Left pretty darned excited about this Jon Stewart rally

posted at 7:58 pm on October 28, 2010 by Allahpundit

Well, he is the most influential man of 2010 or something. And yet, somehow, I still find their expectations a tad … unrealistic.

“This event, while originally intended for jest, could possibly become a ‘turning point’ … in our nation’s history for having immense impact on how political discourse is engaged in the future,” … writer and actress [Nanci Ponne] wrote on the event’s Facebook page this week. “You have created a political movement, intended or not.”…

The rally’s Facebook page is a hive of activity, much of it aimed at the political left, with posts about get-out-the-vote efforts and plugs for Democratic candidates mixed in with logistics advice. As of Wednesday afternoon, more than 223,000 people indicated they planned to attend…

“To many, it might seem strange that a comedian could lead the march to change the level and tone of discourse in America,” said David Todd Agro, a 32-year-old project manager in Brattleboro, Vt. “However, at its best, comedy and satire reveal our foibles to us. We may chuckle, but then the absurdity sinks in and we may even begin to think.”

The anticipation for the rally, which will be broadcast live on Comedy Central and C-SPAN, speaks to the longing many Democrats and independents feel for the excitement of the 2008 campaign.

That’s one way to look at it, and the DNC is certainly trying to take full advantage. (Says a voting expert at American University, “For Stewart, sanity is a code word for Democratic.”) Another way to look at it is that the left is hot to top Glenn Beck’s rally in turnout and “prove” that they’re still the ones who Care The Most, notwithstanding the brutal beating they’re about to take next week. And a third way to look at it, I suppose, is as a reaction to what Shelby Steele identified today in his superb op-ed about the failure of Obama’s liberal Hopenchange redemption narrative. As George Carlin once said, inside every cynic is a disappointed idealist, and there an awful lot of disappointed idealists among the lefty base right now. Is it any surprise that they’d take comfort in a rally organized by two guys who’ve become superstars of cynicism, with a consoling chicken-soup theme of sanity and moderation and, heck, all-around niceness? (Plus, Sheryl Crow will be there!)

As for last night’s “Daily Show” interview with The One, the RNC is calling it “sad” and (some) media critics are calling it “dumb,” but young voters could save a few seats for the Dems next week, so it’s Politics 101 for Obama to show up and give them a pep talk. Gibbs kicked the White House press corps in the stones this afternoon by saying, “Jon Stewart is about as good an interviewer as there is in the public domain right now,” but I don’t think he’s alone in that impression. Many lefties, including lefty media professionals, would no doubt agree, and with some reason: Because Stewart doesn’t have to pretend he’s impartial, he’s free to ask questions from the sort of unabashedly liberal point of view that many journalists hold but aren’t permitted to voice (at least, not too explicitly). David Zurawik:

Maybe I was deluding myself because I like the intelligence of Stewart’s humor, but I really believed he had a more balanced and centrist take on American life. If the White House was looking for the court jester and mouthpiece of the folks senior White House officials described as the “professional left,” they found him. He was sitting across from the president Wednesday night prodding him with all the White House had not done.

And that’s the difference, isn’t it? The right feels Obama has done way too much without thinking it through — call it the the cash-for-clunkers style of governing with massive and misguided social programs. The left, meanwhile, thinks he hasn’t done enough.

If Stewart had a more balanced take, he wouldn’t be nearly as interesting to lefties. The “clown nose on, clown nose off” dynamic that he’s mastered — part comedian, part serious interviewer/commentator — paradoxically gives him cover to ask more biting questions than Katie Couric, say, could get away with. If Katie told Obama, “I feel like you let us down a bit,” it’d kick off a bunch of ponderous media pieces about objectivity and bias and whether she’s crossed the line, etc. If Stewart does it, hey — clown nose on. James Poniewozik:

In a typical network-news interview with the President, “getting tough” with him is defined as presenting him with the criticisms of his opposition. Obama is a Democrat, so the questioning of him is usually framed in terms of the Republican critique. And it’s fine and appropriate that reporters should try to get the President to answer his opponents’ charges—but in this binary system, it means that there’s a critique of the President that goes mostly unaddressed. Sometimes that critique is from the left (healthcare reform or the stimulus were too weak), sometimes it’s not ideological at all (the administration didn’t act boldly enough to remake a corrupt system).

Stewart’s interview, like The Daily Show itself, wasn’t a replacement for the work of the rest of the news media but a supplement to it. A comedian has certain advantages straight reporters don’t. He can call the President “Dude.” When Obama referred to Larry Summers as having done a “heckuva job,” directly recalling George W. Bush’s unfortunate praise of his FEMA head after Katrina, Stewart pounced, “Dude, you don’t want to use that phrase.” (Obama tried to recover with, “Pun intended.” Yeah, I don’t think so, and it wasn’t actually a pun.) And a comedian can laugh when Obama says, “Yes We Can, but…” a moment that probably encapsulated better than any gotcha question or editorial the disparity between the campaign promise and the administrative reality of the Presidency.

Exactly. Stewart can giggle in The One’s face; Jake Tapper, no matter how much he may want to, can’t. Who has the advantage in terms of producing interesting TV?

Rather than give you the full interview from last night, which is long enough that most people won’t have time to watch, here’s a telling clip from Verum Serum in which Obama hints at the inevitable expansion of ObamaCare. Stewart doesn’t call him on it, but then why should he? To his audience, expanding O-Care is the only sane option, and we already know what “sanity” is a code word for. Exit quotation from the Journal, summing up Obama’s calculus about health-care reform and the midterms: “You have to break a few careers to make a European entitlement state.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Leftists should be excited and yes, this rally is a huge deal.

The freaking President has promoted it.

visions on October 28, 2010 at 8:53 PM

CW is having a bad day.

Enjoy, everyone!

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:50

PM

Not a bad day at all. Pukes like you disgust me. You’re a leech and a hypocrite. Aholes like yourself have no regard for America and care less about the damage you do.

I will be having a great Tuesday. You?

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:53 PM

The freaking President has promoted it.

visions on October 28, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Kiss of Death?

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:53 PM

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 8:51 PM

It’s all based off useless data. Real numbers show 200,000 net jobs created between April 2009 and April 2010. Half of those jobs were in Texas. If the stimulus -were- effective, why is the only real effect noticeable in TX?

It’s a real stumper.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Meanwhile, on planet earth. Germany enjoys the lowest unemployment rate in 18 years while you celebrate 9.6%. Sorry. And, by government estimates, about 200,000 net jobs created between April 2009 and April 2010.

Restore the sanity, indeed.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 8:51 PM

Didn’t 60 Minutes correct that stat, and say it’s at 17% percent? Crr6 probably cheers about that number. More people needing entitlements, Dems will rule forever!! UGH!!!

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:49 PM

that’s the first reasonable comment I’ve ever seen you post.

ted c on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

We’re probably going to lose more than the historical mean, because 1) we have pretty big majorities so there are more Dem seats open to being turned over;

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:49 PM

ROFL…now that’s weak.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Kini on October 28, 2010 at 8:52 PM

No, seriously I do. I don’t want to be them. They were so unnecessarily ugly about any rallies by the Right. I am doing the Golden Rule deal on this.

Cindy Munford on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Thanks for the amswer.

Well, if it’s shaping up to be the normal midterm losses then I guess you should just plan on being here with us to watch the polls come in then.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

It’s the liberal way. wait for someone else to come from behind

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Pause.

visions on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

I just watched the full Daily Show interview. It was a decent interview.

terryannonline on October 28, 2010 at 8:55 PM

answer…

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Didn’t 60 Minutes correct that stat, and say it’s at 17% percent?

That’s u-6. I don’t like u-6 because it presupposes the reasons -why- people are unemployed.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

I will be having a great Tuesday. You?

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:53 PM

You know, the annoying thing is it’s going to be hard to listen to the Lefties lashing out on Nov 3…

Of course it’s no fun to be defeated, but the left has historically not handled defeat in a very sane manner.

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:51 PM

I don’t know, remember Denver. The Won had to have two separate arenas and had the columns hauled in for his acceptance speech. I am probably giving Mr. Stewart too much credit.

Cindy Munford on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

crr – why do you long for being a slave to the state? daddy issues? mommy issues?

Or you could be like so many other lefties. You think you will be one of the elites don’t you? Yeh that is it. Truly disgusting.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

Without the stimulus (which saved or created 800 Billion jobs), unemployment would be 115%. Dumb wingnutzzz.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

Restore the sanity, indeed.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 8:51 PM

Sorry that link upsets you. Maybe you should do your own study or something. You seem to be pretty on top of things. Really, I mean that.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

I don’t know, remember Denver. The Won had to have two separate arenas and had the columns hauled in for his acceptance speech. I am probably giving Mr. Stewart too much credit.

Cindy Munford on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Who knows. You’d think that Stewart would be embarrassed to be seen uhhh puffing up Obama’s ego. Then, again, you do see parents coddling their spoiled children without any shame.

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:59 PM

the left has historically not handled defeat in a very sane manner.

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Heck just look at waht the prospect of defeat has wrought.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:59 PM

Well, if it’s shaping up to be the normal midterm losses then I guess you should just plan on being here with us to watch the polls come in then.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

I said it will probably be greater than the historical mean (which I think is around 30, although I could be wrong about that). If you’re going to screw with my responses I won’t bother giving them to you in the future.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

To many, it might seem strange that a comedian could lead the march to change the level and tone of discourse in America,” said David Todd Agro, a 32-year-old project manager in Brattleboro, Vt. “However, at its best, comedy and satire reveal our foibles to us. We may chuckle, but then the absurdity sinks in and we may even begin to think.”

Translation–we’re a sorry joke, and so we have a comedian as a leader. And no, you’re never going to think, because to do that you’d have to engage reality, not some fantasy world in which someone with no experience can have preternatural judgement, even though anyone with any brains knows that judgement comes from experience. Et cetera.

smellthecoffee on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Is this biting Move-On Obama-Care supporter going to be a speaker at Stewart’s “sanity” rally?

Lourdes on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

I mean that.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

You really are a pompous beyotch. GFy.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Sorry that link upsets you. Maybe you should do your own study or something. You seem to be pretty on top of things. Really, I mean that.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

You should be sorrier that there’s still 9.6% unemployment after, what, 3 million jobs created? Or saved?

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

ROFL…now that’s weak.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Heh, crr certianly takes the Gold Medal in bet-hedging.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

I know. Or I could just presuppose the benefit of dollars being spent like the CBO does and ignore the actual net job creation count. Like you’d prefer to do.

Meanwhile, on planet earth. Germany reduced its unemployment rate 4% in the past few years. With tax cuts and cutting government spending.

I know it’s hard to accept.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

I won’t bother giving them to you in the future.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Sweeeeeet

Cya puke

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Didn’t 60 Minutes correct that stat, and say it’s at 17% percent?

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

…sort of. Isn’t that just taking into account those who have given up seeking employment? You can always increase the unemployment rate by taking that into account. It’s not some sort of new, shocking stat.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

You really are a pompous beyotch. GFy.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Yeah, but you must use that term with all your close female friends… I mean, it’s not like you dropped the beyotch-beyotch bomb.

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 9:02 PM

I hope the attendees have a good time and good weather.

Cindy Munford on October 28, 2010 at 8:50 PM

I do too. I hope they continue to party for several days, but not forget to vote on Nov 3.

lukespapa on October 28, 2010 at 9:02 PM

I said it will probably be greater than the historical mean (which I think is around 30, although I could be wrong about that).

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Oh, simply because you have such ginormous majorities. Right? But…but…a couple of years ago we were being told that the GOP would soon be extinct. I mean, we were looking at at least 10 generations of Democrat dominance. What happened?

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:03 PM

I know it’s hard to accept.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Yeah, but Somalia proves that the free market doesn’t work. Or something.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 9:03 PM

sort of. Isn’t that just taking into account those who have given up seeking employment? You can always increase the unemployment rate by taking that into account. It’s not some sort of new, shocking stat.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Ummmm if they were working, and lost their job, tried looking, and have since given up, isn’t that STILL being unemployed? I think so…thus…should be added to the numbers of the unemployed..

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 9:03 PM

I just watched the full Daily Show interview. It was a decent interview.

terryannonline on October 28, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Thanks for the Squish POV Larry.

darwin-t on October 28, 2010 at 9:03 PM

We’re probably going to lose more than the historical mean, because 1) we have pretty big majorities so there are more Dem seats open to being turned over;

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 8:49 PM

ROFL…now that’s weak.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Why? Obviously we’d be open to losing more seats than say, the Repubs in 2006 considering we have bigger majorities. It’s not a very difficult concept.

And I also mentioned that we’ll lost more than the historical mean because of the economy. I think that’s a pretty fair analysis.

I think it’s worth noting that you can only really spin this as a “referendum on Obama” to the extent people think Obama is responsible for the current economy. And the last poll I saw showed most people still blame it primarily on Bush. That may have changed though, because I think I saw that around a month ago.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

I didn’t intend to sound like I was to screwing with your response. You actually seemed to say both things. That it was normal to lose seat after getting White House and it was going to be higher because of the unemployment. Maybe you should check up to see if you’re having the bad day you thought CW was having. I was honestly asking if you’d be here to comment on election night.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

…sort of. Isn’t that just taking into account those who have given up seeking employment? You can always increase the unemployment rate by taking that into account. It’s not some sort of new, shocking stat.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Wow I sure hope the Dems are giving you the reach around.
Do they buy your knee pads and kleenex. Talk about a totally bought dupe. Must be the free healthcare, food stamps, and government grants.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:06 PM

I just watched the full Daily Show interview. It was a decent interview.

terryannonline on October 28, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Ummm yeah. I especially liked when the most transparent president ever said they’ve done things that we don’t know about.

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Why? Obviously we’d be open to losing more seats than say, the Repubs in 2006 considering we have bigger majorities. It’s not a very difficult concept.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

The more Democrats, the more wise and reasoned and intelligent governance. Why on earth shouldn’t they GAIN seats?

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM

The larger lesson is that we are learning for the fourth time in 45 years that America can’t be governed from the left. Democrats exploited the recession and the accident of 60 Senate seats to push the agenda of their dreams, and the American public has recoiled at the effrontery and the results.

from the WSJ. Yeah, and the Left has proven that it only needs to be elected once in a while to move the country into de-facto socialism. They think that it can be repaired…maybe over decades????? Ha. Stop drinking the Kool Aid.

We have powerful self-reinforcing leftist programs that will continue the spiral.

Public employee unions give money to Dims to raise taxes/public employees salaries so that public employees unions have more money to contribute to Dims. Repeat as necessary

AZ now can not screen out illegals in registering to vote…so if they can vote, they’ll vote for people who increase illegal aliens.

If we can not stop self-reinforcing systems we will lose

r keller on October 28, 2010 at 9:08 PM

MeatHeadinCA on October 28, 2010 at 8:59 PM

I am going to consider it a slight nod to the Right by Mr. Stewart, whether it was or not. A weak, at best, attempt to be fair and balanced.

Cindy Munford on October 28, 2010 at 9:08 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Good lord! What poll? Jon Stewart told Obama the other day, to not go there. Meaning…the blame Bush mantra.

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 9:08 PM

I think it’s worth noting that you can only really spin this as a “referendum on Obama” to the extent people think Obama is responsible for the current economy. And the last poll I saw showed most people still blame it primarily on Bush. That may have changed though, because I think I saw that around a month ago.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Of course what people think is what really determines the facts. /

The reality is that the President’s policies and the uncertainty they have created have killed job creation. But hey you keep defending them so you can keep mooching toady.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:08 PM

Oh, simply because you have such ginormous majorities.

No. Because of the economy as well. Did you read my post?

But…but…a couple of years ago we were being told that the GOP would soon be extinct. I mean, we were looking at at least 10 generations of Democrat dominance.

The people who said that were stupid. And you won’t be able to find me saying that. I remember reading a long New Yorker article on the “extinction of conservatism” or something and finding it ridiculous. You guys weren’t going to go away after 2008 anymore than we were going to after 2004.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Of course nearly 4 years of Democratic control of Congress and of the Governorships have just done wonders for this country./

Great work lefties!

Crr were you one of those many idiotic Americans who thought the GOP controlled Congress the last two years of Bush’s 2nd term?

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:11 PM

I think it’s worth noting that you can only really spin this as a “referendum on Obama” to the extent people think Obama is responsible for the current economy.

That and Obama saying it’s a referendum on him.

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 9:11 PM

I didn’t intend to sound like I was to screwing with your response. I was honestly asking if you’d be here to comment on election night.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Fair enough, sorry. Yeah I should be around, at least for a bit.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM

No. Because of the economy as well. Did you read my post?

Yeah I did, and also read that we were saved from destruction by the stimulus bill. The CBO said so. So why are the Democrats facing a shellacking?

The people who said that were stupid. And you won’t be able to find me saying that. I remember reading a long New Yorker article on the “extinction of conservatism” or something and finding it ridiculous. You guys weren’t going to go away after 2008 anymore than we were going to after 2004.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:09 PM

I think the days are coming though when your ideology will be totally discredited. Seriously.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM

The more Democrats, the more wise and reasoned and intelligent governance. Why on earth shouldn’t they GAIN seats?

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11. Even Reagan lost seats in the midterms after he epically PWNED Mondale. I’m not your strawman, sorry. I don’t think Democrats are invincible or immune to historical trends.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Crr enjoy TUES you dumb beyotch .FO.

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:36 PM

In her defense, I don’t believe she’s dumb, and I am sick of misogynist terms like that. Let’s agree to disagree and stick to the issues.

John the Libertarian on October 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11. Even Reagan lost seats in the midterms after he epically PWNED Mondale. I’m not your strawman, sorry. I don’t think Democrats are invincible or immune to historical trends.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:14 PM

So control flips to the other party every other cycle? LOL

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM

Fair enough.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM

“To many, it might seem strange that a comedian could lead the march to change the level and tone of discourse in America,”

If Will Rogers couldn’t do it, Jon Stewart sure as hell can’t.

ButterflyDragon on October 28, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11.

1998

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM

Fair enough.

John the Libertarian on October 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM

I agree.

hawkdriver on October 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM

Yeah I did, and also read that we were saved from destruction by the stimulus bill. The CBO said so. So why are the Democrats facing a shellacking?

I’m getting the feeling you know the answers to these questions already. You read the Hertzberg piece last night, right?

the presence of pain is more keenly felt than the absence of agony.

HTH.

I think the days are coming though when your ideology will be totally discredited. Seriously.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:12 PM

Well then you’re just as big a moron as those who danced on the GOP’s grave in 2008. Which I already knew, so whatever.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:19 PM

The people who said that were stupid. And you won’t be able to find me saying that. I remember reading a long New Yorker article on the “extinction of conservatism” or something and finding it ridiculous. You guys weren’t going to go away after 2008 anymore than we were going to after 2004.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Well, cries that the Republicans were going to “go the way of the Whigs” were stupid, but it wasn’t unreasonable for lefties to postulate that Obama’s sizeable margin over McCain represented some form of permanent leftward shift in the electorate. Not that we’d suddenly become a DailyKOS Nation, but that the post-Bush backlash would last longer than just the 2008 Elections.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11. Even Reagan lost seats in the midterms after he epically PWNED Mondale. I’m not your strawman, sorry. I don’t think Democrats are invincible or immune to historical trends.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:14 PM

You say “soon after 9/11″ as if that was the reason for the gains. With the short attention span Americans have, I’m not sure a full year afterwards that’s why Republicans gained seats. Nor do I think a year should be considered “soon after”. Unless you’re talking in geological terms.

ButterflyDragon on October 28, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11.

1998

lorien1973 on October 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM

Right, thanks. So yeah, it’s only happened twice out of the last 17 midterm elections. And with both of those exceptions the party with the presidency had single-digit gains.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:24 PM

with a consoling chicken-soup theme of sanity and moderation and, heck, all-around niceness?

This is a hatefest, pure and simple. Look at the attacks on Angle and O’Donnell — they are bitchy sluts who are going to hell. Listen to Obama saying “punish your enemies.” There hasn’t been this much venom flying around the blogosphere since GWB was up for re-election. And that’s saying something.

bitsy on October 28, 2010 at 9:24 PM

…I especially liked when the most transparent president ever said they’ve done things that we don’t know about.

capejasmine on October 28, 2010 at 9:06 PM

It WOULD have been (genuinely) funny had Stewart served Obama a big ole’ Slurpee when he sat down. And had technicians enter and place teleprompters on both sides of Obama’s view.

Lourdes on October 28, 2010 at 9:24 PM

Dude, I’m pretty sure the only time that’s happened in modern history is 2002, soon after 9/11. Even Reagan lost seats in the midterms after he epically PWNED Mondale. I’m not your strawman, sorry. I don’t think Democrats are invincible or immune to historical trends.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:14 PM

You say “soon after 9/11″ as if that was the reason for the gains.
ButterflyDragon on October 28, 2010 at 9:23 PM

It was the reason for the gains. Prior to 9/11 he was teed up to get absolutely wrecked in the midterms.

Nor do I think a year should be considered “soon after”.
ButterflyDragon on October 28, 2010 at 9:23 PM

I think 9/11 was still pretty fresh in people’s minds in November of 2002.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:26 PM

In her defense, I don’t believe she’s dumb, and I am sick of misogynist terms like that. Let’s agree to disagree and stick to the issues.

John the Libertarian on October 28, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Thanks for that.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:29 PM

Well then you’re just as big a moron as those who danced on the GOP’s grave in 2008. Which I already knew, so whatever.

crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:19 PM

I know you are, but what am I? Good grief. LOL

I’m getting the feeling you know the answers to these questions already. You read the Hertzberg piece last night, right?

The Hertzberg piece was speculation. Opinion. Propaganda. Why are we in pain still? The stimulus was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:31 PM

It was the reason for the gains. Prior to 9/11 he was teed up to get absolutely wrecked in the midterms.
crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:26 PM

“Prior to 9/11″ was a full 14 months before the midterms, though.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 9:31 PM

It was the reason for the gains. Prior to 9/11 he was teed up to get absolutely wrecked in the midterms.
crr6 on October 28, 2010 at 9:26 PM

“Prior to 9/11″ was a full 14 months before the midterms, though.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 28, 2010 at 9:31 PM

LOL, yeah. “Prior to 9/11″ he had been in office for 8 months.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:33 PM

WOW-Sheryl Crow is going to be there!!!!!!
Glad I don’t have the job of picking up all those “single sheets” that the morons are going to leave strewn across the mall.

DDT on October 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM

WOW-Sheryl Crow is going to be there!!!!!!

DDT on October 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Hopefully she won’t sing. Sounds like nails across a chalkboard. On second thought, considering the crowd, I hope she sings.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 9:41 PM

I’m hoping for a huge turnout, because that kind of folks will probably still be wasted by election day and forget to make it to the polls.

slickwillie2001 on October 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM

crr6, you are pleased with a CBO report that the stimulus spending had a 0.7% impact on unemployment? That is, even allowing the remote possibility that the report is accurate?

$862Billion to impact joblessness by an insignificant margin, and those jobs almost universally connected to the government itself, such as census workers. Clearly a criminal use of taxpayer dollars.

Let’s have some fun. Suppose that blip in unemployment numbers represented 750,000 Americans going back to work (an insanely unrealistic number in your favor, just so you don’t think I’m holding back). That means that each job “created” via money from the stimulus cost an average of $1,149,333 of taxpayer money. Not precisely efficient.

Had the government, instead of misusing most of a Trillion Dollars in an attempt to do what government is never able to do, offered the same total value in tax reductions across the board, the number of jobs created by commercial expansion and increased consumer spending would have returned unemployment numbers back toward those in effect prior to the Freddy/Fannie debacle fomented by Frank, Dodd & co.

You, of course, would never be able to bring yourself to agree with factual concepts which reduce the power of the almighty government, so we can all expect another linked “sorry” which has no meaningful value.

Freelancer on October 28, 2010 at 9:45 PM

He has put a “structure” in place…

No wonder they don’t take him off the TOTUS. He tells the truth about his intentions when he’s left to his own!

PattyJ on October 28, 2010 at 9:52 PM

crr6 in 2006 when the Dems won 31 seats: THIS IS HISTORIC!!

crr6 in 2010 when Dems will lose 31+ seats: meh, means nothing

It’s how all liberals live, in their own demented little world where white is black and black is green.

angryed on October 28, 2010 at 9:53 PM

Trolls are out like horseflies trying to distract us from the fact that The Anointed One himself said that the election is all about him, naturally, and is a referendum on his policies.

Dhuka on October 28, 2010 at 9:54 PM

“Pun intended”

I only watched it once, but the exchange went

Obama: Heckofajob
Stewart: (you don’t want to say that!)
Obama: Unintended (not pun intended)

I don’t think he said pun intended. He said unintended, which actually makes sense.

Go to the tape!

Paul-Cincy on October 28, 2010 at 10:18 PM

Trolls are out like horseflies trying to distract us from the fact that The Anointed One himself said that the election is all about him, naturally, and is a referendum on his policies.

Dhuka on October 28, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Yes, noticed that, too.

The Frank Luntz group thing was on tonight earlier (I think it was on Hannity) and this one guy said that he’d voted for Obama in 2008 “to be historic.”

THAT was his motive for voting.

The guy next to him said he voted for this nation, not for history. There were only a handful of other people there who claimed to have voted for Obama and about 1/5 of the entire group who claimed they’d be voting “Democrat” in 2012 when Luntz asked the group which party they’d vote for.

Someone claimed that this 2010 election was “about Obama” and Luntz disagreed and so did some of those who said they’d continue to vote Democrat. A guy in front insisted this vote (now, Nov. 2010) was about Obama and explained that, “he’s not on the ballot, but it IS about his politics.”

Lourdes on October 28, 2010 at 10:23 PM

So this “Restore the Sanity” event is going to be a mass suicide right?

Inanemergencydial on October 28, 2010 at 10:26 PM

I’m gonna laugh like hell when only 10 people show up for the “rally”.

And those are the bus drivers w/empty buses.

GarandFan on October 28, 2010 at 10:41 PM

“His dog has created more shovel ready jobs than he did” — Leno

Schadenfreude on October 28, 2010 at 11:01 PM

Hey wait, is not the standard that one loses “gravitas” when appearing in such forums? I say we strip Ohama of his presidency for going on The Daily Show (You know I just realized what dumb title that is…)

Sharr on October 28, 2010 at 11:04 PM

That Shelby Steele piece was the bomb.

Dork B. on October 28, 2010 at 11:28 PM

I saw more snippets of the Stewart ‘interview’ on Greta. Not a pretty sight for Bammie. In a couple of cases Stewart and the audience were laughing out loud at Bammie, and he wasn’t laughing.

Appearing on Stewart was a horrible idea for him, and whoever okayed it in the White House is going to get a reaming. This may be a symptom of staff churn in the White House; let’s hope he keeps getting bad political advice as long as it’s domestic.

The irony here, -Bammie would have been given a more respectful and worthwhile interview anywhere on Fox News.

slickwillie2001 on October 28, 2010 at 11:30 PM

Why would anyone waste their unemployment check $$ to go all the way to DC to see Stewart and smoke weed? My kid manages to do it from the comfort of his couch everyday of the week. The ambiance of sweaty tards can’t be that appealing, can it?

di butler on October 28, 2010 at 11:33 PM

The irony here, -Bammie would have been given a more respectful and worthwhile interview anywhere on Fox News.

slickwillie2001 on October 28, 2010 at 11:30 PM

Oh, I dunno. If he can’t appear with a friendly Jon Stewart without looking like a stammering dork, Fox News would tear him to shreds. Which of course is why he’s always avoided Fox like the plague. Imagine Megyn Kelly interviewing Obama. Ouch.

ddrintn on October 28, 2010 at 11:42 PM

I’ve written this before but I think there’s really only one thing Stewart is upset with Barry about. That would be not showing up on his show during his first 100 days in office. I see it like this, Barry was Jon’s guy. He probably thought to himself when Barry won “Oh my god, my buddy won, I’ve always wanted to get the sitting president on and now it’s a done deal. I can probably get him on in the first 100 days.” Then of course since Barry didn’t need Jon anymore he blew him off. (To make matters worse Jon probably thought “Well maybe he’s busy, at least he’ll be on during his first year. I mean it’s not like he’d blow off his friend and then go on Leno’s show. I mean what has Jay done for him?” :) )

Dave_d on October 29, 2010 at 12:41 AM

Or you could be like so many other lefties. You think you will be one of the elites don’t you?

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM

Is there any other reason for a leftist to go to law school?

malclave on October 29, 2010 at 1:33 AM

Who is this John Stewart guy?

I mean, really. I have no idea about anything he has ever said or done other than the fact that I heard Mark Levin call him “Liebovitz” or something like that a few times…

I gather that he has some kind of “show” on Comedy Central. I have cable, so I think I surfed by it a few times on the way past watching someone eating skunks, or worse, on DISC.

If this guy would promise to show me the “proper” way to eat a skunk I might watch whatever it is he is planning. Otherwise, I would expect the same results.

shorebird on October 29, 2010 at 2:26 AM

Oh, I dunno. If he can’t appear with a friendly Jon Stewart without looking like a stammering dork, Fox News would tear him to shreds. Which of course is why he’s always avoided Fox like the plague. Imagine Megyn Kelly interviewing Obama. Ouch.

Yes, Megyn Kelly would rip him a new one.

But Chris Wallace and Bill O’Reilly have both interviewed him in the past and been very respectful. O’Reilly was almost fawning in his pre-election interview in 2008.

Chris of Rights on October 29, 2010 at 5:50 AM

the wall to wall coverage by the msm is going to be sickening…dvr and netflix, here we come!

cmsinaz on October 29, 2010 at 7:27 AM

The Progressives are banking on a comedian, on basic cable to pull their bacon out of the fire……sure why not.

Dr Evil on October 29, 2010 at 7:45 AM

The morning news announced that the Stewart rally has not arranged for porta-potties.

Attendees bring their own Depends.

maverick muse on October 29, 2010 at 9:17 AM

CWforFreedom on October 28, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Jesus. WTF is wrong with you?
I will be the 1st in line to disagree with crr6′s progressive agenda. And I agree she/he unknowingly through willful or accidental ignorance desires the destruction of this Republic, thinking somehow there is a better system out there.
But she/he is always decently curteous, despite the lunacy.
Get yer panties out of yer a$$ & behave nicely please.

Badger40 on October 29, 2010 at 9:18 AM

the wall to wall coverage by the msm is going to be sickening…dvr and netflix, here we come!

cmsinaz on October 29, 2010 at 7:27 AM

There could be 100 people at this thing & I remain pessimistic that they will cover it like there are 1 million.

Badger40 on October 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM

As of Wednesday afternoon, more than 223,000 people indicated they planned to attend…

There could be 100 people at this thing & I remain pessimistic that they will cover it like there are 1 million.

Badger40 on October 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Watch all the tight camera angles. I guarantee you there won’t be any aerial shots.

Unless of course they manage to get the SEIU (and a bunch of homeless people) on buses. They can whip up a pretty nasty crowd on short notice.

Squiggy on October 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM

Comment pages: 1 2