Posted on 06/26/2011 10:15:46 PM PDT by Nachum
The left was so excited after Jon Stewart’s appearance on Fox News last Sunday. But the victory was short lived. First, Jon was fact-checked by Politifact. Chris Wallace pointed it out here.
But there was another claim Stewart made in the interview which also fell apart this week. Here’s Stewart defending the NY Times:
(Excerpt) Read more at verumserum.com ...
What struck me about the interview is how angry and bitter “Stewart” is. That more than anything else outs him as a liberal.
I agree.
Here is the blog text, for those on handhelds.
Jon Stewart Proven Wrong on Media Bias…Again
John on June 26, 2011 at 9:48 pm
The left was so excited after Jon Stewart’s appearance on Fox News last Sunday. But the victory was short lived. First, Jon was fact-checked by Politifact. Chris Wallace pointed it out here.
But there was another claim Stewart made in the interview which also fell apart this week. Here’s Stewart defending the NY Times:
According to Stewart, the NY Times is liberal “to a certain extent” but not “relentlessly activist.” Yes, Jon, you’ve put your finger on something there. Those in power aren’t as activist as those upstarts looking to seize power. Maybe this hasn’t occurred to Jon so I’ll offer him a hint. Of course the NY Times isn’t “relentlessly activist.” The Grey Lady doesn’t have to be. She only needs to whisper or cluck her disapproval and the rest of the media falls into line. (See the treatment of Sarah Palin in the wake of the Giffords shooting.)
In another time, Stewart would be arguing that, while both were partisans for their cause, King George was not as relentlessly activist as George Washington. In fact, the King never even left England so clearly he’s less biased!
Conservatives have played back-bencher in the media for so long we have no hope to be heard except to wave our arms and act up a bit. Jon Stewart can argue that the NY Times isn’t “relentlessly activist” all he wants. Most of us on the other side of the aisle find the Times’ passive-aggressive partisanship (to coin a phrase) not much of an improvement in practice. Case in point…A few days after Stewart’s defense of the Times, one of their columnists said this on Bill Maher’s show:
Who is David Carr? He’s a regular writer on media issues at the Times. Yes, you read that right. This is the guy who writes about media bias at the NY Times! For instance, he wrote this about NPR in the wake of James O’Keefe’s sting videos:
not only did Mr. Schiller call members of the Tea Party racists, but he followed up with a ponderous lecture on a varietal of wine — which is not a winning topic when lunching with devout Muslims, even fake ones — and thus reinforced every extant stereotype of NPR as a collective of wine-sipping, conservative-hating boobs drunk on their own specialness.
But the bias argument misses the point.
Of course it does. Even when the bias is this blatant, it is never the point at the NY Times. I wonder if Carr’s own bias has anything to do with that?
I’m sure Jon Stewart is a nice guy and I give him credit for at least trying to be fair (as he sees things). But he’s always going to lose this argument for one reason: The truth is not on his side. Left-wing media bias is real and it is pervasive. The video of David Carr above is just the latest example. Ask me next week and I’ll have a new example for you.
The problem with stewart is he’s a comedian and he can act like he knows something and just say it’s a joke. So some people take him serious, while anyone paying attention knows he’s a joke.
Comedians are the worst kind of political cowards. They hide behind their clown uniforms and have no responsibility to their actions. Get in the game Stewart or shut the F up....
I wish he’d read that.
Stewart may get his facts wrong all of the time but he does one heck of an Amos and Andy when he is impersonating black politicians.
Thanks Larry! (For braving the internet minefield that is the blogosphere to bring us the text and link.)
It’s appreciated!
Jon Stewart is a bit better looking than Bill Maher, but basically the same guy.
Both Stewart and Maher should look at that long list of writers and production people at the end of their shows each episode. Maher in particular gives off this air of a know-it-all, when all along he`s had his material researched and written for him by folks we don`t see. They`re no more than talking heads, like Couric and the other boobs, and I try not to take them anymore seriously than that.
Jon Stewart lived with Anthony Weiner during the cross dressing years.
you mean Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz ?
Yet another vehemently Liberal , sharp tongued NYC , SoS Jew .
Why is it that the vast majority of truly great Jews have migrated to Israel and we are left with these dregs ?
Deport them all to Israel , wherein they are immediately conscripted into the IDF and sent to face their real enemies .
That would wake them up!
Cynically opportunistic Stewart knows his audience well enough that he even went so far as to have his name legally changed from Leibowitz to his stage name.
Guess I’m too little, too late w/ my above, after viewing the previous few.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.