Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, November 10, 2006
Rusty Shackleford :: Townhall.com Columnist
Jon Stewart: Democratic majority kingmaker
by Rusty Shackleford
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Forget left of center bloggers, Jon Stewart is this year’s kingmaker. Without him and The Daily Show, the Democrats would not have made such large inroads in the midterm elections. Let me explain why.

In 1994 Republicans swept to victory by gaining 54 seats in the House and 8 seats in the Senate that were previously held by Democrats. While many factors explain the Republican victory--a unified theme around the Contract With America, discontent over the more liberal policies of the early Clinton Administration, corruption in the Democratic leadership, etc--Republicans in the House were quick to name Rush Limbaugh the Republican majority Kingmaker.

Is it possible that a single person was responsible for such a huge shift towards a Republican majority in Congress? Looking back, it seems almost silly to believe it. But that is only because right-wing talk radio has become such an ubiquitous phenomenon. It is everywhere. There are dozens of nationally syndicated right-leaning radio show hosts. Rush Limbaugh may still be the biggest, but his is only one voice among a chorus.

But back in the early 1990s national talk radio was new. It was exciting. It was strange. And although no one knew how it would impact American politics we all knew it was important.

For conservatives listening to Rush Limbaugh became a way to connect with other conservatives. Ditto entered into vocabulary and became a secret handshake for fellow conservatives to identify others of like mind. Remember the "Rush room"? In the back of restaurants we gathered to listen to talk radio in a safe atmosphere away from the politically correct ears of our social betters.

Rush emboldened us. He made us feel like we weren't alone.

To what extent the rise of talk radio played in the victories of 1994 cannot be accurately assessed. Surveys do not entirely capture the true reasons why people vote the way they do. What we do know is that between 1992 and 1994 self-identified conservatives rose 7%, that Republicans were energized, and that Democrats were not.

Talk radio played some role in this. Everyone on the right knew it. Newt Gingrich declared Rush Limbaugh the Majority Kingmaker. Congressional Republicans named Rush an honorary member of the House of Representatives.

12 years later Democrats swept to victory by gaining (at this count) at least 29 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate that were previously held by Republicans. While that margin is not as large as the gains made by Republicans in 1994 (54 in the House, 8 in the Senate) it is certainly a big win.

But why? A number of reasons, of course. Discontent with the war in Iraq, corruption among Republicans in Congress, an energized Democratic base, and demoralized conservatives all help explain what happened.

But one phenomenon has been overlooked. One which I believe was a key if not the key to a Democratic victory. That is the phenomenon of faux news. And Jon Stewart is its banner bearer.

Jon Stewart is an unlikely player in national politics. He's not a pundit, he's a comedian. As unlikely a candidate for Democratic kingmaker as he may be, he's a force to be reckoned with.

Ratings for The Daily Show's coverage of the '06 elections were second only to The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News. 2.0 million Americans tuned into Comedy Central on Tuesday to follow election results. That's right, more people were watching a comedian talk about the news than an anchor on CNN.

And just who is it that is tuning into The Daily Show? Young people. Lot's of them.

In fact, in the 2004 election nearly as many young people cited The Daily Show as a source of news as any other source. And Jon Stewart's Daily Show audience has only grown since then.

On the college campus where I teach, Jon Stewart's is the first and last word on all things political. His is the only name that all recognize. It’s more than that: his views are the only views considered socially acceptable. When Jon Stewart believes something, students believe it. He who Jon Stewart hates, students hate.

John Stewart is the Rush Limbaugh, and faux news the talk radio of 2006.

Students talk about what happened on The Daily Show. They do not talk about what happened on Crossfire. They relate to one another by it. It is a shared experience. It is something the most politically aware have in common.

It is this shared experience that is important. The feeling that by watching The Daily Show they are part of something bigger. It emboldens them. It energizes them.

While Jon Stewart may attempt to play the non-partisan comedian, he fails miserably. His viewers are all too aware of his Democratic partisanship and liberal leanings. He explicitly endorsed John Kerry in 2004 during an interview with the presidential candidate. Conservatives are lampoon for being conservative, liberals for not being liberal enough.

One of the most important ways this bias comes out on The Daily Show is the constant slander of Fox News. I also see that disdain among vocal college students. It's likely that many college students did not like Fox News before they became faux news junkies. But The Daily Show gives them the confidence to voice those opinions. It empowers them.

Voters in this election cited the war in Iraq as one of the main issues that drove them to the polls. And when it comes to the war in Iraq, The Daily Show has only a single point of view: it is bad.

The almost nightly segment called Mess O' Potamia constantly reminds young people that things have not gone as planned in Iraq. For Stewart, that the Iraq war was a mistake is not a matter of opinion, it is empirical fact.

For instance, in his opening monologue on election eve coverage Stewart opened up with, "Can Karl Rove's tactical genius overcome, let's say, reality?" For example, "the Iraq war" and "Republican corruption."

Jon Stewart is the voice of the new-rationalism of the Left, his is a front for the self-proclaimed reality based community. There is reality as it really is, and then there is reality as portrayed by Fox News and the Bush Administration. That is the world according the The Daily Show.

And this "reality" is the source of much of the humor on The Daily Show. The jokes are not so much about surprising the audience with the unexpected, but panders to liberal conventional wisdom. It is the expected jab at conservative values that adds humor.

"Rick Santorum has been raptured to a better place," is what passed for a joke on election day at The Daily Show.

A simple reinforcement of empirical reality as seen by Jon Stewart and his cadre of Ivy League educated writers. Facts are found that conform to this reality, and then jokes are crafted to link the fact to the reality. That is the essence of faux news humor.

Had any of them known a person who believes in the theology of rapture they might be surprised to find that very few Catholics adhere to it. And last time I checked, Rick Santorum was Catholic.

But never mind that. There are facts and then there is reality. Never let the facts get in the way of reality. That the religious right is filled with zealots pushing America towards Armageddon is reality. Everyone with any sense knows that.

And this is precisely what Stewart's clan of young followers believe. Fox is biased. That is reality. But when asked whether the CBS is also biased? Blank stares.

The grand irony of ironies in Stewart's election night coverage was the appearance of Dan Rather as a guest. When Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly appeared on The Daily Show the audience booed. Stewart grilled O'Reilly with hard ball questions. With Dan Rather he joked around.

Nothing was mentioned of the use of fake documents to attack the Bush Administration by CBS News or of Rather's continued defense of the forgeries. It's not funny if it doesn't reinforce the liberal worldview.

But even if college students are enamored with all things Jon Stewart, even if there really is a cult of The Daily Show, and even if it is fairly clear that the faux news has a rather extreme partisan Democratic and liberal bias, how does this relate to the election?

The 2006 election saw the youth vote at its largest in 20 years. While younger Americans continue to vote in smaller numbers than older Americans, 2 million more voted in this election than in that last midterm.

And that vote is becoming more Democratic. According to the bipartisan Goeas-Lake exit polls, Democrats bested Republicans among 18 - 29 year olds by a 50 - 35 percent margin.

In nationally pivotal races, it was the young voter who put Democratic candidates over the top. Exit polls indicate that in Pennsylvania 68% of those under 30 voted for the Democrat over the Jon Stewart maligned Rick Santorum. Much higher than any other age group.

In the overwhelmingly Republican state of Montana, where the race was decided by less than 3,000 votes (at last count), 56% of young people voted for the Democratic challenger over the scandal tainted incumbent. The incumbent, Burns, had once argued that President Bush had a secret plan to win the war in Iraq. John Stewart joked that a vote for the challenging Democrat was a vote for blowing President Bush's super-secret plan for Iraq.

Exit polls cannot show that Stewart and the left-leaning faux news phenomenon directly caused these gaps among youth voters. But neither could they show that there was a direct relationship between Rush Limbaugh and the elections of 1994. Yet, we all knew that somehow this new media of nationally syndicated right-leaning talk radio had made a difference. So too has the faux news phenomenon affected this election.

So, while pundits are busy pointing their collective fingers at the ineptness of the Republicans and good recruiting skills on part of the Democrats, we cannot leave Jon Stewart out of the equation. Yes the left-leaning bloggers and netroots helped, but by in-large they are also The Daily Show watchers and under 30. Far more young people watch The Daily Show than read The Daily Kos.

Sure a lot went wrong for the Republicans and a lot went right for the Democrats, but part of what went wrong for the Republicans was the perception among the young--especially among college students--reinforced by The Daily Show of an empirical reality at odds with the majority party's policies.

Just like the dittoheads before them, the cult of Jon Stewart--and increasingly of the faux news of Stephen Colbert's spin off Colbert Report--are energized by their association with like minded people. The lone viewer is now part of a group. It's much easier to voice your opinion when someone is there to reinforce it.

And just like those early dittoheads, the faux newsies are feeling the power that comes when a group first emerges and gains victory in the game of power politics. As a college student and dittohead during the 1994 election, I can tell you how elated I felt for the Gingrich Revolution. I shared that elation by tuning into the Rush Limbaugh program. And that elation spilled over into the halls of my alma mater.

Today in the halls of the college where I teach there is also elation. Among the politically active students there are visible and emotional signs that somehow they won this election. For some odd reason they feel that I should also be happy about the Democratic victory. That somehow all those who are educated must have voted for the Democrats.

The pundit they quote about what the elections mean in a wider context? Jon Stewart.

Jon Stewart, this is your election. Faux news, you are the new black.

And while the presumed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressed his gratitude to the netroots by posting an Election Day diary at the The Daily Kos, he should have been paying homage to the real man responsible for his new office: Jon Stewart.

Jon Stewart, the Democratic majority kingmaker. Expect Nancy Pelosi to name him an honorary member of the 110th Congress. He certainly deserves it.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Be the first to read Rusty Shackleford's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

My man, John Stewart!
In John Stewart's defense, he has made fun of several liberals, including Howard Dean and the mayor of New Orleans. It is true that he is decidedly left-leaning, but there is a reason for that besides ideology. His audience is, as was noted, mainly young people (including those of us who are young-at-heart). Young people tend to be left-leaning and progressive overall. His show caters to its chosen audience, as any good ENTERTAINMENT show should.

I hope someone is forwarding this to John Stewart. He'd love it!

Jon Stewart
I agree-I've been thinking the same thing for awhile also.I'm perplexed on why his show is so popular-I don't think he's funny or entertaining,and it's not just his politics;Bill Mahr is funny,even though I don't agree with him at all.Besides,it's scary that young people get their "news" from a faux news show-it makes me wonder the future of our country.

Ridiculous
After every election, many people feel the urge to tell the world the reasons why they think the election went the way it did.

This column is one of the most ridiculous.

Sometimes in Life
The jokes just write themselves.

nitty-gritty
Interesting column, if a bit long. I have never watched Jon Stewart's show, but I've seen a few of its film clips on other programs and yes, Stewart definitely has a leftist bias.
If Stewart is able to get any traction at all among young people through his slanted yet putative humorous "take" on republicans, it is due more to a dearth of ideas among republicans than to any talent of Stewart's.
Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 911" was an attempt to influence the 2004 election in favor of the democrats by means of a slick piece of propaganda masquerading as documentary. Moore's so-called "slacker uprising" fizzled.
If the republicans can present ideas that resonate with Americans, including young Americans, it will not much matter what Jon Stewart or Michael Moore think. The problem is not with makers of propaganda pieces, or talk-show hosts; the problem is the lack of ideas and innovation within the party.

hahahahahahaha
What I can never figure out is how the right just seems to ignore the ridiculous masking of reality and slanting of absolutely everything that is the propaganda tool of Fox News,
The daily show, seems to be the only show these days that actually has any dose of reality and common sense to it these days. I love the perceived vast left wing conspiracy of the liberal media everyone harps on about, for talking about the obvious facts of a situation, but if it doesnt fit in with an ideological world view its unbalanced and unfair, as opposed to fox news' 'we distort, you comply' ethos.
Its true, the daily show is funny cuz you guys have given him just soooooo much material to work with!

Laughing at Leftists is too hard
When the only branch of gov't the Left controls is the unelected 4th branch (of MainStream Media), it's too hard to laugh at the silly things they do and say -- since they are without "power".

Except to power to change the culture. The right needs to prepare expected jokes for expected Dem mistakes, as well as accept more laughing at Reps itself.

Like the Kerry "secret plan" for Iraq -- never really discussed..."accept Killing Fields and declare victory" or whatever.

Laughing at the other's mistakes is crucial; it helps to laugh a bit at your own mistakes.

The Daily (Kos) Show
Of course the kids like Jon Stewart and the Daily Show! Jon pokes fun at the establishment, makes funny jokes about those in power.

Typical of the young lions of this and previous generations, they see the over-30 bunch as stodgy old codgers with no sense of humor. I remember the old SNL bunch when they wacked away at Nixon and Ford.

The difference between Jon and Rush is purely the difference between liberal and conservative. Young people tend toward liberalism (until life's reality sets in), so they will take Stewart over Limbaugh any day. Rush has become the "establishment".

The kids today will fondly remember (20 years from now) the old Daily Show while they worry about their jobs, money and the next war.

Faux News?
I really must disagree with the characterization of " The Daily Show " as faux news. "The Onion" is faux news. Every story is fabricated. There is as much truth in Stewart's presentation of the facts in his show as there is in any MSM news show. What differs is the interpretation of those facts. Stewart is a political satirist in the tradition of Will Rogers and Mort Saul. He has a pin for every pompous politico's balloon. It's just that the balloons belonging to the Right are so much more fun to pop.

Bias
When the media is so biased, that one station tries to head toward the center, sure, it's going to look like that station is biased conservative, when the rest of the bunch is skewed liberal.

Personally, I don't watch any of 'em because I don't have cable, but I think it's ridiculous to complain about Fox News bias when the others are much worse the other way.

As for Stewart, the thing that makes me mad is that I can't think of a good way to counter him. He does a good job of just taking sound bites where people have said stupid things, and exploiting it for humor. It just so happens that he uses mostly Republicans. He's different from other lefties in that he never seems to take himself too seriously. Sure, he's left leaning, but he doesn't try so hard like Franken, Moore and Maher. He's also funnier IMO.


lighten up and laugh
I like Jon because his show is often funny. The show is at its best when simply stating the obvious like quotes or leaders contrasted with realities. Sure it leans to the left but it sure beats the tired drum beat of talk radio. Colbert should be watched by some on this site to see how they appear to the rest of the world. (Be aware that he is fake too. Some right wingers can not tell. Now that is funny.)

Rush used to be entertaining too but no more. Maybe now that he is going to stop carrying the flag for the republicans he can return to entertainment. Savage is probably the best of the right wing talk because he is funny as well. Both Stewart and Savage are willing to show the warts mixed with some perspective while letting the viewer or listener decide what they really think.

Truth is stranger (and funnier) than fiction.

Faux News Indeed
Faux news is the great weapon of the Democrats. They just make up whatever they want the public to believe and the mainstream media runs with it.

Jon Stewart is another in the long line of "celebrities" who think their leftist thinking shoud inspire a nation to follow.

Where are the stories of the GOP losing with dignity. No recounts, no accuations of voting impropriety. Corker concedes, Allen concedes, if Tester and Webb had lost by such razor thin margins, we'd be back to 2000 and 2004 with the both recounts and unsubstantiated allegations of voting improprieties.

At least when the GOP loses, they do it with class.

I wonder now...
What will Mr. Stewart do when the Dems have both houses of Congress? Where will he get his jokes once the legislature starts echoing his party line?

A lot of truth to this article
The really disturbing aspects of ALL of the late night comics is the sophomoric level of the humor, the uniformity of spirit amongst them, and the arrested development of them all.

It is especially disturbing to watch the middle-aged Letterman types successfully convincing the college sophomores that he is still one of them.

A society that refuses to require its young to grow up will reap the results sooner or later. If Edwards et al didn't have an audience they wouldn't get ratings.

I disagree but accept the results
r0_d2: take a pill your hatred is showing.

walrus: great comment.

The article misses the point
Popular humorists and pundits are popular mainly because they reflect what their followers already believe. People don't tune into Rush and Stewart to get information that will change their mind about politics. They tune in to reconfirm how smart and witty they are to have the beliefs they already have.

Sure its a two way street and once in a while someone will change their mind based on what they hear from Rush or Stewart, but its not often.

How often does the author of this column find himself rolling on the floor laughing at a Stewart joke about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ann Coulter, etc.? Then pick himself up and say - I never thought of the issue that way, how clever. Guess I'll vote democratic this time?

Never? Right, I rest my case.

Jon Stewart
I don't really find him that funny. Colbert is a more entertaining and an ideologically ambiguous political satirist, as is Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien. Anyway, I experience about 2 to 4 laughs per half hour segment, and try to be open-minded about the humor.

The problem is that people will not distinguish between Stewart's spin and the facts of a situation. When these legions of his fans use him as a primary news source they are unintentionally closing their minds. Just like I would encourage Fox News viewers to flip to CNN on occasion, Daily Show viewers ought to check out real news and get the whole story.

Same-old, same-old
Even for its great length, this column is just the same tired, specious argument against The Daily Show. For starters, the main thesis -- that Jon Stewart and cohorts scored the election for the Dems -- doesn't even make sense. Shackleford charges that the nation's youth are zonked out on Stewart's anti-GOP yuks. But that didn't help back in 2004, when the show kicked into far higher gear than it did this past month. (Indeed, the Daily Show mocked the importance of midterm elections as recently as Monday night.) Not to mention: have you not read the polling data? It wasn't only the youth who came out, but everyone. Even 1/3 of Evangelicals turned their back on their conservative brethren and voted Dem. Betcha they're not injecting the Daily Show into their veins every night!

But the problem with this column runs far deeper. The Daily Show has a liberal bias?! What a scoop! Shackleford tries to balloon this into a case that Stewart and Rush Limbaugh are one and the same. But he fails to remotely back this up with evidence -- unless you count claiming that both are stumping for one side of the political spectrum is proof of equivalence. If we're going to define partisanship so narrowly, then who isn't an extreme lunatic who mocks and questions the validity of those suffering from major diseases for ratings and attention?

Shackleford asserts that Stewart's attempt at bi-partisanship has failed miserably, but can't cite a single example, or at least one that holds up to scrutiny. He mentions Bill O'Reilly getting booed when he comes on the show. But that wasnt' Stewart encouraging the boos; in fact, if anything it was O'Reilly who was explicitly encouraging the boos, even scolding the audience. Stewart tries to engage those who disagrees with in a debate. His problem is that he's actually too polite, and winds up cowering when his opponent gets worked up. A year or so ago, he had Rick Santorum on the show. Stewart was nothing but polite to him, and sincerely tried to get to the bottom of his extreme beliefs. When Santorum ducked a question and went off on a rant, Stewart all but hid underneath the desk. Just like Rush Limbaugh! Oh wait...

You also cite Dan Rather being on the show Tuesday night, and how Stewart joked with him rather than grilled him on the events that caused him to prematurely retire. But he fails to mention that this wasn't a typical interview -- it was a special, covering the Midterm Elections. They were joking, sure, but they were joking about...the Midterm Elections. It wasn't a typical interview. He was there as a specialist, someone who's covered elections for most of his life.

There's no doubt that Stewart is a little easier on those with whom he agrees. But not by much. Shackleford claims, "Conservatives are lampoon for being conservative, liberals for not being liberal enough" [sic]. But he fails to cite a single example of Stewart and co. being extreme. They mock the democrats for being wimps (like conservatives!), but never for not being extreme.

And then there's the claim that they have it out for Fox News. What Shackleford fails to note is that they back this hatred up with evidence on a near-daily basis. The way Shackleford words it, it's as though they simply mock Fox News for no good reason. But that hatred is well-founded and buttressed by a neverending supply of clips and analysis.

Lastly, there's this sorry claim: that the youth are getting all their news from The Daily Show. To even understand what the Daily Show does (or for that matter, The Daily Kos), one has to have a working knowledge not just of the news that day, but of news history -- news in general. Young people may not be watching CNN, Fox News or the 6:00 network news. But you don't have to these days. The web has many places one can get news, analysis, and so forth. These days, it's next to impossible to remain ignorant of the news.

The saddest part? Had the Dems won in 2004, this column could've come out, with only minor variations. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Shackleford had written it before Election Day '04 and dusted it off after Election Day '06. That's how relevant and trenchant it is.

P.S. Jon Stewart's name is spelled "Jon." It does alternate between having an "h" and not having an "h," as it does serially throughout this column. Not that fact-checking need be applied to soapbox rants.

Oxymoron
How can the truth be faux? Read your dictionaries children. It's not new that young people tend to be more liberal or that politicians are easy targets for comedians(find your own examples, you can go back at least as far as Will Rogers and before). Unlike many of you, my recollection of TV news goes back to its beginnings, when journalists limited their copy to the 5 W's. Later on in the 60's, a dramatic shift came when at the end of a newscast the anchor was allowed to offer a short comment or analysis. When this happened, the caption "COMMENTARY" appeared on the screen like a warning label. In the 70's Newsweek magaizine announced that it was abandoning objectivity in its newswriting and soon other organizations followed suit. Today we have entertainment shows posing in part as news shows. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. The problem comes when the audience is incapable of distingishing one from the other. The danger comes when the producers of such shows knowingly take advantage of this inability to mold the thinking of the audience e.g. Newspeak.

Youth Voters
I'm just glad all these young voters support the Democrats as that assures me I'll get my big Social Security check that I figured wouldn't be there. I think that it'll be two workers supporting one retiree by that time, so I'll look forward to r0_d2 and one other liberal supporting my conservative retirement.

r0_d2 . . .
spews hatred on every post, then complains about Rush Limbaugh. What a hypocrit!


Cable America
It's a more successful version of the Air America strategy: call your show entertainment (not news), distort the facts to fit your agenda, and if you are ever called on to prove them you can just say,"Hey man, it's just comedy! Can't you take a joke?" No need to back up the facts here. Your pretense of show biz is your escape hatch if the debate starts slipping too far to the right.

The main difference between John Stewart and Air America is that he actually is entertaining, but that doesn't mean his comments are any closer to reality.

faux news scares me
great comment walrus, I was thinking the same thing. for those who don't see the liberal bias of the MSM or The Daily Show..get your head out of the sand and have some integrity - admit it! Conservatives let's now concentrate on how to get back to our values!

Dale Gribble?
So... does anyone know who writes as Rusty Shackleford besides Dale Gribble?

Rush always lies ? Please...
*Jon uses truth...Rush uses LIES.*

Hahahaha.

Snort.

Hahaha.

Liberals never lie but Rush, he always lies (even when he backs his comments up with facts and sources).

/rolls eyes


Rush and Stewart
The Kingdom is doomed'when the jester is King!

I had the privilege of listening to Rush,when he first started his talk radio show in Sacramento,
he really is the same guy he was way back then.
He used to debate the liberal mayor of Davis(UCSD)
on tv,and I never laughed so hard in my life,the left never in history had been chalanged on their views,until the likes of Rush showed up,we knew back then that he would be real big one day.

As to the MSM,I find it interesting that the 3 major networks are free to view,yet a pay chanel like FOX news,blows them off the air in ratings.

Stewart's "Santorum was raptured"....
...gaffe is actually quite common in the entertainment biz. The vast majority of folks in the entertainment biz, judging by the content of the product - TV shows and movies - they put out, tend to lump all Christians together in term of practice and belief. I don't know how many times in the movies I've seen Evangelical Christians with rosary beads and/or statues of the Virgin Mary in their homes (things they would NEVER have) or Catholics portrayed as creationists (the Church has no problem with evolution) or rapturists (the "rapture" has never been an accepted part of Church theology). Ironically, though, it is only Catholic priests who get the "pedophile" rap, though the percentage of Catholic and Protestant clergy that are accused of pedophilia is very similar, and neither is above the national percentage of pedophiliac adult males in the general population nor a fraction of the percentage of pedophiliac public school teachers.

When portraying a culture or a group of people that they are not familiar with, those involved in a TV/movie production will hire a consultant to make sure said culture or group is portrayed acurately. Apparently Christianity does not deserve such consideration.


impressive article
. . . in its way. Certainly it is the most interesting, original article I have ever read on Townhall. I've never seen the parallel drawn between the "dittoheads" of 1994 and the Daily Show fans of 2006 so eloquently. This article also makes my heart swell with pride to be a staunch member of the liberal base, and a true-blue supporter of Jon Stewart. You know why? Because you can call it "faux-reality" all you want, but it won't change the fact that the Dems control both houses of Congress now.

Stewart an exploiter, not a cause....
...of a liberal bias in young voters.

They have picked up these leanings from their teachers in public schools and on college campuses.

Their numbers were growing before Comedy Central ever gave a mediocre standup comic/MTV castoff the "anchor" chair for its fake news show.

The rising number of liberal votes among young people is one more sign that conservatives have lost the cultural war, so far, and may continue to lose it. The left has spread its influence so far, that it may be impossible to cleanse our culture of it.

solar
To your comment about Fox news being a pay channel: what is your point?

Missing the point.....
Stewart is so successful because he is an equal opportunity satirist.

He attacks GOPers and Dems in equal measure, and with brilliant accuracy.

The recent spoof of “Rev.” Haggard was genius – comedy and news combined. It is called “Haggard The Horrible” and I recommend it to all who love this country and who, like me, love Christianity yet despise those who would abuse it.

You can watch it at thedailyshow.com

Jon Stewart is funny
And DavidMac accurately sums up his popularity. Rush is like a political shock jock. He doesn’t just make up his stories, he considers his audience and presents news and opinion for its entertainment value. In that way, he and Jon S are similar. Rush does a very good business and he earns his money honestly. So does Jon. They both try to stick with the truth but sometimes stretch it for affect. I’m sure they both wield some influence on the voters but that’s ok too. Leave them both to their business and tune in if you like or ignore them if you don’t.

Malou
Can't you see'You have to pay for Fox.
You don't have to pay for the other three networks.
Yet Fox ,ratings are way above the other three.
What's not to understand?
I don't even get to watch Fox,so I can't be counted.
I hope this was clear,I don't understand why you even had to ask the obvious.

you still didn't answer my question
I asked you what your point was, I didn't ask you to reiterate what you said. I understand that Fox gets higher ratings than the network news channels. What I don't understand is what the larger point is that you're trying to demonstrate. Is it that conservatives have more cultural sway than liberals? Because that isn't true.

Malou
Oh Gee!
That the MSM are losing their grip on public opinion.
Fox is'more fair and balanced.

Get to your point,you obviously have something of a comment,or you would'nt be nitpicking mine.
So make it!

Speaking of humor...
I just received this email:

Here is the new Liberal 25-point manifesto for the new Congress:
1. Mandatory homosexuality
2. Drug-filled condoms in schools
3. Introduce the new Destruction of Marriage Act
4. Border fence replaced with free shuttle buses
5. Osama Bin Laden to be Secretary of State
6. Withdraw from Iraq , apologize, and reinstate Hussein
7. English language banned from all Federal buildings
8. Math classes replaced by encounter groups
9. All taxes to be tripled
10. All fortunes over $250,000 to be confiscated
11. On-demand welfare
12. Tofurkey to be named official Thanksgiving dish
13. Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems
14. Pledge of Allegiance in schools replaced with morning flag-burning
15. Stem cells allowed to be harvested from any child under the age of 8
16. Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor
17. Quarterly mandatory abortion lottery
18. God to be mocked roundly
19. Dissolve Executive Branch: reassign responsibilities to UN
20. Jane Fonda to be appointed Secretary of Appeasement
21. Outlaw all firearms: previous owners assigned to anger management therapy
22. Texas returned to Mexico
23. Ban Christmas: replace with Celebrate our Monkey Ancestors Day
24. Carter added to Mount Rushmore
25. Modify USA 's motto to "Land of the French and the home of the brave"

Truth to article
Stewart might have lead the charge but there is an overall attitude in the media elite. It is in TV shows, talk shows, late night talk, movies, and music. Each one re-afirms the other to try and make their opinions into "facts that everybody with common sense knows".

The truth is people like Jon Stewart care little for facts and reality. But unlike liberals, we won't go file complaints against him to try and shut him up like what was done against conservative radio.

jcdean1978
Excelent post.
Ignore the little rodent,until he can be civil,no ones responds to him.

Also what does jcdean1978 mean?

Jon Stewart
Rusty… you really don’t get it.

Jon Stewart and “The Daily Show” writers are not mindless mouthpieces for a party or its platform — in marked contrast to O’Reilly and Rush, who unknowingly admitted his own sales work for the Republicans recently. Stewart and company expose the hypocrisy in our leadership wherever it lies. All politicians, Republican and Democrat and Independent alike, are equal targets for their merciless satire. President Bush, V.P. Cheney and their cadre of spinners consistently misrepresent, distort and outright lie to the American people. Yes, Rusty, they lie. And “The Daily Show” has the video archive to prove it. The appeal of Jon Stewart lies in his willingness, or perhaps his mandate to expose that duplicity.

What the youth vote is looking for is authenticity, Rusty. And Stewart provides it without lying about facts.

Here’s a primer for you, Rusty, that may help you understand both politics and comedy. When someone says one thing and does another (President Bush claiming that he “never said stay the course”), that’s called a lie. When someone pushes something to the extreme, that’s called satire. Get it?

Yes, Rusty, humans do tend to be energized by an association with like-minded people: today that means voters who are disgusted with business-as-usual, corruption, influence-peddling, and the rampant “if I say it then it will be so” posturing of the current, or rather past, Republican leadership.

Jon Stewart’s appearance on “Crossfire” was courageous. Stephen Colbert’s performance at the White House press corps dinner was practically heroic. And if you don’t think Fox News is biased, you, my friend, will need to look a lot harder to see the new black.

r0_d2
wow dude you drink so much kool-aid you have to keep saying what Rush said yet you are to stupid to understand it. Rush can't lie because nuts like you would be all over it the sacond he said it. Just admit you do not like him because he shows you what a lemming you and liberals like you are. To blind to see the truth in your face. Jon S does what he does because he knows what sells. You have to remember he is an actor doing what he thinks sells to dopes like you.
He knows you won't question what he says.
But Rush is out to tell the truth that you just can't handle.
Stop repeating Rush if you are going to take him out of context. Real people with intelligence know what he meant. All people in his position "carry the water" for the ones they are backing. Jon does it just with a littlt humor, very little humor.

Not Slackers
Before anyone gets too stressed about the slackers who watch The Daiy Show determining how the nation is run, check this out:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/28/comedy.politics/

Not necessarily such ill-informed slackers after all.

Students at Calif. College ban Pledge of
This paragraph was part of the story.

To the liberals out their,this is the roots of your party,I hope you can see the damage they inflict on American culture.

"That ('under God') part is sort of offensive to me," student trustee Jason Bell, who proposed the ban, told Reuters. "I am an atheist and a socialist, and if you know your history, you know that 'under God' was inserted during the McCarthy era and was directly designed to destroy my ideology."

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-11-10T021338Z_01_N09494500_RTRUKOC_0_US-LIFE-PLEDGE.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

r0_d2
Wow you are so clever with the little silly sayings. But like I said before he is a conservative and was saying what expected of him to help his party. You know like all other reporters journalists and even your king Jon s do it to help their side. Stop being a hypocrite and using the same Rush line. He is not the only one in the media for conservatives yet he is the only one people hassle. You probably do not listen to Rush, only heard someone say what you keep repeating over and over and over again about what he said and is why your dumb-_ss keeps taking it out of context. Let me try your lame attempt at humor, stop being a Dummycrat and listen to Rush for real, don't repeat what you read off The Daily Koz and act like it is your opinion

It's a COMEDY, Lighten Up Everyone


So what if "The Daily Show" has a bias? It's a freakin' COMEDY show. If hordes of young people are using it as a source of news, so what? At least they're engaged in the political process and current news. Rather then rail against, conservatives would do themselves a great service by appearing on the show and using the show as a platform to get their views and positions across to the show's audience. Despite what you all may think of his politics, Stewart is a good interviewer and regularly has on conservative minded guests.

And by the way, what's stopping us conservatives from doing our OWN version of faux news? Isn't that the same reason Fox News was born -- to provide an alternative?

So who else is tickled pink?
None of us can be surprised by the likes of a Jon Stewart or a Streisand being oh-so-happy at the demonRAT wins this week, but look who ELSE is just thrilled! The terrorists! Why, they couldn't be more jovial and congratulatory.

No one loves the demonRATs more than the nutjob with bombs strapped to himself. Who else appreciates his work more than the dems? Who ELSE loves the sight of dead Americans as much as he does?

Nice job, you worthless little leftie worms- may you choke.

a_cermak
You can't get e good stat from six questions. That is like saying you know what America thinks because you phoned 1000 people and asked a couple of slanted questions and now you know what is on the minds of all the nation.
All these polls and surveys that keep trying to tell us how we feel. What a joke. They are made to get the answer the party paying for the poll wants. All polls are useless

r0_d2
So as you say it then all who speak must be liars because they all push their agenda and bend the truth a little. He who is without sin let him cast the first stone.
You are a hypocrite plain and simple. tell us of others not just Rush to prove you are fair and balanced, or are you really Howard Dean and just able to see fault in Rush. Hypocrite like you show the rest of us what a bunch of losers you are even when you win.

TO: Rodent 2
Listen to Rush for a week.
I dare you!
Or are you afraid,it might even give you ammo to come back to TH and give us a good lickin.
Are you game,or a coward?

r0_d2
Tell me about your gun collection.

I have been interested ever since you mentioned it.


_____________________
Comedy in place of news?
What is the other half of a half truth?

Jon Stewart's Elderly Fan
I watch The Daily Show as often as I can. I'm a 66 year old lawyer and I'm on the road a lot, but my wife Tivos it. Not only is it a great source of news, but its one of the few news shows that you can watch a week or two after it is broadcast. How anyone can watch Fox and not see the obvious right-wing bias is beyond me. I suspect the difficulty here is that the author has bought into the right wing delusions about the nature of reality in Iraq.

Is liberal media bias the reason that we have lost the war, squandered the wealth of the nation, thrown away our moral leadership in the world, and destroyed our constitution? Or is it possible that Bush and his gang simply blew it? I'm going for the Bush answer. I think allowing him to get into office was an enormously expensive mistake, and the right owes us for it. How long can the right hang on to Bush despite growing evidence of his incompetence? Of course Jon Stewart is popular. He says what the "liberal" media won't, that the Emperor has no clothes.

Lighten up there, Francis
r0_d2,

I received the manifesto list from some lefty friends of mine, who found it equally amusing. Man, I would hate to be you.

Oh, brother
No matter what else you want to say about it, Rush's admission this week that he has carried water for "Republicans-in-name-only" makes a pretty strong case for his having been a shill. It doesn't make him a liar, per se. And it certainly doesn't make people who listen to him "hatemongers and fools." What nonsense.

People who don't understand the appeal of The Daily Show don't understand humor. Particularly when it comes to politics.

There is a powerful scene in the novel Doctor Zhivago when a group of frustrated soldiers, on the verge of mutiny, are stopped in their tracks by one of their officers who stands in their midst on top of a barrel, and speaks bravely to them, appealing to their sense, their courage, their patience, and their better nature in general.

For a few moments, there is silence, and it appears that he may have defused the situation. But then the lid of the barrel he is standing on gives way, and he falls into the barrel, making him a laughingstock. The other soldiers fall on him at once and kill him in a frenzy.

Who you would destroy, you must first belittle. Disdain is every bit as powerful at "hatred" - arguably more so. And it is every bit as arrogant and self-important. Much of what is behind this sort of humor is condescension. (Is there anything more self-important than laughing at someone else?)

When one can laugh at one's self - that is another matter.

r0_d2
"r0_d2"how long did it take you to come up with your little title there spanky.

If that is the only line you have of Rush's that bothers you then maybe you should relax.
Your party of liars has so many you couldn't write them all yet you only have one little phrase you keep repeating. The whole dem party is after Rush along with every liberal organization out there and that line is still all you got off of MOVE-on.org. We all know you don't listen to Rush because you would of understood ehat he meant by trhe comment, not what your handlers told you to say

Sadly, Stewart can indeed be funny
The author and others are right -- Stewart can be funny.


> Sure, he's left leaning, but he doesn't try so hard like Franken, Moore and Maher. <

Oh yes he does! As noted in Mr. Shackleford's article, and as I've observed from time to time since my kids watches the show a lot, Stewart is **way left**. Viewers have *NO DOUBT* how he feels about what he is "joking" about.


And I, too, share the fear that conservatives, nor libertarians, have nothing to counter Stewart with. Limbaugh himself was forced off TV (by assorted forces), and Neal Boortz is logically forceful but not funny.

Correct
You're absolutely correct.

Jon Stewart has been a liberal-democrat mouthpiece for a long while - which is why I stopped watching his show.

His partisan punditry is thinly veiled, and frankly, caters to people my age that are misinformed with a media-crafted image of 'evil bush and evil republicans'

Truth and logic isn't something you will see on the Daily Show, nor any other liberal spewhole, you'll simply see one sided snippets with a virtual warehouse full of omission.

Steve is wrong...
Steve said, "Stewart is so successful because he is an equal opportunity satirist.

He attacks GOPers and Dems in equal measure, and with brilliant accuracy."

While Stewart does hit the Dems from time to time, you can hardly say that he attacks them in "equal measure". I don't watch the show regularly, but when I do he is usually baggin on Repubs/conservative 90% of the time.

Although, he hits a lot of news that is neither Dem or Repub. I have always found his show to be a bit like SNL News, but even SNL seems to take a few more shots at the Dems. SNL made fun of Clinton a lot during the 90s.

Reality Based Community
This is just classic! So it is we who are living in "the bubble"???

Too funny!

Some of the things you don't mention in your piece:

1. Stewart... and the rest of us... are "emboldened" to speak out about Iraq because just about every mainstream foreign policy analyist thinks it was a mistake, just about every retired military officer of any rank thinks it was a mistake, and because the report by all 16 of this nation's intelligence agencies demonstrates that it was a mistake. Without all that... no Jon Stewart jokes.

2. You mock the "reality based community" without any mention of where that phrase comes from. It comes from a senior Bush aid mocking the reality based community while arguing ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality." Sounds like something you're accusing Stewart's viewers of doing.

3. You also don't mention the Annenberg study demonstrating that Daily Show viewers know more about current events than Fox Viewers do. And. No wonder on that score. We can extend that to Limbaugh listeners as well since his show has been 99 percent character assassination since I started listening to him in Sacramento, Ca. in the late 80s. Stewart and Al Franken do something very different than do the Limbaughs of this world.

4. Comparing Bill O'Reilly to an actual journalist like Rather is just plain offensive to professional journalism. O'Reilly lies virtually every night he takes to the airwaves, which has been well chronicled for some time now. Rather wasn't perfect, but you have to drink a lot of cool-aid to think that he ever purposely mislead the Ameican people. He should probably apologize for failing to dig up a team of forensic experts every time an apparently reliable witness gave him some documents. Meanwhile, O'Reilly had the temerity to mention the UK "ricin plot" as if that hadn't been discredited long ago! I'm sure you covered O'Reilly's lie and the revelation that this plot was untrue in the Jawa Report. Riiiiiight... the bubble wouldn't allow for that.

Limbaugh Was Forced Off TV Because

no one watched him. Plain and simple, his radio audience didn't follow him to the tube. Had nothing to do with politics or biases -- just plain economics. That's why Fox News has never given Limbaugh a show.

Crossfire is Faux News
Yes, the Daily Show is a comedy show, but the reason it's popular is that it addresses real news issues that the so-called real media had been ignoring like frigtened little rats since 9/11. He was the only one that said what half the nation was thinking about our idiot president. Meanwhile, Crossfire and shows like it argued about Terry Schiavo, gay marriage or whatever other diversionary "news" item the Republicans decided would be the issue of the week.

Don't find it funny myself

I tuned into the Daily Show to see what the fuss was about. I found the satire forced and unfunny, and about as subtle as a train wreck. Why does Jon Stewart have to gurn and shout all the time, whenever he tries to make a point? It's a mess get it? Mess-o-potania? Like the old namr for Iraq? Jeez....

Don't get me wrong left-wing satire can be very funny (though I prefer the South Park 'attack everyone' approach), I just don't find this funny.

BTW, I don't subscribe to this- the 'certain media swings elections' idea. To be this is just falling into the Gramsci trap, denying the existance of free-will in a democracy. Generally I believe that these media spring up to feed a demand already there.

It's probably depressing that so many people right and left are willing to only listen to news sources symppathetic to their views, but that's human nature I guess.

RAZIEL vs. r0_d2
You two need to sprayed with cold water! chill out...
That being said...

The venom spewed here by Raziel is unsettling. Who are you, Rush's momma? I am a fiscal conservative and support many Republican party platforms... and many Democratic party platforms. This election turned, earth to idiots, because enough independent thinkers started paying attention and making up their own minds. Yes, I am Republican on many fronts. And still I loathe this administration. Because they are liars. They're selling out our nation for their own benefit. They've squandered the good will of the global community. They've manipulated evangelical Christians to maintain power and pursue their own ends, which are NOT the best interests of this country. And they convince the sheep out there that gay marriage, abortion and right-to-die are the issues in this country. And Rush uses his bully pulpit to help them. Raziel, we can disagree and still respect each other. But when you start defending Rush by quoting scripture and saying "everyone does it"... you embarrass your side and humiliate yourself.

You might also consider learning how to spell. No offense.

post script
I apologize for the ad hominem argument. This is, however, an intellectual forum, and your lack of spelling, grammar and punctuation skills weakens your argument immediately.

mr. man
I have a phone in one hand purchase orders in another and service men looking for material. sorry for all the little problems.
I think the message is more important. I find people who claim to be republican aren't. We do not need to point that out, as far as defending Rush, I was trying to point out the other side of r0_d2 rant. The fact you left him untouched proves you are not republican. He was saying things that are just as leaning as mine. I may not be as grammatically perfect as you but then how does that weaken my argument if my points are right.Can you point out the lies or will you just point fingers with no proof. The weapons were there, we sold them to him. He used them, but I guess that is not important to a scholar like you

Oh for Heaven's sake...
I thought Coulters article was a pathetic attempt to explain away the Democratic victory, but this takes the cake.

Repubs are very sore losers.

mr. man-RAZIEL
You have alot of room to talk,you profess to be a fiscal conservative,well you're half way their.
What does that mean'you're a tight liberal?

Atleast RAZIEL points are grounded in conviction!
Unlike the little Rodent2 who just uses up space when scroling past to someone like RAZIEL,who's post I would rather read,than the rodent2.

RAZIEL vs. REALITY
Poor, sad Raziel. Yes, the message is primary. But your arguments have been proven specious, like Rusty's, already by r0_d2, among others. While r0_d2 is nearly as nasty as you, calling you names, etc., your opponent actually makes points and proves his arguments. Please see postings above. As for me not being a "real" Republican, I'm happy to say that I concur. I am not a "real" Demcrat either. I prefer to be a real American (note the absence of quotation marks, please). I don't follow, I read multiple sources and form my own opinion. Which is why I watch "The Daily Show" and read Townhall. I suggest to EVERYONE here, not just sad little Raziel, that you do the same. And try to remember that O'Reilly is a merely an opiner who knowingly distorts the facts to support his position, and not the JOURNALIST that he professes to be. Stewart, on the other hand, is a comic and a satirist who constantly reminds his audience that he is NOT a journalist.
Do you really not understand the difference?

Laura Hollis
Excellent.

Why can't we all write and think like you? It would make reading the comments as interesting and informative as reading the articles.

Please don't go away.


Anyone notice?
"Rusty Shackleford" is a pseudonymn used by the character Dale Gribble on "King of the Hill" when he's trying to hide his identity from the government. I don't have a point - just wondered if anyone else noticed.

Matthew:
Good point and I tend to agree with you but the sad fact is that most news anchors are so biased these days that I see no real difference between a news anchor and a pundit. Oh, except that the pundit is at least honest about his or her bias.

Stewart debates, Rush lectures
There is a stark difference with Jon Stewart and Rush Limbaugh besides political affiliations. Jon Stewart actually carries on a dialogue with people expressing their opinions (even a differing opinion from Stewart) in his interview segment. Rush tends to lecture, even his own supporters and I can't ever recall when he asked an actual expert with a contrarian view from his opinions. It has been a long time since I have listened to him though, but I would bet he does not attempt to host other viewpoints (and I am not talking about the tomato cans that he calls liberal viewers, they are not real political players).

Reality
Written as only somebody who "researched" the show without ever actually watching it could manage. First of all, let's attempt to let a tiny bit of fresh air into the echo chamber and point out one unsettling fact: The Daily Show isn't a news program. It's a comedy show on... duh ... Comedy Central. It doesn't purport to be a news show.

Second, it's worth remembering that comedians who specialize in political humor *make fun of the people in power.* Why? Because they're the ones currently in control, holding office, and actually DOING THINGS. Late night talk shows are the same way. Stewart has been around a long time, and when Clinton was in office, they tore him to pieces. They still do. (To this day they still use a cartoon of Monica Lewinsky's infamous stained dress because the mileage on that never seems to wear out.) When the Dems take control of congress, you can rest assured he'll be bashing them as well.

One of his most popular people is Lewis Black. Check out his first CD, "The White Album." He spent no less than 1/3 of the album bashing Clinton and stated that "Bill Clinton alone is enough reason to pass a law saying that nobody from Arkansas should be elected president for the next 100 years."

Colbert got a Democratic congressman to say, on camera, that he "enjoyed snorting coke and having sex with prostitutes." They poke fun at whoever is in power. For the last six years that was the Republicans.

Rusty Shackelford is well known from his highly racist blog, "The Jawa Report" and is severely divorced from reality. This long winded column is yet another glaring reason why he is better suited to comedy, albeit unintented, than political commentary.

Mr. Man
I've watched the Daily Show many times and I've listened to O'Reilly many times.

Stewart never "reminds his audience that he is NOT a journalist." Stewart is a comedian and a partisan, not a satirist. Making snide remarks about conservatives and Republicans isn't satire.

O'Reilly has been a journalist for years. He comments about the news. What's your problem with him? "Distorts the facts"? So call him on it. I agree he's wrong on his OPINIONS at times, but I do not believe he deliberately lies.

Yes, you're the consumate fence-sitter. Both a Dem and Republican at the same time. I, too, have some views that are counter to the Republicans' talking points (pro-choice, for example) but I also see the main difference between socialism and free-market capitalism.

Trust me, the Socialist-Democrats are not the people you want running America. They aren't going to redistribute the wealth they confiscate to you. That's just a selling point they tell to the poor and uneducated to get their votes.

Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart in undeniably liberal--he has stated liberal positions many times--but has frequently taken effective potshots at John Kerry and others when warranted.

But what is the deal with the stable of "Ivy league" writers? Why do so many self-declared Conservatives posit this "liberal elite" theme while they also sniff at the unwashed poor and rancid masses?

One would think that free marketers would applaud the meritocracy of college admissions--after all, the admission boards at Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Princeton don't usually know the politics of applicants.

Close your eyes and picture who--Rush or Jon--would fit better on the quad. It's all in the lobes, folks.

Jon Stewart:A proud Leftist.
Using the tired "wink,wink, nudge,nudge" humor has gotten Stewart to the top of leftists "must see TV." The problem with the socialist party in the U.S. is that they use fools like Stewart as stepping stones. When they get what they need out of him, he will be ash canned, along with that poor fat "documentary" maker and the shrill, obese, talk show actresses. Rush, on the other hand, has been active since 1988, and is still a viable power for the conservative agenda. Socialists see only the truth when it fits their agenda, a la Stewart. Conservatives try to live the truth on a daily basis. Our longevity will prove us to be right.

I'd pay money
to see a political debate between Limbaugh and Stewart. Now THAT would be great!

MSM Bias
Some 15 months ago I offered the below 20-word letter for publication in metropolitan Danbury Connecticut's only daily newspaper:

"Folks who have heretofore been unable to discern the media's leftwing bias now need only contemplate the Cindy Sheehan tumult."

The editorial page editor refused to publish it.

Which reinforces my proposition.

Hee hee hee
I never laughed so hard as when I read Shackleford's pitiful excuse for a rationale as to why the Republicans lost on Tuesday. I would have laughed harder except the piece was so compulsively redundant it was tiresome. You're a professor, Mr. S? Did nobody ever teach you to edit?

Let me give a shout out to all the Daily Show/Stewart supporters on this board--I'm glad you're there--but especially ED. Rock on! Like you, I'm a lifelong Democrat and older Daily Show fan (51). I somehow can't imagine a world without the DS anymore. Like Jerry Seinfeld told Jon last week, I hope he hosts the show for the rest of his life. And like Brian Williams of NBC put it, Jon's a freestanding arm of the U.S. government--if you believe, as Mark Twain said, that irreverence is liberty's greatest defense.

As for all the whiners on here lamenting for the loss of "conservative values" as laid out by Rush--all I can say is, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah. This is just the beginning of the wave. To paraphrase one more person--Bob Dylan--something's happening here, and you don't know what it is, do you, Mr. Shackleford?


eshine
Sure beats whinging about voting machines and investing elaborate conspiracies for 6 years.

David Mac doesn't add up
Can someone else testify here?

David Mac says that "Stewart never reminds his audience that he is NOT a journalist." Really? I watch Stewart whenever I can, because his political satire is usually spot-on. And I've witnessed him repeatedly pointing out that "TDS" is a political satire on a comedy network. Didn't you even see him on "Crossfire?" Hello? Please remove head from dark hole, David. "TDS's" focus on Republicans lies in the fact that they've been the party in power and have actually been doing things. Hence the focus on them.

If O'Reilly is what passes for a journalist now, that's a tragic reflection on the American public. O'Reilly is NOT a journalist. And if you do not believe tha the deliberately lies, you should watch "The Daily Show." Their video archive offers ample proof.

Lastly, regarding your assessment of my views... could you be any more negative? I think it's a sad world view that distorts independent thought and calls it fence-sitting. As for seeing the main difference between socialism and free-market capitalism, you needn't explain it to me. I'm a self-made multi-millionaire, and I'm not looking to Dems to redsitribute wealth to me. I'm also not looking to Republicans to help me avoid paying my taxes (off-shore holding companies) or use the means of government for my own benefit (like Halliburton and many other war profiteers). If you're unable to see how Dems and Republicans alike now seem largely to be in government service to service themselves, you're not looking hard enough. The Republicans are simply better, more ruthless, and more experienced at it.

slayer:
No, it doesn't. Because "whinging" about voting machine malfunctions and the fact that the Republican government lied about leading us into Iraq appears, more and more clearly, to have been justified. Wining about how "good Christian Repub values" (like persecuting gays while having affairs with underage Congressional pages) have been sandbagged, and how--even more ridiculously--a *comedian* (albeit a very astute one) caused you to lose an election, is Disneyland in the extreme, and pretty good evidence that certain members of the (formerly) ruling party don't have their heads or feet in reality.

That evidence is really why the tide turned.

and David Mac:
Just to buttress your point: The Daily Show isn't the only forum that's pointed out O'Reilly's lies. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann has been poking convincing holes in him pretty much five nights a week for the last year.

And you're right, Jon Stewart has never claimed to be a serious journalist, or that his show is a "real" news show. In fact, in the remarks by Brian Williams that I cited above, he also insisted that you can't call the Daily Show a "news show." Stewart's detractors would love to prove otherwise, but just exactly *what* they think they'd be proving, I don't know.

And as far as the "Jon Stewart only picks on the right" rant goes, that's also completely bogus. When he came on TDS as host, the Monica Lewinsky scandal was waning, and yet, he rarely left Clinton alone. This week, some liberal fans were upset because they thought Stewart was disrespectful of guest Howard Dean when he appeared to discuss the Dem victory. Jon has always satirized both sides--and he's also provided a gracious forum to both sides through interviews--whether the thin-skinned want to believe it or not.

oops . . .
The first line of that last post should read: Just to buttress your point, *mr. man* (sorry).

Jon Stewart...
Well, now...

Rush Limbaugh is a *commentator* who gets paid based on the size of his audience. Love him or loath him, his goal is to use his comments to get the largest possible audience. If later it turns out that he was pretending to believe things that he didn't really believe in, you can decide for yourself if you agree that's ok.

Fox News is a *news* show. It is supposed to let you know when it is telling you the truth (ie, reasonably unbiased facts), and when it is telling you their opinion. But, it makes its money by the size of its audience - and it is now, by any definition 'mainstream media' (definitionally, the biggest news show on television can't be outside of the 'mainstream').

Jon Stewart has a *comedy* show. By definition, it does not pretend to be telling the truth- just a comedian's take on whatever takes their fancy. And yes, he makes his money based on the size of his audience.

The difference between these three is that two of them are trying to tell you what is right and wrong- what is true and what is not. One of them is trying to make you laugh.

I agree that it is sad that the most politcally aware students in your college get most of their news from a comedy show, but surely that is as much a reflection of the product presented by Fox, CNN, etc.

In the meantime, don't forget the old saying that 'anyone who isn't a liberal at 20 hasn't a heart, and anyone who isn't a conservative at 40 hasn't a heart'. Let the kids be- they want the world to be a good place, where people watch out for others in need and things are generally fair. Don't pretend to yourself that this has ever been the reason that people join the Republican party; content youself with knowing that competent government and fiscal prudence do more to help the disadvantaged than anything else. Just hope that the Republican party remember that that's what they are supposed to be good at, and let audiences decide if comedy is what Jon Stewart is good at.

oops
...sorry, that should have been "...anybody who isn't a conservative at 40 hasn't a head"

Ummm...reality check time
For you folks who think Fox is trouncing network newscasts, here's some cold water in the form of Neilsen ratings from the week of November 6. The numbers are the 25-54 demo, the ratings that commercial charges are based upon.

Thanks to mediabistro.com for these....

First of all, cable. Each number represents 100K viewers.

The Scoreboard: Thursday, November 9
25-54 demographic: (LS)

Total day: FNC: 277 | CNN: 235 | MSNBC: 132 | HLN: 95 | CNBC: 67

Prime: FNC: 396 | CNN: 273 | MSNBC: 203 | HLN: 167 | CNBC: 89


And now, the network numbers, these are daily averages for the week of November 6..... In the 25-54 demo, each number (i.e. NBC's 6.7) represents million homes.

Total viewers: NBC: 9,800,000 / ABC: 8,820,000 / CBS: 7,760,000

Homes: NBC: 6.7/13 / ABC: 6.1/12 / CBS: 5.5/10

25-54 demo: NBC: 2.5/9 / ABC: 2.3/9 / CBS: 2.0/7



As you can see, cable remains the poor relation to the networks.

You're welcome.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.