John Stewart Slaps Carlson Tucker With His Own Clown Phallus

Stewart is the poster child of the modern liberal. Smug and intolerant of other points of view. When I saw him call Tucker a "dick" I was thinking "Pot calling kettle..."

The difference here is that Stewart is not a journalist. He is a comedian. I want my comedians to be dicks:)

I don't share his liberal views but he had many great points about the nature of the "political discourse" on crossfire. Especially the part where Crossfire claimed it was a "debate" show.

Perhaps, I enjoyed the hell out of it:)

This is totally off topic, but....I saw 'clown phallus' and knew it was Greywar's work.

I have to ask - do any of you actually WATCH Crossfire regularly or did you just watch the one clip?

Anyone who actually...you know...watches Crossfire would understand why it's absurd that Stewart would focus on Tucker.  Begalla is not just left wing (which is fine on a debate show) but he's a professional spin doctor. That's what he does. That's what he's traditionally been paid to do.  He's currently working for John Kerry as a spin doctor. So for Stewart to ride Carlson was the height of Hypocrisy.

I like The Daily Show. But I don't like left-wing smugness. That sort of acid "I'm going to lampoon my conservative opponents to demonstrate just how witty and superior I am." Begalla, in many ways, is very similar to Stewart. He loves that biting acid smugness that has the dual effect of minimizing his political opponents while making him seem smart and superior.

Frankly, the left's hatred of Bush I just find plain creepy. I never understood why the right wing kooks hated Clinton so much and I don't understand why the left is so freaked out by Bush. Bunch of god damn freaks on both sides.

Therein lies the Heart of the matter Brad. Not Stewart's smugness. He made an excellent point about their show and Carslon refused to admit that the point might have any merit. He instead decided that he wanted the slugfest and then he came out looking like a tool. You should know where most of my politics lie by know Brad but the reason I didn't take up on Carlson's side versus Begall (not that I took his side anywhere if you will notice) was that he opened his mouth and proved himself to be unworthy of the challenge.

Crossfire is not a debate show, it is just 2 sides blazing away without pause. Meme follows meme from both sides while the producers prod each for greater volume. High theatre as Stewart said. Not a debate.

You know, before writing a smug, "I'm so superior" type message you should probably have bothered to have watched the show so that you didn't end up looking like an idiot.

They were BOTH there. Stewart was on THEIR show. And Stewart, ON CROSSFIRE, focused primarily on Tucker even making fun of his tie. Meanwhile, Begalla, who is a professional spin doctor (literally that's been his career for the most part) goes unscathed. 

Tucker is a conservative but he's a good reasonable debater if he's got a good partner. He was on a show called "The Spin Room" on CNN a few years back with (forgot his name) but they had excellent discussions. It was what Crossfire should be.  But Begalla and other spin doctors like him are the problem.

Just like Hannity and Colmes is useless because Shawn Hannity, a conservative, is just a right wing spin doctor.

And a guy who was on a show called "The Spin Room" is not a spin doctor? Brad I have to disagree with you on this one. Maybe years ago before I ever saw Tucker do anything he was a good debater but nowadays he is very much like Hannity who as you rightly assessed doesn't do very much but repeat memes. Granted the memes both of these guys gush are closer to my views than are Begallas but lets not confuse it with actual debate.

Of course Stewart was easier on Begalla as he also spouts memes closer to Stewarts position. Add in the fact that Begalla knew he was outgunned from the get go and you end up with Tucker left as a target. A target who didn't seem to know where to go. Instead of questioning Stewart with something intelligible like "Ok, you think our show sucks, what would you do in our stead if you had control tough guy?" or "Ok so riddle me this, how do I get a career politicain to just tell the plain truth?" He instead tried to attack Stewart's show for not being hard hitting! Stewart even gives him the out on that a few times before he really lights into him for failing to grasp that you can not compare a comedy show to Crossfire! Tucker came off very badly and looked like a charicature of a conservative not as a resonable debater.

Greywar: DID YOU WATCH THE SPIN ROOM?

Tucker also has a show on PBS.  Tucker is a conservative, no doubt about it. But on Crossfire he also was quick to say that Bush lost the first debate.  A Shawn Hannity would never admit that.

He wasn't attacking Stewart's show for hard hitting. He was pointing out Stewart's hypocricy. Stewart got Kerry on his show and asks him "How's it going"?  That was just plain lame for a guy who's bitching about Crossfire.

I am not talking about what the guy will admit Brad. I am talking about the fact that Crossfire is in now way a debate show any more than Hannity's show is. Both Begalla and Tucker play the roles of partisan hack spin doctors on Crossfire. I have never seen Tucker's PBS show but no matter what he does there it has nothing to do with Crossfire. Could be the greatest debate show since sliced bread and Crossfire would be unaffected by it.

Again using Stewart's show as a ruler for Crossfire is ludicrous. (Although if you really wanted to go that route I think a case could be made that most of the time The Daily Show's humor angle has better analysis in it that many "news" programs.) If a show's slogan is "Where more people get their news than probably should." You can take it to the bank that comparing it to Crossfire in an argument will not serve you in good stead. It worked badly for Tucker too.

The Day Stewart's show is on CNN and not Comendy central then this argument will have some validity. If if had validity now it would be a bit silly as it would rule out making criticism by anyone not directly involved in the same sort of activity. Like saying "You are a hypocrite for saying Social Security is broken because you haven't fixed it yourself! When you fix it then you can come talk to me." It is in fact possible to see a flaw ina  show format even when you yourself use a different one.

Stewert's main point was not that the show was not hard hitting but that it was TOO hard hitting and in the wrong ways. Ask tough questions sure, but when it comes time to tak about the responses both Begalla and Tucker just lean back and toss some spin or a lob a meme grenade. No debate whatsoever. Just partisan hackery.