« Someone I Should Be Reading | Main | Bombs Away » Results!13 Aug 2007 11:21 pm I was watching a little of the cold cable news and saw Bill Kristol try to claim Kenneth Pollack and Michael O'Hanlon as "war skeptics" whose surge enthusiasm should lend credibility to his own. Fortunately, the host of the show pushed back against Kristol's claims. The host, of course, was John Stewart. You don't get that sort of rigor on a news program. Comments (18)
He also got Kristol to use the word "pussy." 
I've noticed that various commenters like to point out MY's spelling errors, with an indignation redolent of Barry Bonds's worst critics. Hey guys -- you're reading this blog for free! There's thousands of other free blogs out there. If spelling is so important to you, you should surf elsewhere.
It's not the misspellings per se that bothers me, it's the fact that a single proofread of what Matt just wrote would (seemingly) shake out 90% of them. It seems to imply he doesn't even do even that small amount of checking.
There are people in the world who don't have cable, like myself, and on their behalf I beg: Links, man, links(Fuck IP it's B.S. c'mon!).
The Grammar Nazi is obviusly a douchbag.
In a spree of ill-advised commenting: I love to troll on this site, but seriously, grammar and spelling are 2 two dos deux different things. je prefere 2 refere a lui a Matheui Igglazyass
I wonder why Jon keeps giving warmongering douchebags a platform. Don't they have enough of those already?
RE " wonder why Jon keeps giving warmongering douchebags a platform." Look at how Tucker Carlson's career is doing lately. Those bowties look kinda ..er.. shopworn.
rk, surf on over to the Comedy Central web site. They have clips of The Daily Show. They may even have the one yer looking for. ran, as Yglesias points out, Stewart actually tries to get his guests to answer to obvious logical criticisms. I'd much rather that the audience see an actual dialog with *whoever* than the misleading, rhetoric-filled nonsense that you see on the so-called leaders of cable news.
Jon's not mean enough if you ask me. I could see having an bloodthirsty neocon asshole like Kristol on if you're gonna rip him a new one for the entire interview but Jon doesn't do that.
If I recall correctly, Kristol's defense of the notion that O'Hanlon & Pollack were war critics was to repeat with "of course they were skeptics". So, no justification, just repetition and an expectation that the host will be gracious and allow your BS to stand, which it did, because Stewart didn't dwell on this lie and moved on to another way of asking the question.
I wonder why Jon keeps giving warmongering douchebags a platform. Well, actually, what he does is he brings these people on the air and ridicules them. They are all egotistical enough to think they beat him at his own game, although it seldom works out that way for them
If nothing else, I hope that JS is remembered by history for coming up with one of the most awesome political nicknames ever: "Bob Novak, douchebag of liberty"
Jon's not mean enough if you ask me. I could see having an bloodthirsty neocon asshole like Kristol on if you're gonna rip him a new one for the entire interview but Jon doesn't do that. He doesn't do that because he wants them to come back to be taunted a second time. Kristol's been on the show many times.
He doesn't do that because he wants them to come back to be taunted a second time. You silly English kah-niggett
Probably no other interviewer would have done so. As I mentioned in another thread, it was hilarious hearing Kristol say, "Petraeus thinks you're a pussy." Even Job cracked up on that one. I hadda give Bill that one - it was funny (even though he stole the line from Jon's earlier use of the word.) What is clear from the interview, though, is that this is going to be the spin next month: 1) General Petraeus is a "non-partisan" general and he says the surge is working. 2) "Everyone agrees" the surge is working. 3) "The troops morale is high", "the troops support the strategy", blah, blah. 4) Anybody who doesn't agree is a defeatist, doesn't support the troops, blah, blah. 5) We can pull this out if we "stay the course." And the Democrats will roll over and buy it...or just be too stupid to be able to counter it effectively - or both. Bush will immediately push for a bigger and longer surge - and then start a war with Iran (because he needs more troops in Iraq to start one, which is what the surge is really all about.) And the Democrats will just roll over and die...
Call me naive, but I think Stewart genuinely believes in debate, and that's why he brings on people like Kristol. It's a happy side effect that he often bests them, or surprises them by being well informed enough to know that O'Hanlon was not a war critic. In this regard, though I watch Olbermann and basically like him, it's disappointing to me that he never puts on conservatives and questions them.
Comments closed August 27, 2007. |
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Matthew Yglesias
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Weekly Archives
Categories
|
Copyright © 2007 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I believe the New York Times just ran a piece regarding the Times' frequent misspelling of names. I think the piece was picked up by The Huffington Post (Eat the Press), the author confessed to spelling Jon Stewart's name incorrectly on several occasions. He'd spelled it "John." Hint, Hint.
Posted by modthinglet | August 14, 2007 12:02 AM