, and I lose interest in their message. Stewart is too smart of a man to have to resort to comments like he made, when he is trying to get his point across.

He was pointing out that the bow tie was his costume for the theater, and it was a good point. He didn't segue into that randomly. I think the dick comment was a little out of line, but Carlson had accused Stewart of being Kerry's buttboy. I think at that point he was just trying to piss off Carlson who was visibly angry about getting his ass handed to him on his own show.

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:18 pm

Al wrote:
jblank wrote:You cant have a show thats set up like the Presidential debates.
Why not?

Because nobody would watch it, Al. You have to have a little bit of confrontation, some sort of challenge to the opinions. Would you sit there, on your sofa, for 1 hour, watching Chris Matthews, seated behind a desk, asking questions to Rick Santorum and Charlie Rangel, who are behind podiums with lights on top of them, that go off when they have 5 seconds left or something? I wouldnt, thats not entertaining every night, but on Crossfire, Hardball, O'Reilly, and H & C, at least you get to hear opinions get challenged, usually by multiple people, and see some of the BS cut through.

You do get alot of the 2 sidedness, but within both parties are other opinions, and people that dont see everything as black or white.

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:22 pm

malchior wrote:
jblank wrote:
malchior wrote:I was impressed by how he came on to pimp his book and basically ignored it to press the issue he thought was more important.

Carlson was totally outmatched by Stewart. Begala at least had the good sense to shut up because Stewart was just beating the crap out of them.

I could see how someone could see how he came across as a dick. I was a little shocked to see someone step out of spin bullshit mode and lay the smackdown on them. We see it so infrequently that it is a little shocking. No one in the media usually has the guts to challenge anything anymore. The unwritten code is that they need to be nice to each other because that'll help them make more money, and Stewart pissed all over the code because he thought it was the RIGHT thing to do. It's honestly a little unusual these days.
Maybe my problem with him was that like you said, I just didnt expect him to come out and speak like he did. Hey, he made his point, and I respect his view on it, but for me, when people have to resort to calling the hosts of shows "dicks", and attack their clothes or appearance, it turns me off, and I lose interest in their message. Stewart is too smart of a man to have to resort to comments like he made, when he is trying to get his point across.
He was pointing out that the bow tie was his costume for the theater, and it was a good point. He didn't segue into that randomly. I think the dick comment was a little out of line, but Carlson had accused Stewart of being Kerry's buttboy. I think at that point he was just trying to piss off Carlson who was visibly angry about getting his ass handed to him on his own show.

Well, he's wrong about Carlson wearing the bowtie for "theater". Carlson was wearing that bowtie when he was writing for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and Readers Digest, so I think its just something he wears, his trademark if you will.

But thats beside the point, my only beef is that Stewart, in my opinion, showed his ass somewhat, and even though Carlson used a poor choice of words in describing him as a Kerry Buttboy, his responses didnt win him any points.

Al · Post by Al » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:26 pm

jblank wrote:Because nobody would watch it, Al.

Really?

Sure, might have to relax the rules a little bit but a real debate would still be both possible and marketable.

jblank · Post by **jblank** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:31 pm

Al wrote:
jblank wrote:Because nobody would watch it, Al.
Really?

Sure, might have to relax the rules a little bit but a real debate would still be both possible and marketable.

Come on Al. Dont you think that maybe the fact that these are candidates for the Presidency had just a little to do with the ratings? Sorry, but if you tried to make a nightly show into something like you are suggesting, its just not gonna fly. People arent that interested in politics unfortunately, and the fact that the HIGHEST rated political show, The O'Reilly Factor, only garners at most a 4 share, with I believe a 3 average, proves that there just wouldnt be a market like you think there is.

People would be bored to death, and you arent going to get any more substance out of that type of show, than you do on Crossfire, et al. Let alone the fact that I bet booking guests would be rather challenging.

Al · Post by Al » Mon Oct 18, 2004 1:56 pm

jblank wrote:Come on Al. Dont you think that maybe the fact that these are candidates for the Presidency had just a little to do with the ratings?

I'm not suggesting that a debate show would pull in 51 million a night but the fact that the show was a success does prove that the format can work.

People would be bored to death and you arent going to get any more substance out of that type of show, than you do on Crossfire, et al.

I disagree. You can make a good, watchable show that would be a lot more than "Who can shout the loudest and spin the best?" if you got a good moderator.

Let alone the fact that I bet booking guests would be rather challenging.

That, on the other hand, could be the stumbling block.

Gizah · Post by **Gizah** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:39 pm

I disagree. You can make a good, watchable show that would be a lot more than "Who can shout the loudest and spin the best?" if you got a good moderator.

Sounds like the News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS to me. The News Hour is still the highest rated news program going is it not? Sadly, highest "rated" does not mean that it has the highest viewership share.

WAW · Post by **WAW** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:44 pm

Funny that the only person going after Stewart is Matt Drudge. Well maybe not, Tucker Carlson is a pretty boy.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:27 pm

Gizah wrote:
I disagree. You can make a good, watchable show that would be a lot more than "Who can shout the loudest and spin the best?" if you got a good moderator.
Sounds like the News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS to me. The News Hour is still the highest rated news program going is it not? Sadly, highest "rated" does not mean that it has the highest viewership share.

Yo mad props for my fave show. Word!

Shields and Brooks are da shizzle!

(best darned news show on the air. all the national network news and the CNN/MSNBC stuff is utter crap with a bunch of preening talking heads. And that Robert Novak scares the shit out of me!!!:shock: )

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:29 pm

WAW wrote:Funny that the only person going after Stewart is Matt Drudge. Well maybe not, Tucker Carlson is a pretty boy.

Just wait. Stewart broke rules. He may suffer for this long-term. But, I'm sure he knew the risks.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:02 am

And Jon Stewart continues his owning of Crossfire on the Daily Show tonight! Should we start counting the number of times Jon Stewart refers to himself as the monkey?

I'll try to clean this image up a bit later, but my photoshop skills are kinda suxx0r.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:25 am

Seems Stewart has given Carlson a complex.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:26 am

Yep; the pwnership continued on the Daily Show. Hilarious, Jon. Keep up the good work.

Guy Incognito · Post by **Guy Incognito** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 10:02 am

Zaxxon wrote:Yep; the pwnership continued on the Daily Show. Hilarious, Jon. Keep up the good work.

Anyone have a transcript of that Daily Show?

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:16 am

Guy Incognito wrote:
Zaxxon wrote:Yep; the pwnership continued on the Daily Show. Hilarious, Jon. Keep up the good work.
Anyone have a transcript of that Daily Show?

Can't seem to find one via a quick Google search; just older ones. Stewart basically just kept interrupting whatever he was talking about to get another jab in.

Nice sig, btw.

CSL · Post by **CSL** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:10 pm

Found another transcript with Jon Stewarts latest foray on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/trans ... ewart.html

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm

What's wierd is that the transcripts read like Stewart is totally pwning them IMO.

However, this is now getting radio play like mad, so I am hearing the conversations and to me hearing them make Stewart sound like an ass.

I'm not positive why, but as I reflect it sounds like Stewart is really playing games here. Either with great effort or unconsciously, I am not sure which. The big sticker for me is that he talks about xfire being used as part of the political strategy of this country while in the same conversation refusing to discuss why he interviewed Kerry the way he did, but rather misdirect with talk of puppetry lead in. He knows he's political news satire and that he is listened to. On the one hand he says it's for comedy, on the other he refuses to be a monkey. It's very shifty, like only the best of the used car sales men can do.

This interview probably won't ruin things for a lot of people, but every time I hear it, I think Jon's credibility goes down further with me. I have to wonder if he is really pushing an agenda and not just adding his own beliefs in the form of polish to his political satire.

It's pretty clear that's not what others are getting from the interview, but I often tend to be a bit left field of the populace.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:46 pm

And so I read the PBS link and now my reading is totally tainted by feeling that Stewart is being a bad hipocite.

I hear David Bowie when I read him.

Listen to me
Don't listen to me
Talk to me
Don't talk me
Dance with me
Don't dance with me
oh ho
beep beep
We are the goon squad and we're coming to town
beep beep

Eco-Logic · Post by **Eco-Logic** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:24 pm

I actually agree LM

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:36 pm

I actually agree LM

That I am a little left field of the populace?

These last couple of years have left me totally confused. I have always been on the conservative side of independent. I have totally moved away from that conservative side, but rather than embracing neoliberalism, I see them embracing the things that disgust me about the contemporary conservativism. I'd say I long for the classic conservativism, but the classic conservatives were no bones about it bigots and an enviornmental distaster.

At this point, I still long for Dean. As much as I genuinely disagreed with his general policy, I felt he would have been a strong (com)passionate leader and that I at least knew where he stood. If he was gonna fuck me, that at least he'd at least warn me by kissing me first.

Edit: A couple of more confusing than normal for me almost freudian slips.

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:44 pm

LordMortis wrote:What's wierd is that the transcripts read like Stewart is totally pwning them IMO.

However, this is now getting radio play like mad, so I am hearing the conversations and to me hearing them make Stewart sound like an ass.

I'm not positive why, but as I reflect it sounds like Stewart is really playing games here. Either with great effort or unconsciously, I am not sure which. The big sticker for me is that he talks about xfire being used as part of the political strategy of this country while in the same conversation refusing to discuss why he interviewed Kerry the way he did, but rather misdirect with talk of puppetry lead in. He knows he's political news satire and that he is listened to. On the one hand he says it's for comedy, on the other he refuses to be a monkey. It's very shifty, like only the best of the used car sales men can do.

This interview probably won't ruin things for a lot of people, but every time I hear it, I think Jon's credibility goes down further with me. I have to wonder if he is really pushing an agenda and not just adding his own beliefs in the form of polish to his political satire.

It's pretty clear that's not what others are getting from the interview, but I often tend to be a bit left field of the populace.

I think he absolutely IS playing games, but in seeing it (as opposed to just hearing it) it seems that he's doing it with a sense of amusement vs. simply dickery. Which is to say, when I see his facial expressions and look at the physical cues, he is not being a condescending ass (as some media types are -- I'm looking at you O'Reilly) but rather is being a bit lighter -- there doesn't seem to be any real venom (until the "dick" comment) in what he's saying.

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:47 pm

Jon Stewart is putting on his Dennis Miller mean.

wire · Post by **wire** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:53 am

John Stewart talks a little about his appearance on Crossfire and can be seen here

Eduardo X · Post by **Eduardo X** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:30 pm

LordMortis wrote:
I actually agree LM
That I am a little left field of the populace?

These last couple of years have left me totally confused. I have always been on the conservative side of independent. I have totally moved away from that conservative side, but rather than embracing neoliberalism, I see them embracing the things that disgust me about the contemporary conservativism.

When you say neoliberalism, what do you mean? Do you mean a rapidly and globally expanding US economy, or as neoliberals call it, free trade, or do you mean something else?

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:00 pm

The new liberals pay lip service to middle class with empty promises, embrace censorship in the name of the public good, work with corporate and investor greed, and have lost their sense of social idealism to play the political game. Basically in their "moderate" approach, they keep what is worst about liberalism and they mix it with some of the worst approaches that conservatives have. The extremism they have kept is ain't no better. That leaves me only respecting the less extreme new liberals in the field of enviornmentalism, which I fear ends up being more lip service. Kerry, himself, mentioned siphoning off the Great Lakes to provide fresh water throughout the country early in his campaign before he was crucified for it and we haven't a word about it since.

Edit, and while I am at it why don't I actually avoid the question.

The new liberal voters (not politicians, generally) are waking up to the idea that while being socially left is the moral way to lead life, taxing and spending for every little program is not the way to be. That generosity of spirit and activity and wallet starts at home. That we have domestic obstacles that need to be overcome before we invest too much in the world. This is all contrary to the powers, the movers, the shakers in the new liberal movement both in government and in education (where the liberal movement really pushes its agenda)

Dirt · Post by **Dirt** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:09 pm

I think what Jon Stewart is doing is exposing the hypocrisy of these talk people and playing on the 'sound bite'. Look at Limbaugh, he'll say anything to pander to his listeners about drugs and people use them. Yet, when he's being convicted of drug abuse, he does everything he can to avoid punishment instead of owning up to his crime.

Eel Snave · Post by **Eel Snave** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:33 pm

I think Stewart comes off as pompous in the transcript. He has very good points, though.

I think the most telling story about network news is this:

Network news never, ever made a profit in the early days. It was primarily there just because the networks felt it was necessary to inform, kind of a public service, and it didn't matter if it lost money. Then 60 Minutes came along, and people watched for the first time ever. One season, though, it finally cracked a profit, for the first time ever in television history. Andrew Heyward found out about this and told one of the people involved, "I have good news and bad news. The good news is we just made a profit for the first time."

The person replied, "What's the bad news?"

Heyward replied, "We just made a profit for the first time."

Once news changes from being NEWS to being ENTERTAINMENT, which is what it is now, then it's totally screwed.