Did anyone here just see Jon Stewart on Crossfire?
10-15-04, 04:07 PM
#1
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
Did anyone here just see Jon Stewart on Crossfire?
Damn, he was on fire, calling Carlson & Begala "hacks".
But this was my favorite part:
Carlson: "I do think you are more fun on your show. Just my opinion though."
Stewart (sheepish pause): "You know what's interesting though, you're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show."
Gotta love Tivo! Ran that back 10 times!
But this was my favorite part:
Carlson: "I do think you are more fun on your show. Just my opinion though."
Stewart (sheepish pause): "You know what's interesting though, you're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show."
Gotta love Tivo! Ran that back 10 times!
10-15-04, 06:09 PM
#3
DVD Talk Special Edition
It was some great TV with Stewart ripping them both. Here's the transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../15/cf.01.html
10-15-04, 07:26 PM
#7
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: H-Town, TX
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually agreed with Stewart's point that Crossfire should be a debate show when in reality it's more about political hacks and their talking points.
What I didn't agree with was his condescending tone and him resorting to calling Tucker Carlson a dick just because he and Begala tried to defend themselves.
What I didn't agree with was his condescending tone and him resorting to calling Tucker Carlson a dick just because he and Begala tried to defend themselves.
10-15-04, 09:08 PM
#11
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 3,068
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pharoh
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
His show doesn't pretend to take itself seriously, his point is that other media does, and they're failing the American people.
It has some validity to it.
birrman54
10-15-04, 09:08 PM
#12
DVD Talk Hero
Originally posted by Pharoh
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
10-15-04, 09:16 PM
#13
DVD Talk Hero
• Pharoh •
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
Since I've never watched the Daily Show, I have to ask. Is Stewart always this much of a hypocritical ass?
das
10-15-04, 09:31 PM
#14
Moderator
Originally posted by Birrman54
what makes him a hypocrite?
His show doesn't pretend to take itself seriously, his point is that other media does, and they're failing the American people.
It has some validity to it.
birrman54
what makes him a hypocrite?
His show doesn't pretend to take itself seriously, his point is that other media does, and they're failing the American people.
It has some validity to it.
birrman54
How about this?
Neither his show nor his book is serious, they're humurous and satirical. CNN and Crossfire invite him on to be satirical, humurous, and not serious. He then gets pissed off and behaves boorishly because he wants to speak seriously and professionally.
Or how about:
He acknowledges that his show does have some relevance, that it is taken seriously by many who watch it, that it is not just some completely comedic show along the lines of Crank Yankers. He does this by endorsing a Presidential candidate. Yet when he is called on his behaviour in that serious and relevant realm, such as his interview with the man he endoresed for the Presidency, called on engaging in the same type of behaviour he accuses the mainstream press of engaging in, he resorts to the fact that he is not serious and that his show has no relevancy. Which is it?
I personally find both hypocritical, but maybe it is just me.
10-15-04, 09:31 PM
#15
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: PDX Metro
Posts: 8,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-15-04, 09:36 PM
#16
Banned by request
For those who want to watch it:
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2652831
It's really stunning.
And I don't think he's a hypocrite. Why do comedians always have to be funny? They don't. Crossfire is a live, unscripted show. If they brought on a politican or a political pundit who cracked jokes the whole time, would you call that person a hypocrite?
Secondly, I don't see him making the point that The Daily Show is to be taken seriously. He goes out of his way to say it's not meant to be taken seriously. He says "[Crossfire] is on CNN, my show is led into by a show featuring puppets making crank phone calls! What's wrong with you?" He's clearly, clearly saying that his show is for entertainment purposes only, whereas the journalistic media have a responsibility to me more than just entertainment. Where's the hypocrisy?
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2652831
It's really stunning.
And I don't think he's a hypocrite. Why do comedians always have to be funny? They don't. Crossfire is a live, unscripted show. If they brought on a politican or a political pundit who cracked jokes the whole time, would you call that person a hypocrite?
Secondly, I don't see him making the point that The Daily Show is to be taken seriously. He goes out of his way to say it's not meant to be taken seriously. He says "[Crossfire] is on CNN, my show is led into by a show featuring puppets making crank phone calls! What's wrong with you?" He's clearly, clearly saying that his show is for entertainment purposes only, whereas the journalistic media have a responsibility to me more than just entertainment. Where's the hypocrisy?
10-15-04, 09:43 PM
#17
Moderator
Originally posted by das Monkey
Many times, yeah. Of course, he's also completely right in nearly everything he said.
das
Many times, yeah. Of course, he's also completely right in nearly everything he said.
das
Not sure I agree that his statements concerning Crossfire are correct. Nor do I agree with his assessment of the spin that comes out of the campaing staffs of the two candidates.
Regardless, I take much greater exception to his methods and to his spin. It would seem to me that he would the penultimate individual to hold politicians accountable, to call them on their bullshit. Yet when he had the golden opportunity, he didn't take it. Why not?
I also take exception to his using his show as a cop out. He wants to be serious and relevant when it suits his purposes, such as when castigating the big evil mainstream media as the voice of the disaffected, but he falls back on the notion that his show is not meant to be taken seriously or relevant. He wants to always be above reproach, skirting whichever side of the line he sees fit.
Again, maybe it is just me, but I have a problem with people that act in this manner.
10-15-04, 09:59 PM
#18
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: PDX Metro
Posts: 8,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pharoh
Not sure I agree that his statements concerning Crossfire are correct. Nor do I agree with his assessment of the spin that comes out of the campaing staffs of the two candidates.
Regardless, I take much greater exception to his methods and to his spin. It would seem to me that he would the penultimate individual to hold politicians accountable, to call them on their bullshit. Yet when he had the golden opportunity, he didn't take it. Why not?
I also take exception to his using his show as a cop out. He wants to be serious and relevant when it suits his purposes, such as when castigating the big evil mainstream media as the voice of the disaffected, but he falls back on the notion that his show is not meant to be taken seriously or relevant. He wants to always be above reproach, skirting whichever side of the line he sees fit.
Again, maybe it is just me, but I have a problem with people that act in this manner.
Not sure I agree that his statements concerning Crossfire are correct. Nor do I agree with his assessment of the spin that comes out of the campaing staffs of the two candidates.
Regardless, I take much greater exception to his methods and to his spin. It would seem to me that he would the penultimate individual to hold politicians accountable, to call them on their bullshit. Yet when he had the golden opportunity, he didn't take it. Why not?
I also take exception to his using his show as a cop out. He wants to be serious and relevant when it suits his purposes, such as when castigating the big evil mainstream media as the voice of the disaffected, but he falls back on the notion that his show is not meant to be taken seriously or relevant. He wants to always be above reproach, skirting whichever side of the line he sees fit.
Again, maybe it is just me, but I have a problem with people that act in this manner.
P.S. Tucker Carlson IS a dick.
10-15-04, 10:11 PM
#19
Moderator
Originally posted by Tsar Chasm
His show is on Comedy Central. Maybe if you'd seen a couple of episodes you could see this for what it truly is.
P.S. Tucker Carlson IS a dick.
His show is on Comedy Central. Maybe if you'd seen a couple of episodes you could see this for what it truly is.
P.S. Tucker Carlson IS a dick.
Really? Seriously? I didn't realise that. Thanks.
Didn't I acknowledge that a few times already? I have a problem with his hypocritically taking advantage of that fact. It seems that his fanbase has no problem with him doing this. That's fine, I suppose.
10-15-04, 10:28 PM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pharoh
How about this?
Neither his show nor his book is serious, they're humorous and satirical. CNN and Crossfire invite him on to be satirical, humorous, and not serious. He then gets pissed off and behaves boorishly because he wants to speak seriously and professionally.
How about this?
Neither his show nor his book is serious, they're humorous and satirical. CNN and Crossfire invite him on to be satirical, humorous, and not serious. He then gets pissed off and behaves boorishly because he wants to speak seriously and professionally.
If I were a pro football player, and was invited to be a guest on Late Night with Conan O'Brien, a humorous show, I wouldn't spend my five minutes tossing footballs into the audience; I would adapt to the show and try to tell some funny stories.
Or how about:
He acknowledges that his show does have some relevance, that it is taken seriously by many who watch it, that it is not just some completely comedic show along the lines of Crank Yankers. He does this by endorsing a Presidential candidate. Yet when he is called on his behaviour in that serious and relevant realm, such as his interview with the man he endoresed for the Presidency, called on engaging in the same type of behaviour he accuses the mainstream press of engaging in, he resorts to the fact that he is not serious and that his show has no relevancy. Which is it?
I personally find both hypocritical, but maybe it is just me.
Regardless, I take much greater exception to his methods and to his spin. It would seem to me that he would the penultimate individual to hold politicians accountable, to call them on their bullshit. Yet when he had the golden opportunity, he didn't take it. Why not?
Because The Daily Show is and always has been a comedy show.
I also take exception to his using his show as a cop out. He wants to be serious and relevant when it suits his purposes, such as when castigating the big evil mainstream media as the voice of the disaffected, but he falls back on the notion that his show is not meant to be taken seriously or relevant. He wants to always be above reproach, skirting whichever side of the line he sees fit.
He wants to be serious and relevant when on a show that is supposed to be serious and relevant. When on his show, he wants to humorous an satirical.
His criticism of journalists do not apply to him, as he is not a journalist; he is, as you implied, a humorist and satirist.
Last edited by No Use For A Name; 10-15-04 at 10:30 PM.
10-15-04, 11:08 PM
#23
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pharoh
How about this?
Neither his show nor his book is serious, they're humurous and satirical. CNN and Crossfire invite him on to be satirical, humurous, and not serious. He then gets pissed off and behaves boorishly because he wants to speak seriously and professionally.
Or how about:
He acknowledges that his show does have some relevance, that it is taken seriously by many who watch it, that it is not just some completely comedic show along the lines of Crank Yankers. He does this by endorsing a Presidential candidate. Yet when he is called on his behaviour in that serious and relevant realm, such as his interview with the man he endoresed for the Presidency, called on engaging in the same type of behaviour he accuses the mainstream press of engaging in, he resorts to the fact that he is not serious and that his show has no relevancy. Which is it?
I personally find both hypocritical, but maybe it is just me.
How about this?
Neither his show nor his book is serious, they're humurous and satirical. CNN and Crossfire invite him on to be satirical, humurous, and not serious. He then gets pissed off and behaves boorishly because he wants to speak seriously and professionally.
Or how about:
He acknowledges that his show does have some relevance, that it is taken seriously by many who watch it, that it is not just some completely comedic show along the lines of Crank Yankers. He does this by endorsing a Presidential candidate. Yet when he is called on his behaviour in that serious and relevant realm, such as his interview with the man he endoresed for the Presidency, called on engaging in the same type of behaviour he accuses the mainstream press of engaging in, he resorts to the fact that he is not serious and that his show has no relevancy. Which is it?
I personally find both hypocritical, but maybe it is just me.
I wonder if TDS will actually become watchable again once the election is over. I've been watching TDS since day 1, but I've had to stop watching in the past few months. The show has become so much more serious this year and Stewart still uses stupid fucking lines like: "The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls." Stewart whines about politicians not being truthful and yet he doesn't have the balls to actually admit that he and many other people take his show extremely seriously.
10-15-04, 11:25 PM
#24
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by Doughboy
I actually agreed with Stewart's point that Crossfire should be a debate show when in reality it's more about political hacks and their talking points.
What I didn't agree with was his condescending tone and him resorting to calling Tucker Carlson a dick just because he and Begala tried to defend themselves.
I actually agreed with Stewart's point that Crossfire should be a debate show when in reality it's more about political hacks and their talking points.
What I didn't agree with was his condescending tone and him resorting to calling Tucker Carlson a dick just because he and Begala tried to defend themselves.
Begala was smart to keep his mouth shut, but Carlson just solidified his supercilious blueblood weenie persona.
10-15-04, 11:32 PM
#25
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Suprmallet
For those who want to watch it:
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2652831
It's really stunning.
And I don't think he's a hypocrite. Why do comedians always have to be funny? They don't. Crossfire is a live, unscripted show. If they brought on a politican or a political pundit who cracked jokes the whole time, would you call that person a hypocrite?
Secondly, I don't see him making the point that The Daily Show is to be taken seriously. He goes out of his way to say it's not meant to be taken seriously. He says "[Crossfire] is on CNN, my show is led into by a show featuring puppets making crank phone calls! What's wrong with you?" He's clearly, clearly saying that his show is for entertainment purposes only, whereas the journalistic media have a responsibility to me more than just entertainment. Where's the hypocrisy?
For those who want to watch it:
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2652831
It's really stunning.
And I don't think he's a hypocrite. Why do comedians always have to be funny? They don't. Crossfire is a live, unscripted show. If they brought on a politican or a political pundit who cracked jokes the whole time, would you call that person a hypocrite?
Secondly, I don't see him making the point that The Daily Show is to be taken seriously. He goes out of his way to say it's not meant to be taken seriously. He says "[Crossfire] is on CNN, my show is led into by a show featuring puppets making crank phone calls! What's wrong with you?" He's clearly, clearly saying that his show is for entertainment purposes only, whereas the journalistic media have a responsibility to me more than just entertainment. Where's the hypocrisy?
He also blames the two hosts of doing a biased job in covering the news and then promotes entirely partisan opinion.
How can you not see the hypocracy?
Lastly, the almost complete lack of content in his parade of zingers was irritating and immature. This is not Thomas Friedman here, these are not thought out positions. He was just taking the proverbial piss, not really adding anything to the discussion. That's not intelligent, that's boring.
I don't agree with everything Tucker Carlson says but try actually reading what he writes some time. He's hardly a party yes-man or a mindless drone. He takes stands. As someone who has the guts to put out serious pieces, rather than shoot potshots behind the shield of being a "satirist", I have a hell of a lot more respect for him than I do Stewart.
In the end, Stewart came off as one of those annoying grad students who doesn't really stand for anything or actually know what he's talking about. To me, he seemed more interested in making himself perceived as "controversial" or "principled", scoring some cheap points and selling a few books. That's true media hypocracy in my book.
Last edited by Hiro11; 10-15-04 at 11:34 PM.