CNN's Roberts says Scheuer's "major weapon" comment is "out there"
July 02, 2009 8:46 pm ET
From the July 2 edition of CNN's Campbell Brown:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
-
-
Baier brings conspiracy theory that Reid is "in cahoots with" NV Tea Party candidate to Special Report
7 hours and 7 minutes ago -
Hannity on health care reform: "It's like giving the American people the middle finger"
March 11, 2010 11:41 pm ET -
Hannity advances conspiracy theory on Reid reelection strategy: Get phony tea party candidate in the race
March 11, 2010 11:39 pm ET -
-
-
Running with a bad crowd
by Jamison Foser - March 11, 2010 -
The Pentagon shooter, insurrectionism, and right-wing bloggers
by Eric Boehlert - March 09, 2010 -
Media Matters: Bush-nesia strikes again in smear against Obama, DOJ
by Karl Frisch - March 05, 2010
|
|
||
Connect & Share
© 2010 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.
  |
||
Now we have a conservative commentator suggesting that not being attacked post-Bush is proof that we're NOT safe. Of course, if this idiot gets his way and we ARE attacked again, that will also be considered proof that we're not safe. Either way, Obama gets blamed by conservatives and the mainstream media.
Now, I want you to imagine a liberal, ANY liberal, openly calling for attacks on the United States. If merely disagreeing with the Bush administration was synonymous with treason, do you doubt that a liberal advocating terrorist bombings by America's enemies would get that liberal jailed indefinitely without charges, or worse?
But the best Roberts can do when the calls for attacks against America come from conservatives is passively note that the statement is "out there?" What "liberal" media?
This clip is undeniable proof that conservatism = terrorism,
Besides, the folks we're discussing (Messrs. Beck and Scheuer) aren't conservatives. They're reactionaries. Actually, I wonder if "reactionary" is a strong enough word for how far right they are.
The problem is, these folks call themselves "conservative," and the mainstream media lets them, so that it is, as you say, hard to tell the difference.
Of course, he missed the chance to focus on the Beck's unwillingness to call the fool out on the air. The Glenn was coyly dismissive of the comment but let it stand because Glenn knows how much hay he could make if it happened, King stopped the Stewart clip too soon as Jon went on to point out that Scheuer has a dope-pinion.
True, it's a strange context to place the beck/scheuer thing in.
What does the 'Daily Show' really have to do with it?
Is it commentary on the beck/scheuer thing, or on Jon Stewart?
And as far as any commentary it might have been on beck/scheuer, again, why frame it in the context of the 'Daily Show'?
What, CNN doesn't have a direct access to video of Fox News Channel and the beck program, but only knows of such things and can only get video clips of them, from the Comedy Channel?
On a far more negative note, I have no idea what funny or insightful thing was said by Jon Stewart about the beck/scheuer thing... he called the guy a 'dick' and a dope, so what, if that's commentary or satire or even humor, then I missed it... he also took the opportunity to utter a few of his trademark F-bombs, and then noted to you how they were bleeped out (bleeped so lamely that only non-English speaking people would not have known what word it was he had said), and what was the FCC point he made? That he should be able to say the F word on television w/o the FCC bleeping it out?
I claim that Jon Stewart's citing of the beck/scheuer thing (and CNN's strange indirect citation of the same thing, strange for having Jon Stewart wrapped around it), I claim it was nothing insightful or satiric or even funny, just a couple of F-bombs lamely bleeped over, and he called the guy a 'dick' and a dope...
Worthless stuff on all levels.
Contrast that to the other clip MMFA had on the same morning, of Stephen Colbert, where he funnily satirized Fox News Channel's anti-Democratic mission, by not only pointing out the thing where Gov. Sanford was identified by them as a Democrat, and where previously they had done the same thing with mark foley, but he made the brilliant funny of "Hurricane Katrina (D)"... that's funny and brilliantly satirical!
Also, Colbert's routine included a montage of hypocritical Republicans bashing President Clinton, Gov. Sanford included! Larry Craig also! That was all funny and insightful commentary and brilliant satire... no F-bombs lamely bleeped, or even the pointlessly juvenile "he's a dick and a dope".
Leave it to CNN to take the beck/scheuer thing, and frame it strangely as just being "out there", and then framing it stranger still in the context of the unfunny and pointless non-commentary of Jon Stewart ('dick' and dope don't tell me anything, except about Jon Stewart's disdain for the 'dick' and dope, and about his empty head and emptier vocabulary), with two lamely bleeped F-bombs included for who knows what reason.
Hi-freaking-larious.
He didn't.
As far as his bleeping F-bomb FCC reference, you seem to know what insightful thing it was he meant...
What was it, what was his point?
He didn't have one...
He just did what he always does, when he's empty and when he reaches for a nervous senseless laugh from his studio audience : he drops an F-bomb (and we hear a bleep).
Hilarious.
I love being right, and I'm happy to say something true and sensible, again and again... and I love rubbing people's noses in it.
Jon Stewart is an unfunny and completely uninteresting pop icon among people who don't know any better.
He's so lame a comic and so lame a commentator, that he says nothing memorable or interesting, ever.
Take the above example for instance (as I now point it out again, and rub your nose in it): Jon Stewart calls this guy a 'dick' and a dope (dope-pinion he said, that's brilliant), and in so doing makes no sensible or insightful comment or criticism of the guy, or makes any kind of joke or humor or even satirical remark...
He drops two F bombs, because that's what he and his fans think humor is, and then he complains that his F bombs are bleeped.
Now if that's a stupid argument I made (for the third straight comment), then counter it... otherwise, you're as articulate and witty as Jon Stewart is (you may even be Jon), because to call an argument stupid, is not to counter it or to even argue... it's like calling someone a 'dick' or a dope, and thinking you've made some kind of point... it's like dropping F bombs, and thinking they are points of argument or discussion.
Again, counter my argument if it's so stupid, or say what's idiotic about it...
The only thing worse than Jon Stewart's absolutely empty and worthless humor, is his complete inability to argue with or oppose people like this sheuer character, or anyone else for that matter... he's a waste of time among thinking people, he's completely ineffective and worthless as a commentator, he routinely has newt gingrich types on his show, and sits there with a stupid plastic mock grin on his face, and fails to counter them or oppose them in any sensible way, which is why they love going on his show and having there way with him...
Disagree?
Find my argument stupid?
Then take it on and counter it, or shut up...
I love being right, and I love rubbing people's noses in the truth.
It's fun, and funny too.
But it's Stephen Colbert who owes all his success to Jon Stewart. It's Stewart who groomed Colbert to become the host of his own show, that Stewart co-produces. Colbert is the first to say he owes it all to Stewart, and Stewart will say that it's all due to Colbert. There's a mutual love/respect between the two of them that obviosly escapes your arrogant, angry hatred of the Daily Show host.
You know, if the two of them took the time to read what you just posted, they would just be laughing hysterically over the thought process, or lack thereof, of a small, petty, insignificant fool like yourself. Try and rub that into one's nose, loser.
You may now resume your sad, pathetic excuse of a life.
Stewart's point in deliberately dropping the F-bombs, which he knew would be bleeped, was to point out the idiocy of censoring a time-honored Anglo-Saxon verb commonly used by millions in everyday English in the same non-literal sense in which Stewart used it, while at the same time allowing the far more obscene and quite literal proposition that what this country needs - indeed, that the only thing that could save our country - is a mass slaughter on a scale unseen in the 60+ years since we ourselves perpetrated it on the Japanese.
And your argument is not stupid, it is absent. You don't like Jon Stewart? Don't watch him. But don't claim his humor is "unfunny and uninteresting" simply because you don't get it. Millions do get what he's doing when he allows right-wingers to say such stupid things that no rebuttal is necessary "among thinking people."
Again, it's subjective, but I've seen plenty of good material on his show over the years. Many of the interviews I've seen are civil and spirited at the same time. Not long ago he had Huckabee on there, and Stewart made several good points against him.
You seem overly swayed by the "F bombs" and his reaction to people who say things that are so incredibly offensive that they shouldn't be allowed on the air. Even if you find that distasteful, it doesn't destroy his value altogether. Calm down and try to moderate yourself a bit.
Maybe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLkFC0guAA8&feature=related
I know I worked at Mickey D's in the late '80s, that sure as hell has nothing to do with my life now.
And IIRC, Hannity worked at a college radio station in the '80s, bashing gays. Roberts sure beats that.
He should be working at Faux in that case.
A man who worked at the CIA is allowed to openly wish for an attack on the US so...people will want to be protected by the Government.
Jon Stewart gets bleeped for saying a word on the air, because kids ears and you must be protected from profanity, by the Government(by way of the FCC)
Tell me something Dem- Do you seriously think that a word of profanity is more dangerous than kids and parents hearing this person actively wish for an attack?
Please, don't tell me you think Scheuer is within his rights to say that. Anybody who has reason would(and should) investigate this man for WISHING OSAMA BIN LADEN ATTACK THE US WITH A MAJOR WEAPON!
Anything about that you don't understand? I have an idea-maybe before you comment, demonstrating possibly rocks in the head, YOU actually read and watch the entire interview, and Jon Stewearts specific show,to understand the comparison and hypocrisy bleeping his "profanity" and allowing this Scheur to spew HIS profanity.