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

[jpyaks3]

No need to get the vest out, pal.

I kid, I kid

~Bang

Ha ha, its been 5 pages of him ranting about a show he has never watched and asking why Stewart won't insult Allah, I would just love to get a straight answer at some point.

[Ax]

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

Cause it irritates you.

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

He has no need to criticize or mock any religion. He chooses to. Why does he discriminate against Allah? Does he hate Mooooslims?

What is your point with the whole Allah tangent?

I would call it an observation.

Seriously what are you driving at, don't be a coward and dance around it why don't you say what you mean.

Wow! Mr. WebMuscles called me a coward.

You so brave. Ooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Here you go Wabbit. Jon Stewart is not as brave as Salman Rushdie. :evilg:

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.

What are YOU trying to say?

[Ax]

Ha ha, its been 5 pages of him ranting about a show he has never watched and asking why Stewart won't insult Allah, I would just love to get a straight answer at some point.

All my posts, added together, don't fill one page.

Don't be so hysterical.

[jpyaks3]

He has no need to criticize or mock any religion. He chooses to. Why does he discriminate against Allah? Does he hate Mooooslims?

Where did he attack the Christian God or the Jewish Yahweh? The answer is he didn't so why in the world would he criticize or mock Allah. There has already been a clip shown where he criticizes and mocks Muslim extremists so why in the world do you think he should attack Allah?

You seem to be saying he is afraid to criticize something. Your proof is that he hasn't criticized something that he has absolutely no need to criticize. You don't see the problem there?

What are YOU trying to say?

I am trying to figure out why you need to mention Allah at all, and why you seem so persistent to pursue that line.

[mjah]

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

So a very basic Politics 101 type effort to put the lie to the Fox News fictional bile-spew is synonymous with being a candy-ass?

A person who believes that has no room at all to call anyone else a "hack."

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

Drivel? LOL. From a reasonable person's viewpoint it also happens to be, by far, the most likely explanation.

Maybe you're getting tired of setting yourself up to be an easy punching bag in this thread. Just be more straightforward and well-considered in your arguments.

And if you don't want an honest discussion, that's fine - just say so. I'll be sure to remember it when reading your future posts, and not to give them serious consideration. Shrug.

[Bang]

Stephen Colbert used to do a segment on there called "This Week in God" that mocked every religion. But that's been a while

~Bang

[Ax]

Where did he attack the Christian God or the Jewish Yahweh? The answer is he didn't so why in the world would he criticize or mock Allah. There has already been a clip shown where he criticizes and mocks Muslim extremists so why in the world do you think he should attack Allah?

Gee Wally, didn't you read my response to Henry?

Why does he criticize or mock anyone?

Why do you not think mocking Allah, or God, or Buddha, would be fun to watch?

You seem to be saying he is afraid to criticize something. Your proof is that he hasn't criticized something that he has absolutely no need to criticize. You don't see the problem there?

My guess is, he's criticized everyone BUT Allah. You don't see a problem there?

I am trying to figure out why you need to mention Allah at all, and why you seem so persistent to pursue that line.

Because you won't stop asking about it?

Why do you only get upset about Allah?

Do you hate God?

[Bang]

My guess is, he's criticized everyone BUT Allah. You don't see a problem there?

Because you won't stop asking about it?

Why do you only get upset about Allah?

Do you hate God?

Honestly,, how can you expect to be taken seriously?

~Bang

[Ax]

So a very basic Politics 101 type effort to put the lie to the Fox News fictional bile-spew is synonymous with being a candy-ass?

He is very thin skinned.

Drivel? LOL. From a reasonable person's viewpoint it also happens to be, by far, the most likely explanation.

That's problem with hacks. They think they're the only ones being "reasonable".

Maybe you're getting tired of setting yourself up to be an easy punching bag in this thread.

No, as the cat loves to fling the dead mouse around, so, do I, enjoy toying with you little rodents.

And if you want an honest discussion, I'll be sure to not to give you serious consideration.

Fixed that for you.

[Ax]

Honestly,, how can you expect to be taken seriously?

~Bang

Has he?

Besides, I don't take this whole thing, seriously.

[mjah]

That's problem with hacks. They think they're the only ones being "reasonable".

So you're the reasonable one?

Okay, reasonable guy. Which of these do you honestly think is more likely to be the truth?

1) Despite all the hard work and attention that has gone into the Obama administration's decisions about NASA's technological future and our future in space, and despite the high visibility of all major NASA efforts, Obama literally told Bolden that one of his top priorities is to spend a bunch of time and money to help Muslim nations "feel good" about their science/math histories.

OR

2) Obama told Bolden that one of his top priorities is to engage scientists from around the world, including Muslim nations, in NASA's work -- and the wonkish Bolden foolishly took some liberties with that when talking with a predominantly Muslim media outlet whom he wanted to impress.

Are you willing to allow that (2) is the more reasonable explanation to a "reliable narrator" whose judgment isn't hopelessly corrupted by preconception? Or is Bang right on the money when he wonders whether it's even worth it to take you seriously?

I've come to realize over the years here, that for every person who actually posts in a thread, there are anywhere from a handful to a large crowd of folks who lurk, read, and take their impressions of posters/positions, but who never post themselves. They, and not the smaller group of people who type out replies, are the "silent majority" of people to whom you're actually making your pitch. The way you present your argument tells them a lot about not only you, but also the quality of the position(s) you're trying to support. The worse you represent yourself, the worse off your "side" of an argument suffers for your involvement.

This forum is a lot of fun and benefits from a wide spread of opinions and styles. It's important to take things in stride and have a good sense of humor about it all. At the same time, often you'll really want to make a point and get people thinking. I've become a lot more conscientious about my own posts after realizing that my past "hey, just foolin' around fellas!" wingnutting has actually moved some of my own past causes in reverse. If your presence on the board is about anyone other than strictly yourself -- even partially -- then playing the boor moves you and your positions backwards.

Just like you're doing to yourself right now, Ax.

[IHOPSkins]

...1) Despite all the hard work and attention that has gone into the Obama administration's decisions about NASA's technological future.........

When did Obama do this so called "Hard Work".....before or AFTER he gave his wonkish appointee marching orders?

When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering.

Notice point 2....and how point 3 is different

Now the WH denies this? White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said "That was not his task, and that's not the task of NASA."

Wonkish Appointee made this Up? "He wanted me"

:bsflag:

And for anybody that catches Stewarts take on Obamas Flip Flop on this...please post

[skinfan133]

1) Despite all the hard work and attention that has gone into the Obama administration's decisions about NASA's technological future and our future in space, and despite the high visibility of all major NASA efforts, Obama literally told Bolden that one of his top priorities is to spend a bunch of time and money to help Muslim nations "feel good" about their science/math histories.

Or going back to my rant that was overlooked :cool:

legitimate criticism of NASA under the Obama administration is being drowned out by this ridiculous non-issue. I would greatly contest that any sort of attention has been given to NASA, nor any hard work, nor any funding. Obama has clearly shown the world that the United States will no longer be the leader in space. We have no manned spaceflight capacity and his administration scrapped the (already 1/4th done and expensive, already paid-for) replacement project. He scrapped a bold scientific endeavor to freaking colonize the moon. All of this in the name of nebulous goals to inspire people to become interested in math and science education and reach Mars by 2050. Obama cut the programs in order to score a momentary political gain by showing that he was "serious" about getting rid of government waste. BULL****. Please inform me, someone, how cutting programs like manned spaceflight and colonization of the moon is a step toward inspiring people to get interested in the math and science of space??? Colonizing the ****ing moon? How cool was that? We would have had a goddam permanent outpost in 10 years...

My views of NASA greatly differ from some of my fellow libertarians, I think it is an incredibly important national asset in terms of security, cultural advancement, and scientific development.

[Baculus]

Oh, it is absolutely hilarious to watch some people get themselves worked up into a frothing-at-the-mouth frenzy over this. I wouldn't expect them to really understand Stewart's humor, either -- some folks just don't have a very well developed sense of irony.

[Baculus]

And for anybody that catches Stewarts take on Obamas Flip Flop on this...please post

Is your hair on fire? Because you are sure worked up and determined to prove a point. Did you even watch this Daily Show video, because that's how this appears to the rest of "us."

[Ax]

So you're the reasonable one?

No, I'm the handsome one.

Okay, reasonable guy. Which of these do you honestly think is more likely to be the truth?

1) Despite all the hard work and attention that has gone into the Obama administration's decisions about NASA's technological future and our future in space, and despite the high visibility of all major NASA efforts, Obama literally told Bolden that one of his top priorities is to spend a bunch of time and money to help Muslim nations "feel good" about their science/math histories.

OR

2) Obama told Bolden that one of his top priorities is to engage scientists from around the world, including Muslim nations, in NASA's work -- and the wonkish Bolden foolishly took some liberties with that when talking with a predominantly Muslim media outlet whom he wanted to impress.

Are you willing to allow that (2) is the more reasonable explanation to a "reliable narrator" whose judgment isn't hopelessly corrupted by preconception?

1), of course. As IHop asked, What hard work? Where?

skinfan13 details the ineptness of Obama's handling of NASA to date. Why would it be so hard to believe he'd have them doing PR work instead of SPACE EXPLORATION. It's a wonder he didn't use them as temporary census workers. Of course, that would have lowered the "temp jobs" created.

Or is Bang right on the money when he wonders whether it's even worth it to take you seriously?

Bang is usually right about a lot of things. But if I guessed right

about Stewart (God Shine His Light Upon Him), don't that mean I win the cookie, this time?

I've come to realize over the years here, that for every person who actually posts in a thread, there are anywhere from a handful to a large crowd of folks who lurk, read, and take their impressions of posters/positions, but who never post themselves.

Well gee, I figured that out in a couple weeks. Took you years, huh?

This forum is a lot of fun and benefits from a wide spread of opinions and styles. It's important to take things in stride and have a good sense of humor about it all. At the same time, often you'll really want to make a point and get people thinking.

Yes, and we all get to choose when, and if, we want to try and influence someone else's opinion.

Jon Stewart's (God Show His Mercy Unto Him) comedy show is hardly worth getting serious over.

I've become a lot more conscientious about my own posts after realizing that my past "hey, just foolin' around fellas!" wingnutting has actually moved some of my own past causes in reverse. If your presence on the board is about anyone other than strictly yourself -- even partially -- then playing the boor moves you and your positions backwards.

The importance you place on your, or my, existence here, and our perceived ability to significantly alter anyone's opinion, on any matter, much less this meaningless thread, is laughable. If somebody bases there opinions on the chatter of a bunch of dolts wasting time on a message board, then they were already too ****ing stupid to come up with an opinion of their own to begin with. So, filling their empty heads, with anything, is a public service.

[Burgold]

he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering.[/color]

Notice point 2....and how point 3 is different

Just finished up a feature on Mars and Mars exploration. One of the things that didn't make the final cut was a discussion about why it is said that we no longer have the ability to land a man on the moon. The scientists all seemed to agree that the chief power we are lacking is will. Space doesn't inspire folks like it used to and so that drive that was necessary to devote the resources necessary is lacking on most levels.

In that sense, finding a way supercharge American kids interest in math and science and engage scientists from everywhere in a cooperative effort (like we did with Skylab) seems a similar goal.

The goal being to generate interest and excitement and inspire in order to cultivate technological advances.

[fullnelson9999]

This thread hurts my brain.

[Bang]

Bang is usually right about a lot of things. But if I guessed right

about Stewart (God Shine His Light Upon Him), don't that mean I win the cookie, this time?

Thanks, but this time you didn't guess right. This is where I'm having a disconnect with you. Your preconception is wrong. I know it is because I watch the show practically every night, and you, as you say, have never watched it. To have you continue to assert that your guess is correct is the height of absurdity.

As far as what NASA can and can't do.. i think one thing that's for sure is we don't have much of a budget for it. The country's finances are a friggin' mess, and throwing it into space as heavily as before is not a smart idea.

Of course, I have a sneaking suspicion that if it were the reverse and he was ramping up NASA's mission and dumping hundreds of millions into their budget, that we'd hear an opposite complaint.

~Bang

[Corcaigh]

Don't feed the troll.

[Ax]

Thanks, but this time you didn't guess right. This is where I'm having a disconnect with you. Your preconception is wrong. I know it is because I watch the show practically every night, and you, as you say, have never watched it. To have you continue to assert that your guess is correct is the height of absurdity.

I don't believe I asserted that my guess was correct. Only, "if" it were, would I win the cookie.

I must, however, admit to confusing Allah, with the Prophet Muhammad, all day yesterday.:doh: He's the guy that gets people threatened if they don't like a picture/comment/criticism of him. My bad there. I offer a couple lines from John Prine's song, Pretty Good, in my defense.

"I heard Allah and Buddha, were singing at the Saviors feast,

When up in the sky, an Arabian Rabbi,

fed Quaker Oats to a priest.

Pretty good. Not bad. They can't complain.

Cause actually, all them Gods are just about the same."

However, I do still guess that the show targets Muhammad, less than any other deity/god/idol. And I would ask you, is that accurate?

As far as what NASA can and can't do.. i think one thing that's for sure is we don't have much of a budget for it. The country's finances are a friggin' mess, and throwing it into space as heavily as before is not a smart idea.

I don't see it as any less smart than throwing money into the recently passed healthcare bill. Especially when everybody finds that the proposed cost, is only the first installment, of a down payment, on an ever increasing final balance due.

Of course, I have a sneaking suspicion that if it were the reverse and he was ramping up NASA's mission and dumping hundreds of millions into their budget, that we'd hear an opposite complaint.

Not from me, you wouldn't.

[mjah]

Why would it be so hard to believe he'd have them doing PR work instead of SPACE EXPLORATION.

:ols:

You'd better watch out, or else Glenn Beck's people are going to show up at your door with an invoice.

Assuming you're at all serious, the talk radio mindset is slowly killing your brain.

Take care, and please stay off the roads until you get your eyes fixed. As my local optometrist's ad says: Vision correction for a healthy outlook!

[Bang]

I

However, I do still guess that the show targets Muhammad, less than any other deity/god/idol. And I would ask you, is that accurate?

No, not at all. In fact, i don't see them "targeting" any deity. I watch this show every night (except for repeats) and I have no idea where the basis of this 'guess' comes from. Trust me, you're off base. (and also trust me when I tell you that even though I like the show, there are many times that I disagree with what they're saying. But that's satire. It doesn't always work, and it isn't always a sentiment you'll agree with.)

I think the right views the Daily Show as a threat because it exposes some of their hypocrisies for laughs, and they take it way more seriously as an affront then the left does. But many of the top players on the right frequent the show,, Newt Gingrich is on there a lot, and they are very interesting conversations. He's one of the most frequent repeat guests, and he does have a sense of humor, even when Stewart is ripping him one for something or other (which isn't all the time. I get the feeling those two are semi-friends. The patter between them is smart and relaxed and funny.). McCain used to go on a lot, but has stopped since he's become such a hardliner.

I don't see it as any less smart than throwing money into the recently passed healthcare bill. Especially when everybody finds that the proposed cost, is only the first installment, of a down payment, on an ever increasing final balance due.

Sorry, but this just seems like the usual political contrariness(?) to me. I think you personally do believe in the value of space exploration, but the space program is not an immediate need. To paraphrase Kilmer in a lot of threads, "You claim you can't afford X, but you've still got cable TV".. well the space program is sort of like cable tv. It's nice, there's some good in it, but if we're trying to get finances under control, some things have to get cut. There is no need to continue to do low earth orbits, there is no immediate need to go back to the moon or beyond. It just seems to me that folks want to keep it so we don't "lose" to other countries going into space.

Who cares if they do? Let them flush money away discovering what we've already learned. If India wants to go to the moon, let them. If China wants to go to Mars, let them. (we can make money off of selling them "support" and technology) If they want to lay spy satellites up there, i do believe we've got the technology edge in handling that. (I know that history says Reagan's "star wars" ideas didn't publicly hatch, but I think that private industry took it upon themselves to develop things based on that idea. Once an idea is out it'll be used if there's value in it. Funding will come from somewhere. I think if China laid up a satellite we didn't like, we could take it out and blame a collision with some space debris or something.)

~Bang

[IHOPSkins]

Is your hair on fire? Because you are sure worked up and determined to prove a point. Did you even watch this Daily Show video, because that's how this appears to the rest of "us."

I usually only watch what gets posted here

Maybe thats why My impression of Stewarts Slant on comedy is tilted to the left?.....Funny how the typical celebration of his wit leans the same way

Funny....until you wonder if he is usually a one trick pony

So to bring it back

Has he made fun of Obamas Secret NASA Muslim Program flip flop yet?

[Bang]

I usually only watch what gets posted here

Maybe thats why My impression of Stewarts Slant on comedy is tilted to the left?.....Funny how the typical celebration of his wit leans the same way

Funny....until you wonder if he is usually a one trick pony

So

Has he made fun of Obamas Secret NASA Muslim Program flip flop yet?

Not yet,, they're on vacation for two weeks. By the time they get back there will likely be something else to make fun of. Which sucks because it seems like they just took a two week break three weeks ago.

This is how it goes in summer.

However, they do make fun of Obama plenty, and those links have been posted here as well, usually to show you guys that they do it.

When Olbermann had his ridiculous tirade about Scott Brown, it was the harangue from the daily show that got him to sort of apologize.

Hell, you should have seen the Inauguration day one where they sent their reporter down here to make fun of the idol worshippers and the people in love with Obama. Stephen Colbert's interview with Barney frank is downright hilarious because he keeps making gay jokes and pissing Frank off. When they are shown walking through the capitol to his office, Colbert drops back and gets behind him and starts shashaying like the biggest fag in DuPont Circle..

Their site has a great archive, and you can search them by tags if you want. Take some time and watch them hammer the left for a while. You might find it funny.

~Bang