Foisted!

Hopefully the Cheney history remembers will be the one in "Hubris" and "Vice" rather than this propaganda effort. It's nice to see them getting called out again on knowingly leading the country into this "meshugas" we call Iraq.

Stephen Hayes (heart) Dick.

Another closeted repig?

I saw this last night, and was one of the few times I was CHEERING my TeeVee, and not yelling at it.

Bravo, Mr. Stewart!

ysbaddaden @ 6:

Fluffer-Nutter?

Felater-nutter

More propaganda from the worst administration in the history of the US. The cheney apologist sure had his work cut out for him - making shit look like an ice-cream sundae - and only made himself look like the dick-sucking idiot he is.

The old line of "everything changed after 9-11" does not excuse blood lust, especially when plans were in the works to take out Sadaam before bush was even chosen by the SCOTUS.

john nichols cheney bio is better

peter dale scott's account of the cheney/rummy authoring Continuity of Govt/FEMA plans still better

neither apparently allowed on the teevee

i wish the idiot from Fox would come on the show...

A crook is a crook, you've got to admit a dam good one. Then you have the peddlers, liars, cheats, and fakes who want to eat crumbs (a little book deal, it's ok he's got a family too) http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=220
http://www.YouPolls.com/

.
.
.
That. Was. Beautiful!

And that is what American journalism SHOULD be like.
.
.
.

That shows some class not going after either John Gibson or Stephen Hayes. He didn't let either man get the best of him by showing anger. I think his one line about John Gibson got his point across more effectively then doing an entire segment on it. If someone made fun of my grief on 9/11 I wouldn't have been a class act like John Stewart. Way to go John Stewart!

I was hoping he would say something about Gibson. And I think it was just perfect: Not naming him (only "some idiot") while making perfectly clear that he was upset and unnerved but didn't want to reward it with some further discussion.

"Some idiot" Gibson. I think that was totally apropriate.

Stewart: I can’t jive with the portrait you paint. . .

That should be jibe, not jive. Stewart says it correctly, but the transcription errs.

NewNameAcquired @ 22:

I never understand why people like Stephen Hays think they can trick us with not only books like these... but think they can trick us by what they say on the talk-shows. How can he go out there, knowing that the truth lays on the side with Jon Stewart?

The only rationale I can think of... is that Hayes and the rest of them are psychotic. And I mean that literally. Maybe there is a more accurate term, as I'm not versed in psychological, and scientific, etc terminology. But I have a feeling that the only reason a person would be willing to go on national television to try and defend a lie, which can clearly be debunked, thus making themselves look like an idiot... because they literally have something wrong in their heads.

Or maybe he just unbelievable stupid. But, writing books like this shows this was all premeditated, and it takes SOME kind of brain to put a book together. So I think stupidity is out.

Or maybe.... it is just that he doesn't care what people think. He just goes out there, looks like a fool, and then collects his check from the evil men in the White House. I just don't get why the White House or whomever it is telling him to go out there and lie, how that person could have faith that the messenger they are sending out can actually trick us.

That makes me wonder about this mysterious person behind the curtain. Who thinks they can send someone out there to fool us? Again, the truth is against them, so why do they think that ANYONE can go out there and spin things?

I do not get these people.

Publishers set up these book tours. He goes on the show, gets his butt handed to him, fellow conservative sycophants say "Awwww, that nasty librul beat up our boy" and go buy more books. It's just the way things are done in their world.

That was very powerful. JS was graceful yet forceful (without being a bully). Definitely struck a chord with the audience!

Now, if only a few more politicians could say what Jon is saying, we'd have something.

As I watched that, echoes of the sentence, "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists" kept playing in my head. Seems that's pretty damned close to calling anyone who wasn't with them a traitor.

Simon White-Thatch Potentloins @ 29:

That was very powerful. JS was graceful yet forceful (without being a bully). Definitely struck a chord with the audience!

Now, if only a few more politicians could say what Jon is saying, we'd have something.

Not only politicans, but how about the MSM "doing it's job" ; but as we know,
there are not many journalist out there who can do so because the MSM is
owned/controlled by BIG business and the Corporations.

acquiescence=acceptance or agreement without protest

I love it when Hayes tries to say he doesn't think anyone was questioning people's patriotism, and Jon just smiles while the whole audience calls bullshit.

StirFry @ 38:

Hayes couldn't answer a couple of the questions - either he couldn't or wouldn't.

frenchfries @ 23:

I was hoping he would say something about Gibson. And I think it was just perfect: Not naming him (only "some idiot") while making perfectly clear that he was upset and unnerved but didn't want to reward it with some further discussion.

"Some idiot" Gibson. I think that was totally apropriate.

I was kind of hoping to hear his name actually. Its time to start playing hard with Fox, and start singling out these bitches.

As someone pointed out in a C&L thead yesterday, Jon Stewart and Gibson worked
together in the past and Stewart not "calling him out by name" shows the class and
type of person Stewart is.

I'l never buy this book and will pledge to flip it over if I come across it in a bookstore. Hayes had no intention of writing a biography, it's apparent in this interview, he was paid to defend a monster and that's what he'll be known as forever more - Cheney's autobiographer. What a stupid career move. I doubt he was allowed to write anything without Cheney's final approval, and he looks like the right wimp for the job.

"I do not get these people"

me neither. Karl really believed the 06 election was in the bag. We are being told to trust the occupation/surge for 6 months over and over again. And the amount of cockiness on the part of neo cons is outrageous. What ever it could be i don't feel we have time to wai t for the other shoe to drop. Will no one apprehend the culprits? Somewhere there are perps that are out to destroy every freedom for everybody. Is somebody holding out for a mega giant coup that could incapacitate the entire continent?
I try not to let fear rule me. It's getting harder and harder.

With this interview, Jon more than made up for his far-too-chummy talk with Bill Kristol a couple days ago. I think the "idiot" John Gibson really shook him up and he's even more ready to fight now. Go Jon!

I'm surprised that these guys still go on television. Well, I guess he might sell a few more books to the knuckel-draggers.

Just Me @ 46:

Cheney pronounces his name "chee-nee", not "chain-ee".

He gets a kick out of others bungling his name. I would bet that this is his way of distancing himself from his revolting actions, thus, making him feel better about himself ("that's somebody else they're talking about").

I would say it's a good thing to start addressing him "chee-nee". A little psychological war with the bastard might be the only way to agitate him.

Funny, I thought his last name was pronounced "hed", as in Dick Head.

PNAAC Minister @ 50:

►Runs-With-Dog◄ @ 30:

For anyone who didn't get to see the 1994 video of Cheney, here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnV4tMvI0ME

TDS and everyone else needs to keep showing this clip as often as possible. It might also be considered evidence in Darth''s impeachment.

That is kind of what the written commentary near the end says.

New Name @ 22--Certainly it seems these people must at least be schizoid. Who u gonna believe, Stephen Hayes or your lying eyes/ears?

The reception JS's audience gave vs. the reception he likely gets from NeoCon audiences are as different as night and day. And seeing how totally differently the two camps view him is enough to make ME crazy (but then, I don't claim to be normal).

I dunno. Does Hayes do it for the money/glory?

#48-Citizen J

My comments at post #20 echo what you have written.

StirFry @ 52:

Doggiebobo @ 39:

As someone pointed out in a C&L thead yesterday, Jon Stewart and Gibson worked
together in the past and Stewart not "calling him out by name" shows the class and
type of person Stewart is.

I suppose you are right. I'm just still fekking pissed at Gibby for that ignorant stunt.

Me too, but Gibbon in not the only monkey on Faux Noise...they all belong in cages
in a Zoo.

L.A. Confidential @ 44:

Why is Jon's show used as a pr platform for people selling books?

I doubt if one person who watched this would buy his book based on this interview. Someone has to do it to expose these frauds.
Some have criticized Jon for not correcting him on several points. I thinks it brilliant that Jon doesn't swallow that bait. To catch a rat, first you have to corner it than parallel with it while moving forward. Where most TV journalist (that's a joke) do is corner them and if they make slightest they move counter and thus the rat scurries away. Jon keep following up on the same question, without being hostel and eventually got him. Brilliant.
Most TV journalist believe they have to get in many questions into an allotted time and miss many opportunities to set the record straight and hold these people accountable for their words and actions. I very sad that Jon is one of the few understands this.
I hope Oberman will soon drop going to the same 5 or 6 guys for comments and start going right after these propagandist on a one to one basis,

This is the best video clip I've seen of Jon Stewart, the first time I've seen him demolish an argument by logic.

Tim @ 54:

Again ... I know its been said in previous comments ... but why does it take a comedian on basic cable to ask these obvious questions that Americans want answered? The MSM is so busy tossing Rove's salad as he leaves DC and they still haven't taken on Cheney? They leave that to Stewart (and Moore, Miller and Rhodes)? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

You probably already know the answer to this:

Clinton left us a legacy of media conglomerates gobbling up all the independents. Today, over 90% of "mainstream media" is now owned by a handful of huge companies, some of which profit from war.

As discussed in a previous thread, "mainstream media" is hardly mainstream. It's corporate media, and those corporations are 100% republican.

If you work for one of them and you want to keep your job, you become part of the corporate problem, and you don't report "mainstream" news.

It really is that simple.

Ruthless People @ 58:

Several points I'd like to make:

1 - This country is not polarized by accident. It's the Bush/Rove/Cheney/GOP political strategy of polarization, together with the GOP/Bush gross incompetence that those of us on the left can see and those on the right can't or refuse to see, that has so polarized this nation.

2 - 1994 Cheney wasn't in a position of starting a war in Iraq and getting no bid government contracts steered to Halliburton like 2003 Cheney was.

3 - Propagandist for Profit like Hayes should be deported.

One more point:

4 - That video of 1994 Cheney should be used in an international court of law to help convict Cheney of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Send him to The Hague to face the music.

The more you learn about the Bush regime the more you come to understand their opposition to an international criminal court isn't to protect rank and file Americans but rather to protect themselves from their heinous crimes. Their lying warmongering asses would be the first ones hauled before the court. There is very little difference between Saddam and Dick Cheney....except maybe that Cheney has caused the deaths and suffering of more innocent people than Saddam at this point.

Owned

blackspeak,DC,USA @ 62:

I'M GOING OUT NOW AND BUY THIS BOOK!!!...YESSIREE!!!... I'll use the pages to change the paper is my bird's cage...

why would spend that much money to get paper to line your bird's cage. better ways to spend your cash

Putting this in some perspective, Hayes book has been out about two weeks and it's currently ranked #427 on Amazon.com. In other words, no one but a few Freepers are buying.

Just Me @ 46:

Cheney pronounces his name "chee-nee", not "chain-ee".

But of course. It sounds more like "cheat" that way and is therefore more fitting to his nature. Dick Cheat-nee. Absolutely.

Stewart is truly amazing (especially considered side-by-side with the irresponsible hacks other networks hire to interview people). He invites a man on his show, gives him the opportunity to speak ( a little less than he should have, perhaps), maintains his cool and his logic, is funny, and apologizes for any transgression of politeness he may have made--all of this when you know he finds the person on the other side of the table reprehensible. No 'Cut his mic', no personal attack: a model of giving the benefit of the doubt when none is deserved. He is a national treasure, and in spite of the surely cynical reasons the corporate network keeps him on the air (he turns a profit), there is a bright spot in broadcast journalism. We're lucky to have Jon Stewart.

Just Me @ 63:

Tim @ 54:

Again ... I know its been said in previous comments ... but why does it take a comedian on basic cable to ask these obvious questions that Americans want answered? The MSM is so busy tossing Rove's salad as he leaves DC and they still haven't taken on Cheney? They leave that to Stewart (and Moore, Miller and Rhodes)? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

You probably already know the answer to this:

Clinton left us a legacy of media conglomerates gobbling up all the independents. Today, over 90% of "mainstream media" is now owned by a handful of huge companies, some of which profit from war.

As discussed in a previous thread, "mainstream media" is hardly mainstream. It's corporate media, and those corporations are 100% republican.

If you work for one of them and you want to keep your job, you become part of the corporate problem, and you don't report "mainstream" news.

It really is that simple.

So what is your point "Just Me Says"? Is all of the cheney/bush clusterf**k in Iraq, Afghanistan, the US and the rest of the world Clinton's fault? Go flog your trash elsewhere, asshole.

John is awesome. He conveyed the frustration felt by most of us perfectly, better than anyone else has. It's funny how simple it is actually.

Don't lie to us, Dick.

Unfortunately, we all saw Dick lie, and now we're in the mess we're in. What an avoidable mess.

Jon Stewart is cementing himself as one of the most hard-nosed interviewers in history. He's no Mike Wallace, but Jon is every bit as tenacious at asking the questions that people want asked. All other interviews that Hayes will give while promoting his book won't even touch this.

Chris @ 21:

That shows some class not going after either John Gibson or Stephen Hayes. He didn't let either man get the best of him by showing anger. I think his one line about John Gibson got his point across more effectively then doing an entire segment on it. If someone made fun of my grief on 9/11 I wouldn't have been a class act like John Stewart. Way to go John Stewart!

I agree. I think he recognizes that some of these nimrods like Gibson are saying wacked out things just to get people to talk about him. Best way to do that is to be the biggest jackass you can be. For Gibson, it was making fun of someone pained after 9-11.

The funniest thing, however: You calling him "John" Stewart! Didn't he make fun of himself because he doesn't have an H in his name?

Ex-Canuck @ 77:

Just Me @ 63:

Tim @ 54:

Again ... I know its been said in previous comments ... but why does it take a comedian on basic cable to ask these obvious questions that Americans want answered? The MSM is so busy tossing Rove's salad as he leaves DC and they still haven't taken on Cheney? They leave that to Stewart (and Moore, Miller and Rhodes)? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

You probably already know the answer to this:

Clinton left us a legacy of media conglomerates gobbling up all the independents. Today, over 90% of "mainstream media" is now owned by a handful of huge companies, some of which profit from war.

As discussed in a previous thread, "mainstream media" is hardly mainstream. It's corporate media, and those corporations are 100% republican.

If you work for one of them and you want to keep your job, you become part of the corporate problem, and you don't report "mainstream" news.

It really is that simple.

So what is your point "Just Me Says"? Is all of the cheney/bush clusterf**k in Iraq, Afghanistan, the US and the rest of the world Clinton's fault? Go flog your trash elsewhere, asshole.

Wow, that was quite a vulgar trashing you delivered to me.

Learn your history, smartass. Bill Clinton, although one of my favorite presidents, was responsible for the current media conglomerationss. And I said nothing of Iraq; you did.

It is a shame that moderators here can't edit or delete posts like yours. You are clueless, rude, and you appear to be a very bitter person.

The Main Stream Media is completely cowed by the Administration.

The Major Networks and The New York Times have been accused (for the last 25 years)
by conservative groups of being biased (as biased as Fox"News" is), the result being, that
they back down at every opportunity to provide real analysis of the deceptions of this
Administration.

Jon Stewart has to make the MSM and Networks blush and ashamed.

Blue Buddha @ 16:

Ex-Canuck @ 11:

The old line of "everything changed after 9-11" does not excuse blood lust, especially when plans were in the works to take out Sadaam before bush was even chosen by the SCOTUS.

I liked how Stewart countered "everything changed after 9-11" with "but there wasn't a rift in the space-time continuum." :lol:

absolutely - 9/11 didn't change physics or sunni shia relations or the fact that attacked people fight back
"9/11 changed everything" what a jackass

Saying "9-11 changed everything" is an outright admission of rank cowardice. Even if you accept the dubious assertion that our civil liberties and adherence to the law somehow made us less secure-- even if you accept this ridiculous claim-- saying "9-11 changed everything" still amounts to nothing but cowardice.

Only a coward abandons their stated principles the moment they become inconvenient or-- *gasp*-- dangerous. Only the truly yellow could send someone else to fight and die in a foreign country to "defend freedom" while willingly surrendering it themselves, just because they feel a little scared sitting at home.

It's repulsive.

Ruthless People @ 58:

2 - 1994 Cheney wasn't in a position of starting a war in Iraq and getting no bid government contracts steered to Halliburton like 2003 Cheney was.

This point should have been brought up during the interview AND when they showed that clip.

This point should have been brought up when the very first no-bid contract was awarded to Haliburton/KBR/etc. The repug's would have had a field day if "Clinton did it!"

How's this for a bumper sticker: There's a reason Cheney doesn't call himself RICHARD !

Hayes can sell plenty of books to the 29%. I think this whole administration is in the "steal everything on the way out of the hotel room" mode.

Jon was right on!

Jon Stewart panders too much to the right wing. He is feel good for progressives.

Also he likes to portray progressives as victims saying, "Why does the Bush Administration make us feel stupid for saying Iraq is a mess".

Thanks Jon, now I have a headache too........

@7 percent of America should run out and buy that book before the GOP buys every last one to promote their partry's image in the book market place of popularity.

Like the do with Ann Coulter's books. You think hannity will buy "Cheney " the book?

Jon Stuart is perhaps one of the nicest people on the planet. He was gracious and still challenged this Bushco synchophant. Would that we all could be so smart and pure. It's the example we need. All of us who feel nothing but disdain for this regime should take notice. We can counter their hate with brains and kindness.

kerplunk @ 101:

Also he likes to portray progressives as victims saying, "Why does the Bush Administration make us feel stupid for saying Iraq is a mess".

I would call that a radically incorrect interpretation of the text. What he's saying is, "Why does the Bush Administration and its sycophants persistently label critics as cowards and traitors." It's a different question, but he knows how to ask it with civility.

Just Me @ 85:

Ex-Canuck @ 77:

Just Me @ 63:

Tim @ 54:

You probably already know the answer to this:

Clinton left us a legacy of media conglomerates gobbling up all the independents. Today, over 90% of "mainstream media" is now owned by a handful of huge companies, some of which profit from war.

As discussed in a previous thread, "mainstream media" is hardly mainstream. It's corporate media, and those corporations are 100% republican.

If you work for one of them and you want to keep your job, you become part of the corporate problem, and you don't report "mainstream" news.

It really is that simple.

So what is your point "Just Me Says"? Is all of the cheney/bush clusterf**k in Iraq, Afghanistan, the US and the rest of the world Clinton's fault? Go flog your trash elsewhere, asshole.

Wow, that was quite a vulgar trashing you delivered to me.

Learn your history, smartass. Bill Clinton, although one of my favorite presidents, was responsible for the current media conglomerationss. And I said nothing of Iraq; you did.

It is a shame that moderators here can't edit or delete posts like yours. You are clueless, rude, and you appear to be a very bitter person.

Not recognizing where problems originate is the hallmark of the bottom 29%. The FACT is that Clinton himself will tell you that was the biggest mistake he made while in office so there is nothing wrong with pointing this out in the context of this thread.

To the commenter that suggested that this was the first time Stewart has skewered someone on his show I suggest you watch more regularly. It happens quite often.

to whoever made the comment about him being psychotic, i think the word you're looking for is sociopath. someone who will lie, cheat, steal, hurt as many people as it takes to get whatever they want with no guilt whatsoever.

Just Me @ 63:

Tim @ 54:

Again ... I know its been said in previous comments ... but why does it take a comedian on basic cable to ask these obvious questions that Americans want answered? The MSM is so busy tossing Rove's salad as he leaves DC and they still haven't taken on Cheney? They leave that to Stewart (and Moore, Miller and Rhodes)? What the hell is wrong with this picture?

You probably already know the answer to this:

Clinton left us a legacy of media conglomerates gobbling up all the independents. Today, over 90% of "mainstream media" is now owned by a handful of huge companies, some of which profit from war.

As discussed in a previous thread, "mainstream media" is hardly mainstream. It's corporate media, and those corporations are 100% republican.

If you work for one of them and you want to keep your job, you become part of the corporate problem, and you don't report "mainstream" news.

It really is that simple.

i.e. It's Clinton's fault.

How come no one blame's Clinton's congress for the bad things, but will gladly and freely give the congress credit for the good things?

jr @ 12:

Only in America would a comedian have to do the work that journalists won't do for fear of not getting invited to any more beltway dinner parties

I know our media is a joke, but "only in america" comments are pretty stupid. I'd say our level of journalistic freedom is still above the 80th percentile. But yes it sucks.

At 16% approval rating it is safe to say that fluff biographies for the pacemaker are a niche market.

#95-Tomi

I would like to suggest that you are going to win very few arguments when you engage in irrational ad hominem attacks. Apparently your main argument, such as it is, is that no criticism of Jon Stewart can ever be allowed to happen because Stewart is revered as a liberal icon. You ask "How can Stewart possibly be expected to point out all the problems with Iraq"? As I attempted to explain at post #20, apparently to no avail, all I wished Stewart to tell Hayes was that the invasion of Iraq was based upon lies and falsehoods, therefore making the occupation illegal and proving that there is no justifiable reason for the United States to continue occupying and brutalizing and terrorizing the Iraqi people. You seem to believe that this would have somehow taken the whole interview for Stewart to state what I had written when in actuality it probably would have taken, considering how fast Stewart speaks, about twenty seconds to make those assertions. Contrary to what you believe, saying this would have made Stewart sound knowledgeable and intelligent.

You claim that the interview was not about the Iraq war. To refresh your recollection of the interview [which, despite your claim of being one minute, lasted about six or seven minutes] Hayes, to borrow a legal expression, opened the door when he claimed that Iraq actually possessed those mythical WMD and was one of the reasons why the U.S. [illegally] attacked Iraq [along with, later on, claiming that they went in to topple Saddam Hussein and to impose democracy upon the Iraqis at the point of a gun]. That is when Stewart could have succinctly informed Hayes and his audience that the invasion, and ipso facto, the occupation, was and still is illegal. I believe, despite your assertion, that the people of this country need to be reminded that this occupation of Iraq has been illegal, violating the UN Charter, the Geneva convention, the U.S. Constitution, the Nuremberg Principle, all of which state that wars of aggression are illegal under international treaties. Since most Americans receive their news from television and the mainstream media, it is highly doubtful if they have seen fit to inform America's citizens that their government has lied to them, which is why it would certainly not hurt for Jon Stewart to reiterate that information to his audience.

Between Gibby's remarks about Edwards and about Stewart, one can assume by his position at Fox "News" that John Gibson knows a thing or two about being a whoring phony.

jr @ 12:

Only in America would a comedian have to do the work that journalists won't do for fear of not getting invited to any more beltway dinner parties

Touche', touche', touche'

This is not important but it makes me crazy ..its jibe not jive. John Stewart actually gets it right and says "jibe" ..you transcribe it as jive..its often is misspoke as this.

[...] Jon Stewart Grills Cheney Biographer Stephen Hayes. this guy looked like a fool. [...]

Bush, Dick and John Gibson are pussies.

You felt the conviction in Jon's voice when he was talking. Stewart is a true patriot.

I cannot imagine anyone actually writing a book about Dick Cheney. Who in the world would by it, except for Dick Cheney?

Jon just gets better and better at interviewing people like this neanderthal Hayes. Jon can cut the idiots off at the knees and they enjoy it because he does it with such aplomb....all the while smiling and making the fools think they are his BFF.

Go Jon...

I just started watching the Daily show and love it. But in this short time I can't recall a JS interview quite as intense as this one was towards the end. Jon was like right up in his face (or as close as you could get with a table between them_ and Hayes just sat back and didn't know what hit him.

It was great.

I think Jon had him in his sights the moment Hayes proclaimed that Cheney was the best VP ever. It's obvious this guy was more then a biographer. He's a Dick Cheney groupie.

I am a bit dissapointed he didn't go after Kristol the same way. Or at least take him to task a bit more. They acted like my daughter would call "frenemies"

DNS @ 136:

Why is it that the only place you can hear such serious nail-them-to-the-wall interviewing is on COMEDY Central?

BECAUSE the MSM is completely cowed by this Administration.

Also, I'm sick and tired of journalists, pundits, commentators, biographers, scholars, et al. responding to penetrating criticism of their argument by saying things like, "Yes, an argument could be made...", or "Sure, there's an argument to be made..." If the person criticizing you is making a valid argument, then admit it! If it's a valid argument, you should agree with it! And if you're smart and informed you should have known about this argument in advance. In which case, why did you take the position you took in your sycophantic power-loving piece of shit? If you think it's not a valid argument, refute it! But if you take a position and someone like Stewart shows you that it's completely wrong, it's pathetic to adopt a pseudo-Olympian perspective and withdraw into graduate-seminar thought-experiment formulations. We are not speculating on abstract theories of ontology here; this is the real world. You have no right to take a position on something serious when you already know that the counter argument is both valid and devastating. The next time someone like Hayes acknowledges a critic's argument by saying "Yes, an argument could be made that...", I'm going to reach for my gun.

I love Jon Stewart. I find it sad that I have to go to Comedy Central to get objective interviews that aren't controlled by the White House or sensationalized.

Jon/Colber '08!

Obligatory: Daily Showned

Is there anybody better than Stewart at getting past his own anger and frustration to make very clear and concise points in this sort of political repartee? Brilliant Jon. Brialliant.

On the one hand, I enjoyed watching Mr. Stewart make some very reasonable points.

On the other hand, it made me a little ill to see him bashing this poor, mercenary sycophant again and again with his cruel logic.

Well, just a little ill.

John Stewart is not a real person, he is just another aol time warner gumball machine. Did anyone notice how fast they replaced Dave Chapelle with the mexican guy? I think they even use some of the same comedy from the chapellle show.

John Stewart has no business representing the Democratic party.