Jon Stewart and the truth is bad for Democracy!

Roshambo

Antediluvian as Feck
Bottom clip here. Some more info here.

So apparently telling the truth is making people feel a little cynical about how the country is run, about elections, and how choosing between two dumbasses means that our electoral system is flawed. And that is "anti-democracy" to the Snow Blower and the rest of the Fox News idiots.

Go-go Fox News, where they will be the good guys by not reporting about anything bad that discredits Duh-Duh-Duh-Dubya's reign. So there you have it, only those who report the wrongdoings are "anti-democracy" again, versus the actual events themselves.

"It seems like what this really comes down to is that Stewart is telling the truth...and by telling the truth, he's somehow ruining democracy for everyone. Way to go, Jon."

Events like Senator Inhofe being an absolute moron and spin-doctor by saying that global warming as reported by TIME was an absolute hoax (when a few HUGE glaciers that I knew of as a child, that were there for THOUSANDS of years...are now gone or nearly so), and a Nevada Senator actually cooking up "scientific evidence" that mercury isn't harmful at all when present in wild fish local to his constituency. His constituents in the mining industry.

To top it off, there's a SHITLOAD more important things Congress could be worried about, but it seems that the only three issues of concern of recent are: violent video games, homosexual marriage, and flag burning. Yet these assholes are paid this for working only about 92 days out of the year, with a pay raise of about $3k each/ year, with expenses covered, and they had turned down raising the minimum wage increase so that it is still at $5.15, as it has been at for the last eight years. In fact, some like those who volunteered their lives and health for their country, are looking at getting a pay cut as the veteran service organizations were often barred from attending Congress, which is usually the only thing keeping the VA chairman and the rest of the congress from being absolute idiots. (Only in person do they realize they're tampering with the welfare of many who were trained to kill.) Something about a shitload more vets not being taken care of in time by the VA, who sits on their ass for 6 months before they *have* to acknowledge giving benefits to the disabled.

And now, to end with a clip from the second article:

And then there's the PIPA poll showing that those who watch cable and network news had numerous misperceptions about issues surrounding the Iraq War. While newspapers fared better than TV news, nearly half of their readers still believed, incorrectly, that the world was either evenly split or was in favor of going to war with Iraq.

Wanna bet Daily Show viewers knew the answer to that one?
 
This goes a long way to explain why sometimes I feel like the world has gone insane:

A President who hid during the Vietnam war and speaks like a retard was elected.

People are renaming snack foods as political protests.

A sovereign nation (Iraq) was invaded for false pretenses - blatant news of this has come out on Fox, even, but people are still cool.

European newspapers figure it's a GOOD idea to publish offensive cartoons about a religion which they've historically opressed.

...seriously, sometimes I just want to yell out The Emperor has no clothes! I don't claim to have a very thorough understanding of the Global Politics, but I mean, come on! Reading something like this helps explain how I can be so right, when most people are so wrong, without making me worry about schizophrenia...

Seriously. Thanks.
 
Atomic Cowboy said:
European newspapers figure it's a GOOD idea to publish offensive cartoons about a religion which they've historically opressed.

Err.. First of all, it was Denmark and secondly they havn't historically oppressed anyone, they havn't the means. In fact, Denmark was one of the first countries to have multi-religious cemetaries, IIRC, in Fredericia. Oppressed by 6 feet of dirt is as far as you can stretch it.

Way to go for a first post, but I had to get that off my chest, I apologize to the regulars.
 
Nova said:
Err.. First of all, it was Denmark and secondly they havn't historically oppressed anyone, they havn't the means..

Didn't they, like, pwn Old England?
 
Yes, but that isn't a religion they historically opressed, they just plundered people regardless of religion. Plus, that was almost a thousand years ago :p

Also, if vikings didn't exist, what would you call thursday? (Thor's Day) :p
 
Considering how fucked up reality is, it's no surprise everyone's getting so cynical these days.
 
Nova said:
Err.. First of all, it was Denmark and secondly they havn't historically oppressed anyone, they havn't the means.

I was being glib for the sake of making a point.

It was Denmark that published it first, but then right wing newspapers across Europe, and even some in North America figured it would be a great idea to immitate them (the Calgary Sun for instance).

As for the historical oppression I was referring primarily to the WWI peace settlement which basically split the Middle East into two along the Maginot Line, giving half to Britain and half to France. Since then there's been a government aided dominance of our own Oil monopolies (Imperial Oil, and one of the split offs of John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil - I forget which one, but they all worked together anyway, so it's moot) to the detriment of middle eastern attempts at oil companies. Furthermore, there is still a persistant view in the Middle East of the Westerner as Crusader.

But whether or not they have a justifiable reason to be feel exploited by us is irrelevant; they do feel exploited and publishing that comic was irrisponsible in the current political climate - especially since it contained no satire that I could detect, just crude humour.

Hmm... come to think of it I should have included destroyin your own cities because of a comic in a foreign newspaper on the list of "shit that hasn't made sense lately."

All that being said, this is derailing the thread so I'll end it here.
 
Atomic Cowboy said:
A President who hid during the Vietnam war and speaks like a retard was elected.

Hiding for something as stupid as the Vietnam war is a positive trait in my book.

Atomic Cowboy said:
European newspapers figure it's a GOOD idea to publish offensive cartoons about a religion which they've historically opressed.

'Europe' never truly opressed the muslim religion - they've opressed muslims, that's for sure, not never really muslim religion. By the time Europe was strong enough to conquer and colonise the muslim world, religious sentiments were by far not as important as ethnic sentiments.

Nova said:
Err.. First of all, it was Denmark and secondly they havn't historically oppressed anyone, they havn't the means.

I guess the Norwegians, the Sleswig-Holsteiners, the Swedes and the Inuit don't count, then?

Nova said:
Yes, but that isn't a religion they historically opressed, they just plundered people regardless of religion. Plus, that was almost a thousand years ago :p

Not to mention they never had enough time to do any permanent or even effective long-term opression - medieval occupation of the Middle East proved to be too short-lived to do anything along the lines of what some muslim governments do to christians nowadays.

Atomic Cowboy said:
basically split the Middle East into two along the Maginot Line,

The Maginot line?
 
Jebus said:
I guess the Norwegians, the Sleswig-Holsteiners, the Swedes and the Inuit don't count, then?

Sure they count, but the Danes started the whole shebangabang. Not that I'm proud of it.
 
Jebus said:
Atomic Cowboy said:
A President who hid during the Vietnam war and speaks like a retard was elected.

Hiding for something as stupid as the Vietnam war is a positive trait in my book.

I doubt he was protesting on moral grounds, more likely off on a bender.
 
Atomic Cowboy said:
It was Denmark that published it first, but then right wing newspapers across Europe, and even some in North America figured it would be a great idea to immitate them (the Calgary Sun for instance).

Ever heard of free speech? I doubt you have, you fucking islamo-fascist.
The media that showed the cartoons weren't rightwing, they were the ones who said no to extremism, no to terrorism, no to the goddamn sharia.

The media who didn't show the cartoons were in the wrong. They succumbed to terror. They sacrificed freedom of speech to please some extremists.


denmark_turban.jpg
 
The funny thing is that the article that came with those cartoons said something along the lines of: We can't show these cartoons without people going amok.

And they were absolutely right.
 
Mani said:
Ever heard of free speech? I doubt you have, you fucking islamo-fascist.
Mani: calm down, that's completely uncalled for, and very much unfounded as well.

The media that showed the cartoons weren't rightwing, they were the ones who said no to extremism, no to terrorism, no to the goddamn sharia.
Yes, and he didn't say the comics were right wing, but that right wing newspapers felt it was a good idea to republish them, to stand up for their right to free speech, and simply annoy a lot of muslims.

The media who didn't show the cartoons were in the wrong. They succumbed to terror. They sacrificed freedom of speech to please some extremists.
No they didn't. They felt it was in bad taste to publish cartoons like that if they offended a shitload of people. There was no obligation whatsoever for those media to show those cartoons. They reported the news without showing the cartoons.
 
Freedom of speech is a terrible threat to democracy! What would USA be like if people we're allowed to have their own opinions and express them freely?
 
Atomic Cowboy said:
It was Denmark that published it first, but then right wing newspapers across Europe, and even some in North America figured it would be a great idea to immitate them (the Calgary Sun for instance).

I'm pretty sure the Calgary Sun Never published those cartoons. They made a big point of it in their letters to the editor section.
 
't Was never really only right-wing newspapers that printed them too, really. A lot of newspapers went into 'OMG OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS THREATENED' mode, like some sandniggers and ugly old motherfuckers with beards really have the power to threaten anything.
 
Publishing those cartoons never had anything to do with free speech... only with taste and balance. I mean all newspapers around the world have a right to show cartoons of a defecating human being and yet they do not do it, why?

Furthermore the real issue is that muslim religion forbids picturing Muhhamad... picturing him would be on the edge. Still they not only publish it but suggest that the muslim religion is nothing but terrorism (in a way that is supposed to be humorous) when it reminds me of christian crusading...

I consider all religions a load of crap, but I think they shouldn't be offended in any way for believing in it. It's their choice.
 
Atomic Cowboy said:
It was Denmark that published it first, but then right wing newspapers across Europe, and even some in North America figured it would be a great idea to immitate them (the Calgary Sun for instance).
I just remembered something. When the whole scandal about the Mohammad cartoons broke out, Feral Tribune, the most left-wing (and coincidentially, the most intelligent) political magazine in Croatia, printed the following front page:

get_img


Literal translation:

"Fuck you and your drawing!" (directed at raging Muslims)

And below:

"We print 12 Mohammad cartoons."

Is it any surprise that Feral is pretty much the only printed publication I read?
 
Back
Top