The Daily Show: Jon Stewart On Hillary's Declining Respect For Voters

[jpeyton]

Text

Question: Why does the MSM rarely use a politician's own words against them? Bush would be a prime example of the ultimate flip-flop, with McSame a close second, but even Hillary has turned the primary process on its head with a blatant disregard for the same rules that have been in place long before she or her husband ever ran for President.

Where does she get this sense of entitlement that the rules can, and should, be bent to give her the nomination?

WSJ: Obama Is The Nominee

First the NYTimes, now the journal weighs in post-PA, and the message is loud and clear:

No matter how many kicks the rest of us find in such famously fun primary states as Indiana and South Dakota, it's going to be McCain versus Obama in 2008.

Time for supers to take heed.

 

[Moonbeam]

The imperative of change demands more than a fighter.

 

[nageov3t]

I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

 

[bamacre]

The Daily show is proof that when you look at politics in this country from a common-sense perspective, it is quite comical.

The MSM has not done a good job covering the Obama/Hillary conflict, they make the race seem much closer than it actually is. Perhaps ratings get in the way of truth.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Pandering to their young, Obama-supporting audience.

But that doesn't change the numbers, which don't favor Hillary.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Pandering to their young, Obama-supporting audience.

But that doesn't change the numbers, which don't favor Hillary.

you point it out like I'm disagreeing with you

I've been finding it hard to stomach the shows lately, though.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Text

:laugh: Great clip of Jon Stewart!

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Nice, I'm sure.

But how does that imperialist dick taste? Bitter, like blood and oil?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Nice, I'm sure.

But how does that imperialist dick taste? Bitter, like blood and oil?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

More then Rush gets?

Since this thread is about comedy, I got this in an email today, it made me chuckle:

"We in Ireland cannot figure out why you are even bothering to hold
an election.

On one side, you have a bitch who is a lawyer, married to a lawyer,
and a lawyer who is married to a bitch who is a lawyer.

On the other side, you have a true war hero married to a woman with
a huge chest who owns a beer distributorship.

Is there a contest here?"

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Really? They've poked fun at both but most of their coverage of the primary has been poking fun at the media. I don't remember the exact TDS episode but the one that covered the PA debate poked fun at Obama's speaking ability because he stumbled and stammered answering some questions. They did nothing against Clinton in that skit and as usual most of the jabs went to the media (ABC) for such a poorly constructed debate.

 

[fskimospy]

Oooh good, this thread is going to turn into another one of those "why does the media hate [candidate that I support] and give [candidate I don't support] such a free ride!?! BIAS!"

Everyone knows that in reality every candidate and position is exactly equal and equally deserving of teasing/condemnation/etc. To report anything otherwise would be biased.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'd love to know how much Stewart/Colbert are getting paid to suck Obama's dick like they've been doing.

Pandering to their young, Obama-supporting audience.

But that doesn't change the numbers, which don't favor Hillary.

you point it out like I'm disagreeing with you

I've been finding it hard to stomach the shows lately, though.

Well since I love the hour of power and am also a Hillary supporter, it's been tough watching for me as well recently. So I thought about that, and from a disinterested observer's perspective, Hillary has no business sticking around. Obama will end the primary season with a lead in delegates and votes (unless you count FL/MI which is dumb). Exactly how does Hillary get the nom without the supers vetoing the will of the people in the 50+ state contests that have taken place? To do so is suicide for the dems, so it won't happen and I haven't seen one reputable person argue that it should happen. It's fertile ground for comics I think. I don't care if Hillary drops out or sticks it out, but to expect an third party observer to be sympathetic to the second place finisher not being given the nomination would be pretty petty on my part.

I still think Hillary is the better person for president, but I'm pretty much resigned to the Obama nomination. I am in no way positive about the result in the general election however.

 

[nageov3t]

I've always felt like tds/cr were kind of about screwing it to the people in power, and it's just so happened that republicans were the ones in power for most of the time they've been on the air.

from my obviously biased perspective, it's seemed like they've been going after Hillary and McCain pretty relentlessly, giving Obama a pass (or holding to the Probama spin), despite the fact that he's been the front-runner since January.

but you'd be absolutely correct to say that my bias (I like Hillary and McCain more than Obama) is no doubt skewing my perspective.

 

[jonks]

Stewart did give Obama the Dick Move of the Week award a couple weeks ago. I think they fall about 60/40 in Obama's favor, but hey, he's winning. When McCain and Huckster were all that was left in the Rep race, more jokes were made about Huckabee for sticking around.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Well since I love the hour of power and am also a Hillary supporter, it's been tough watching for me as well recently. So I thought about that, and from a disinterested observer's perspective, Hillary has no business sticking around. Obama will end the primary season with a lead in delegates and votes (unless you count FL/MI which is dumb). Exactly how does Hillary get the nom without the supers vetoing the will of the people in the 50+ state contests that have taken place? To do so is suicide for the dems, so it won't happen and I haven't seen one reputable person argue that it should happen. It's fertile ground for comics I think. I don't care if Hillary drops out or sticks it out, but to expect an third party observer to be sympathetic to the second place finisher not being given the nomination would be pretty petty on my part.

I still think Hillary is the better person for president, but I'm pretty much resigned to the Obama nomination. I am in no way positive about the result in the general election however.

Don't mean to sidetrack the thread but how do the Dems not *somehow* count the FL/MI delegates without completely alienating them during the GE?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Robor

Don't mean to sidetrack the thread but how do the Dems not *somehow* count the FL/MI delegates without completely alienating them during the GE?

Probably seat their delegates anyway after the nominee has been decided.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Stewart did give Obama the Dick Move of the Week award a couple weeks ago. I think they fall about 60/40 in Obama's favor, but hey, he's winning. When McCain and Huckster were all that was left in the Rep race, more jokes were made about Huckabee for sticking around.

Yeah, that was a good. He gave free Dave Matthews tickets for a concert on the same day Bill Clinton was speaking. There was another one 'DMotW' award for Obama before that but I can't remember it.

I :heart: Stewart & Colbert. Oh, and Dave Matthews rocks too!

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Robor

Don't mean to sidetrack the thread but how do the Dems not *somehow* count the FL/MI delegates without completely alienating them during the GE?

Probably seat their delegates anyway after the nominee has been decided.

That seems meaningless - especially as a resolution to states that moved up their primaries because they thought voting late would be meaningless.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Oooh good, this thread is going to turn into another one of those "why does the media hate [candidate that I support] and give [candidate I don't support] such a free ride!?! BIAS!"

Everyone knows that in reality every candidate and position is exactly equal and equally deserving of teasing/condemnation/etc. To report anything otherwise would be biased.

A better way to put it would be:

The media is biased against anything that doesn't generate more money for themselves.

imho of course.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The imperative of change demands more than a fighter.

It also demands more than one man. More so, it'll require a political party determined to remove the power and authority from Washington DC. Everyone knows Obama wants to increase that power. His effect on our government will be no different than GWB.

Patriot Acts galore.

 

[Brigandier]

No mainstream candidate running for federal office is interested in reducing their power or spending.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The imperative of change demands more than a fighter.

It also demands more than one man. More so, it'll require a political party determined to remove the power and authority from Washington DC. Everyone knows Obama wants to increase that power. His effect on our government will be no different than GWB.

Patriot Acts galore.

Link to proof Obama wants to restrict freedoms?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The imperative of change demands more than a fighter.

It also demands more than one man. More so, it'll require a political party determined to remove the power and authority from Washington DC. Everyone knows Obama wants to increase that power. His effect on our government will be no different than GWB.

Patriot Acts galore.

Link to proof Obama wants to restrict freedoms?

I would very much like to see this, as Obama is widely known for his work on civil liberties.

Yeah, yeah... I know it's an op-ed. Still, if you look at the bills he's stood for and what he has stood against it is pretty disingenuous to say that he would be trying to pass more patriot acts.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Well since I love the hour of power and am also a Hillary supporter, it's been tough watching for me as well recently. So I thought about that, and from a disinterested observer's perspective, Hillary has no business sticking around. Obama will end the primary season with a lead in delegates and votes (unless you count FL/MI which is dumb). Exactly how does Hillary get the nom without the supers vetoing the will of the people in the 50+ state contests that have taken place? To do so is suicide for the dems, so it won't happen and I haven't seen one reputable person argue that it should happen. It's fertile ground for comics I think. I don't care if Hillary drops out or sticks it out, but to expect an third party observer to be sympathetic to the second place finisher not being given the nomination would be pretty petty on my part.

I still think Hillary is the better person for president, but I'm pretty much resigned to the Obama nomination. I am in no way positive about the result in the general election however.

Don't mean to sidetrack the thread but how do the Dems not *somehow* count the FL/MI delegates without completely alienating them during the GE?

oh they do count them but 'somehow' is right. Above I meant you don't count MI/FL as Hillary wins since all agreed they wouldn't count. But you seat the delegates in some proportion come august. Maybe even let FL sit based on the primary results as a peace offering.