Fuck Jon Stewart! Impeachable offense, thousands dead="spilled milk"

[In Truth We Trust]

they've gotten to him too. He should have mopped up the floor with Powell but instead he kissed his motherfucking lieing ass. He even got dissed when he asked to throw out the first pitch at a Nationals game. He has sold out people.

[bluestateguy]

1. I have no idea what this is about

But there is a tendency at DU for people to villianize someone because of a disagreement on a single issue.

[tallahasseedem]

2. Jon Stewart let Colin Powell repeat the Freep Mantra on The Daily Show

and essentially did not call him out on any of the blatant lies he was telling. Powell also managed to somehow blame it on Clinton. It was pathetic.

[DuaneBidoux]

68. That is his basic style, period. He had Zell Miller on recently and it

was the same thing. I have never seen him be confrontational with any guest. Remember, these are guests that have been invited. Apparently it's important enough to the producers to be able to invite guests such as Miller and Powell. Personally however I think that is where there is a problem. I hate to even see these people invited on the show.

[Cha]

92. God, that pisses me off when those

M(*&^%$F#F@$%!)$ Liars try to piss it off on Clinton.

Freakin' scared murdering MoFo Rat Dung!

[Imagevision]

125. Viva Jon Stewart - Viva Jon Stewart...!

[In Truth We Trust]

3. Lieing to cause war and and death to innocents is a single issue perhaps

you can disregard but not me.

[RoyGBiv]

5. Yes, and it's obnoxious ...

I get mental whiplash coming to this place sometimes.

One day I'm here, and everyone has the love bubble smiley floating around <person xyz>, and the next day it's "I hate <xyz>."

I have some rather unflattering things I'd really like to say about this practice, but I'll leave it at this. It makes us look ridiculous.

[bluestateguy]

7. Case in point: John Edwards

talk about going from hero to villain overnight.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Just what I was thinking about ...

On the other hand, it's good to know that DU is so full of perfect people that we have the luxury of condemning anyone who isn't perfect, according to our collective definitions (plural intentional) of perfection all the time.

[Blue Belle]

47. I thought...

"the luxury of condemning anyone who isn't perfect, according to the collective definitions (plural intentional) of perfection all the time" was the stuff of Republicans. Maybe we aren't so far apart afterall... :crazy:

This "John Stewart is a Traitor" campaign is truly pathetic. He's a comedian... the only thing he should be held accountable for is being funny.

[In Truth We Trust]

18. Can anyone consider principles?! Whether your a comedian or journalist

ask yourself how you would have handled an opportunity to interview a main conspirator in a war crime which has cost over 100,000 innocent lives and cost our nation over 300 billion dollars. Would you refer to the lies as "spilled milk"? People I love the daily show but I also love the truth and I would not be complicit in a war crime or refer to it as spilled milk. Stop being "pragmatic" or apologists because of someone that knows better,m has a forum, and doesn't speak to power what needs to be said.

I would have asked C Powell why he lied to the country and the world and how does he sleep at night?

[crimson333]

23. ambien

[stopbush]

24. Yes. Compare Jon's performance with Powell to the smackdown

Rosie O'Donnell laid on that a-hole Hannity the other day.

But lest we forget, we were all trashing Rosie back in her days as an ardent * supporter.

It's sad that we're at the point where we depend on comedians like Stewart to act like journalists and defenders of the truth. Maybe we expect too much of them. Let's face it, if the MSM was doing even a remotely balanced job of things, TDS wouldn't need to be the oasis of truth we wish it would be...it could just do comedy.

Let's not be surprised when entertainers decide to entertain.

[Cha]

94. Yes, basically we're in a sad state

of affairs..poor things..we don't have any news media so we depend on Jon and KO, and I don't know who else?

At least Jon gave it to begala and tucker that day on Crossfired.

I wonder what the audience reaction was to colon's lies?

[Cha]

95. I can't believe rosie o'donnel would

support bush in any way shape or form..it doesn't compute.

[OneTwentyoNine]

142. great post......n/t

[foo_bar]

45. fitfully

Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in The New Yorker last year of a diplomatic soiree that Powell attended on the eve of war, at which a foreign diplomat recited a news account that Bush was sleeping like a baby. Powell reportedly replied, "I'm sleeping like a baby, too. Every two hours, I wake up, screaming."

http://slate.msn.com/id/2095756/

[Imagevision]

87. Principles? Oil production peaked in the US in 2000 - Saddam-Iraq

was a natural - #2 oil reserves in the world - a US. middle-east presence and it puts the US. in a much better position -- they recently made Chalabi the "oil minister" of Iraq.

Sad to say masive numbers of US troops will remain in Iraq until the flow of oil is controlled even if the draft is reinstated in February 06 as is common knowledge around Georgetown these nights and days.

Cheney; "The insurgent problem in Iraq will be under control by 2009.

Jon Stewart is doing a fine job!!

[nashbridges]

102. Can anyone consider principles?! Whether you're a Pol or a housewife

-------------------------------------------------------------

Ask yourself how you would have handled an opportunity to interview a main conspirator in a crime which has cost over 4,000,000 innocent lives and cost our nation over 30 million lost resources. Would you refer to the lies as "spilled milk"? People, I love America but I also love the truth and I would not be complicit in a war crime or refer to it as spilled milk. Stop being "pragmatic" or apologists because of someone that knows better.

I've got a forum, and I speak to power what needs to be said.

I would have asked The Supreme Court why they lied to the country and the world and how do they sleep at night?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Do you understand how absolutes work? "Principles" are tricky business...

The principles you reference in your post only apply to you. It's well possible your principles do not line up with others. That's fair. It's also possible that the people who don't agree with you write posts like you just wrote, simply changing words. That's what I did.

Dogmatic, unforgiving approaches to any problem always lead to the worst solution.

[Clark2008]

66. Well... uh... to some of us, NOTHING has changed

on this matter.

Take that anyway you want.

:hi:

[name not needed]

78. One day someone is being touted as the hero of the Democratic Party,

the next they're being denounced as a DLC stooge.

[beaconess]

148. Isn't it pretty pathetic that we're relying on a COMEDIAN to speak up for

us?

He's a COMEDIAN, not the spokesman for the Democratic Party.

I haven't seen Howard Dean or Wes Clark or John Edwards or Al Sharpton smack down Colin Powell and doubt that they would even in private conversation, much less on national television. Why do we expect our entertainers to do what our leaders don't do?

Jeeez.

[whometense]

81. Completely and totally OT, but

I LOVE Americam Dreams!!!!!!! Sniff.

[Avalux]

4. I started an angry thread about Colin Powell -

but we do have to remember the Daily Show is comedy and CAN'T degrade into "mopping up the floor". Stewart did ask the right questions, it's just that Powell is such a skilled liar there wasn't much Stewart could do.

[NYCGirl]

6. Exactly. Before the "Jon Stewart has gone over to the other side" posts

begin, remember, JON STEWART IS A COMEDIAN, not a journalist. He'd be the first one to admit it.

[Spectral]

11. Then why is a comedian interviewing Colin Powell?

I just kinda wondered.

[NYCGirl]

13. Because it's a FAKE NEWS show. Any other questions? NT

[In Truth We Trust]

28. Yes I have another question. Is the blood of over 100,000 innocent people

really just "spilled milk" as Jon Stewart claimed tonight?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[In Truth We Trust]

36. you're statement doesn't make sense as a rejoinder to my question?

could you elaborate please?

[burythehatchet]

53. you're behind the curve

Hannity has already upped the number to 400,000. Do I hear 500,000?

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OneTwentyoNine]

139. So does Rummy and Reagan giving SH WMD concern you?

When we talk about those mass graves where the FUCK do all the Bush boot lickers think that SH got the weapons from to kill that many? Why... of course from RONALD REAGAN and DONALD RUMSFELD.

They happily handed over the materials so SH would do the dirty work for them and kill off as many Iranians as possible. To bad SH had some material left over and used it on his own people when BUSH 1 told the Iraqi's to rise up and overthrow SH.

[TryingToWarnYou]

75. You are perpetuating a RW lie. Blair admitted the claim was false.

The 300 thousand, or 400 thousand in mass graves was a complete lie. Do some research on it. Or better yet, just go here...

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1263901,00.html

On 14 December Blair repeated the claim in a statement issued by Downing Street in response to the arrest of Saddam Hussein and posted on the Labour party website that: 'The remains of 400,000 human beings already found in mass graves.'

The admission that the figure has been hugely inflated follows a week in which Blair accepted responsibility for charges in the Butler report over the way in which Downing Street pushed intelligence reports 'to the outer limits' in the case for the threat posed by Iraq.

Lots more at the link...

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

96. Then you would Fucking hate

what bush did to the innocent Iraqis that he bombed the shyte out of!!!

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TryingToWarnYou]

122. Denial. Its not just a river in Egypt anymore...

Try looking up casualty figures in "The Lancet". You will get a real eye opener.

Of course though, since the MSM didnt report it, it must not have happened, right? :eyes:

[TryingToWarnYou]

123. More info inside...

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/

[OneTwentyoNine]

140. No evidence that Bush has killed innocent Iraqi's? My God......

Hitting the button as of now....

[TryingToWarnYou]

121. Then say that..dont repeat a well known lie to further *your* cause.

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

130. Uh, how about IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11?

"Least efficient" - it was completely the wrong fucking target!

As far as the mass graves, of COURSE I'm glad Hussein isn't killing Iraqis anymore (though the number is widely overestimated, I think), but this doesn't in any way excuse the fact that we illegally invaded a country that was no threat to us. At all.

And fyi, I was against the war before we ever invaded, unlike some sunshine dissidents who later realized almost everyone's now against the war, and THEN decided they were against it. I knew it was wrong from before the first Iraqi was killed by bombing.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

134. Oh christ, you've swallowed the FauX News Koolaid.

Facts disagree with your alternate reality, ace. If you really think those things are true, and that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, you're obviously not paying attention to what's being posted all the time on DU.

I pity you. I used to be like you. Then I woke up. I hope it happens soon for you.

[LynnTheDem]

143. HUH??? Wow someone is WAAAAAY behind in the REALITY department!

STOP DRINKING THE KOOLAIDE! Reality is GOOD! Try it, you'll like it!

"Saddam was paying large amounts to families of suicide bombers."

ALL the nations in the mideast pay surviving PALESTINIAN family members and have for years; Saudi holds TELETHONS for the families. We call it LIFE INSURANCE.

"Saddam gave refuge to well known Al Qaeda operatives inclding
Abu Musab Zarqawi"

WRONG. Zarqawi was in KURDISTAN, dear. That was under AMERICAN control, NOT Saddam's. And Zarqawi WAS NOT al Qaeda. He was with Ansar al Islam.

"The 911 lead operative had met with Iraqi agents many times"

WRONG. This is so DEBUNKED long ago.

"Saddam violated 17 UN resolutions after Gulf War I."

WRONG. In case you didn't notice, there was no WMD and hadn't been any WMD since 1991. He was in NO violation.

Hussein had NO TIES to al Qaeda. NO TIES to any other international terrorist organization. NONE.

FACTS: NO TIES between Iraq & 911/al Qaeda.

Sky News (London): "One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?"

Bush: "I can't make that claim.'
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030131-23.html

Bush: No evidence Saddam Hussein involved in Nine-Eleven attacks
http://www.kltv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1447698

Sept 16, 2003- Rice: U.S. Never Said Saddam Was Behind 9/11
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/983821/posts

Sept 16, 2003- Rumsfeld sees no link between Saddam Hussein, 9/11
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-09-16-rumsfeld-iraq-911_x.htm

Wolfowitz: Iraq Was Not Involved In 9-11 Terrorist Attacks, No Ties To Al-Qaeda
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4372.htm

Brent Scowcroft, one of the Republican Party’s most respected foreign policy advisors;

"Don't Attack Saddam. It would undermine our antiterror efforts. There is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks."
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133

Allies Find No Links Between Iraq, Al Qaeda

"What I'm asked is if I've seen any evidence of that. (Iraq links to al Qaeda) And the answer is: I haven't.” -British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who supports U.S. invasion & occupation of Iraq.
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-noqaeda4nov04,0,4538810.story

British Intelligence agencies, MI6 and MI5

A dossier prepared by the two agencies “showed no discernible links between Iraq and al-Qaida,”
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=375403

Richard Kerr, a former deputy CIA director who lead an internal review of the CIA's prewar intelligence;

“the CIA has not found any proof of operational ties between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime.”
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=375403

The White House’s own publication, A Decade of Defiance and Deception, makes no mention of Osama bin Laden or al Qaeda.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect5.html

The 2002 congressional joint intelligence committee’s report on the Sept. 11 attacks revealed that the Bush administration had no evidence to support its claim that Saddam’s government was supporting al-Qaeda.
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030723-064812-9491r

MSNBC - No proof links Iraq, al-Qaida, Powell says
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150

According to a "top secret British document", quoted by the BBC "there is nothing but enmity between Iraq and Al Qaeda."

The BBC said the leak came from intelligence officials upset that their work was being used to justify war." (quoted in Daily News, New York, 6 February 2003).
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO303D.html

Iraq-al Qaeda links weak, say former Bush officials

Three former Bush administration officials who worked on intelligence and national security issues have told National Journal that the prewar evidence tying al Qaeda to Iraq was tenuous, exaggerated, and often at odds with the conclusions of key intelligence agencies.
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0803/080803nj2.htm

Split at C.I.A. and F.B.I. On Iraqi Ties to Al Qaeda

"…analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency have complained that senior administration officials have exaggerated the significance of some intelligence reports about Iraq, particularly about its possible links to terrorism, in order to strengthen their political argument for war, government officials said."

and…

"At the Federal Bureau of Investigation, some investigators said they were baffled by the Bush administration's insistence on a solid link between Iraq and Osama bin Laden|s network. "We've been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't think it's there," a government official said."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70D1EF83E5C0C718CDDAB0894DB404482

This is consistent with what they were saying back in October 2002.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A14056-2002Oct24

"There's absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda, ever."
-Richard Clarke, former terrorism chief under bush.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/main607356.shtml

Iraq-al Qaeda ties have not been found

Bush administration hyped sketchy and false evidence to push for war
The Bush administration’s claim that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda — one of the administration’s central arguments for a pre-emptive war — appears to have been based on even less solid intelligence than the administration’s claims that Iraq had hidden stocks of chemical and biological weapons.

Nearly a year after U.S. and British troops invaded Iraq, no evidence has turned up to verify allegations of Saddam’s links with al Qaeda, and several key parts of the administration’s case have either proved false or seem increasingly doubtful.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/2004/03/04/news/nation/8101079.htm

Iraq and al Qaeda: What Evidence?
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=23816

bush's own hand-picked Republican weapons hunter ISG, Dr. David Kay;

David Kay was on the ground for months investigating the activities of Hussein's regime. He concluded "But we simply did not find any evidence of extensive links with Al Qaeda, or for that matter any real links at all."

He called a speech where Cheney made the claim there was a link, as being "evidence free."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/06/16/bush_backs_cheney_on_assertion_linking_hussein_al_qaeda

Israeli intelligence (the Moussad)

“According to Israeli intelligence, Palestinians are still not connected to the global terror network, and neither is Iraq.”
http://www.haaretz.com /

bush's second and final hand-picked Republican weapons hunter ISG, Dr. Charles Dueffler;

Report: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq, no capability since 1991, no evidence of ties to al Qaeda, no serious threat;
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/06/1096949583023.html?from=storylhs

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/

OFFICIAL VERDICT: WHITE HOUSE MISLED WORLD OVER SADDAM-AL QAEDA TIES
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0617-03.htm

No evidence of Iraq-Al Qaeda ties: 9/11 commission
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/06/cheney.911

"CIA Review Finds No Evidence Saddam Had Ties to Islamic Terrorists"
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1005-01.htm

NO ties between Iraq and international terrorists, al-Qaeda or otherwise:

Central to the Saddam - al Qaeda connection claim is the assertion that Czech authorities had evidence of a meeting between one of the September 11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi agent in Prague in April 2001.

Both Czech President Vaclav Havel and Czech intelligence refuted this report.
http://www.intelmessages.org/Messages/National_Security/wwwboard/messages/2155.html

More than that, so do the FBI and CIA;

Only one problem with that story, the FBI pointed out. Atta was traveling at the time between Florida and Virginia Beach, Va. (The bureau had his rental car and hotel receipts)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/060203A.shtml

Ansar al-Islam, a radical Kurdish group, whose leader lives a free man in Norway, after 2 FBI interrogations found nothing to even declare him an "enemy combatant".

Of course there's that other pesky little fact, that Ansar al lives in the Kurdish north of Iraq, out of Saddam's control and under Kurdish AND AMERICAN control for the past 13 years.

http://www.iht.com/articles/85957.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO302B.html

FACTS ARE GOOD.

[gristy]

146. Good post, Lynn

Very good.

[LynnTheDem]

147. Thanks, gristy. I luv FACTS and REALITY and I really really really

HATE RIGHTWINGNUT CRAP!

Does it show? :D

:hug:

[In Truth We Trust]

149. GREAT reality smackdown Lynne! In Truth We Trust!

[LynnTheDem]

145. THERE ARE NO 300,000 MASS GRAVES. WAKE UP.

You've been TOLD THIS several times.

We've found 5100.

STOP POSTING BULLSHIT.

[OneTwentyoNine]

137. 300,000???--More RW Limbaugh/Hannity bullshit..

Quit getting info from the RW asses and check out the facts for yourself. DO YOU REALLY think SH could have killed 300-400,000,pushed them in a hole and the World would have just watched??

Problem keeps growing because Hannity and Pillboy have to keep pushing SH numbers higher so the innocents that BUSH has KILLED in Iraq seem so much less.

Gawd...

[LynnTheDem]

144. You mean the 5100 found in mass graves.

PM admits graves claim 'untrue'

Downing Street has admitted to The Observer that repeated claims by Tony Blair that '400,000 bodies had been found in Iraqi mass graves' is untrue, and only about 5,000 corpses have so far been uncovered.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1263830,00.html

[Lefergus70]

151. Debating points

During the Cold War, Americans attending seminars in Moscow would eventually express concern about repression in the Soviet Union. In reply to such criticism the Russians always had an adept sidestep: "And what about the Indians?"

[NYCGirl]

48. The blood of over 100,000 innocent people is not usually considered as

fodder for comedy, so what was the ACTUAL context in which he said "spilled milk"?

[Imagevision]

110. Fake news? compared to what?? - Fox News?!!

[TXlib]

74. Did you kinda wonder when Kerry was on?

Stewart did not ask hard-hitting questions then, either.

I don't recall any comment about that on DU then.

Stewart is being consistent.

[OneTwentyoNine]

138. Kerry hadn't invaded a country over lies and killed thousands...

Wonder what Stewart would have asked him if that had been the case?

[Blue Belle]

100. Bush has exhausted trotting out Laura to do damage control...

of his tanking poll numbers. And now that the Downing Street Memo now is beging to trickle into his tightly guarded MSM...who better to use than Powell to supercede the blowback.

Who'll be the next to surface in this dog & pony show of GOP spin. :eyes:

[Tux]

9. And

Jon does have adertiving to think of for Comedy Central. If it turns into a conservative grill fest that it should be, ads may start to fade away.

[In Truth We Trust]

25. so what you're saying is his master is the corporate demons who

are destroying this country. ok I agree just wondering if you understand that yourself.

[Tux]

71. Duh

Comedy Central needs advertisers to pay for the Show. If jon gets too aggressive, advertisers might not want to associate with the Show. That simple. It's called business.

[tuvor]

8. If you want to see JS mop up the floor with someone...

...you'll just have to catch him on a news program (Crossfire, anyone?) instead of on the--*ahem*--COMEDY CHANNEL.

Clearly, he's not intent on being your monkey, either.

[Morose]

67. Perfectly put

nt

[ComerPerro]

80. Good point, but I still get nauseated when he kisses the ass

of Bush administration officials.

[kimchi]

10. Oh for Goddess' sake.

You REALLY think that Jon is going to put down a politician to his face on national TV? Especially one of *'s minions? Think about it. Tragic accidents happen every day, you know. Plane crashes, suicides, anthrax inhalation.

Jon isn't God. He is doing the best he can without getting killed. He hasn't sold out, he is doing a damn comedy show, and he does it well.

[Fleshdancer]

14. And yet Jon asked better questions than Russert or any other blowhard

Stewart seemed a little nervous to me. Perhaps I'm reading too much into his body language, but I thought he really wanted to ask what we all wanted him to ask but held himself back because, well, he's not a reporter he's a comedian.

Frankly, I was impressed that the words "Downing Street Memo" was even said tonight.

[Avalux]

15. That's true - DSM mentioned

even though Powell poo-pooed it, the words were said by both Stewart and Powell. Legs!!

[Fleshdancer]

19. Powell half-assed his dismissal of DSM (in my opinion)

There's a lot of damaging info in the minutes. Powell claims that the minutes were wrong because the administration supposedly already planned to go to the UN prior to the time the minutes were written? riiight.

I'll have to do some article digging, but if my memory serves me correctly, the administration was blowing off the idea of presenting at the UN for a while. Didn't they give the excuse that they didn't have to go through the UN since Iraq violated UN rules? Didn't they do a 180 on this absurd concept after Blair received a great deal of negative feedback from the public?

[TexasLawyer]

72. Powell's DSM denial was interesting--

It's possible that having the opportunity to articulate that denial (to Jon Stewart's get-your-news-off-the-internet demographic) was the very reason that Powell went on the show.

As to the substance of the denial, it was pretty lame. In so many words, Powell was saying: "Look at what we were doing in the lead-up to war. In the months before we started bombing Iraq, we were at the U.N. trying SO VERY hard to get a diplomatic resolution to the problem of Iraq's WMD."

Not good enough, Colin. If I'm going to cook up a rationale for war and make the case to the American people that we need to go to the other side of the world and fight it, I'm going to make it at least look like I tried all the other options.

The U.N. efforts were just smoke.

[Imagevision]

112. yes but Saddam said; no wmd's here and Bush & Blair failed to

come up with any. Blair at least apologized to his people saying that; "we've seemed to be wrong about the wmd's" -- Bush just says Saddam was a bad guy and the world is a better place without him.

Hey, Iraq is a huge gas station and that was what it was all about regardless of how many get dead them or us.

jan-Feb-Mar.- April & May Recruitment has been off by an average of 30% the Pentagon finally admitted today. so, Feb. 06 here comes the draft because the commanders on the ground for the past year have said they over extended and need a half a dozen platoons...for openers.

[whometense]

82. I loved the part where

he asked the audience if he ought to turn off the backstage feed. That was pretty funny.

[ezod]

16. Agreed.

It would have been preferable for Stewart to have either directly confronted Powell with the inconsistencies between his UN performance and the truth, or just not have him on the show. But this stammering Stewart dancing around Powell trying to infer that Powell was somehow in spirit against the Administration's position really sucked and gave Powell a wide platform to disseminate a load of utter bullshit. Very bad Daily Show.

[Stinky The Clown]

17. John Stewart is a **comedian** folks.

I mean, its obvious he leans left and all, but come on ... its a comedy show.

[livinginphotographs]

77. Can we pin this post at the top of GD please?

I really don't get the way some people act like John Stewart's job is to do anything than entertain. He certainly doesn't pretend to be a journalist, but I guess some people, even some DUers, will believe anything they see on TV.

[Imagevision]

113. comedy show? --yaeh, like the one in Iraq!!

Stewart knows what he's doing --what's up and down.

[OneTwentyoNine]

141. Then have comedians as guests and quit letting RW'ers spew lies....

It's BS to let someone like Powell come on and LIE out thier ass about Iraq while Stewart sits there like a deer in the headlights.

[Riverman]

20. Stewart got his gig

Why mess it up? I love his show and his humor. But, let's get real, like Al Franken, who I like, they are just too ennammered with being cozy with the establishment, its soooo comfortable and rewarding - can't screw it up now by catering to the lefties! Right? They are about self-promotion, thier earning power.

[NYCGirl]

22. They're also about

keeping the show on the air. What good would it do anyone to have it taken off? If he started confronting the guests on an entertainment show (which TDS is), no one would show up.

[In Truth We Trust]

29. Oh I see......go along to get along, Great strategy for our future.

[safi0]

34. He's not one of us

He may vote Dem. but Jon Stewart isn't who you go to for the news, and he shouldn't be. His job is to entertain, and he does that damn well.

[NYCGirl]

49. If you're looking for political vision from a comedian (albeit a fine one)

you're in greater trouble than I thought.

[demwing]

41. You talk about keeping a high paying gig

that has taken the rightwads to task untold times, as if it were bad thing.

Would you be happier if there were NO Daily Show?

[Don1]

21. You're Right.

It's all right here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1840702

[In Truth We Trust]

26. Great link and discussion-thanks, i couldn't agree more

[Don1]

27. And...

Someone in the other thread said that maybe he gave in to rw pressure.

I think DU should start a campaign to pressure back.

I nominate you, In Truth We Trust, to lead the campaign.

[In Truth We Trust]

31. I sm speechless. thank you DU thanks to my agent, and the academy and ....

Seriously though as I said before I do love the daily show but i also do believe Jon has been too timid at critical times and tonight was very very disappointing to say the least. It is sad that we've come to expect a fake news/comedy show to be the only flicker of truth out there. And to now see even that dim light of hope be compromised is downright pathetic.
The show has been so "right on" in it's sarcasm and contrasts in the past. It has been inspirational and entertaining at the same time. However there is a definite change from the past which in itself was dubious at times. Do you recall the furor you felt over the fraWd election 04 when we all waited literally weeks before the daily show even broached the subject?

edit to add: as to my spearheading such an effort I honestly would but I am too busy with work (2 jobs), election reform, wife, kids, soccer, and honeydo to do such an endeavor justice. So please pick up the mantle and run with it. I will however take the time to write Jon and thank him formhis show and to also point out my observations.

[rfrrfrrfr]

32. what gets me about

Threads like this is the OP's treat Jon Stewart as if he were a full time professional investigative reporter working for a hard nosed no beating around the bush news organisation. He is not he is a comedian doing a comedy show nothing more nothing less.

The problem is that there are no hard nosed, no beating around the bush news organizations out there anymore. And Jon Stewart, a comedian, has more hard news and thoughtful questioning in the 15-20 minutes of one of his shows than the entire MSM puts together all week.

That is a sad state of affairs my friends, but that is no excuse to get your panties all in a bunch or blame Jon for not being something he isn't. It's the same thing Tucker Carlson tried to pull on him on Crossfire trying to compare a supposedly hard hitting news program to Jon's Comedic Sattire. The comparison is just as invalid now as it was when Carlson tried it.

So instead of Yelling at Jon go yell at your local television station for not doing its job. They are the ones with the problem not Jon Stewart. Its not their fault that every comedian on the show is a better journalist than anyone else out there.

[In Truth We Trust]

35. He did say " spilled milk" in reference to the lies and manipulation

leading up to an illegal war as though it were" water under the bridge". Innocent blood does not equal "spilled milk". at least not in my book.

[tuvor]

37. You've never uttered a poor choice of words?

Sheesh.

[rinsd]

79. Sure let's send him a bunch of DU threads....

...calling him a sellout and a shill.

I'm sure that then he'll be on our side!

[Bucky]

30. The herd mentality in this thread reminds me of something

Late night posters are prone to hy-sterics. Go get some sleep people. Jon Stewart is a not a COINTELPRO mandarin who's just been activated. At worst he's a comic who had a slow night. Geeze, who knew you could serve kool-aid in a tin foil cup?

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. Our worst fears are coming true

It looks like Jon Stewart may actually be an entertainer rather than a political activist.

[Gloria]

39. I just watched the video and have a totally different impression from

what is expressed in many posts here...

Jon was offering "rebuttals" to Powell in his questioning! He framed all the questions from the "devil's advocate" position, which was a very clever thing to do. He set up all the arguments before hand....then, as Powell spun, his answers were actually in "defensive" mode.

This was a far more effective technique that trying to argue with Powell...he wouldn't have gotten very far and probably would have been "dealt" with.

Jon lives to fight another day, as it stands now. He really did frame all the questions in a way that he got out all the questions, doubts, etc. about Iraq into the open. In that sense, without being confrontational, he did actually challenge Powell.

And he did it so smoothly that Powell jabbered away and didn't even see what Jon was doing....

[demwing]

40. You must hate America!

and freedom, and gays and fuzzy bunnies. In that order!

/sarcasm

[Montauk6]

42. Someone mentioned Rosie...

I recall that she did pretty much what many here expected JS to do... and it possibly blew up in her face.

Remember her infamous interview with Tom "I'm the NRA" Selleck where she laid in on him his pro-gun stance in the wake of the Columbine tragedy? I'm not sure if this was the jump-the-shark moment that sent her show into an irreversible downward spiral (honestly, I'd never watched it) but I do recall the massive (and cleverly constructed) backlash against her: from "fat pig" to "evil bitch" to K-Mart-shilling hypocrite (because K-Mart sells guns, whatever).

Unfortunately Powell is still revered by many people who don't know any better (and maybe should at this late date). He's seen as the "voice of reason" in the Bush Cabal, and Stew rosied him out, I'm sure the backlash would've been much greater than the current one on these boards.

Alas, it's still a comedy show, like it or not. And while some might be inclined to think Jon a coward, I submit that it's POWELL who ONCE AGAIN takes the easy way out by going on this show as opposed to, say, Jeremy Paxman from the BBC.



Now THIS GUY is a journalist!

BTW, for those who don't know this guy, check this out (requires Real Player): http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da68000c040/nb/09012da68000c156_nb_16x9.ram

And of course there's the grilling of PM Blair: http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news_web/video/9012da68000a100/nb/09012da68000a38f_nb_16x9.ram

Contrast that with Russert's flufferthon with Bush.

[AX10]

61. Good to hear!

[Cha]

97. Thanks, Gloria..

I wonder what the audience reaction was when powell was spinning his lies?

You just know that Jon was thinking.."Oh man..what a liar.".

[CantGetFooledAgain]

43. I viewed the Colin Powell appearance as damage control....

I am speculating that the White House spinmeisters, trying to get out in front of the DSM story, sent Powell (still widely popular, don't ask me why) to the Jon Stewart show (hugely popular among younger, left-leaning Americans) to offer an acceptable alternate model to explain the contents of the minutes.

In the Powell version, he (CP) reigned in Bush and the WH, forcing them to "do it right" and go through the whole UN process. At the end of that process, Saddam got a failing grade and there was no choice but to invade.

Of course, this is nonsense. And I'm surprised Jon didn't call him on it. Remember, though that Powell is a huge "get" for Stewart's show, and Stewart respects him, and without a doubt there were ground rules established for the interview. Note that Jon steered away from Bush and Blair's hilarious lie-a-thon when asked about the DSM. This surely could have been mined for big laughs, but I'll bet that the CP interview was conditional on "no jokes about the DSM" (for that one night at least.)

I think that Stewart's corporate masters may have forced him into a bit of a compromise. Hope he doesn't make a habit out of it.

[Griffy]

98. DING DING DING... Jon did GREAT... he's a great force for us!

Powell was on damage control..bush met with him last week he said! ALSO, he is covering his own ass too... the poster here is just expecting to much at once, Stewart is a great progressive force, a MSM busting comedian! .. go look at what Conyers is doing if you want real action!

[sendero]

44. It is true..

....that the mighty can fall from grace pretty quickly around here.

I hadn't watched Jon in a while and just happened to catch last night's show.

It was a big dissapointment. Colin basically spouted the spin, the absolute bullshit spin, and Jon did little more than make a couple cutesy quips.

It really seemed that Jon was "starstruck".

Hey, it was a good run, I'm not ready to throw Jon down the stairs, nor am I interested in watching yet another venue for Bush** apologists to spout their self-serving drivel.

[In Truth We Trust]

46. there are some who claim he must be subtle and nuanced and there are some

who feel that when you host a war criminal you should treat him as such!

[leesa]

50. I suspect he was being facetious, don't you?

[SheepyMcSheepster]

51. if i recall correctly, they were discussing the reasons for going to war

and he mentioned it being spilled milk becase we are there now and there is no way back. we can't undue the invasion, that is what i think he meant by the comment.

i think you have to reach a bit to say that jon believes that the invasion and the events leading up to are just "spilt milk" to him. I don't think that was his intention at all. your point seems to be taking his comments out of context imo.

[Jack Rabbit]

52. Was the invasion of Poland spilled milk?

Neither is the invasion of Iraq.

[burythehatchet]

54. was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

NO. And its not over now.

[rman]

56. ehm well, they didn't

japan did

[burythehatchet]

58. thank you, youngster

movie references from the 70's don't get much traction these days. Animal House.

[Kber]

60. Quiet - he's on a roll.

[Richard Steele]

73. You should listen to him, rman: he's pre-med!

[Johnny Noshoes]

136. I thought he was pre law? nt

[Griffy]

99. quiet, he's on a roll.... AND IT AINT OVER NOW!!!

whos with ME!

..cause I'm with Conyers!

[Imagevision]

118. I agree totally -- Stewart knows damn well what he's doing

ask Tucker Carlson....!

[Hippo_Tron]

55. Jon Stewart is a comedian, not an agent of the Democratic party

I don't know where you get this idea that Jon Stewart's job is to bring Republicans on to the show and make them look stupid. Stewart is a comedian and nothing more. His job is to make good and funny television. Does he usually make fun of Republicans more than he does Democrats. Sure, of course he does, but our President is a moron who is easy to make fun of. Jon Stewart has taken on the GOP and the religious wrong thousands of times on the Daily Show. He doesn't need to please you with every single episode.

So yea, I don't see who it is exactly that Jon Stewart sold out.

[GreenPartyVoter]

63. It is so sad that Dems rely on Stewart to do what the Dems ought to do

and then they get angry when he doesn't do it for them. :shrug:

[Hippo_Tron]

103. EXACTLY!

Granted, Jon Stewart is sometimes very good at asking questions and debunking stuff. But Jon Stewart is not in journalism, he's in comedy, his job isn't to ask the tough questions, it's to make people laugh and have a good time watching his show (which frankly I think he does quite well).

Part of the problem, I think, is that sometimes the Daily Show is better journalism than CNN is. We need somebody who is actually a liberal to get their own show on one of the big cable networks. Until that day comes, though, our leaders need to speak up and they need to put some of these people in their place.

We could do this pretty easily as well. Howard Dean constantly makes comments that are talked about and percieved as "controversial" by the MSM. Let's say for example, that Howard Dean called Bush a traitor to America. It would obviously get picked up. What we need to do is send Democrats on to the talk shows that will actually make a good case for Dean and put some of the pundits in their place when necessary. Unless Jon Stewart becomes an employee of the DNC, we can't expect him to do it for us.

[rman]

57. oh, the monthly "they've gotten to him too" thread

-

[The Flaming Red Head]

59. Expecting anything real or worthwhile from this MSM

Is crazy. If there is any real comedy, creativity, journalism, political savvy, novels, poetry, music, etc., it’s buried under this avalanche of filth and outright corporate talking points spokespeople that come into our homes via satellite and cable daily.

That said, Jon Stewart is much better than most them and I keep looking to Chapelle, too as our next greatest comedic hope (wrong or right)

[Ian David]

62. Dude...

Jon Stewart is an entertainer.



Besides, as you can see from this picture below, Jon Stewart and Colin Powell have been friends with Elmo and Big Bird for years.

[Norquist Nemesis]

64. Calm down!

Geez people! Get a grip!

One (or even a few) shows with Republican icons does not make Jon Stewart a traitor!! It's an entertainment show!!!!

It doesn't mean they have gotten to him or he's turned or anything like you're accusing. It sounds as if a very heavy burden has been put on Jon Stewart; one that he did ask for. If people are going to continue going to the extreme in this manner, all that will be accomplished is to alienate that person.

Chill. Please!

[DrGonzoLives]

65. HA! I KNEW IT WOULD HAPPEN!

A scant few months after Jon Stewart was Our Hero for telling Tucker to go fuck himself, now he's a worthless piece of shit for not spouting the party line that the hero-worshippers want him to spout.

Let me put it in simple terms:

Jon
Stewart
Is
A
Comedian
Not
A
Journalist

[The Blue Knight]

70. Dr. Gonzo hit it on the head. Stewart is a comedian, not a journalist.

You all sound like a bunch of whiny ass Tucker Carlson's, "OMG YOU LOB SOFTBALL QUESTIONS TO YOUR GUEST"

It's not his job. He's not there to skewer his guests.

[livinginphotographs]

76. Maybe someone needs a hot bath and some soothing music.

With all due respect - LIGHTEN THE FUCK UP! Jon Stewart is a COMEDIAN!!!! He's funny, but I don't understand all the Daily Show-worship around here.

I know the MSM is a total joke, but if you're expecting hard news from the Daily Show, well, that's your problem, not John Stewart's. It just gets tiring how some on DU will worship the ground someone walks on, but when one disagreement comes up, it's all "He's a freeper!" "Sell out!" and other hysterical crap.

[elperromagico]

83. It's a sad state of affairs if we're looking to a comedian as our watchdog

Jon Stewart is intelligent and knowledgeable when it comes to current affairs. I watch The Daily Show every chance I get because it is such a breath of fresh air.

However, Stewart is first and foremost a comedian. He's thinking of the next joke. If that joke can be made at a Republican's expense, great. If it can be made a Democrat's expense, that's great too.

That is Jon Stewart's job and I happen to believe he does it extremely well.

He may lean left in his private life (I believe he voted for Kerry). When he's behind that desk as host of The Daily Show, however, his bias is toward neither the right nor the left. It is toward getting a laugh.

Rather than venting your spleen at a comedian who didn't send Colin Powell running off stage in tears, why not aim for the media that didn't do its damned job in the first place?

[LeftCoast]

84. You said it!

:thumbsup:

[Disturbed]

85. Ok he is a comedian.

Why wasn't he funny at any time in that entire interivew?

[iconoclastNYC]

86. Settle down chicken little.

You are sounding a bit paranoid.

[AlCzervik]

88. How dare Jon Stewart be a "Host" to his guest, the nerve!

[In Truth We Trust]

124. He "hosted" a war criminal and kissed his ass-even offered to paint his

fucking housed fir chist's sakes.
I love the daily show but I will call em as I see em too. Again, 100,000 dead and $300,000,000,000 later over lies and impeachable offences is not "spilt milk".

[flpoljunkie]

91. Stewart was so awed by Powell he offered to paint his f*cking garage!

To show how grateful he was to Powell for agreeing to come on his show.

Enough, already, John!

[Imagevision]

116. anyone have a clue -what was Powell's bottomline message??

[flpoljunkie]

119. An obvious attempt from a compromised Bush man to debunk DSM.

Powell really jumped on the opportunity to try and discount the Downing Street Memo. That's one question Stewart was definitely encourage to ask, I would bet.

[rinsd]

101. Someone tell me how we're different from rwers again?

At least in the respect that we are so freakin knee jerk that if someone who is generally friendly to our causes doesn't preach to the choir and throw out the red meat they are a traitor.

Only Sith deal in absolutes and all that jazz...

[high density]

104. I don't expect Jon Stewart to be a hard-hitting interviewer

That's what Russert, Blitzer, et al are supposed to do. Jon is a comedian and he does a damn good job at making me laugh. I do not expect him to be confrontational with every Repuke he invites on the show.

But to be honest, I stopped watching last night's show as soon as Powell started poo-pooing the DSM.

[insane_cratic_gal]

105. I'm not rolling over on Stewart!

Like asking me to give up my only piece of insanity in the asylum.

Stewart's genius is not in his political cut throat questions, god help us if it were! His genius is to make us laugh at the absurdity of it all.

[Imagevision]

117. I'm with you -- I'm sticking with Stewart

[Freddie Stubbs]

106. Perhaps now people will realize that he is not a good journalist

;)

[holboz]

107. He's not a journalist...he's a comedian. It's FAKE NEWS.

[Freddie Stubbs]

108. My point exactly

[Imagevision]

114. It's fake news/// whata schlept --like Bush is a fake Prez!

[flpoljunkie]

120. Stewart speaks more truth to power than the lot of the cable talking heads

He has kept us all sane through the nightmare of the Bush administration by telling more truth about the Bush administration than all the rest of the media-print included--combined.

That said, he missed the opportunity to confront Powell with his own words in 2001 that Saddsm was no threat to anyone because of containment. Most of the rubes in this country don't know that. Perhaps John Stewart missed it, too, and the reason why he failed to bring up this salient point.

[Imagevision]

115. Stewart a comedian? -- like Jeff Gannon/Guckert is a journalist

[CAcyclist]

126. I saw it last night

and I don't get why you are so upset. I read your statements before I watched it - Jon tried as hard as he could to get Powell to admit something - but you live in a dream world if you think its going to be that easy.

If Powell admits anything, he's as well as giving evidence that can be used for a criminal trial. Do you really think Jon Stewart is going to be able to get that information in the 15 minutes he has with Colin Powell?

I liked the way Jon cut himself short at the end - essentially saying to his audience, "I know this guy is holding back and I'm disappointed, but we're not getting anywhere."

[fortyfeetunder]

133. I agree, tempest in a teapot

What high expectations folks have for the Daily Show.

The only way to get JS to grill people is to have him substitute for Tim Russert or George Stephanopoulous-- not do it on the Daily Show!

[McCamy Taylor]

132. Stewart asked about Iraq. A soft interviewer would have avoided

Iraq altogether and asked about POwell's future plans. Stewart reminded the viewers and Powell that the former SOS will have to carry the baggage of the Iraq Invasion with him forever. Notice that he didnt ask if he was running for president, something he usually asks guests with political aspirations. It was as if Stewart was saying "You and me both know you can never be president now that you are tainted with Iraq."

Stewart was polite as usual but by the end of the interview I saw Powell as someone who has been brought down by the Bush administration.

[orpupilofnature57]

135. Lest we forget, Jon Stewart was the only one with Balls in 2005

[Donailin]

150. I dunno abou that . . I think Stewart was simply in shock and awe

that Colin Powell was his guest. My impression was that Powell commands a level of respect that even Stewart felt. He wanted to be contrary but seemed too humbled to get the words out.

[zulchzulu]

152. The message about Eating Your Own brought to you by...

Sheesh. What was Jon supposed to freakin' do? He's a comedian...he did ask some pointed questions and I'm sure he was told not to ask some questions. Other conservatives have come on the show before and he's been respectful, funny and a bit nuanced.

The audience knows the drill...except the apparent misjudgement from this thread's author.

Saying Jon is a sellout is bullshit.

[In Truth We Trust]

154. Saying "spilled milk" re: the impeachable offenses IS BULLSHIT

[zulchzulu]

155. So your wishful possibility would be this?

Jon Stewart had Colin Powell come on the comedy show and didn't mince words. As soon as Colin sat down, Jon stood up, spat in Colin's face and that he should be ashamed of himself. He then pulled a hot bucket of water out from under the desk and poured it on Colin's head while a couple Comedy Central staff held Colin down.

Jon then kicked Colin in the balls and screamed "War criminal!" repeatedly while the other fellas kicked Colin in the head and finally...some guy who goes by "In Truth We Trust" on DU poured boiling pig's blood on Colin's face.

Comedy Central FINALLY made a statement! Yay team!

:argh: :freak:

[Pepperbelly]

156. get a grip ...

it is a fucking comedy show.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

153. Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai Mi Lai

[ElectroPrincess]

157. Jon Stewart did not sell out , he's an ENTERTAINER ...

Please understand that Jon Stewart did NOT ever volunteer to carry the torch for the Democratic Party. Take your "Even ENTERTAINERS go with me lock step, or I'll take my ball and go home!" elsewhere.

Let me put it more delicately: We're in a world of SHIT if we choose comedians and entertainers to ALWAYS carry the Democratic torch to all the sheeple.

What does all this "bully boy" rhetoric serve anyway? The reason many of us enjoy Stewart is because he is NOT anyone's puppet ... and most especially - he is NOT running for office.

OK once more - he's not a campaigning politician but a comedian.

Some folks here on DU are getting way too "wrapped tight" over a COMEDY SHOW. :( Please focus on the politicians who are willing to actually ADMIT the role becomes them? (Our Elected Representatives)

[Warren DeMontague]

158. Okay, then, bring back Craig Kilborn.

If really you think THAT'S a good idea.

[MaryBear]

159. This thread is good for a chuckle!

Some serious posts, and some humor. :rofl: