The Top 5 Ways Jon Stewart Was Full of Sh*t

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

The Top 5 Ways Jon Stewart Was Full of Sh*t

HD Video Download

Jon Stewart has been a major cultural and political commentator for the past 16 years. He liked to take down the powerful—at least, when his head wasn't shoved up Uncle Sam's ass. 

As The Daily Show host ends his run, reminisce with Reason TV the top five ways Jon Stewart was full of shit.

Approximately 5 minutes. 

Produced by Justin Monticello and Alexis Garcia. Written by Justin Monticello. Music by Digi G'Alessio. Additional footage by Videvo and BlinkFarm. 

Watch the video above for the full interview and scroll down for downloadable versions. Subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel for daily content like this.

Comments

[bacon-magic]

Funny how all these shills keep jumping off the boat.

[bacon-magic]

Woo hoo! I'm first. That means I'm the least productive at work today, right?
What did I when? Sunglasses that can be donned? Gaze narrower(hope swiss is doing alright)? A, dare I say, Rand Paul autographed woodchipper?

[William C.]

lol, thanks for the laugh amongst this incredibly negative video + haters hating.

[Jordan]

Can't watch it at work, but I hope his pathetic softball interview of Obama makes the list.

[thelma567]

Start making cash right now... Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I've started this job and I've never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here...
http://www.jobnet10.com

[Onlooker]

Yeah, he was worth watching at one time; funny, irreverent and all that (you could at least stomach the occasional left wing B.S.). Then a few years ago he really went full bore partisan Democrat shill, thumping climate change, gun control and other such crap. Full of shit indeed.

[JWatts]

"Then a few years ago"

You mean in 2008, I assume.

[Bobarian (Would Chip Her)]

2004

[mad.casual]

'Top 30 Ways Jon Stewart Was Full Of Shit: No. 8 Will Drive Dems Insane!'

C'mon Reason. If you're gonna go with the buzzfeed 'Top N Ways...' headline ya gotta drive the numbers up. Especially when there's so much material to pick from.

[Curtisls701]

Thank you for coming very close to encapsulating my overall view of Stewart. I would add that his schtick of snarky commentary gets very old, very quickly, regardless of topic.

[Knarf Yenrab!]

I can't tell if I'm getting old and even crankier, but none of these television "personalities" are funny. It's tiresome and a sad reminder of all the boobs we're surrounded by.

Gutfeld's double entendres were great back when he was doing Red Eye ("if he were a soap dispenser, I'd pump him in the men's room"), but the popular Fallon/Stewart/Colbert stuff is canned Jay Leno warmed over.

[freedomlover]

Yes. I felt the same way when watching Bill Maher. Everyone was always talking up up. Bur for me, he wasn't really funny. He was just cantankerous and snarky and outright rude for no other reason than to throw of an air of holier-than-thou.

That was too much like the 1960s I came of age in when the test of one's coolness was measured by how acerbic and snarky one could which feeds into critical and contrarian and ends up bitchy. After all, you didn't want anyone to think you were "establishment". That just wouldn't be "cool".

The problem with this is, it's funny for a bit. But it grows old. It relies on constant state of negativity. What a sucky way to go through life.

[Gurble]

"It relies on constant state of negativity. What a sucky way to go through life."
So kind of like Reason and all of the commenters?

[bluecanarybythelightswitch]

It's hard to find his holier-than-thou attitude funny when he is such a complete and utter retard.

[Ceci n'est pas un woodchipper]

You know, I'd share this on Facebook but the people who need it most won't care and the people who'd appreciate it already know.

[american socialist]

I've got two... First, the way he equated what msnbc does and what foxnews does. Second, that brief period when he took Tea Party talking points seriously and concluded that the IRS and Benghazi "scandals" were serious issues. Yeah, he wasn't perfect all the time.

[BearOdinson]

So I am assuming you are going to tell us that MSNBC is a legitimate news network with thoughtful commentary, and Foxnews (sorry Fauxnews) is just an arm of the RNC.

PHAKE SCANDULZ!!

[John Titor]

Remember, american socialist is the one who lectures everyone here on their principles, while definitely showing that he has none. He'll be an utter partisan hack to blatantly corrupt people as long as they coo things he likes.

[Sevo]

Commie kid is so full or 'principles' that he's passed his mortgage off on everyone else to pay, sleazy little shit.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

He didn't build that !!!!11!!!

[Res ipsa loquitur]

He didn't build that !!!!11!!!

[Knarf Yenrab!]

I believe people in the know refer to it as "False News" now after their colleagues in the English department informed them how the word "faux" is pronounced.

[Zeb]

In English we pronounce our Xes.

[Pulseguy]

Zeb....faux is an English word, and it is pronounced 'fo'.

It does come from the French, but it has been an English word for some time.

[freedomlover]

Nope. Faux is still French. Our incorporation of it into English is called a "loan word" But the pronunciation remains at it's root - French. Thus, we still say "Fo".

C'est la vie!

[gphx]

'fo' is afta 'fee' and befo 'fi'

[Knarf Yenrab!]

Not when we don't!

[triclops]

So true,

Fox will have liberals on their shows, MSNBC will not have conservatives on theirs.

I like that you are still trying to defend the IRS "dog ate my hard drive then all the hard drives of people i emailed, i erased my phone, and accicentally deleted all the backups i denied existed even after they were subpoenaed." Just a bunch of crazy coikydinks!

[freedomlover]

Dogs don't eat hard drives. They pee on them. Ask me how I know.

[Knarf Yenrab!]

So, when will your skin be sufficiently thick that you can go hang out with talking-points Democrats rather than continuing to spew gibberish here?

And is there anything I or anyone else here can do to help hasten the day when you reunite with your fellows?

[Woodchipper Terminator T-1001]

Are we going to have to pay for another mortgage of yours when you fail your family again? Stupid asshole.

[Jordan]

The Tea Party even corrupted the IRS Inspector General!

[jmg09]

Who misses Craig Kilborn?

[Bobarian (Would Chip Her)]

woot.

[Tony]

Lame.

[Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair]

Yes you are. Or is that your last name?

[Migrant Log Chipper]

Tony Lame'

[Migrant Log Chipper]

Tony Lame'

[freedomlover]

Nope. It's what he wears. Gold lame'.

Darn it. There goes my French again.

[JimBob7]

Gold lame underwear? (bra and panties?) NTTAWWT

[RockLibertyWarrior]

Talking about yourself, again Tony fucktard Derp?

[Fist of Etiquette]

The contradictions in his attacks on power were probably due to having different writers at different times. It looks like some had some idea of the dangers of a Big Brother while others, not so much. Also, of course, depending on which party was doing the Big Brothering at the time.

[Greg Gutfelt's Nutpunch]

That is not a matter of artistic license. You can't blame his writers for that.

He make fun of democrats at times but never because that was the policy direction of the show. He did it just enough to get "cred" of being "impartial". He would never do it if it didn't provide this false halo to his audience.

Jon Stewart was a blatant partisan hack, masquerading as a comedian, masquerading as a news organization. It's a masterpiece of propaganda, and it worked on several levels.

[american socialist]

I've got another one... In April of 2003 when he said that anyone not celebrating the overthrow of saddam Hussein was lost to the Left. You mean the occupation of a sovereign country by an imperialist army is something to celebrate, Jon? Yeah, he was a hack that conflated the relative power of Noam Chomsky and George bush and how many warplanes each of those men could summon, but so what? Everyone has their blind spots. Plus, he was only a comedian.

[John Titor]

Well of course you can't understand why even a person who was against the Iraq War could recognize that ending the reign of a murderous dictator may be a good thing. Atrocities and massacres don't exist in AS's mind, unless they can be used to smear filthy capitalists of course.

[JimBob7]

Plus, he was only a punk.

.
FIFY

[Tony]

Bunch of humorless psychopathic assholes, libertarians. Of course Jon Stewart, a liberal, is going to favor a national healthcare system over Obamacare. But then the utter disengenuousness of saying, in effect, the VA is the only government-run system in the whole universe and thus his point is dumb. America is not the only place in the universe. And just see how vets do if they were shuffled off to private-sector healthcare.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

You're right, medicaid is even worse.

And stop fisting kittens, Tony.

[Tony]

I want to be a libertarian for a day and experience what it's like to be completely unburdened by the normal empirical requirements of reasoned thought. A whole day when things are only what I assert them to be as required by the platitudes of my dogma.

[John Titor]

what it's like to be completely unburdened by the normal empirical requirements of reasoned thought.

You mean how you regularly act? Of course, I don't expect self-awareness.

[JimBob7]

Good thing, too. If it demonstrated self awareness I'd want to get a temperature report on how cold it was in Hell that day.

[MarkLastname]

That coming from a guy who has literally never once even attempted to rebut an argument made against something he said. A guy whose sole contribution (probably in real life too) is to make a quick sarcastic swipe to pad his ego, before tucking tail and running from the discussion as fast as his legs will take him.

You and amsoc share that trait. I have never seen either of you even attempt to defend one of you indolent ideas. You just come here, shit on the doormat, then leave. At this point, that you still hold any of those ideas must be due to sheer hatred of the people who disagree with you. No other real explanation. You get soundly refuted on the regular and yet, every time, back to drop another log on the carpet.

[AFSlade]

*DING!DING!DING!*

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

- "I want to...........experience what it's like to be completely unburdened by the normal empirical requirements of reasoned thought. A whole day when things are only what I assert them to be as required by the platitudes of my dogma."

Aren't you already a liberal?

[Tony]

Clever retorts guys. We have humorless down. Who wants to try psychopathic next?

[John Titor]

*Tony collectively insults nearly everyone here in a moronic fashion, then sarcastically comments on other people's 'clever' responses.*

See, there's that whole lack of self-awareness thing again. Tony, I get that you think very highly of yourself, but unfortunately your opinion of yourself fails to match reality.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

Tony, please think of the kittens!

[DesigNate]

Says the asshole who readily admitted that he would line up his political opponents and shoot them.

Go fuck yourself Tony.

[Chevy the Mulched]

I wonder if he'd do it with an assault rifle.

[JimBob7]

Why would we try psychopathic- you already have the patent on that.

[MarkLastname]

How is making a joke humorless?

But it's nice to know not liking Jon Stewart is a diagnostic marker for psychopathy.

I'm just going to be generous and assume you've been doing a lot of coke tonight.

[Pulseguy]

I think you've got all that nailed perfectly.

[JWatts]

"A whole day when things are only what I assert them to be as required by the platitudes of my dogma."

Ok, that has to be irony.

[Sevo]

Tony|8.5.15 @ 5:18PM|#
"I want to be a libertarian for a day"
Forget it, shitbag; it requires the ethics of an adult and principles. You're a moral cripple without any familiarity with the concept of principles.

[freedomlover]

"A whole day when things are only what I assert them to be as required by the platitudes of my dogma."

Earth calling Tony.

You've been doing exactly that since I've been reading this forum.

[Libertarius]

What a stupid fuck you are. For you, empiricism consists of listening to lamestream leftoid talking points so you can parrot them uncritically. Leftoidism is the dogmatic cancer this country is suffering and failing from, bozo.

[PH2050]

And just see how vets do if they were shuffled off to private-sector healthcare.

Already starting to happen because, *magically*, the wait times are shorter and the quality of care is better. Of course, you would know that if you ever knew what the fuck you were talking about.

[Tony]

Nobody disputes that the VA is riddled with problems. That is not a confirmation of laissez-faire economic theory. In this country you can see a doctor immediately and get the best treatment in the world, if you can pay for it. I'd have more respect for libertarians if they'd admit that in their system, a person who can't get insured (because say she has cancer) or pay out of pocket deserves simply do die of cancer.

[John Titor]

In this country you can see a doctor immediately and get the best treatment in the world, if you can pay for it.

As opposed to the wonderful public healthcare system I live under, where it's far, far more difficult to get immediate or long-term medical attention and you can wait five hours in the ER with severe, possibly deadly head trauma. Hell, in Montreal sometimes ambulances just won't show up. Rufus can confirm this. But the rich can still get treatment.

I'd have more respect for libertarians if they'd admit that in their system, a person who can't get insured (because say she has cancer) or pay out of pocket deserves simply do die of cancer.

Would you be willing to admit that my grandfather deserved to die on a surgery waiting list in the glorious Canadian universal healthcare program?

[Pulseguy]

Or, my friend Linda, with two kids, who couldn't get the treatment she needed and died of a heart attack? Or, my countless friends who wait two years to get something painful taken care of that is low on the list of medical priorities in Canada, only to fly to Mexico and get it done for $2000 in Mexico.

Or, women with free breast exams and guys who have to pay for a PSA test because breast cancer has way more political clout than does prostate cancer.

And, so on, and so on....

[freedomlover]

Where do I sign up to be a free breast exam provider?

[MarkLastname]

Tony wants you to console yourself with the fact that they were necessary sacrificial lambs to the Great God of the State and almighty Centrally Planned Economy.

[Chevy the Mulched]

It appears as this is another of those moments where Tony gets busted out on his platitudes and then cowers in the corner waiting for this to blow over instead of backing up his talk.

[Tony]

Were they forbidden from paying out of pocket for good old American healthcare?

[Carolynp]

I'd like to pile on. My friend from England who was in a simple car accident, hurt her back. She needed surgery, but was triaged as unimportant. When she finally was supposed to get the surgery, two years later, it was too late. Her spine fused with the injury. She has a permanent hump in her back. Who is responsible? No one. Who can she sue? No one.

[But Enough About Me]

Preach it, bro.

I'm always amazed by Americans who, for some utterly unfathomable reason, seem to think that socialized medicine (as epitomized in their minds by the Canadian "system") will produce better outcomes for more people than what they've got now.

As a Canuck, I've actually had to flee to our nascent private medical susbsytem (the British Columbia variant, not the Quebec one) twice now to get timely care. It was surprisingly inexpensive, too.

In Canada, health insurance is universal. Health care, not so much. And once you become even slightly jaded about it, then you start learning about the quirks ? like each province's list of approved/non-approved treatment options. Need a non-approved treatment? Too bad for you, buddy ? you just discovered another hole in the "universal" health care you claim is so wonderful.

[freedomlover]

Whoa. Stories like this are whisper stories. The MSM down here loves to flaunt the universal Canadian system as the holy grail of socialized medicine. A few Canadians I've run into do as well, although I have to admit, they're usually young and lack the experience of difficult or lengthy health issues.

Would you guys please start a blog to set the record straight. Then you might not have to be amazed at the number of American's who believe that the Canadian "system" is the nirvana of health care systems.

In the meantime, a friend of mine who retired young, is affording health care by medical tourism which many find objectionable on the suspicion that Juan the doctor in Mexico City is the same Juan who was cutting their lawns just a few short years ago.

Back home, I can't find a doctor that speaks English in the Kaiser HMO system my employer has relegated me to because it's the closest thing to socialized medicine we have and the model HMO for the medical industry.

[Bgoptmst]

Please notice Tony doesn't argue with you that you are wrong. That's because you have experiences and he has feelings. Your experiences don't mean that your statement is an absolute truth, but it is a data point that another individual can consider and come to their own conclusions.

Or, you could just feel that something is a certain way, and then base all your arguments on feelings haphazardly disguised as facts.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

Versus the NHS that determines your care is not cost effective and shuttles you off to die. Wanna know the really dirty secret, Tony? Private insurance is on the rise in all of your single payer paradises that don't outlaw it, so in your fantasy the rich still get better care (including life saving care) than the poor.

And stop fisting kittens dammit. They do NOT like it!

[John Titor]

Private insurance is on the rise in all of your single payer paradises that don't outlaw it, so in your fantasy the rich still get better care (including life saving care) than the poor.

The great part about Canadian healthcare is when politicians go down the U.S. for treatment rather than stay here. St. John's apparently has the best heart disease department in the country, but when Premier Danny Williams needs heart surgery he doesn't go to the hospital in his own province, he goes south. Good enough for the proles though.

[Zeb]

deserves simply do die of cancer.

Here's a big part of your problem. Deserves has nothing to do with it. People get things they don't deserve and don't get things they do deserve all the time. You can't fix that. The fact that we don't think that every bad outcome means there is a need for a government program to fix it has nothing to do with what anyone deserves or our feelings on the subject. Shit isn't free and actions have consequences.

[Intn'l House of Badass]

Please support your assertion that no one deserves to die. Your answer should reference Planned Parenthood.

[PH2050]

Nobody disputes that the VA is riddled with problems. That is not a confirmation of laissez-faire economic theory.

That's not what we were discussing, dipshit. You implied that veterans would receive worse outcomes if forced to utilize private sector care.

Not only are you ignorant of the fact that a shitload of vets currently get private care through various programs like "fee basis referral" and other vouchers but you're also ignorant of the fact that this has actually been occurring for quite some time. Certain specialty clinics just cannot handle the patient load.

[JimBob7]

If you were a veteran (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!) you'd already know what a load of codswallop you are peddling, so shut the fuck up.

[AFSlade]

THIS^^^^^

[RockLibertyWarrior]

Tony, your fucking stupid, it must be hard being a derp through your whole life. Before government stuck its big nose in healthcare it was affordable and there was numerous charity hospitals that took care of the poor free of charge. But you of course ignore that, because it isn't considered help if the government isn't stealing and giving to something or someone else. I don't like you, I never will. I don't trust somebody who advocates robbery and murder like you do, go choke on a dick, asswipe

[MeatBorg]

For Christ's sake, when calling someone "fucking stupid", please proofread your own spelling: your != you're

[Pulseguy]

Yeah Tony. It isn't fair to use the VA as the counter example when they could have used all the other federal departments that are really well run. All those ones. You know the ones. They're super well run and get a lot done, and, and, and.....

[PD Quig]

With a government grant I think I could make this walk truly silly.

[BearOdinson]

The Interstates HighRoad Web is an amazing feat done by govt..... SQUIRREL!

[freedomlover]

Humorless Libertarian is an oxymoron.

But "humorless" is the perfect description for socialists and their lesser offshoots if there ever was one.

[RockLibertyWarrior]

"Humorless psychopathic assholes, libertarians." No, Tony, read what passes for your "comments" what you described us as describes you to a T. Your a fucking idiot, please go fuck off and die eating your own shit in a gutter, you fucking straw man building fucktard.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Not bad, but you missed out on some of the best ones, like his parroting of some of the most thoroughly debunked gun-control bullshit.

I especially liked his brain-dead claim that the NRA was being hypocritical at its convention immediately following the Boston Marathon bombing when LaPierre made a comment praising the efforts of law enforcement, because NRA membership tends toward conservatism and libertarianism, and both philosophies are suspect of overly big government...and law enforcement is a function of government....therefore they must hate cops....or, something.

[Rockabilly]

Clown Stewart is the official court jester for central committee.

[Grant]

Jon Stewart isn't full of shit ... he's making a bunch of money. It'd his audience that's full of shit or they wouldn't be his audience.

[OneOut]

Bingo.

Stewart has found a niche to exploit. He's rolling in the dough just telling some people what they want to hear in a funny way.

That's capitalism. He is delivering a product that people want at a price they are willing to pay. It is up to his customers to decide if they want more of his product or less of it.

It's free association all the way down.

[freedomlover]

Like Trump?

[Palin's Buttplug]

Same with Rush (King of the Rednecks) Limbaugh.

[BearOdinson]

But Limbaugh never even pretends at objectivity or going after both sides. He is completely open about his views and what he does. He also ALWAYS openly admits he is NOT a journalist. He goes out of his way to state he is an entertainer who tries to educate about his point of view.

Of course, look who I am arguing with..........

[MarkLastname]

So it would be more apt to call him a shit-salesman?

Problem is, I think he actually eats it too in addition to selling it.

[Adans smith]

In other news,The Nightly Show is unwatchable.

[Knarf Yenrab!]

No mention of the time he confused the national debt and the deficit in his "debate" with hard-hitting, uberintellectual Bill O'Reilly?

Confused might not be the right word, as it was unclear that he even understood that there is a difference between the two terms.

[James Anderson Merritt]

The several clips showing Stewart at his self-contradictory and hypocritical worst added substance to this story in a way that would not be possible in print. But I don't like sitting for five minutes or so to watch a video that takes the place of a page or two of print that I can scan in a minute or less. I'm still waiting to encounter some discussion on Reason about the list of questions Stewart posed to libertarians some time ago. Now that he is on his way out the door, does Reason have official answers for those questions? Did I blink and miss them at some point?

[Sevo]

Are you asking about this:
http://johnhumphreys.com.au/20.....ertarians/
For starters, most of them aren't questions, they're assertions with a question mark at the end. Besides which, those are the same crap that gets dealt with here on a regular basis.
Did you have a point, or just dropping by to leave some shit on the thread?

[freedomlover]

It's the way of the left. Just pretend to ask a question while pontificating.

The right just threatens to beat your face in if you say anything.

[american socialist]

Another low point was when he apologized for calling Harry Truman a war criminal.

[Sevo]

american socialist|8.5.15 @ 7:29PM|#
"Another low point was when he apologized for calling Harry Truman a war criminal."

Not nearly as bad as your mom not aborting you.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

Hey Sevo, Weapon was hovering around a Musk piece on the Register again. You could practically hear the spooge dripping off his monitor as he typed with one hand.

[Sevo]

"Hey Sevo, Weapon was hovering around a Musk piece on the Register again. You could practically hear the spooge dripping off his monitor as he typed with one hand."

Was the subject Musk's human vacuum cleaner hose? The Tesla's increased mileage that might let you get to Tahoe if you don't use the heater?

[OneOut]

Sevo you are rude.

American Socialist is trying to assert he is one of the Good Pigs and is above those other Pigs but you just won't let him.

You are an oppressor Sevo.

It is obvious for all to see that Am Soc is different from all the Am Socs of history. He is one of the good guys. He is one of those Socialists who would do the right thing unlike all the Socialists of History. Those who tortued, encamped, reeducated, starved to death, and murdered all those who didn't see and recognize their God given right to rule over hoi polli who disagreed with their worldview.

[freedomlover]

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

Get it right comrade!

[american socialist]

Paging Sheldon richman...

Is this the type of empathy and understanding we are all supposed to exhibit when we argue with those that disagree with us?

I'm a libertarian and all believing that we should exhibit distrust of institutions in the public and private sector, but if this is how we talk to each other in the internecine I'd say we might have a way to go in trying to persuade someone who was, say, a totalitarian religious fundamentalist.

[Sevo]

american socialist|8.5.15 @ 9:20PM|#
"Is this the type of empathy and understanding we are all supposed to exhibit when we argue with those that disagree with us?"
You 'disagree' with me in that you support mass-murderers; you are an evil human being and the world would be better off if you were dead. Is that clear?

"I'm a libertarian"
You're a lying sack of shit besides.

[Libertarius]

Libertarians are cool with the private sector because it is voluntary and we understand how incentives work.

You're a fairy.

[MarkLastname]

"I'm a libertarian and all believing that we should exhibit distrust of institutions in the public and private sector"
Do you normally try to funnel countless billions of dollars of other people's money into institutions you don't trust?

And from what I've seen of you, you receive no less empathy and understanding than you give.

Btw, there is no 'we.' There are individuals, who choose to interact with other individuals. But if you want to force me into the same fucking boat as you, then it's not 'we' who need to be protected from 'them', those religious hicks you live in fear of; it's me who needs to be protected from you and your ilk; I'd especially like my bank account protected from you and your phantasmagorical plans for a utopian society. But alas, one could sooner teach a horse to do calculus than teach a socialist the concept of voluntarism.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

Hi AmSoc!

Say, I'm working on my Socialist Terror And Larceny In North America (S.T.A.L.I.N America) Badge, but there's one thing I just can't keep straight: Do I kill everyone and then take their stuff, or do I take their stuff and then kill them? Thanks in advance for the help!

[Migrant Log Chipper]

Ha

[freedomlover]

Then answer lies in the neutron bomb.

[JimBob7]

Yeah, because dropping the 2 atom bombs saves 10,000,000 to 20,000,000 million Japanese lives from death by starvation in 1946 and '47. Good call, you Unicorn Worshiping Dimwit.

[freedomlover]

If we'd have just starved them out, we could have taken their stuff without a fight.

Geez!

[american socialist]

The other thing that's funny is the way dean Acheson kept adding zeroes to the casualty estimates that an invasion of Japan would entail. He did that about every 5 years so you must have caught up with one of his papers around 1963-- you know, about the time he and the rest of the cabinet were urging Kennedy to invade Cuba.

[freedomlover]

Not unlike the published numbers of VC killed during that fiasco.

But, they were breeding like flies because they just kept coming.

It's ironic that we still don't realize the incentive to fight on that is provided when one's country is repeatedly invaded by foreign forces that are there to save one from himself.

[american socialist]

I guess I'm disappointed that on a libertarian comment board there is such a rush to defend a monstrous public works project that seriously polluted a significant portion of eastern Washington and South Carolina to build a weapon of war that killed 95% civilians. I just thought we all believed that Roosevelt was a war pig and would leave it at that, but yet there seems to be sympathy in the most unexpected places for nuclear war. Who knew.

[Sevo]

american socialist|8.5.15 @ 9:29PM|#
"I guess I'm disappointed that on a libertarian comment board there is such a rush to defend a monstrous public works project that seriously polluted a significant portion of eastern Washington and South Carolina to build a weapon of war that killed 95% civilians. I just thought we all believed that Roosevelt was a war pig and would leave it at that, but yet there seems to be sympathy in the most unexpected places for nuclear war. Who knew."

This from a turd who supports Stalin, mass murder and, oh, those who 'built' Chernobyl.
I'm sure a fucking idiot like you has a wonderful alternative in mind that would have saved all sorts of lives, right?
Oh, and that pollution? Well, yeah, a "significant portion" in lefty-propaganda-speak ahs smoe measure of pollution, but no one has left. Besides which, I'm sure you can quote several lefties who predicted this, right?
Fucking scum bag; who knew?

[Sevo]

Hey, asshole!
I'm waiting to hear what you propose as an alternative to the nukes. Let's hear it!

[Sevo]

american socialist|8.5.15 @ 9:03PM|#
"The other thing that's funny is the way dean Acheson kept adding zeroes to the casualty estimates that an invasion of Japan would entail."

What's really funny is ignorant fucking assholes posting about subject that are beyond them.

[MarkLastname]

Hey, I bet you're glad that Robert Conquest just died (RIP). Probably like to burn all his books, eh? Publicizing the (no doubt 'manufactured scandals') atrocities of socialist countries when people like you were still trying to old up Russia as big step forward for civilization. You must be celebrating. That Stalinist George Bernard Shaw is no doubt smiling in hell.

[Bgoptmst]

The problem with people like AMSOC is they don't take the time to gain historical perspective and try to use their perspective to judge the past.

Okinawa was horrible, and it was going to get worse. In order to invade mainland Japan more divisions and material would of been needed, which would have probably had to come from the European theatre. America was war weary by that time, and the public stomach for rationing coming after the 30's was lessoning. The bombing campaign we pursued in Germany and Japan makes the atomic bombs being used look kind.

I also submit that an America engaged in a protracted land war with Japan might have given Stalin the stomach to get belligerent in Europe earlier with a weaker America. Japan also might have been able to hold some of its captured territory, and would have retained its belligerent warrior culture.

Of course, if AMSOC thinks its a bad idea I imagine almost every reader here gained an opinion to the contrary without the need for any further facts.

[John Titor]

Amsoc's a utter hack, don't expect him to actually be consistent on anything or actually consider the historical reality. The only time he'll ever bring up massacres or atrocities is so he can wave his finger and pontificate about how horrible the United States/capitalists are. He has previously white-washed the millions of people killed by the Soviet Union. Because it's more in line with his politics, so of course he won't hold them to any kind of standard.

[HTuttle]

Really? That was all you could come up with?

Not that he was absolutely certain of everything he ever said even when what he said was absolutely and easily proven WRONG?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0Qw_hs6rXo

[Bill Dalasio]

Good piece overall. I would pick a nit, however. Jon Stewart was never "an honest commentator seeking his own truth" (or words to that effect). We're talking about a guy who edited discussions or responses to make opposing arguments look worse than they were and would put on his clown nose whenever somebody challenged him ("Oh, buy my show is on Comedy Central...."). Stewart was as much a partisan shill as any of the people he called as much.

[the other Jim]

Thank you for pointing that out. His show's production was dishonest as hell, and he was a coward for claiming he wasn't supposed to be taken seriously whenever anyone called him on the dishonesty.

Jon Stewart is basically the TV version of Krugman, except not angry: He tells smug liberals what they want to hear.

[RockLibertyWarrior]

Jon was right on some things, wrong on most. Just admit he was a dick sucking, statist. Fuck him, good riddance.

[tommy0302]

It's articles such at this why I stopped reading Reason...am I supposed to take this seriously? You all enjoy your echo chamber. Goodbye Reason!

[MarkLastname]

I never knew Jon Stewart was such a sacred cow among progs. I also didn't know so many were dumb enough to actually fail to see how curiously selective he is about mocking people.

[woodNfish]

"Jon Stewart has been a major cultural and political commentator for the past 16 years."

Stewart wasn't any of those things except to you suckers in the LSM. He had a low end cable show that was supposed to be a parody of the news and he thought he was more than that. Other idiots in the LSM (including Fox) helped him think he was something by showing clips of his show and interviewing him. It was a regular LSM circle jerk. The public however, never thought much of Stewart at all, and his viewer numbers proved it. I never watched him, not one single time.

[block30]

Good riddance. But hey, at least his extreme fawning over dems is part of what soured me towards the democratic party, and I began considering myself libertarian. Thanks Jon!

[Foo_dd]

i am so glad i saw the article about them coming after reason for things said in the comment section. you guys rock.

my take, Stewart used to be good, but then he really shifted to fawning over the liberals and fighting FOX more specifically. not sure if it was falling in love with Obama, or getting a big head from other shows taking so much notice of him, but he stopped being a comedian a long time ago.

[John Galt]

Once it had been established by admission that a number of younger, mixed-up Americans, whom I personally know, got most of their "news" from little Jonnie Stewart there was little doubt left that our future will not require sunglasses to look at.

[Ken Sarkuse]

Check out an article I wrote on the sheer ignorance and moral degeneracy that these adult children otherwise known as leftists routinely exhibit....

http://www.criticalweary.com/?p=37

And we can all thank Stewart for helping to groom these prototypically asinine and arrogant modern "liberals". Is there anything more pathetic than watching them burst into applause and adoration for him when he affirms their moral superiority on, say, Obamacare and makes them laugh hysterically at us obstructionist peons at the same time?

[Jonathan Goodman]

I got stuck at point number 2. If you're going to call yourselves "Reason" and earn a reputation for intellectual rigor, you probably shouldn't pretend that federal revenue going up contradicts the claim that the top marginal tax rate has gone down since Clinton was President. And you probably should not quote raw government income numbers without some kind of normalization (percentage of GDP, or per capita, etc.).