Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Wednesday, June 16, 2010 by The Daily Show
Respect My Authoritah
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Respect My Authoritah | ||||
| ||||
© 2010 The Daily Show
Comments are closed
77 Comments so far
Show AllYou know...I love Jon Stewart...but it's just not funny anymore.
But you gotta admit, it's not Jon Stewart's fault.
Think of it this way: if it's not funny any more, then that makes Jon Stewart one of the few real newsmen we have left in the country.
No, it's not Stewart's fault. And I applaud his willingness to take Obama to task. And I wish I felt the "Frodo" connection rang true, the essential goodness eventually winning over the desire to serve evil. But it doesn't. Because I see no essential goodness in Obama anymore.
But I do love Jon, and I'll continue to watch.
I'm just not laughing...as much, anyway.
Having represented himself as a constitutional scholar throughout his academic and political careers, Obama cannot simply claim that the crooked advisers he hired are giving him bad advice. Obama's actions need to be examined under a higher standard of accountability than the actions of Dubya and other presidents who were not constitutional scholars.
"Having represented himself as a constitutional scholar throughout his academic and political careers ..."
To be considered a constitutional scholar, it takes more than being an adjunct non-tenured instructor who taught a couple of freshman con law classes to first year law students. If he cared much about the constitution, he wouldn't be wiping his ass with it like his brother W.
It's kind of like taking a short term contrived resume item to promote yourself as a community organizer while keeping quiet about your corporate law firm job. It sounds good if you say it fast, but like all of his other statements on the road to the white house, it's pure BS.
I am reminded of an article I read by Glenn Greenwald who pointed out that there are TWO kinds of constitutional lawyers/scholars -- 1) those who uphold the Constitution and 2) those who look for loopholes to get around the Constitution.
Respectfully, I disagree. It may not be Stewart's fault that it isn't funny. However, he is still trying to get laughs out of it. As he was doing his little shell game there, I was thinking, wait, those aren't little pebbles, or nuts, they are people, real people, and frequently they are children. It's not funny. I don't feel any relaxation by laughing at the Kafka of it all. I really don't think that people have any historical perspective of habeus corpus, what it really means to the individual, and all the lives that were lost fighting for it and defending it.
Furthermore, the really disappointing thing about Stewart and the other shows like his is that they are distractions. They're worlds better than the alternatives, but do not truly question the status quo. I.e. it would all be just hunky dory if the "terrorists" were given their human rights. There is never any question of why GWOT is a farce, that we should get (our troops) the hell out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea, Japan, Italy, Germany, Cuba, Columbia, and the 100 other countries where the US maintains military bases. These bases represent American weakness, not a projection of strength. China doesn't have to use military force to secure the mineral wealth of Afghanistan, because China has real power. Once we have resorted to force to get our way in the world, we have already lost. Military power is not real strength. This is one of the great, sad myths of America, that force is a solution to problems, that force secures freedom and democracy.
What did it for me, in the case of the Daily Show, was Stewart's interview with Sebastian Junger about his non-fiction bestseller, "War". The take away message from that interview was basically that "our boys" over there just want to kill someone to fend off boredom, and that it's a great buddy-buddy experience. WTH? Where is the critique of this "support our troops" militarism? Hey, it's great if individuals joined the armed services with the purposes of defending our freedoms and supporting our country, but they would be wrong. You will not ever see this opinion on television. Turn off, tune in and drop out. Turn off your TV, tune in to your local community, and drop out of that consumerist, star-focused pseudo culture.
That said, I was glad to see a liberal criticizing Obama. What alternative is there, though? And, through personal experience I must say that one shouldn't look to the Green party. Aside from being a disorganized, underfunded, neurotic wreck, the whole idea of greening capitalism is a sad joke. The elite in this country have some radical changes in mind. We should too.
Great summary, deva0019, however your final paragraph understates reality, to wit:
"The elite in this country have some radical changes IN MIND".
Based on what I have witnessed during the past decade, you need to change IN MIND to IN PROGRESS !
"That said, I was glad to see a liberal criticizing Obama. What alternative is there, though? And, through personal experience I must say that one shouldn't look to the Green party. Aside from being a disorganized, underfunded, neurotic wreck, the whole idea of greening capitalism is a sad joke. The elite in this country have some radical changes in mind. We should too."
Very well said.
I voted for Obama, and defended him. I knew he would disappoint and said as much, though I held out some hope that he would surprise us and come through on at least the major themes of progressive values.
That was my last gasp of hope, or maybe my last view of the illusion that things could change in the U.S. They won't change. As you mentioned above, the elite have some radical changes in mind.
Still...still, this does not call for a capitulation of any sort on our part. Not if we value our children and their future. There are many levels we can work on. If we are not inclined to do things to physically monkeywrench the system, we can perhaps do things in our own back yards (literally and figuratively) that enable us to withhold our support. This is not easy, but what choice to we have? What's coming, is coming, but we can fight it, and should. Preaching to the choir only goes so far, and it's not nearly far enough. Not anymore.
I think Obama is more of a schizo Gollem than a Frodo.
He also has Gollem's ears.
It may not be funny, but thank God for Stewart's popularity. He's able to lay things out nicely for the public, using comedy -- and get away with it. It is heartbreaking, though -- and how could it be otherwise?
Obama should end once and forever the idea of strategic voting for the lesser of two evils. Time to swing to the Green Party, en mass.
I agree Serious Citizen, we have to leave the Democratic party this fall so that people in the party realize how weak a candidate Obama will be by 2012. At the rate he's going he is bound to make more and more enemies in the party. Maybe the Green Party can attract a true progressive with some stature if they see Obama as vulnerable. We should all be watching for possible candidates, but not jumping on anyone who seems good in a few areas. I know many people think Kucinich would be a good candidate but he has made some spectacularly poor decisions in the past. I cannot forget he once said he would consider running on a ticket with Ron Paul. Aka Dr. Evil.
Like the Tea Partiers say, the President is a liar.
If Obamabots were demanding accountability from Obama, they could attach their agenda.
While the teaparty's demands for accountability are laudable, the agenda they attach to those demands is frightening.
What a great job, to be a cynic and get paid to mock the GOD KING!
I noticed that too, I agree with the Tea Party when they say that the president is a liar. As for Obama, Steward asks"Did you think we would forget? well I think Obama's banking on it
I appreciate the underlying principle of raydelcamino's call for a "higher standard", but I think that "higher" and "lower' standards are an error. There is one standard, and in my judgment Obama, judged by that standard, fails -- and not by a narrow margin. He seems to me to become worse as time goes by, and I say that having never felt any enthusiasm for the man.
Having said THAT, I have to add that I've read a lot of blog posts and have yet to read any plan for improvement at the local, state or national level that seems remotely realistic.
And having said THAT, I hasten to add that I do not mean it as a call to support Obama as the least of all evils. I mean it as a statement of fearful anticipation of what lies ahead.
-"And having said THAT, I hasten to add that I do not mean it as a call to support Obama as the least of all evils. I mean it as a statement of fearful anticipation of what lies ahead."
That is pretty much where I am at. This clown turning on Obama for a laugh, this is not a sea change or watershed moment or last straw, this is what always happens as a US president's term grows longer. First they are idolized, because that is what sells, then they are torn down, to make way for the next idol. I don't think we've seen the real seismic shifts come to the surface yet that would indicate that Americans will do anything other than continue to vote R and D. The way to turn things around, apparently, has not crystalized in the awareness of most Americans. Congress will go Republican next time, or it won't. Obama will be re-elected, or he won't be. Either way, it won't affect the general trend towards tyranny, war, a huge wealth gap, environmental devestation.
Your post looks at reality square in the face. If you get rid of O at the next election, you get another repug. We are looking square at one more decade of the same, or possibly worse. That should punish us for voting for the lesser evil. Lets support Nader or for the Greens, until they eventually become a viable party that even the corporate media cannot ignore. Oh, but of course, the corporate media will ignore them. Deliberately. And you will be told not to waste your vote. No hope on the horizon.
The simple and easy way is to remove the legitimacy by not voting.
If you don't like the system, recognize that it offers little for you, don't support it.
If you still vote for it, you support what you say you dislike. This is illogical.
"If you still vote for it, you support what you say you dislike. This is illogical."
It is not illogical to choose between strychnine and a bullet. It is suicidal, but not really illogical...given the choice.
I am at the point of possibly not voting for the first time in my life (I'm 55), but I don't see that as a solution to anything. It will accomplish nothing other than give me a slight edge on the moral scorecard. Not much to brag about.
Whether I vote or not, I realize that that is the very beginning of my responsibilities. I need to follow that up with some kind of action. The acceptance of responsibility and action to back it up is what is lacking in so many people.
"I need to follow that up with some kind of action. The acceptance of responsibility and action to back it up is what is lacking in so many people."
Voting and personal actions are not necessarily related. You can only vote for a politician but there is nothing you can do to follow up on it. Responsibility and action lie in the leaders you hire. An employer hires employees to do certain tasks. After that, the employer can choose to either pressure the employees or fire those who don't do their job. With politicians, you can't do that until they are up for the next election. You cannot follow up on who you voted for. You hired someone to represent you. Your responsibilities and other people's responsibilities at that point have nothing to do with what politicians do. If politicians do bad things, it is imperative that we speak out against them. We may be responsible for who we vote for based on what we know about them but we are not responsible for the actions they choose for or against us once in office.
Mr. President, throw the ring of power into the fires of Mount Doom......along with yourself!
Boy are you people easily managed or what? Here you are so disappointed at Obama's performance that you cannot even laugh at it; his broken promises, his lying ass. Oh poor babies, he dashed your hopes, did he?
What planet where you on when you heard that the choice you had was between Twiddle-de-Di or Twiddle-de-Dum? Did you think that the MIC and MSM would be suspended or that the Wall Street Banksters would be made to stand in the corner and give back their easy pick’ns. I suppose you believed the commercial about BP’s efforts to go green?
How can the Americans that read CD be quite so naïf and innocent that they cannot understand the fundamental structure of their own country’s camouflaged, yet obvious despotic fascism in which they are living? How can they still believe that they have a democracy in any shape or form, after two stolen Bush elections and a put up job of a black Pinocchio with all his strings still attached for variety, or a bunch of congressmen and stators who are run from Tel Aviv or their local arms contractors head office? How can they imagine they have "rule of law" when the authorities can sweep the evidence of something as apparently catalytic as 9/11 under the carpet and suspend physics along with logic as well as eventually suspending Habeas corpus... just to mention a couple of the obvious ones.
The next thing your going to believe is that the financial crisis caught everyone by surprise and that the economic collapse and unemployment, is just one of those things that happens, a kind of cycle thing, and then, when the dollar finally collapses you'll be blaming it on China.
I think the real joke is just that. The real joke is you! Like those air and sand filled punching bags you get on the beach. The Americans keep standing up again and saying the next time it will work. They keep killing millions of people around the world and keep threatening the ones they don't kill either directly or through sponsored thugs and cronies, and then every couple of years go out and pretend the next guy is one of the "good guys" and it will all get better.
You know what they say about people who keep doing the same thing and expect a different result? It will not work until firstly you realise how broken your system is, and that it is broken principally because you spend your entire lives fooling yourselves, admittedly with some help. One day you must face it that it is not them that is lying to you it is you lying to yourself. Then you can take personal responsibility for the mess that you have allowed to be created in your name, get involved and organise yourselves out of the hole you dug. And if you are too busy, because you’re after all working two jobs just trying to stay alive, well then you are just part of the same old problem, and you might as well vote for another term of Obama, or go ahead and get Palin into the hot seat, at least then you'd get a daily laugh!
Best post I've read all day.
"black Pinocchio" -- A puppet who is also a pathological liar -- Perfect!
Presidents will continue to do the same thing and get the same failed results so long as the money men keep funding their political campaigns to encourage them to keep doing that same old thing.
I have advocated not voting as the way to remove the credibility from the current political system.
Once only ten or twenty percent of the people turn out to vote, the political system will have lost its legitimate authority to rule. Once it looses legitimate authority real substantive change can be had.
Once you vote, you support what you say to hate. That is illogical.
I intend not to vote, but not because I think anything will change as a result of it or that enough people will join me to make any difference. I think I would just feel stupid voting. In the first place I am not likely to have a candidate on the ballot. In the second, I resent being treated like a child - like someone who would accept a bogus ballot box suction cupped to a wall down at the community center as the equivalent of self determination. You are absolutely right, DHC. Voting is an agreement to accept and support the winner, and I am unable to agree to that.
If you want your dissent counted, vote third party. No one cares if you don't vote. About 50 percent of eligible U.S. voters already don't vote and there is no questioning of the "legitimacy" of electoral results.
-TIA
TOUCHE', from HELL, Lucitanian. I did actually vote for Nader, though even THAT had me feeling sold, somehow. The buck, such as it is (snicker), does indeed stop with us. It always has and it always will.
I stopped watching Jon Stewart after the election because his show was just a Democratic love fest. It's great to see someone as influential as Stewart turn on Obie.
Only problem is unlike a parliamentary system we can't just hold a vote of confidence and ditch him and his government. Actually we can't do anything except vote for another asshole in a few years.
Time for a real change, now: http://TakingCongress.net
Kyle:
When you say that "we" can "hold a vote of confidence and ditch him", you do realize that the "we" you're referring to are the members of parliament, the so-called representatives of the people, and not the people themselves right? In the case of a majority party control of government, that would mean the leaders' own party voting against him as well as most (if not all) of the non-ruling party members.
Also, it's not just an ad hoc confidence vote that can be called by anyone at any time. It's a vote on a specific bill initiated by the ruling party.
The point I'm trying to make is that a parliamentary government wouldn't allow "us" to simply get rid of Obama and call a new election.
Adhoc, the actual method varies from gov to gov, but the other major difference between "our" government and parliamentary systems is way more than two parties. This forces the "ruling party" to form a coalition, which is what breaks up when the people get really pissed, forcing the vote of confidence. But this also varies from gov to gov.
But anyway I'm not advocating a parliamentary system for the simple reason that other than an insurrection nothing is going to force congress to call a constitutional convention. What I am advocating is replacing congress with a direct vote - us. Check out TakingCongress.net to see how to get there.
Only a revolution will have any chance of making changes you propose. This government of the people, by the people, and for the people in terminal and doomed.
- or, according to Zinn, it never was.
Now if Stewart could just bring himself to be more critical of Israel's illegal board of ships and murdering its occupants in international waters, I might start watching him again.
While Stewart may not go as far as many of us would like in criticizing Israel, he at least brings more to the subject than any of the corporate news organs. He also holds rabid zionist mouthpieces like Krauthammer and Schumer up for ridicule.
q
He certainly does better the Bill Maher who did everything but grovel at Israel's bloody feet this past Friday. Oliver Stone tried to set him straight, to no avail. Even the three other guests, including Maddow, looked rather surprised by Bill's "poor, defenseless Israel" rant.
I am very grateful for Stewart. Someone on HuffPo complained about the Obama transgressions Stewart left out. Others quickly pointed out the show is only do long. I'm sure this won't be the last time either.
Maher shocked me with his defense of Israel's piracy and murder. Usually he's right on, but that was pathetic.
Most of the damn Democratic Party has defended the actions of Israel.
Did anyone happen to see Biden groveling for Israel on Charlie Rose last week?
What a pathetic ass!
Chelsea
Thank you, Jon Stewart, for an excellent and easy to share encapsulation of Obama's betrayals. How much more will it take for the thinning ranks of his apologists to finally face reality? Is it not time for an "anyone but Obama" movement to start taking shape?
The BBC World News is showing on the ground coverage of oil spills and ecologic devastation in the Niger Delta left by Shell. They could have a substanial program on this subject in many parts of the world. When it comes to ecologic genocide the US would have to look around for the high ground for casting stones. Then there is genetically modified food prostituition all over the map. Then with closer self examination the leaked military video where US military are bold faced murdering unarmed Iraqi civilians and shooting children with zeal. Karma works in mysterious ways. Exposing the truth in a way is a tuff job and someone has to do it, I'm rather thankfull for Jon Stewart.
Good. I haven't been up late enough to watch BBC World News, but it's always a pleasure when I do -- the coverage seems a lot more, shall we say, balanced and professional. After reading the story on the Niger Delta on this site it's great that it is finally getting exposure.
Interesting posts on this thread. Apparently, when Stewart was mocking W, it was funny as all get out. Now that Stewart is being bipartisan and mocking the Black Pinocchio, all of a sudden it's not funny any more. It seems that there isn't really much difference between the Bushies and the Obamabots. Neither can stand it when their boy is criticized.
I was pro-Obama.
I am totally disappointed in him, now.
Not all of us are "Obamabots," just like not all of us are "Bushies," either.
Some of us actually think with our brains.
And we don't have to resort to racist-sounding insults ("Black Pinocchio") either.
I can just flat out say that I am 100% disappointed in him, and feel that he has totally betrayed us, and sold us out.
rm8471
Your first sentence,
"I was pro-Obama"
is in total contradiction to your second next sentence:
"Some of us actually think with our brains", unless that "some of us" refers to people other than you.
The signs were all there, in plain sight, you were warned and you insisted in relying on "hope" instead of principle, and voted to continue the "two"-party deadlock. Should people who do think thank you guys for bringing us four more years of this s***? Just also think that you brought us two warmongering corporate henchmen AND a continuing dynasty (Clinton this time) for the price of one.
"I can just flat out say that I am 100% disappointed in him..."
You refused to listen, you brought that catastrophe on smarter people who knew, and you are "disappointed"? Boo f****** hoo! Be your age and accept your own responsibility!
I personally did not get to vote, but DID support the man that was going to talk to Iran, that would abolish extraordinary rendition, that would close Guantanmo, that would make sure everyone was going to get a fair trial. My disillusionment came with the AIPAC stooges and warmongers that he appointed shortly after taking charge.
OK, so we believed the lies. We wrongly trusted someone who did the exact opposite of what he said he would do. We were fooled. We were duped. We were had. There is no point whatsoever in rubbing in the "I told you so".
braithwa842:
"OK, so we believed the lies. We wrongly trusted someone who did the exact opposite of what he said he would do. We were fooled. We were duped. We were had. There is no point whatsoever in rubbing in the "I told you so"."
Yes there is, and how!
It's not about one instance of "I told you so", though.
If 10-15 presidential elections (I am losing count) couldn't show you that it is absolutely criminal to vote for one of the two-but-really-one big "parties", that voting for the "lesser evil" can only maximize evil, then there is no hope for anyone.
On what basis did you believe that the man "was going to talk to Iran, ...would abolish extraordinary rendition, ...would close Guantanmo, ...would make sure everyone was going to get a fair trial..."? His own words only.But you also knew that he was the fully paid-for gopher of the big corporations and was licking AIPAC ass, as the winning one of the two clowns presented by the so-called Democratic Party! You were not "fooled.. duped... had", but you just hoped.
There were candidates without this kind of ties to corporate or Zionist dictatorship, earnest about reining in or even stopping imperialism. Their having a small following is not an excuse.