Monday, August 3, 2015

Jon Stewart Destroys Kochfest!

Oh, this is much too funny not to share.  The best comes near the 5:25 mark, where Stewart does the most remarkably accurate take of Scott Walker (slightly NSFW):





H/T Heather at Crooks and Liars

15 comments:

  1. Omg ! That is so damn good.......how can Jon Stewart be leaving us?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. How many times was Jon Stewart wined and dined at the White House?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. more than you have you no-talent hack.

      Delete
  4. Jon nails what an absolutely paid-off loser Walker is, and how owned all of these GOPs are (except for 1...and he's a xenophobic fool). And no, there is no Dem equivalent, trolls. OWN the fact that Walker is a empty suit suck-up.

    Speaking of, hey WHAAAA-ska, bet you've had dinner with the Bradleys and the Walkers a whole lot more than Jon ever had with Obama. And Jon didn't sell himself out in the process like your sorry self has. Not surprising though, since Jon has three things WHAAA-ska never will- talent, wit and self-respect)..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BZZT! Times up! The correct answer is "multiple times." The article describes Obama as “cultivating” Stewart to an unusual degree in order to advance the administration’s agenda. At the 2011 visit, for instance, Obama used the meeting as a chance to push his economic plan and “lay the groundwork for his 2012 re-election campaign.”

      BTW, Jake: name-calling is not really a substitute for a cogent argument.

      Delete
    2. But it doesn't matter -- Jon Stewart has never made any bones about being a liberal... ever.... so what you are saying is "this guy has DINNER with people who he likes and has supported and therefore - its the same thing as these guys going to beg for a billion dollars from those people over there.... .... ..... Do you REALLY think anyone else is buying that false equivalency? I can't imagine that you are actually, you seem like you are capable of thought - in which case.... do you really think other people are stupid enough to buy it? REALLY, do you think that? If you do Mr. Blaska I feel very, very sorry for you.

      Delete
    3. It’s not name calling if it’s an accurate description.

      Delete
  5. From the Daily Caller: "Even when Obama wasn’t personally meeting with Stewart, contact between the White House and Daily Show was frequent, going well beyond just fielding calls to the White House from show staff. Top Obama aide David Axelrod frequently called and emailed Stewart, and described him as a “useful prod” for the White House. Fellow aide Austan Goolsbee often emailed a friend on the Daily Show staff as well, in what Samuelsohn describes as a “work-the-umps” strategy.

    The result? Quite often, Stewart and The Daily Show were effectively working “in concert” with the White House on political matters. Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri was blunt, telling Politico that “Democrats are worried” they’ll lose a key mouthpiece when Stewart retires from The Daily Show in early August."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One can only hope -- however, read my comment above and please feel free to explain how someone being a liberal and hanging out with... other liberals... is equivalent to a very small group of someone's competing for a billion dollars. I hang out with several Left wing elites.... On the rare occasion one of them runs for office somewhere, I support them and even raise a few thousand dollars for them from my colleagues (I'm a professional and not a lawyer - which unfortunately probably immediately tells you what field I am in, but what can you do) if you genuinely can make yourself believe that my friendship with people and even my delivery of a few thousand dollars to a candidate, or for that matter the friendship, if it is that, between Barack Obama and Jon Stewart is the equivalent of someone spending a billion dollars to buy candidates you have to explain to me your thinking process, because I think to most of us, at this point, it has to be labyrinthine.

      Delete
    2. That's right, Reyn. Scott Walker was living in an Occupy Wall Street encampment as a Sierra Club community organizer when he met Raoul Koch, mysterious half-brother to the Evil Koch Twins, who bought him a clean suit of clothes and a bowl of soup. Ever since then, Scott Walker has been dancing for his dinner.

      The guy's running for President, Reyn. He's got to compete with the Clintons, who "earned" $139 million making speeches b/w 2007-14 but donated $14.95 million of that to charity — all but $200,000 of it to their own foundation, which pays for their travel.

      So, yeah, Jon Stewart and Barack Obama. Just two ol' buds breaking bread together -- at the White House.

      Delete
    3. Alrightie - so switch the ball then, alright.

      Obviously you have no answer to my response to your prior attempt to equate Jon Stewart being friends with the Obamas with people seeking to be purchased by the Kochs (as Donald Trump has pointed out rather elegantly, don't you think?). If you had an answer showing how there was a logical connection - you would have given it -- instead you turn immediately to a different topic - - and attempt to "put me in my place" with "humor" -- an attempt which, btw, was a failure.

      So ignoring the Red Herring fallacy - lets actually go to the topic you now assert is your "real" issue.

      Hillary's campaign has raised about 50 million to date, setting aside any money she personally has, which she could move to the campaign but has not shown any sign of doing.

      Bernie Sanders, also a Democrat, has raised approaching 20 million at this point - almost all from small donors.

      You APPEAR to be saying that the rank and file of the GOP will not monetarily support a candidate with the hundreds of thousands of small donors that BOTH major Democratic candidates have gotten - and that therefore, people like Scott Walker have to go begging to a small handful of multi-billionaires to fund their campaigns because otherwise they won't have the money to run them. While that is certainly the position that I and many other Democratic Leftists and Liberals take - I find it somewhat surprising to hear a Republican or Right leaning Independent concede, tacitly, that the Right is actually dependent on its wealthiest members to buy elections, or at least the candidates that run in them - I also think its very sad - that was my parent's party.

      As for your last paragraph, ignoring the fact that given your red herring defense it becomes a non sequitur - when the honorable Frank Lautenberg (D- NJ) was last in the senate, I was invited to go down to a private event at his townhouse. There is a senator right now who is close to the family of one of my friends - I could conceivably, without much difficulty actually, get invited to an event at that person's DC residence - and it would mean squat. If I were in a position to - would I support them publicly YES, whether they invited me to an event or not, that is normal - people hang out with people who share their values and defend the values that they share -- check your right wing friends and see how many prefer to hang out with blatant Liberals - it won't be many. I do not see any valid point that you could be making with this recitation. To compare the outright purchase of candidates who - you tacitly admit - cannot get their routine backers to fund them, with people preferring to spend time with others with whom they agree - regardless of what influence they think they have or don't have - seems disingenuous at best and an attempt at misdirection (as you then evidence you intend in this post) in all likelihood.

      Regards,

      Reyn

      Delete
    4. Wait, Daily Caller? The site that's founded by Tucker Carlson, Fox news pundit? If I quoted from Daily Kos on your IBMadison blog you would excoriate me! Get real Dave and source facts from something more "believable", like World Nuts Daily, now that's a publication you can trust to be unbiased.

      Delete
  6. I see Dave's point. Influence peddling is not restricted to just Republican backers. However, the video and Stewart's skewering IS funny. What is not funny is the Koch brother's attempt to buy an election.

    Big difference.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not early the same as say, Dick Cheney going duck hunting with a member of the supreme court right before they ruled on something directly involving Cheney... himself:http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/18/politics/18CND-SCAL.html

      or..http://www.cbsnews.com/news/scalia-cheney-trip-raises-eyebrows/

      Delete