Comments on: THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART: C-SPAN HANDLES A RACIST CALLER

By: Obama's "Promises" | Ethel The Frog

Obama's "Promises" | Ethel The Frog — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:43:16 +0000

[...] THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART: C-SPAN HANDLES A RACIST CALLER … [...]

By: Kyle

Kyle — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 05:15:29 +0000

lol, Brad Anderson went directly to a lynching metaphor, while Angel preferred the slavery route.
Chill out guys, you’re having absolutely no effect on the world!
No effect! This is liberating! Now you have time to go fishing, or watch some movies!

By: Angel

Angel — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:54:15 +0000

P.S. Brad Anderson. Go Fuck Yourself.

By: Angel

Angel — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:51:51 +0000

This is to Mr. “politically incorrect”. So “tea-party” folks can clog up the congressman or congresswoman with all of their “kill the bill” nonsense, and other folks (no matter if they’re black or white) cannot call up C-SPAN because they’re supposed to know they’re only 12% of the population? Hmm, let me know when you can tap into C-SPAN’s phone lines and tell me how many different ethnic groups call in. Maybe you can be the call-screener and have everyone tell you their ethnic origin before they are let through.

Why don’t we just count how many people should be on a plane flight? Maybe X% of the seats should be reserved for whites, because it would be UNFAIR for more than 12% to go to African Americans. Why don’t we do this with education? Why not with doctor’s offices? Maybe we should all wait until the MAJORITY does what they like, and we little folk down here can serve the MAJORITY and call ya “MASSA?”.

By: Brandon Fiadino

Brandon Fiadino — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 23:38:33 +0000

Um Brad Anderson I’d like to cut you off right there, Go Fuck Yourself. Lmao it’s comedy get over it. What makes it funny is the delivery, if you can’t find humor in simple good timing then you don’t get the basics. Stewart was completely right and that’s how it should have been handled. It had nothing to do with Republicans and liberals it was the fact that the caller was CLEARLY RACIST. The fact that the CSPAN anchor didn’t say anything about that and just brushed it off falls under complete idiocy. I know if I was that anchor I would have cut him off and asked him….”Why so racist?”

NJ 4 Life!

By: Kyle Lawlor

Kyle Lawlor — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 22:07:58 +0000

No, no, no. That guy was a racist, just let it go. Black people can be republicans (Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele) and there are certainly black independents, but this guy obviously thinks of republicanism as a white’s only club.
Jon Stewart doesn’t get to define comedy. There are totally a whole bunch of different kinds of humor! And some people think Jon Stewart is funny, and some people think Larry the Cable Guy is funny!
I think 30 Rock is really funny.

By: Paul Johnsonn

Paul Johnsonn — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 22:05:57 +0000

is jon stewart realy jewish? wwo that kind of puts a new light on it

By: Brad Anderson

Brad Anderson — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:21:15 +0000

P.S. If Ston Jewart thinks that he can do the C-Span job so well, why doesn’t he apply for the position? I’m sure they’re just DYING for a flaming one-sided left-winger who screams his foul mouth at anyone who says something right-of-center or politically incorrect.

So they’v got 80% black pro-bama callers jamming the lines that are clearly stated to be for REPUBLICANS, deliberately in order to suppress Republican opinions? Well that’s just FINE with Mr. Stewart (aka Stewart Liebowitz)– it’s ok for it to be 100%, the more foul-play left-wing tactics the better in his book!
Just god forbid anyone should MENTION it!

I just don’t see the C-Span guy coming down to Comedy Central and telling Stewart how to slow-pitch a soft curve-ball with a left spin; but Stewart’s obsessed with telling the C-span guy how to do his job, so it’s clear who’s the winner on that one.

By: Brad Anderson

Brad Anderson — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:12:16 +0000

Oh, did the left-wing liberal Stewart REALLY define “comedy” as simply screaming cuss-words at someone whom he defines as “racist” simply because he is white, and states a fact regarding non-whites– i.e. the equivalent of an on-the-air lynching?

Clearly, liberals are only for free speech as THEY define it.

I guess it’s also “racist” for whites to say that black voters were stuffing Obama’s ballot-box simply because he’s black– but it’s also “racist” for a white person to vote for a candidate because they’re white.

And I know the response: “it’s not about race, it’s about POWER.”
But if it’s power pertaining to race, then it IS about race– i.e. they’re saying it’s ok to be racist to GAIN power, but not to KEEP it.
The problem here, is that gaining power IS keeping it, relatively speaking.

So the obvious message here, is that blacks don’t have ENOUGH power. and thus have the right to practice “affirmative action” in order to get more.

Sorry, but blacks are only 12% of the population; and so if you’re going to say that a race’s power is reflected by their number of delegates in office, then by that logic a black president would give them TOO MUCH power, since he’s supposed to represnt the MAJORITY; and by this definition, a black candidate can never represent more than 12%.

But liberals never did sit too well with facts and logic; you lose them at the word “black,” since they’re already screaming “racist” and cuss-words at you, and hoot-smirking like they just broke the cleverness-barrier of originality and razor-sharp wit simply by doing that.