What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
127 Comments
- rwbrinso, on 09/29/2009, -4/+88It's kind of depressing that he doesn't rock the bowtie any more. That made him eleventy billion times more smug.
- veganpa, on 09/29/2009, -5/+63Shooting fish in a barrel.
Unfortunately, only Comedy Central (!) will call out the lies. The rest of the media just presents "he said, Faux says." - Apokalyps2547, on 09/29/2009, -1/+41Haven't YOU ever watched Crossfire, TheCash? Carlson's introduction was always preceded by "From the Right...".
- AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -2/+39And after every one of those clips when he showed either the right wingers doing exactly the same *****, and being completely hypocritical, or how ridiculous the claims even were in the first place, but that doesn't count right? Of course, of course. How can I forget?? Facts are only what they tell you! That must be why you guys can compare Obama to Hitler with a straight face.
- bjenidles, on 09/29/2009, -6/+41Canadian mirror:
http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-wi ... - RoflCoptah, on 09/29/2009, -1/+29good ol jon stewart. He portrays news so much more realistically than many news anchors i see today in the "politically correct" media
- AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -1/+29Might I ask why you didn't just call him "Jon Stewart" like everyone else, and even he himself, calls him?
You're not one of those people that emphasizes the "Hussein" in Obama's name in a sarcastic tone as if that's actually a valid criticism, are you? - johnwayne1, on 09/29/2009, -0/+27"Kids are stupid" LMAO
- AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -1/+27Well what the hell would you classify him as? He sure as ***** isn't a liberal/left winger...
- GamerXR72, on 09/29/2009, -0/+24I like both.
- BoneheadFarker, on 09/29/2009, -1/+24I never want to see the word "brazilian" used while referring to Carlson Tucker EVER AGAIN...
- mtdna, on 09/29/2009, -2/+22Eleventy billion? I would say it's closer to a brazilian.
- KeithLM, on 09/29/2009, -1/+20Jon Stewart addressed that video on a previous episode, and he made ACORN look pretty bad. Just because he didn't do that entire bit in this episode again doesn't mean he's changed his mind on it. He only has 80 minutes a week to work with, not like those fox nitwits who pound on the same stuff hour after hour.
- AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -13/+32Any right winger care to retort? Hello?? Hellooooooo??? Bueller? Bueller????
Yeah, didn't think so... - EricSchC1, on 09/29/2009, -2/+20"Everyone else but Stewart-fellating leftists have long abandoned these sorts of articles."
And that makes you...? - mnemy, on 09/29/2009, -2/+20Didn't really rip him apart... he was more ripping all GOPs apart. Would have been more entertaining if he focused on that douche tho
- Slicklines, on 09/29/2009, -0/+18Oooo! Another post from today's Troll of Choice! Look, could you edit your post down to one vowel that has anything to do with reality?
- MichaelCorleone, on 09/29/2009, -3/+19More like quick one liner about TC. Wouldn't say rip apart.
- AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -0/+16@solid12345
Who gives two ***** if he's ***** Jewish or of Jewish parentage?
Does that actually mean something to you as far as their mindset goes?
Do you not see the difference is making fun of someone for wearing a bowtie and making fun of someone for being Jewish? Really??
You're coming across as kinda anti-semitic here, buddy. - Liverboy, on 09/29/2009, -0/+15The thing that surprises me about calling the right on their just jaw droppingly obvious, easily provable hypocrisy is that it is so common that a lot of people just look at it and say "Yep, there they go again..." instead of, "Man, that's horrible and the perpetrator should be ashamed".
And again, these aren't all way way way right loony bin types saying this stuff, it major leaders in the mainstream of the GOP. Feh. - orlandogeek, on 09/29/2009, -1/+16@Barackalypse - I'll see your ACORN and raise you a Blackwater. Let's see, who's worse?
- Slicklines, on 09/29/2009, -2/+17How about the fact that your candidate for Prez., John "Slave to the Neocons" McCain called ACORN an outstanding example of democracy in action. Hello? No memory?? Typical. Look, it's obvious you are a two-bit troll, with a budweiser IQ and a double-wide lifestyle, but that doesn't mean you have to be so obvious about it. I'm only trying to help. 'Cause dude? You need it.
- lolerskate, on 09/29/2009, -2/+17Aww you used is jewish birth name to try and make a moot point isnt that cute!
- bsmang, on 09/29/2009, -1/+16I can't believe Fox portrayed that as they did. There should at least be some kind of minimal standard of truthfulness for news media, outside of which this sort of ***** would lie.
- Zoshchenko, on 09/29/2009, -0/+14People who practice a double standard are too narrow-minded to know they are practicing a double standard.
- SomeRandomGuy, on 09/29/2009, -0/+14You have to watch the video to get it.
- akeldama, on 09/29/2009, -3/+15Jon Stewart is America's most trusted newsman:
Cliff May: "We did do Hiroshima, do you think Truman is a war criminal for that?"
Jon Stewart: "Yeah."
Cliff May: "You do?"
Jon Stewart: "Yeah."
Cliff May: "Ok. Listen..."
Jon Stewart: "This is what I think about the atom bomb; I think that if you drop the atom bomb 15 miles off-shore and you said the next one's coming to hit you, then I would think it's ok. To drop one on a city and kill 100,000 people, I think that's criminal."
...
Cliff May: "You think Truman was temporarily insane when he dropped the bomb?"
Jon Stewart: "Yes." - charlie55, on 09/29/2009, -1/+10stewart is the most "politically correct" person in all of media.
- Taiyoryu, on 09/29/2009, -2/+11Fox News viewers are children?
- rednip, on 09/29/2009, -0/+9Actually when completely backed against the wall with facts, they always start pointing fingers and claim that democrats are 'just as bad'.
- Propethic, on 09/29/2009, -0/+9No.
- pinchduck, on 09/29/2009, -2/+10They're trying to, but they keep getting buried.
- Salinator, on 09/29/2009, -0/+8His 'point' doesn't become any less insane if you frame it in the context of indoctrination.
- batguano, on 09/29/2009, -0/+8okie dokey
"Jon Stewart has Lupus." (it's never lupus) - PBRbeer, on 09/29/2009, -1/+9Title: Jon Stewart Rips Apart Tucker Carlson Again....
Truth: Jon Stewart makes one comment that lasts 12 seconds relating to Tucker in a 6 minute video clip.....
Gilded Headlines - AngryDeuce, on 09/29/2009, -0/+7Do you really think Jon Stewart is a "self hating" Jew? People in Hollywood change their names all the time, regardless of their heritage. They do it because it's just easier...easier to pronounce, easier to remember.
And I could care less about your stance on Iran and Israel...you said, and I quote "but don't dare make fun of anyone coming up with a stagename to prove to his supposedly tolerant liberal audience they are just Jewish in wikipedia bio only" as if his being Jewish was something to cover up. Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's how it comes across. - lolerskate, on 09/29/2009, -1/+8With or without a bowtie and on any news network Tucker the sucker is still a douchenozzle of epic proportion.
- gianttoolbox11, on 09/29/2009, -7/+14Fun fact: Tucker Carlson is a Ron Paul supporter.
- bsmang, on 09/29/2009, -0/+7Why?
- paperpanda, on 09/29/2009, -0/+7But that's the problem Jon is pointing out.
The republicans were basically being boldfaced hypocrites even with the knowledge that the parents didn't mind when the song took place during the inauguration. Now, that the video has resurfaced they're all claiming INDOCTRINATION!111. Tucker didn't have a point unless he also called out the kids singing for Laura Bush and the "wonderful" job FEMA did during hurricane Katrina. At least then he would have been consistent. No one's trying to "get a leg up" they're trying to get republicans to see that they are complete hypocrites. - A11YND, on 09/29/2009, -0/+7Hahaha. I get it, Zyklon-B! Get it? Because he's Jewish.
Racist *****. - gasoline, on 09/29/2009, -1/+7Let's see what Admiral William D. Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during World War II had to say about it:
"Both sides were prepared throughout the war that had just ended to unloose deadly gases, but not even the fanatical followers of Hitler and Hirohito, who committed so many other unspeakable atrocities dared use poison gas—for fear of retaliation.
To me, the atomic bomb belongs in exactly the same category.
I have admitted frankly in the preceding chapter that I misjudged the terrible efficiency of this entirely new concept of an explosive. In the fall of 1944 I held conferences with Professor Bush, Lord Cherwell, the British expert on atomic energy, and Major General Groves. They had convinced President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill of the potential effectiveness of atomic energy for military purposes.
As a result, vast sums of money were appropriated to push the development with all possible speed.
In the spring of 1945 President Truman directed Mr. Byrnes to make a special study of the status and prospects of the new atomic explosive on which two billion dollars already had been spent. Byrnes came to my home on the evening of June 4 to discuss his findings. He was more favorably impressed than I had been up to that time with the prospects of success in the final development and use of this new weapon.
Once it had been tested, President Truman faced the decision as to whether to use it. He did not like the idea, but was persuaded that it would shorten the war against Japan and save American lives. It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
It was my reaction that the scientists and others wanted to make this test because of the vast sums that had been spent on the project. Truman knew that, and so did the other people involved. However, the Chief Executive made a decision to use the bomb on two cities in Japan. We had only produced two bombs at that time. We did not know which cities would be the targets, but the President specified that the bombs should be used against military facilities.
I realized that my original error in discounting the effectiveness of the atomic bomb was based on long experience with explosives in the Navy. I had specialized in gunnery and at one time headed the Navy Department's Bureau of Ordnance. "Bomb" is the wrong word to use for this new weapon. It is not a bomb. It is not an explosive. It is a poisonous thing that kills people by its deadly radioactive reaction, more than by the explosive force it develops.
The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children. We were the first to have this weapon in our possession, and the first to use it. There is a practical certainty that potential enemies will have it in the future and that atomic bombs will sometime be used against us.
That is why, as a professional military man with a half century of service to his government, I come to the end of my war story with an apprehension about the future.
These new concepts of "total war" are basically distasteful to the soldier and sailor of my generation. Employment of the atomic bomb in war will take us back in cruelty toward noncombatants to the days of Genghis Khan.
It will be a form of pillage and rape of a society, done impersonally by one state against another, whereas in the Dark Ages it was a result of individual greed and vandalism. These new and terrible instruments of uncivilized warfare represent a modern type of barbarism not worthy of Christian man.
One of the professors associated with the Manhattan Project told me that he had hoped the bomb wouldn't work. I wish that he had been right.
Perhaps there is some hope that its capacity for death and terror among the defenseless may restrain nations from using the atom bomb against each other, just as in the last war such fears made them avoid employment of the new and deadlier poison gases developed during World War I.
However, I am forced to a reluctant conclusion that for the security of my own country, which has been the guiding principle in my approach to all problems faced during my career, there is but one course open to us:
Until the United Nations, or some world organization, can guarantee—and have the power to enforce that guarantee—that the world will be spared the terrors of atomic warfare, the United States must have more and better atom bombs than any potential enemy."
(Leahy, I Was There, pp. 440-442). - MagnumX, on 09/29/2009, -1/+7Ya know...its easy to be smug when you're the only person in the media (on a fake news show, no less) pointing out what are obviously radical hysterical conspiratorial fanatasies.
Want to see him be less smug? Be smarter and quit providing him such obviously ludicrous material. There's lots of arguments that can be made using facts without resorting to a Mccarthy-esque series of insunations, diatribes, and innuendos. Calling someone who's a democratically elected, sitting moderate (let me say that again slowly for you, MOD-ER-ATE) president, a far leftist idealogue intent on turning us into a socialist or communist dicatatorship is pure, died in the wool, bat$#!% crazy talk. If you want to oppose him, fine. Just stick to the facts, but don't go just repeating rhetoric because whoever screams loudest probably gets more coverage.
/rant - QuantumNighmare, on 09/29/2009, -2/+8Let's see, Democratic President, Democrat congress, yet somehow the vast majority of hyperbole and hypocrisy is coming out of the conservative party and it's television station.
Don't give him so much easy material, and he might need to move on to the democrats. But c'mon, who would avoid all the easy targets? - rednip, on 09/29/2009, -1/+7"like the first time he hammered tucker carlson. he said crossfire was hurting america. a stupid show is hurting america? if so, arent the idiots who watch it and expect it to matter (like stewart) the idiots?"
I know that sarcasm is an advanced subject for dito heads, but I'll try to explain Jon's joke in simple terms. In 2004 there was a Presidential election, and during that election, some elements of the American left were (god-forbid) questioning the current President at the time (President Bush II), during war time even. Many members of the 'right wing' media (including Carlson) complained that this was wrong, as we were at war, and everyone should respect the President. Jon Stewart pointed out the the lively discussion on Crossfire was as likely as any other to be 'hurting America'.
"why are you watching tv news and expecting it to be good?" I'm guessing that 'talk radio' is your thing. - inactive, on 09/29/2009, -0/+6"Well if the democrats hadn't called me a meanie head back in 73, this would never have happened!"
- youjettisonme, on 09/29/2009, -0/+6It's fun to watch republicans respond to John Stewart's assertions about hypocrisy. They can offer up flaccid comments about his supposed arrogance, but rarely can they ever take him to task for any of the content.
- scottaculous, on 09/29/2009, -3/+8These articles disputes that claim:
"* In yet another label, the Smithsonian asserts as fact that "Special leaflets were then dropped on Japanese cities three days before a bombing raid to warn civilians to evacuate." The very next sentence refers to the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, implying that the civilian inhabitants of Hiroshima were given a warning. In fact, no evidence has ever been uncovered that leaflets warning of atomic attack were dropped on Hiroshima. Indeed, the decision of the Interim Committee was "that we could not give the Japanese any warning. "
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0805-24.htm
http://www.doug-long.com/letter.htm - Arsi, on 09/29/2009, -0/+5thank you <3
- max1001, on 09/29/2009, -0/+5Do you understand the concept of News?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 130 discussions
