"I'm not a partisan hack!
I'm not the voice of the Republican party!
I don't hate Jon Stewart!
Serious cat is not serious!
Internet is not serious business!
I'm not gay!"

I see Tucker is wearing a tie. Must be he got laid finally.

Course it's a pink tie.. that guy has some issues.




And it that one dude, Zurawik or what ever, is wrong. It is not the purvey of journalism to help citizens make smart choices, thats the purvey of consumer reports.

Journalism is there to be critical on all things and especially to ask the real questions in situations like the one we are in today. We have Freedom of the Press not so they can inform the consumer of what their corporate office wants them to hear, but to critically think and report on our world. Not to tow the political line, but to challenge political lines.

When these journalists and pundits clearly don't even know the purpose of the Press (such as the one guy I'm talking about,) then you know that real journalism is an endangered species, with people like John Stewart one of the few real 'journalists' left.

And Carlson is a retard. Stewart is clearly a democrat but to call him a 'partisan hack' is beyond ludicrous. Does he not remember John Stewart busting Bill Clinton during his administration? You could probably pull up dozens of clips of him hammering that administration over the years.

Last (edit) Stewart wasn't busting CNBC and Cramer, though they were clearly the immediate focus. He was busting on ALL of today's corporate media, particularly any of the 24 hour networks that propose to 'report' on ecconomics.. which AFAIK is.. all of them.

I personally can only hope that this isn't over. I'd be beyond happy to see this situation continue and for Stewart to just keep up his fantastic work.

LOL partisan hack, who remembers the 04 crossfire beat down by Stewart on Tucker calling him a partisan hack.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Jon-Stewart-on-Crossfire

Tell me, how do you reconcile with yourself the fact that your comment exhibits the same behavior that you are criticizing?

It is quite simple - and if you exercised your faculties for a moment and thought about as opposed to 'emoting' about it then you could answer your own question for you without bothering me. As it stands, I am more than pleased to fill in the gap of your ignorance.

1. I am commenting about a single known individual who has a long track record of bias, anger, spite, and of propogandizing. Garofolo is not a neutral party. She is a partisan hack, and every time she speaks she makes logical fallacies, hasty generalizations, prejudiced comments, and otherwise proves that she is a smally, petty, bitter individual who blindly opposes 'Republican' and bends over for 'liberal' with equal blindness. She's a hack. A simplistic hack who has proven again and again that she is not 'well adjusted' or anything close to it.

2. She is commenting about literally millions on millions of persons and using the worst kind of prejudice, and stereotyping to apply characteristics to ALL persons in that group. Stereotyping is a common human coping mechanism, but she does the worst possible thing you can do with it. Most normal, well-adjusted human beings use stereotypes to mentally 'bin' people into basic categories, and then take the time to learn about individuals they meet. Not all persons in a 'stereotype' fit the bill. Certainly not all Republicans are mean, cruel, or anything of the sort. Therefore she is that most odious and stupid of persons that can possibly exist... A person that lets her stereotypes do her thinking for her. That makes her a troll - unworthy of further consideration. Any concept or idea she proposes should be rejected on that basis alone. She is intellectually incapable of moving outside of her prejudices. She is small minded, vapid, and stupid if she actually believes what she's saying.

That spell it out for you? That's how I can criticize her. Because I'm commenting on an analysis of HER and what SHE says and thinks based on her actions, words, deeds, writings, and comments... You know - REAL things that she has said and done. She on the other hand is commenting about millions of people she's never met in her life, and has the gall and cheek to claim that she thinks she knows they're evil, cruel people. All it proves is that if you changed her gender and sent her back a few decades you could rename her "Goebbels" instead of "Garofolo" and you couldn't tell the difference...

I giggled myself silly when I read this comment. Leaving Bush out of it, the hero worship is HILARIOUS. Calm down, ladies and gentlemen. Someone is going to get trampled in the rush to lick Obama's handsome, eloquent, apologetic feet.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Get real everyone. Barak Obama himself had NOTHING to do with the vetting process except the initial "check this guy". Do you think the President has the time to go do the literal mountain of fact-finding needed for the hundreds of people in his administration? Here is what really happens... AIDE1: "Mr President we checked and Tom Daschle looks OK." OBAMA: "OK, let's go" (fist bump).

And as far as the "Oh wow - that's how a President should act"... You people must rent yourselves out as Hoovers you are such suck-ups. Bush accepted blame & apologized for a lot of things, but you never cut him one inch of slack. Now you're all falling over yourselves to say how wonderful Obama is for doing it. What a bunch of brainless Obama-zombie tools. Your two-facedness and partisan hack nature make you completely pathetic sell-outs.

I never at any time during Bush2 would sell-out my principles. Bush did TONS of things I thought were incredibly stupid and I said so. Farm subsidies, immigration 'reform', education bill, reckless spending and a bazillion other things. And I want him held responsible and blamed for all that crap, so when he did them I criticized him like he deserved for being an over-spending jackass. But you Obama-zombies... Obama could re-open Gitmo2 under the name "Obamaland" (which he probably will) and you'd say he was a genius. Obama could declare war based on faulty intelligence and you'd fall over yourselves to be the first person in line to french-kiss his duodenum.

Winstonfield_Pennypacker says"
" Bush accepted blame & apologized for a lot of things, but you never cut him one inch of slack. Now you're all falling over yourselves to say how wonderful Obama is for doing it. What a bunch of brainless Obama-zombie tools. Your two-facedness and partisan hack nature make you completely pathetic sell-outs. "

Bush accepted blame for some things, as he was leaving. I can't remember any time Bush took any meaningful responsibility in a timely manner. If he had, he would have less to regret as he left.

There was little Bush ever did that wasn't blatantly partisan, and you're criticizing the other partisan side for not ever being behind him? Well, that's brilliant.

When a democrat wins in places like Indiana and North Carolina, the election trasncends the partisan. This country wants him to fix the mistakes the made by his predecessor and previous congresses. It's not just democrats that want this to happen. You act like you don't understand this.

You're a moron. The way you write makes you look like a right wing moron, which makes you look even dumber.

I like Obama. I voted for Obama. I can be happy for Obama. I can be happy for the change in atmosphere. You seem upset. You must not have voted for Obama. Sucks to be you, I guess. Might as well accept it and get over it, dude.

"You've sold out logic, reason, and even common sense in the name of blind partisan fanboism."

You're acting like a loser. I'm sorry for your loss. If you're going to be a cry-baby, why don't you just take your ball and go home?

This administration was drastically different from the last one on day one. This is another example of how and why. Most of us who don't have REAL obsessions (like yours) can recognize that. You're the only "fanboi" here - the anti-fanboi. You're so edgy, dude.

Extreme! Let's flex our penises to show how extreme we are.

ps. Like it or not, this is history. There's already songs written for him, and his face on all kinds of merchandise, and his name being used for all kinds of different things. It's probably as embarrassing to him as it is to me, but you can't sit around expecting it to stop, because the man made history.

Get real everyone. Barak Obama himself had NOTHING to do with the vetting process except the initial "check this guy". Do you think the President has the time to go do the literal mountain of fact-finding needed for the hundreds of people in his administration? Here is what really happens... AIDE1: "Mr President we checked and Tom Daschle looks OK." OBAMA: "OK, let's go" (fist bump).

And as far as the "Oh wow - that's how a President should act"... You people must rent yourselves out as Hoovers you are such suck-ups. Bush accepted blame & apologized for a lot of things, but you never cut him one inch of slack. Now you're all falling over yourselves to say how wonderful Obama is for doing it. What a bunch of brainless Obama-zombie tools. Your two-facedness and partisan hack nature make you completely pathetic sell-outs.

I never at any time during Bush2 would sell-out my principles. Bush did TONS of things I thought were incredibly stupid and I said so. Farm subsidies, immigration 'reform', education bill, reckless spending and a bazillion other things. And I want him held responsible and blamed for all that crap, so when he did them I criticized him like he deserved for being an over-spending jackass. But you Obama-zombies... Obama could re-open Gitmo2 under the name "Obamaland" (which he probably will) and you'd say he was a genius. Obama could declare war based on faulty intelligence and you'd fall over yourselves to be the first person in line to french-kiss his duodenum.

Partisan hack! He wouldn't have been so upset if it were a Republican... wait...

Keith Olbermann should be put out of his misery from living in so much stupidity. He thinks Palin didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was, when Charlie Gibson (who was interviewing her) used the term incorrectly, and was trying to trip her up, and all she asked was, "In what way, Charlie?" It's perfectly fair to have antagonists define their terms before asking a question.

Keith is a f--king partisan hack moron worse than anything on Fox News.

Great sift. This comparison and contrast analysis between FAKE news analyst, Jon Stewart, and FAUX news analyst, Bill O'Reilly, is a wonderful way of eliciting the partisan hack politics behind these so-called ways of representing the 'news'.

Extremely informative! Lives up to the moniker of "Real News." This really highlights the horrible job that the traditional media (television/radio and newspapers) does in speaking about relevant information. An analysis of the candidates foreign policy advisors doesn't play into the horserace narrative that the media prefers.

Could have done without the swipe at McCain at the end. I am no fan of the man, but that wasn't really necessary. Stick to the solid analysis and let the partisan hacks take shots at each other.

Debate? DEBATE?!?

This has nothing to do with debate. This is two partisan hacks yelling at each other. The fact that I agree with one of them only makes it more disheartening. And honestly, this is not even the fault of the hacks - they are doing what they do because this is the only forum they are offered.

People should watch Jon Stewart on "Crossfire" again. This sort of talking head, no make that "yelling head" thing is, as Jon said "hurting America".

"But which points of Gabriel's speech do you disagree with here?" --> the point at which Heritage Foundation invited her to speak.
If the NRA or ACLU invited someone to speak, it wouldn't be just anyone off the street. So do I disagree with everything Heritage Foundation stands for and f-ks with in policy influencing, yes. Scaife et. al. are real scum. She is a partisan hack who represents a Christian, conservative think tank (ACfT)

"The difference between the Arabic world and Israel is a difference in values and character. It's barbarism versus civilization. It's democracy versus dictatorship. It's goodness versus evil." -- Duke University Counter Terrorism Speak-Out, October 14, 2004

Hmm, hard to disagree with that... The difference between this woman and Ann Coulter is.. well.. one's adam apple is bigger.