Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Jon Stewart on the response to NASA's outreach to Muslims


SkinsHokieFan

Recommended Posts

Dude, it's one bit. And it was funny.

Well, like I've already said, I don't watch the show. My thoughts on that show, still stand. And, I didn't find it as funny, as I did typically partisan. Which, seems to be ok as long as it's against ones target of choice. If it's not a strong left leaning comedy show, fine. My bet is, that it is.

In another bit, he told radical Muslims to go **** themselves.

In protecting his coworkers. So what?

Was he sucking up to Christians and Jews in that one because he said they had a better sense of humor?

No, he was very careful to make sure his attack on radical Muslims had the cover of, "see, he went after anybody threatening someone over a skit".

Because he pointed out EXACTLY what you are trying to point out in this thread?

What, that if it was so wrong to criticize the directive, why is the White House backing away now? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the show in those days, but I'd have to say that Stewart is probably a better fit for the show than Kilborn. Stewart is probably closer to the "stoic newsman" persona, which is what makes the show work. It allows him to be the straight man to the more nutty correspondants.

The old Kilborn show isn't really comparable to the current show.

Essentially, Kilborn insulted some of the people running the show, he quit and the people running it quit at the same time leaving the whole place open for reinvention.

People from the Onion came in and took over with Stewart.

The show changed pretty dramatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, like I've already said, I don't watch the show. My thoughts on that show, still stand. And, I didn't find it as funny, as I did typically partisan. Which, seems to be ok as long as it's against ones target of choice. If it's not a strong left leaning comedy show, fine. My bet is, that it is.

It is left leaning, but unlike certain media outlets, that doesn't mean you stroke the side that you are on. Fox News is a target not because it is right leaning, but because they continue to say stupid **** all the time. A lot of that stuff is comedy gold. I don't care which side of the aisle you are on, everyone should laugh at some of the stuff Fox News puts on.

And yes, when CNN and MSNBC do stupid ****, he calls them on it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old Kilborn show isn't really comparable to the current show.

Essentially, Kilborn insulted some of the people running the show, he quit and the people running it quit at the same time leaving the whole place open for reinvention.

People from the Onion came in and took over with Stewart.

The show changed pretty dramatically.

Actually, according to Wikipedia, the staff mostly stayed the same after Kilborn left. He did bring in some of the Onion guys to help sharpen the more satirical edge of the show. It does sound like a very different show, and for the better IMO.

Edit: As an aside, I didn't realize that there were some raising a stink about the hiring of Olivia Munn. While I agree that she's been a little shaky in her three appearances so far, I do shake my head at the inference that you can't be both funny and physically attractive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, it's not rocket science.

Like in showing how their supposed standard bearer Ronald Reagan proposed and did the exact same thing with the Soviets

Not even close.

See, the USSR was this whole other country. They had a gubment, an army, uniforms and all.

"Muslims" is not a country. But your attempt to equate the two was very, how shall I say, Fox-like.:pfft:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, like I've already said, I don't watch the show. My unsupported theories on that show, still stand.

Fixed that for you. :)

What, that if it was so wrong to criticize the directive, why is the White House backing away now? :D
Maybe because of a rash of knee-jerk cable-TV style reactionaries pumping out half-truths in an attempt to spin it into lucrative political opportunity, which the White House would prefer to avoid to the extent possible. Hmm, maybe?

But I actually don't think that's the case. As far as I know, Obama hasn't indicated that the NASA chief's remarks were an accurate reflection of his actual directive. We seem to have only an Al Jazeera interview with a wonky guy who clearly wanted to maximize the opportunity to speak directly with a largely Muslim audience -- and probably overstated his actual directive in a ham-handed attempt to play techno-ambassador.

From what I've seen, our new NASA director really doesn't seem to have either the international diplomacy skills or the actual administrative mandate to do that. But since his job is to run NASA, not to play modern-day Ben Franklin, it's very unlikely that he'll do something so silly again. At least the possibility stands that he'll do a competent job of managing NASA's internal transition back to technology development and next-generation manned space exploration -- a task at which his predecessor failed miserably and, in some important ways, actually sent us backwards.

This artificially inflated Muslim-outreach commentary is exactly the kind of trumped-up non issue which politicians on both sides of the aisle love to watch the cable "news" viewers and their sheep get angry over. Every hour wasted in pretending that this is a significant issue represents another hour during which the nation's hen house is left unguarded and raidable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not even close.

See, the USSR was this whole other country. They had a gubment, an army, uniforms and all.

"Muslims" is not a country. But your attempt to equate the two was very, how shall I say, Fox-like.:pfft:

No, it's not the same exactly, but if it garners goodwill and accomplishes the same goal, why is it so bad?

Seriously, I just don't get the spite of it.

We've sent people of all races creeds nationalities and religions into space. So we need to bridge a gap from the west to the muslim world. Isn't that obvious?

Why just arbitrarily **** on every attempt to do so?

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fixed that for you. :)

Appreciate that, hack boy. ;)

Maybe because of a rash of knee-jerk cable-TV style reactionaries pumping out half-truths in an attempt to spin it into lucrative political opportunity, which the White House would prefer to avoid to the extent possible. Hmm, maybe?

Ah, so he's a candy-ass who can't take a little criticism. That seems accurate.

But I actually don't think that's the case.

Well of course you don't.

The drivel that followed the above statement was well crafted, very possible, and exactly what I would have theorized you might say.

However, candy-ass seems more accurate, to me. :pfft:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's not the same exactly, but if it garners goodwill and accomplishes the same goal, why is it so bad?

Seriously, I just don't get the spite of it.

You can attach spite to whomever else you want, I just see it as a weak, empty gesture that will accomplish the same thing all his other gestures have.

Nothing.

Grow a set, Mr. President. Name exactly who you are, and are NOT talking about. Don't be afraid to anger someone because they might hate us.

NEWSFLASH: They already do!

Pick a country. Any country. Be specific. And then, if you believe in the cause, stand by it for Buddha's sake.

We've sent people of all races creeds nationalities and religions into space. So we need to bridge a gap from the west to the muslim world. Isn't that obvious?

Why just arbitrarily **** on every attempt to do so?

Again, he needs to be specific. State a case, and go for it. This wishy washy verbal handjob is the wrong approach, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can attach spite to whomever else you want, I just see it as a weak, empty gesture that will accomplish the same thing all his other gestures have.

Nothing.

Grow a set, Mr. President. Name exactly who you are, and are NOT talking about. Don't be afraid to anger someone because they might hate us.

NEWSFLASH: They already do!

Pick a country. Any country. Be specific. And then, if you believe in the cause, stand by it for Buddha's sake.

Again, he needs to be specific. State a case, and go for it. This wishy washy verbal handjob is the wrong approach, IMO.

And all I see is a PR move.

:whoknows:

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ax - you have spent 4 pages talking about and sharing your opinions of a show you admit you never watch. Don't you think it is hard to form an opinion on something you never see?

No, it's much more worthwhile to make up **** and speculate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ax - you have spent 4 pages talking about and sharing your opinions of a show you admit you never watch. Don't you think it is hard to form an opinion on something you never see?

Here, I'll type slow.

My original comments pertained to the skit that was posted. I've said numerous times I don't watch the show.

Tell me which words are giving you trouble, and I'll try to help you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here, I'll type slow.

My original comments pertained to the skit that was posted. I've said numerous times I don't watch the show.

Tell me which words are giving you trouble, and I'll try to help you.

Well, you did throw this in:

I find it surprising, with the touchiness of Allah worshipers, that if he ever went after him like he does the Christian's God of choice, he would have been killed by now.

How is he going after the Christian's God? Since you've never watched the show and you're only talking about one skit that doesn't attack the Christian God ... what the hell are you talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yah Skinfan13, get the hell out of here with your on-point posts regarding our space program. Just who do you think you are?

Let's get back to the Jon Stewart is a hypocritical libtard discussion. :munchout:

yah, to be honest the space program is kinda boring and uninspiring anyways

:movefast:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't see why you're getting so worked up about a comedy show.

There are serious parts of the Daily Show, this skit was not one of them.

It was supposed to be humorous, you clearly didn't find it funny but I think you're taking it way too seriously.

On the contrary. I'm not worked up at all. My flippant criticism of Jon Heroburger seemed to get some folks panties in a wad. I've enjoyed the entertainment of toying with them, on a slow work day. As legitimate inquiries were posed, I continued to reply out of courtesy. Fielding the pot shots from the few halfwits is also entertaining.

They actually take him seriously. I don't.

No biggie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is he going after the Christian's God? Since you've never watched the show and you're only talking about one skit that doesn't attack the Christian God ... what the hell are you talking about?

You are correct. He went after the symbols of the Christians God, not the God himself.

It still struck me though, that he knows it's relatively safe to go after every other deity, or their symbols. While sparing Allah, and his.

Even in the second skit, when he went after the "radicals" he made sure they weren't singled out, but were part of the group he sang, "**** off" to, or whatever it was.

So yes, in only two skits, I determined he was scared to single out Allah, by name, but more than willing to go after all other Gods. Whether he did in these two skits or not. Just a gut feeling.

Do you have any proof to the contrary? Direct criticism/mockery, ever, of Allah.

And no, since I don't watch the show, I have no proof he has ridiculed any of the other Gods, by name.

Maybe some of his parishioners will help me out.:silly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary. I'm not worked up at all. My flippant criticism of Jon Heroburger seemed to get some folks panties in a wad. I've enjoyed the entertainment of toying with them, on a slow work day. As legitimate inquiries were posed, I continued to reply out of courtesy. Fielding the pot shots from the few halfwits is also entertaining.

They actually take him seriously. I don't.

No biggie.

south_park_smug.jpg

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct. He went after the symbols of the Christians God, not the God himself.

It still struck me though, that he knows it's relatively safe to go after every other deity, or their symbols. While sparing Allah, and his.

Even in the second skit, when he went after the "radicals" he made sure they weren't singled out, but were part of the group he sang, "**** off" to, or whatever it was.

So yes, in only two skits, I determined he was scared to single out Allah, by name, but more than willing to go after all other Gods. Whether he did in these two skits or not. Just a gut feeling.

Do you have any proof to the contrary? Direct criticism/mockery, ever, of Allah.

And no, since I don't watch the show, I have no proof he has ridiculed any of the other Gods, by name.

Why the **** are you talking about it then.

He has absolutely no need to criticize or mock Allah because it has no relevance whatsoever to what the Daily Show does.

What is your point with the whole Allah tangent? Seriously what are you driving at, don't be a coward and dance around it why don't you say what you mean. Because right now you are rambling about him being afraid of criticizing/mocking Allah based on absolutely nothing, and criticism of Allah is nowhere near the topic so what exactly are you trying to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the **** are you talking about it then.

He has absolutely no need to criticize or mock Allah because it has no relevance whatsoever to what the Daily Show does.

What is your point with the whole Allah tangent? Seriously what are you driving at, don't be a coward and dance around it why don't you say what you mean. Because right now you are rambling about him being afraid of criticizing/mocking Allah based on absolutely nothing, and criticism of Allah is nowhere near the topic so what exactly are you trying to say.

No need to get the vest out, pal.

I kid, I kid

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...