Wow, you’ve got to see this clip. This is fantastic.
Be sure to watch it clear until the end; it’s only about 5 minutes long. (The first few seconds of video are kind of messed up.)
VIDEO HAS BEEN REMOVED: Sorry, but it looks like the video I uploaded from YouTube was pulled for copyright reasons. I didn’t realize there was a copyright issue. Here’s the link to the clip from Comedy Central.
Joking aside, I think Stewart is capturing something I have been suspicious of. Many Palin supporters are being hypocritical concerning their support of her, and I suspect that this runs much deeper than the issues presented in this clip. As just one example, many Mormons will deride (openly or quietly) the career ambitions of someone like Hillary Clinton, but celebrate them in Sarah Palin. One reason for this certainly may be that there is a larger context to consider, but whatever that is is not being explicated — as is very clear by Stewart’s clip.
But I’m probably sexist for even bringing this up.
Filed under: Politics | Tagged: Bill O'Reilly, Bristol Palin, Brittany Spears, Dick Morris, double standards, FOX News, gender card, GOP, Hillary Clinton, hypocrisy, Jamie Lynn Spears, Jon Stewart, Karl Rove, LDS, McCain, media bias, Mormons, Nancy Pfotenhauer, Obama, Palins, Richmond, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, sexism, teen pregnancy, Tim Kaine, Wasilla Alaska, working women |
Thinking in a Marrow Bone 
Thanks for posting this clip. Wonderfully funny stuff.
First off, I can’t believe anyone could be so sexist.
Second, you can get a better, embeddable (is this a word?) clip from Comedy Central’s website.
Rutkowski,
I tried that, but I had trouble with it.
Plus this copy has a part edited out that I would prefer to leave edited out.
One more thing concerning this hypocrisy.
I wonder if some of the people who are cheering on Palin’s daughter (I also am happy she is keeping her baby, but I think it’s ridiculous how people are even making an issue out of it) would do the same thing if, say, one of Barack Obama’s daughters were a little older and in the same circumstance. My guess is no. I suspect that you would see at least some reactions like Bill O’Reilly’s concerning Jamie Lynn Spears.
Gotcha. Nice pick up on the edit.
Well, Dennis,
As long as your making up what might have happened in a world of what might have been…
Assumptions and innuendo do nothing to change anything in the GoP. [Remainder of post is removed by administrator. This kind of personal insulting is not allowed here.]
Population of Wasilla when Palin was mayor: 5,469.
Population of Richmond, VA (that Rove calls a small town): 200,123.
When I saw this last night I had to pause the show because I was so shocked from this clip. Unbelievable stuff. And for the record, Wasilla is not the 2nd largest city in Alaska, it is the 4th largest city in Alaska. (When she was mayor in 2000, it was the 9th largest city in Alaska.) And Alaska is 47th in population among the states, with only North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming having smaller populations.
Hilarious! Gotta love the flip-flops from both O’Reilly and Rove. Absolutely embarrassing.
There’s plenty of hypocrisy on both sides. One wishes The Daily Show covered both equally. (I love watching Stewart and am even thinking of voting Obama but I can’t stand watching Stewart near election time because he kind of wears his views on his sleeves)
BTW – regarding Palin’s daughter. I think most of us would want Obama’s kids to be off-limits. I was appalled back in the 90’s when some Republicans like Limbaugh started making fun of Chealsea’s appearance. (I’m sure I spelled that wrong)
“(that Rove calls a small town): 200,123”
Not surprising considering Rove’s a neocon. We’re all just ants to him and his illuminati controllers.
You say: “As just one example, many Mormons will deride (openly or quietly) the career ambitions of someone like Hillary Clinton, but celebrate them in Sarah Palin.”
I may be judgmental in my analysis of this statement, but that sounds like the Utah bubble speaking. My Mom has worked all my life. I spent lots of hours as a little kid at her vet clinic watching surgeries. My Dad is very successful, but works in construction, a notoriously cyclical business. Several times, my Mom has had a better year than my Dad.
I respect women who stay home with their families and hope to provide for my future family in a way that my wife won’t HAVE to work. If she chooses to, I will support her entirely. My like or dislike of Senator Clinton and Governor Palin is based entirely on policy. I am not going to touch either of their families with any of my comments (except for the former President Clinton, he is fair game.)
Tony,
Certainly there are plenty of people like you whose differences really are rooted in policy. I’m not even trying to say how many Mormons (and others) are being hypocritical about the whole work thing, but I’ve heard enough to know that a visible number are.
But what I think really happens, Tony, is that most people really do like politicians based on their policies, but that they then will use non-policy related things as reasons why they do or don’t like them. Let’s be honest, if Hillary were in Palin’s place with a four-month old baby — many of the same people who are praising Palin would be criticizing Hillary. And vice-versa concerning those who are criticizing Palin on this matter — but in this respect, anyway, there would be much fewer because the Palin criticizers are more from the liberal side who have a greater approval of young mothers working.
For the record, Wasilia isn’t the second largest city in Alaska. Anchorage is first, Fairbanks is second, Juneau is third. Wasilia recently passed Sitka for fourth place. Juneau with over thirty thousand souls is more than three times larger than Wasilia, which has under ten thousand. Richmond is twenty times larger than Wasilia.
C’mon Clark, Stewart may well be biased, but he’s so darn funny!
I think Stewart is funny and I usually catch him once or twice a week. But Clark is right, around election time, he gets a little too serious and the usual satire gets sacrificed. But he usually gives both Republicans and Democrats a bit of flack, though for different reasons. And it’s funny how Democrats don’t realize Stewart’s making fun of them with the whole Obama as the Messiah bit.
Stewart was always at his best when he’s skewering the media, not politics. That was the foundation the show was based upon, but now it seems Stewart has taken his role to mean something more.
The show also hasn’t been the same since Colbert, Helms, and Corddry left. The current “correspondents” are awful save for John Oliver. And someone needs to drag Samantha Bee off that show. She’s just not funny, ever.
As far as the clip goes, I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, that Fox News would EVER contradict itself. Next you’ll tell me the sky is blue and the Pope is Catholic.
OH, Stewart is very funny. No doubt about it. But around election time he’s just too shrill. What’s odd is often I agree with his criticisms but just the way they come off grates on me and makes the show unenjoyable. Stewart is at his best when he is playing the role of the bemused outside spectator noting all the doublespeak. As soon as he starts to care a lot (which usually means attacking Republicans and giving Democrats a bit of a pass) then he loses something.
And I say that, once again, thinking he was dead on about Bush back in the 2004 election.
BTW – I also agree that the correspondents are really, really lacking. (Although I always like it when John Hodgeman comes on) I kind of preferred Colbert when he was on the Daily Show to his own show which I just don’t care for as much.
The show never really recovered when the best correspondents left and went Hollywood.
“And I say that, once again, thinking he was dead on about Bush back in the 2004 election.”
True, but the funny thing is after that election he had the political guy from Rolling Stone on(can’t remember the name). The guy said Kerry could have won the election but he was such a “doofus”. The crowd gave it a very hearty boo to which Stewart turned to them nodding saying, “actually, he’s right.” Again, this is where Stewart is at his best.
So, Jon Stewart is a genius for calling Republicans hypocrites for pointing out Democrats hypocrisy in attacking Sarah Palin’s family, woman-ness, and superior experience over Obama?
When the facts aren’t on your side, distract the jury.
Nice.
So, does she have more experience as mayor of a city than a community organizer or not?
Bull Moose:
Barack Obama fwas a community organizer over 20 years ago after he graduated from Columbia University, where he majored in political science and specialized in international relations – He then attended Harvard Law School, graduated magna cum laude, and served as the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review. (FYI Martin Luther King was one too – its an important job)
In the last 20 years he has also been:
A civil rights lawyer
Taught at the University of Chicago Law School as a senior lecturer specializing in constitutional law.
State legislator, 1997–2004
U.S. Senator 2005-present
Stop spreading missinformation – he has done way more than community organizing (something that should be praised IMO).
Tim J.: As somewhat of a Daily-Show-phile, I feel the need to point out that historically its foundation was skewering normal people who thought/did/said crazy things. It used to be rather mean-spirited towards people who some of the time didn’t really deserve it. When Stewart took over attention turned towards those who did deserve it whether known or unknown, and once on that trajectory criticism of the media and politicians followed rather naturally. Additionally, I think (as he has stated often in interviews) that he considers his ‘role’ virtually unchanged, namely to make people laugh. I think the media is the party responsible for assigning him any more significant role, (for example: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/arts/television/17kaku.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin).
p.s. I thought Bee has great in her segment last night.
“I feel the need to point out that historically its foundation was skewering normal people who thought/did/said crazy things.”
I agree, but it was done in the style of a news show with the “fake” interviews (which they barely do anymore), commentaries, etc. It was done as a satire on the media. Now it’s a commentary on it.
And Samantha Bee has her moments but they are few and far between. Whenever she’s introduced I can usually count on a reference to her crotch and bleeped out vulgarity.
This is something Stewart starting doing a while back too. Bleeped-out F-words was funny but it’s time has passed. I was dismayed that The Office started to use the gimmick. It’s just low-hanging fruit, humor-wise, which is only good for shock value and goes against what the Daily Show should be and once was, smart, biting satire.
And Samantha Bee killed “This Week in God” which was an incredible weekly segment.
“I think the media is the party responsible for assigning him any more significant role,”
I agree, however, he’s fallen into a trap of too often making serious commentary instead of jokes at the top of the program.
Also, his interviews are very crappily edited.
Jeff:
Reaallly?!? Misinformation? You mean like comparing the experience of Sentor Obama’s current position which he described as “running a campaign” to Gov. Palin’s position two jobs and almost ten years ago: specifically, the Mayor of “Wasilly.” I’m just using Obama’s yardstick. Don’t blame me for following his lead.
Please define “community organizer” to help me understand that “its an important job.” (Nice job throwing in the red herring reference to Dr. King. I don’t recall Obama orgainizing peaceful protests in the South or a march on Washington. I believe he was a “voter registration” organizer. Mmmm hmmm.)
BTW, in the last 20 years, Gov. Palin has also been:
A sports reporter
A salmon fisherman
City Councilmember (1992 -1996)
Mayor (1996-2002); President of Alaska Conference of Mayors
Ethics Commissioner of Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (resigned in protest to bring attention to ethics violations and legal issues among Commission Members)
Governor (2006-present)
And why should “community organizing” be praised while serving on the PTA, city council, or as Mayor be derided as evidenced by the comments by Obama and his surrogates as well as the media pundits? All together now: “Hy-po-crites!” That’s why.
One more thing, Whitney, I don’t want you to get me wrong. Overall, I enjoy the changes made to the Daily Show. I much prefer Stewart interview and author, news anchor, or politician over an actor. I just think it’s gone too far.
If there ever was a candidate for a stay-at-home mom…its Sarah Palin!!
PJD,
As a stay at home mom I’d be interested in hearing you expound upon that.
I am hockey mom, hear me roar.
Any democrats that think conservatives don’t care about the middle class need to educate themselves. Why do you think Park Rangers tell you not to feed the bears in the wild? Because the bears will get used to and rely on free handouts and eventually won’t know how to get off their own lazy arse and provide food for themselves. Sound familiar liberals? The ONLY way to a strong economy is through strong companies with productive employees. That’s what made this country strong, not big government providing tons of free handouts by stealing from the wealthy successful people. How long do you think that would last before the employers providing the jobs will decide it’s better to just retire, sitting on their money in the Caribbean. Wise up liberals. It’s not a difficult concept to “get”. How many times does history have to prove it? Start listening to the successful business experts (the Forbes, Romneys, etc.) for advice and not some big talker who’s never even tried running a business. They will help you understand why the McCain/Palin economic plan is far superior to the Obama plan, which would very likely lead us into a depression.
Rick,
Considering that McCain/Palin’s economic plan has no noticeable difference from Bush’s, which is already leading us into a recession, I’m at least confident that McCain/Palin do not have compelling solutions regarding the economy.
Dennis,
I don’t believe the conservative principals have been implemented too well lately, probably partly because of Bush, partly because of the Congress which has been more democratic in the last couple of years when things have primarily deteriorated, and partly because of 9/11 and world affairs. I think McCain and Palin will do a better job and get the republicans back on track. And if you look around the world, we Americans have gotten a little greedy. Many of our personal financial problems we created by just over spending. Things are still very good in the US as evidenced by the immigration lines into this country.
Rick,
OK … how?
By reducing corruption and wasteful spending (and I work for DOE) as they have each demonstrated to do in the past and making sure our business taxes are not the highest in the world, so jobs will stay in the US and unemployment will drop and people will be able to have healthcare, peace of mind and everything that comes from a productive society.
Rick,
Obama and co. will say the same thing about reducing corruption and wasteful spending. Not a lot of difference there as far as I’m concerned; it is true that McCain/Palin have some experience in this (Obama does too, though I’ll admit it is limited), they are so wedded with lobbyists that it makes this promise disingenuous to me.
Regarding low business taxes, this is certainly what the Bush administration has fought for and it hasn’t really got us anywhere. And whatever promise can come with trusting the market on healthcare, I don’t see any real solutions that will have any impact on the millions of (hard-working) Americans who do not have adequate health insurance.
Honestly, how can the GOP say at this point, trust us, things will get better if we just trust in the market ….? It hasn’t worked, people.
“I’ll admit it is limited), they are so wedded with lobbyists that it makes this promise disingenuous to me.”
There are some who even have kids who are lobbyists…
“Regarding low business taxes, this is certainly what the Bush administration has fought for and it hasn’t really got us anywhere.”
Not sure I follow the logic. It’s not affecting the economy so let’s take money out of small business owners’ pockets? This makes sense for the economy?
“And whatever promise can come with trusting the market on healthcare, I don’t see any real solutions that will have any impact on the millions of (hard-working) Americans who do not have adequate health insurance.”
Straight from barackobama.com:
Part of his plan is “lowering costs by increasing competition in the insurance and drug markets…”
Take a look at johnmccain.com. He’s not saying the market will fix all.
I was just reading the past comments under this category. One of the first ones was from Clark about Limbaugh and certain Republicans making fun of Chelsea Clinton’s appearance in the 90’s.
McCain apparently had a hand in this as well. He is apparently credited with once saying: “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.”
So it definitely goes both ways.
If we went throught the last 8 years without the Bush tax cuts I imagine the economy really would be in very bad shape now. I think we still live in the greatest economy in the world. I bet that all of you are living in much better homes, driving better cars, have more TVs, etc. than your parents did or had. I know I sure do and my Dad had a better career than I have so far. I’m surprised at the number of people in their 20’s living in half million dollar homes. No wonder there is such a high number of repos.
I disagree. In times of war, tax cuts are wrong for economic and moral reasons. John McCain used to realize this. What we really should be saying is this: “If we went through the last 8 years without the Bush war, I imagine the economy would be in much better shape now.” That’s the truth.
Regarding your comment about homes, cars, and TVs … certainly nice cars and TVs have little correlation with real wealth and prosperity. Mere stuff. Mere things. Stuff is cheap. Homes certainly do have to do with wealth — but like you’ve suggested, a lot of people in fancy homes can’t afford it. The reality is that people are practically forced to buy nicer homes than they can afford because the low to mid middle class homes are no longer being built. (We call this bondage where I come from.)
Real wealth (as opposed to counterfeit wealth) is about job security, quality home-grown natural food, clean air, clean energy, safe neighborhoods, community resources, and quality health care. In these respects, many of our parents have us beat hands down. And the future might not look so hot.
Rick reminds us that feeding the bears will make them lazy.
Sarah Palin’s Alaska gave every Alaskan an extra $1,200 from oil revenues, and the GOP loves her. This is the Hugo Chavez plan. Alaska has no income tax and no sales tax. Alaska’s tax revenues come from taxing oil
Actually, I am warming to Sarah Palin on this. We ought to do more of this nationally.
Per dollar of Federal tax collected in 2005, Alaska citizens received approximately $1.84 in the way of federal spending. If only we could do that nationally.
Back to feeding the bears or feeding people for that matter. This is, after all, an LDS oriented site. I don’t think we should embrace the harsh social Darwinism that treats people as bears. Nature may be red in tooth and claw, but our social policies shouldn’t be. See Mosiah 4:17-18
As for how well the social Darwinism of tax cuts and deregulation has worked out for the middle class, job creation has been weak and real income has fallen for middle-class families under the Bush administration. See
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/27/news/economy/state_of_working_america/
I am agreed with Leo on these counts.
1. Neither theory nor empirics support the GOP assertions that the Bush tax cuts were the key to economic recovery (or increased government revenues). Two things influence the progress of the economy: growth trends and business cycles. In the short term, those tax cuts had little influence on the business cycle and no influence on the trend. In other words, the recovery would have happened regardless.
In the long term, lower taxes structure incentives in such a way that greater growth is achieved. However, much of this growth is offset by chronic deficit spending. So, I applaud tax cuts when we are on the track to balanced budgets. I oppose tax cuts that distort incentives for job creation (such as increased capital gains taxes, increased corporate taxes, and yes, increased taxes on “the rich”). What I do support is leaving taxes as they are now and cutting spending to fit them.
The short-sightedness of political dialog means that politicians on both sides can present “solutions” that make things worse. For the GOP, this is the laissez-faire idea that government is unnecessary, which undermines stability during crises. For the Dems, this is the Revenge strategy: if you’re hurting economically, it’s probably the Corporations’ fault, or the Oil Companies’ fault, or Rich Peoples’ fault, so we should tax them more. This sounds good, but reduces incentives for job creation, thus making things worse. Ahh, tradeoffs. They do exist.
2. Leo, don’t count on Palin bringing the pragmatic aspects of her record to the White House. I think she and McCain have both shown their willingness to cave to pressure from the GOP when it comes to these kinds of issues.