Why Jon Stewart isn't funny

boston globe (via townhall.com) ^ | March 3, 2006 | Michael Kalin

[flixxx]

Why Jon Stewart isn't funny By Michael Kalin | March 3, 2006

THE SELECTION of Jon Stewart as the host for Sunday night's 2006 Oscars undoubtedly marks a career milestone for the aspiring king of late-night comedy. Unfortunately, however, the ascension of Stewart and ''The Daily Show" into the public eye is no laughing matter. Stewart's ever-increasing popularity among young viewers directly correlates with the declining influence of progressive thought in America. Coincidence? I think not. Let me explain.

[flixxx]

I found this linked from townhall.com

Absolutely priceless...If I understand the argument correctly...the Left does not like Jon Stewart because he makes light of their issues and is causing young people to become disillusioned...

Actually, I think he can be pretty funny sometimes (though I have never watched his show from start to finish).

[Hildy]

This is too funny. Now the left is BLAMING the liberal media for its woes. Unfreakingbelievable!!!

[peyton randolph]

Stewart is (a) liberal and (b) funny.

[cmsgop]

The Left Adores Jon Stewart and Keith Olberman. Those are real News Shows to the Left.

[1rudeboy]

I agree. I think he's funny.

[SandRat]

The key to the wailing, gnashing of teeth, renting of clothes, wearing sackcloth n ashes by the Boston Globe (really the NYT) lies in this phrase ..declining influence of progressive thought....

The Entire piece can be summed up below:

[voletti]

So its not 'blame Bush' but 'blame Stewart' now, eh?

Interesting.

Decent, healthy debate and dissent is the first sign of a living, thinking political organism. Am yet waiting for signs of the same from the Dem party.

[keithtoo]

The writer of this article is a prototypical humorless Lib.

Stewart is funny, and he is smart, but he is also very shallow.

[Freee-dame]

progressive thought

I wonder if they will mention that today is the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Stalin.

[weegee]

The left likes Jon Stewart. In 2004 they tried to groom him as the voice of his generation and "anchor material". Certainly there are moments of levity in morning news broadcasts. And many Americans get their "news" from night show monologues.

Infuse Stewart with just a touch more "credibility" (he had a book, the cover of Rolling Stone and maybe some other magazines, and an interview with John F. Kerry all about a month out from the 2004 election).

And I doubt anyone majoring in Political Science isn't going to read printed publications (however much completelyu fabricated propaganda the Nation, USA Today, LA Times, Washington Post, New York Time, AP, CBS, NBC, Daily Mirror, BBC, Boston Globe, etc. are exposed to be).

Meet Joshua Goldberg, a fictional composite of the typical apostle of ''The Daily Show." Born in Newton, Goldberg attended Newton South High School where he played an integral role in securing the school's debate championship. His 3.8 grade point average and impressive array of extracurricular activities earned him a scholarship to Vassar, where he majored in political science and joined a Jewish fraternity. Throughout his formal education, Goldberg stayed up-to-date on national politics through nightly coverage on ''The Daily Show" and even led a petition to protest the genocide in Darfur

Sounds like more of Goebbel's Big Lie technique where the left insists that people go liberal because they are just plain smarter. I knew my share of hard left poli-sci and journalist majors in college. They seems quite dumb to me. Then again I was majoring in engineering.

[stm]

Stewart has his moments but they are coming with declining frequency. And his bleeding heart liberal viewpoints only serve to dampen his humor in my opinion. Compare and contrast him with someone like Robin Williams. Robin is liberal in a lot of his thinking but he is absolutely hilarious in his jabs at politics and politicians. I will even laugh at his jabs of the right; often times he is right on.

[Dr. Frank fan]

The real problem is that the article is unbelievably asinine and content-free: the author simply made up who he imagines to be a stereotypical TDS viewer in order to "prove" his preconceived point. Why doesn't he do his masturbation in private?

I do agree with the premise that Jon Stewart isn't funny, however, though probably not for the same reasons. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person who remembers that prior to The Daily Show, Stewart was given not one, but two failed TV talk shows, and before that, was just a mediocre standup comedian who wouldn't have stood out at all. The guy's been given so many opportunities in showbiz it makes you wonder if he's connected or something and a horse's head was placed in someone's bed.

[weegee]

This article (especially the talk of "ivory towers") made me recall Walter Cronkite. A man who was labeled "the most trusted man in America".

ALL journalists should be trustworthy. They are there to report the news as objective truth. NOTHING could be further from a description of what Cronkite did. He abused the power of his "office" yet was never elected. THIS is what sours the public on the (dumb)mass media.

SeeBS-MTV-Viacommie lying to teens daily that Bush was gearing up a draft (when it was Democrats who sponsored both pieces of legislation). I know for a fact that at least one young voter turned off to BOTH candidates because she had heard enough "bad stuff" about Bush even if it was later proven to be DNC lies. She couldn't support the DNC for lying but still "didn't feel right" voting Republican.

The media is in the service of the DNC. The anal exams that prospective candidates are given is what keeps them from seeking office. Yet this intensive screening is largely reserved for candidates of the conservative agenda. There are Democrats who are rebuked for stepping out of line or for crowding out the "real" candidate.

The media loves playing kingmaker. And they answer to no one. When they are caught in a lie, they swirl the pot so that people don't realize the con that has been played.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>Why Jon Stewart isn't funny

That's easy. He doesn't make me laugh. Stewart does make me smile and shake my head, only because he's such a putz.

[Williams]

Thank you. I've watched this show a few times, and I swear I am a person who can enjoy a liberal movie or a liberal joke if it's a good one. I think Stewart is weak. But to a 20 something, maybe even a thirty something, every lame joke or rehashed sitcom on tv may sound original. I think his show is silly at best.

[TSchmereL]

"Jon Stewart Not Funny to Liberals Who Are Serious About Political Power" Ping!

[lawnguy]

The thing about Stewart is he THINKS he's smart and well informed. Bill Maher has the same problem. Because they read a paper or watch a news show they are usually more informed than their not-so-bright audience.

This gives them the mistaken impression that they are the smartest people in the room, while in fact they are just shallow, superficial, and are ripped to shreds by those of us who ARE in fact well informed.

These guys do provide a lot of fodder for us here in cyberland :)

[weegee]

The type of folksy solemnity brandished by President Bush does not resonate with ''The Daily Show" demographic. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, only 2 percent of the show's audience identify themselves as conservatives. At a time when the Democrats desperately need inspired leadership, the show's self-conscious aloofness pervades the liberal punditry.

It isn't the mannerism of the GOP candidate that keeps conservatives from watching the Daily Show. It is a reluctance to tune in and have the host piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.<

Jon Stewart handled John Kerry with kid gloves and said later that his lips were pressed so far up Kerry's backside that he could tell what Kerry had for breakfast. It is a nauseating display.

[popdonnelly]

If you liked Coretta Scott King's funeral, you'll love the Oscars.