A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Jon Stewart on Beck/Rupert on Soros

Posted: Nov 20, 2010

For your entertainment.

;

Right out of the gate.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
let me say straight up I do not agree with everything Glenn Beck says, and I think he could impart his information without mimicking folks.

I realize this is how Jon Stewart makes his living, but unless I am mistaken he works for a big evilll corporation and I am sure makes good money but also has accountants who will take every tax loophole known to man so he can keep as much of it as possible. If you liberals really believed what you say, you would think he was part of the PROBLEM not part of the solution. I feel certain he makes a great deal more than $250,000 a year.

That being said, Glenn Beck's intelligence,his knowledge of American history and the Constitution put Jon Stewart way at the back of the line. And even though he disintegrates into the making fun stuff on occasion, that is a man who loves his COUNTRY. Not a PARTY. Jon Stewart does not love his COUNTRY. Most liberals don't. They don't like America, they look down their noses at half the population as ignorant (how many times did we hear that about tea partiers), they don't like how America began and they want to change America into what they think it should be. Jon just loves being a liberal and pats himself on the back because he as a liberal is so dedicated to the less fortunate. Talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. That's what liberals do. They like to pat each other on the back and congratulate each other...but that is about it.

Case in point...Darryl Hannah climbs a tree on a vacant lot in LA because the person who actually OWNS the lot wants people stop farming it so it can be cleaned up and sold. She thinks they should be able to farm it and the owner should just let them farm it, so she climbs the tree to stop owner from cleaning it up. Now if liberals really put their money where their mouth is, she would have paid the person for the lot and then let those people go right on farming. Instead she climbs a tree. If she did not have all the money herself (which I highly doubt) she should have called Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher (to name a few) to buy that land for those people. Oh wait...maybe she did and they didn't pick up or put her on hold.

Liberals are all about talking the talk...they just do not seem to walk the walk when it is THEIR money. They are really free with ours, but stingy with their own. Lead by exammple. Check that extra box on your tax returns. Stop taking deductions. Volunteer where there aren't any cameras. Like people said at the midterms...quit telling us what is so bad about the other guy. What are YOU going to do to fix it???

Sigh.

The Republicans have until 2012 to clean up the - mess they created.

[ In Reply To ..]
Why do you hate liberals so much?

Are You Serious? - tstone

[ In Reply To ..]
The Dems have been in control of Congress since 2006. The Pubs now have until 2012 to clean up their mess.

Agree..all downhill since dems took over in 2006!. They - are always in denial with that fact.nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Hmmm. Wasn't Bush president until - January 20, 2009?

[ In Reply To ..]
Oh yes, now I remember. The history re-write does not include those.

ummmm....yes, but Dems had majority in Congress the... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
the last two years. They had the reins and basically voted for TARP (the start of the bailout stuff...you know, that Bush gets blame for...lol).

No history re-write. Google it.

Dems had control by what, a margin of one? And Ted - K. missed a few votes

[ In Reply To ..]
Vote Counts: TARP
YEAs 74
NAYs 25
Not Voting 1

49 pubs voting
50 dems voting - included is one liberal independent and one ID.

YEAs
Pubs - 34
Dems - 40

NAYs
Pubs - 15
Dems - 10

Remove a Democratic vote and guess what. Hmmm, you really should check the facts before you blame everything on the Democrats.

Maybe my math is wrong but those figures are not quite correct - Backwards Typist

[ In Reply To ..]
Yeas:
39 Dems
34 Pubs
1 Ind

Nays:
9 Dems
15 Pubs
1 Ind.

Total:
48 Dems
49 Pubs
2 Ind.

It's not how many voted, it's HOW they voted that counts. If you notice, most of the Dems were FOR the TARP, most Pubs AGAINST. It was split between the Ind.

The difference was not 1 vote. No matter how you look at it, the Dems had the majority for this vote and they were the ones who passed it.

It is how they vote, not whether the Dems had control of the house - as was the point

[ In Reply To ..]
Too bad so many pubs voted Yea.

Addendum before folks become confused - "house" here means the - senate part

[ In Reply To ..]
x

The figures are right - both the independents are included - with the Dems

[ In Reply To ..]
Went a little further than you in research.

Oh please - not with the "hate" routine again - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
So why do you hate conservatives so much?

She stated some facts. And very good ones at that. It is the democrats fault we are were we are because they have been in office since 2006. They are the ones who got us where we are - not Bush. Congress votes and passes bills and spends, etc. Democrats voted to go to war, not Bush. Democrats got us into the housing mess (can we say Franks?). Now the republicans finally got back in and they've got til 2012 to clean up the mess the democrats left.

Why do you hate conservatives so much?

I don't hate anybody. I just wish they would.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
put THEIR money where their mouths are and leave mine alone. You don't see me posting hit pieces about anybody on this board, but the liberals do it continuously. Nasty personal attacks that have no bearing on what is going on in this country. I have not seen the conservatives/Republicans/Independents doing that on this board at all. No personal pieces on Obama..no hits on his family. Yet every week or so come the hit pieces on conservative commentators or families of Republicans not even in public office anymore.

Liberals are supposed to be the ones who care about people. I guess if you are a down and out or poor Republican you are just scre*ed. No help coming from the left.

I just do not understand the level of animosity. My opinion, based solely on what I see and hear in the world and on this board...leads me to believe that liberals like to think they are noble, but they are anything but.

They are free at any time to change course from the politics of personal destruction and start listening to the majority voice (that is what democracy is, in case you don't remember) and put country above party.

I am not holding my breath, however.

Give me an example..... - tstone

[ In Reply To ..]
I would be interested in your ideas as to what the "Republican mess" really is. Can you provide some examples? I want to know what they are responsible for.

Boehner BEGGED for TARP - Video evidence

[ In Reply To ..]
You 'pubs must have the shortest memory ever.

Okay...and here is how the vote went.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
More Democrats voted FOR it than against it, and more Republicans voted AGAINST it than for it. The link below goes to the senate roll call page as to the Democrats who voted for it.

You will note Barack Obama Democrat from Illinois voted yea.

How did you come to this conclusion - conclusion?

[ In Reply To ..]
X

You are going to have to be more specific - specific. nm - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Do you see a conclusion in your post? - How did you reach it?

[ In Reply To ..]
It doesn't look like it was by counting.

See below, other poster. I did not include the link for the House. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
sorry about that.

Aye: Dems 241 Republicans 19
No: Dems 10 Republicans 156

34 pubs Yea and 15 nay. Doesn't look like more pubs voted - against it than for it

[ In Reply To ..]
How did you figure that more voted against than for?

Sorry, I failed to post the house results....the posted was senate only. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
see link below.

Aye: Dems 241, Republicans 19
Nay: Dems 10, Republicans 156

Sorry about that.

This isn't the decisive factor. - This is only

[ In Reply To ..]
how it got to the senate. More pubs voted for it than against it.

You cannot be serious...now this is just embarrassing for you. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
If it did not get out of the house, it would have been DEAD, i.e., would never have gotten to the senate. Yes, more Republicans voted against it than for it.

And in the senate, one of the Dems who voted for it is our current President. LOL.

This is a prime example of totally ignoring the truth because it doesn\'t fit your agenda.

ARE YOU SERIOUS???? Unfreakingbelievable. LOL. Just GIVE IT UP. You can blame it on Bush if you want, but you can\'t blame the Republicans in Congress. They went against the President of their party. They tried to kill it. The votes show that.

You really think somebody is going to buy this fuzzy DNC logic?

RU Serious? This is UNBELIEVABLE - More

[ In Reply To ..]
in denial than is survivable. What if? What if a frog had wings...he wouldn't be bumping his rear on the ground would he?

Here's one for ya. WHAT IF more pubs voted against it than for it in the senate?

Get a grip and at least act like you're smart.

I would say ditto.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
You should take your own suggestion and at least act like you are smart to avoid further embarrassing yourself.

That is what the government works. It has to pass the house before it goes to the senate or it is a dead bill. Republicans and Democrats vote on it. The Democrats outvoted the Republicans on the "yes" side by a huge margin and the bill went forward to the Senate. Yes, in the senate, more Republicans voted for it than against it. More Democrats also voted for it than against it.

In the House, even though the bill passed, more Republicans voted against it than for it. You cannot change that fact or say it doesn't matter and use all the grade school frogs with wings comments you would like to. In the senate, more Republicans voted for it than against it. In BOTH the house and the Senate, more Democrats voted FOR IT, including Obama. It would not have passed the Senate had the majority of Democrats NOT voted for it, including Barack Obama.

It all boils down to the same thing...more Democrats in both sections voted FOR it. Therefore, you cannot lay it at the feet of Republicans. They TRIED to kill it at the house level, they were unsuccessful. THe Dems could have killed it any level but judging by the yea numbers, they didn't WANT to.

Now why don't you act like a grownup, admit you are wrong if only to yourself, and move on.

You restate in wordy, lofty, boring posts - what was already said

[ In Reply To ..]
What is there about "this is how it got to the senate" that makes you launch into such a long restatement? You should quit to avoid further embarrassing the conservative "independents." lol.

Oh I don't know...perhaps I thought the poster.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
was really not stupid, just having difficulty understanding. I suppose your opinion is that the poster was just stupid. So sorry that you feel that way.

The "conservative" Independents...again you demonstrate you do not understand political parties and Independents. There are conservative Democrats, conservative Republicans, and conservative Independents. Not all Republicans are conservative. Not all Independents are conserative either.

By the way, if you agree with the poster that the House of Represenatives is irrelevant to the process....you might let Nancy Pelosi know. I don't think she agrees with you. LOL

I said nothing of the sort. You obviously have - difficulty understanding

[ In Reply To ..]
the simplest of statements. Using the word "stupid" is typical of you. I said "what part of this is how it got to the senate, made you launch into a wordy restatement?" Not that there is an answer to that other than you have issues.

I'm sorry you just cannot grasp any meaning other than what suits you.

The point about the house (on THIS issue) is that it passed and made it to the senate where the Republicans had a very good chance of failing it, and did not.

tsk tsk

And the Dems could have failed it easily....and did not. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
the point of the post was trying to explain to the poster before who said that the House vote determined nothing so how many Republicans voted against it did not count. You and I both know that is wrong. So, the Democrats were WITH Bush on TARP. Including Barack Obama who voted for it in the senate. I said Bush and the Dems could share it.

Here are your words right back at ya:
I'm sorry you just cannot grasp any meaning other than what suits you.

Though I think you grasped the meaning just fine. It just didn't suit your condescending purpose. tsk tsk.

Now you can have the last word.

I've read the posts and no one said the house vote - meant nothing

[ In Reply To ..]
This is your problem. You assume and jump to conclusions. It's just a shame.

For someone who asks for facts from others to - back up their opinions

[ In Reply To ..]
in order to discount their opinions, you sure take a lot of "liberties." How about playing by your own rules?

I believe what I asked for was backing up what was presented as "fact".... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
with sources of those facts. I don't believe I ever asked anyone to back up opinion with fact. It should be relatively clear to anyone reading the post that is my opinion...other than what the mid-terms meant. I got that quote from ABC news talking about what people were saying coming out of the polls..."we are tired of hearing how bad the other guy is, we want to know what YOU will do to fix it." Should I not trust ABC to deliver the correct news?

You can verify the Darryl Hannah story if you look for it. She did climb the tree and she did not try to buy the lot to allow the people to keep farming. Those are facts. I just said if she were a liberal in the way liberals portray themselves, she would have gotten the funds together to buy the lot and that would have looked a lot better than her up a tree on the 5 o'clock news.

I'm just sayin. What do you think being liberal means?

What is the difference? Anything you agree with - then becomes your opinion

[ In Reply To ..]
Whether it is "stated as fact" is an opinion on your part. If someone says "Republicans today would not treat the slaves as Lincoln did" do you think that you should be asking for facts to back this up?

Everything you say is your opinion and you have a lot of them.

If you will review the post I believe that was stated as a fact.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
not an opinion. I believe the piece was revisionist history, that somehow the old Republican party has morphed into what is now the Democratic party, and history does not bear that out. It is quite the opposite in fact. Some of the "facts" presented were not historically correct. Easy for anyone to research. Much as some people would like to, you can't re-write history.

A lot of what I say IS my opinion, you are correct. I usually post links to "facts." When someone puts up an opinion piece like it is the only side of the story and therefore true, yes, I do post an opposition view, because things trotted out as truth not always are, and I for one am tired of a party telling me how I should interpret something.

How you handle it is up to you...but expect to be challenged, just like I expect to be challenged. It is how we learn and grow. Don't just sit still and let people feed you things. Do some independent research to find out if you are getting the whole story.

Just a suggestion.

One can usually tell the difference between something - that can be supported

[ In Reply To ..]
by cold hard facts and an observation. It would be obvious to a thinking person that how a group or a person would treat someone at any given time is an observation.

First...a thinking person QUESTIONS. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
and a thinking person is willing to look at history objectively without the bias of the party they belong to NOW. You are unable to do that.

So we will have to agree to disagree. In my OPINION, there is nothing historical to support that Abraham Lincoln, if he lived today, would be a Democrat. If he had lived in the 60\'s he sure would not have been, as Democrats were STILL fighting giving African Americans the vote in the 60\'s.

Sorry. I just don\'t see it. My observation is based on historical fact; not sure what yours is based on.

So we will agree to disagree on this subject?

Sure, I expect you to disagree on anything that - is based on

[ In Reply To ..]
an observation you don't want to consider, whether the facts are there or not. No problem.

Similar Messages:

Jun 05, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-3-2010/glenn-beck-airs-israeli-raid-footage ...

Nov 06, 2009
An absolutely superb parody by John Stewart is available on media matters. To be fully appreciated, the viewer must have watched Beck with his chalk and blackboard, or many of the nuances of Stewart's brilliant performance could be lost. ...

Mar 19, 2010
This is hilarious! http://rawstory.com/2010/03/daily-show-jon-stewart-parodies-glenn-beck/ ...

Jun 04, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/04/stewart-slams-glenn-beck_n_600486.html ...

Oct 21, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t75xvZ3osFg Autists have started compiling a list of all Board of Elections in all Counties in all States that will be using Smartmatic/Soros voting machines. Help is needed... These places need to be called and petitioned to use their fall backs of a manual voting process (as detailed in OP post below)... We also need to gather as much information as possible with Smartmatic and Soros, showing a conflict of interest with the people behind the voting machi ...

May 14, 2013
You will all think I am crazy, but am having a difference of opinion with a good friend and would like to know what others say. Do you think Rod Stewart is handsome? I do. He (along with the Beatles and the Stones) was one of my faves back in the day. The other day I said that I thought Rod Stewart was handsome. My friend nearly choked on her coffee and said, "HANDSOME? You're crazy." What do you think? How would you classify Rod Stewart ...

Feb 24, 2010
.. ...

Mar 18, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-17-2010/in-dodd-we-trust ...

Mar 25, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-march-22-2010/on-topic--scandal-list---tea-bagging ...

Mar 30, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-march-29-2010/health-care-slime-machine ...

Apr 07, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-5-2010/inethical-basterds ...

Jul 25, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-29-2010/blame ...

Jun 04, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-1-2010/cenac---the-spilling-fields---oil-leak-containment-ideas ...

May 02, 2012
His routine on the republicans complaining about Obama politicizing bin Laden's death. I think he is very effective in cutting through the garbage. I nominate him as press secretary for the Hilliary/Rachel ticket. No more "messaging" just tell it . . . . ...

Dec 11, 2014
Here is a link to his thoughts on torture report and John McCain. ...

Aug 20, 2011
Jon Stewart telling it like it is as usual. I do not agree with Jon on everything, but he calls out both sides and has principles. It is appalling that the only truth we get is from a comedian. My favorite liberal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EY5Ofcxjs0 ...

Mar 10, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-3-2010/anchor-management ...

Apr 01, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-31-2010/fear-of-a-black-c-spanet ...

Apr 09, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-7-2010/pope-opera ...

Apr 30, 2010
irritating, and can NOT answer a straight question to save his life. He is perfect example of what many of us on the left see on a daily basis-sticking to an idea like velcro in spite of the proof to the contrary. Just keep on regurgitating the same garbage and hear nothing else-hands over the ears, eyes closed, saying nah,nah,nah,nah, nah....... http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-28-2010/exclusive---ken-blackwell-extended-interview-pt--3 ...

May 11, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-10-2010/a-nightmare-on-wall-street ...

Aug 01, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-july-29-2010/leader-s-digest ...

Jun 14, 2011
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110614/ts_yblog_thecutline/jon-stewart-defends-sarah-palin-rips-media-for-wasting-our-time-with-defcon-1-coverage-of-her-emails No smoking gun... its all ridiculous... get over her, people ! ...

Jun 16, 2010
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah ...

Apr 28, 2013
Warning: This video contains vast amounts of funnies and is probably offensive to Fox fans. PS--Is Ann Coulter for real? Go to prison for wearing a hijab? ...

May 14, 2014
I can't believe Rush can't find anything better to complain about than an awareness campaign regarding over 200 kidnapped girls. It was a South African activist who started this campaign (although the misinformed are claiming Michelle Obama started it) and these days, Twitter campaigns have played a leading role in spreading information in a world where people seem to have technology-induced ADD. Not to mention the fact that the President caught flack for sending assistance to Nigeria ...

Sep 12, 2014
This is pretty funny, and sad. ...

Oct 16, 2009
Stewart does it again! See video at: http://rawstory.com/2009/10/gop-supports-rape-arbitration/ ...

Dec 04, 2009
Finally, Jon Stewart "reports" some real news.....with clips from Fox too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgPUpIBWGp8 http://climatechangefraud.com/humor/5709-jon-stewart-on-climategate-poor-al-gore-global-warming-debunked-via-internet-you-invented ...

Feb 10, 2010
Take note of Newt's big blunder about the nationality of Richard Reid (shoe bomber) . . . http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/10/newt-gingrich-richard-reid-american-citizen_n_456259.html ...