Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Tell the Truth campaign logo
NewsBusters.org logo

February 12, 2012
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • RSS
Home » Blogs » Tim Graham's blog
  • Evan Thomas and Chris Matthews: Jackie and Serial Adulterer JFK Had a 'Good' and 'Full' Marriage
  • Bozell Column: Another Fleeting Failure for NBC
  • Martin Bashir Implies GOP Too Racist to Have Marco Rubio as VP Candidate
  • Barbara Walters, Shameless Hypocrite: Hits Kennedy Mistress for Greed, Tells Her She Should Have Stayed Quiet
  • NY Times Writers Rush to Obama's Defense Like It's Their Job
  • Rachel Maddow Trumpets Inane 'Amish Bus Driver' Analogy for Obama Contraception Rule
  • MRC's Bozell Scolds Media's Reluctance to Cover HHS Birth Control Mandate
  • Chris Matthews Excoriates: Rick Santorum Is a 'Theocrat' and Franklin Graham Is a 'Disgrace'

Jon Stewart Bashes Ann Coulter, But Puffs Nader, and Eugene Debs?

By Tim Graham | November 09, 2007 | 06:38

Change font size:  A |  A
Tim Graham's picture

In the November 15 Rolling Stone, the hippie mag interviews a pile of politicians, media stars, and rockers to celebrate its 40th anniversary. Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show, was interviewed by Jeff Sharlet of The Revealer. In a strange interview he unloaded the usual criticism on Ann Coulter, but praised old American socialists Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas. Coulter came up as Stewart tried to say that no one mocking the government today is a "Soviet dissident," that our discourse is free enough that "It's very difficult to shock anybody any more. I'm not even sure what the subversive edge is." This exchange followed:

ROLLING STONE: Ann Coulter suffered repercussions from calling John Edwards a faggot.

JON STEWART: As a businessperson, she has made a choice: "Even if I narrow my audience to true believers, there’s enough money there. I have to keep pushing until it’s just me and one other crazy person with a lot of money." Maybe she’ll be hired by a crazy billionaire, just her and him, and he’ll go, "Say something about lesbians! Heh-heh! 9/11 widows! Gimme another!"

ROLLING STONE: So you don’t think her brand of extremism represents the future of politics?

STEWART: What you generally get from politicians is "Vote for me or we shall all perish!" In a puff of smoke, or rising waters. You know, 19 guys with box cutters brought down the Twin Towers. Are we supposed to go to war until there’s not 19 guys who want to do damage to us?

Stewart isn’t really against extremists. He cheers the Socialist Party presidential candidates who mainstreamed the New Deal:

ROLLING STONE: I read that one of your childhood heroes was Eugene Debs, the five-time Socialist Party candidate for president in the early twentieth century.

STEWART: Yeah, baby! Actually, more Norman Thomas.

ROLLING STONE: Six-time candidate for president, after Debs, and a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union. Are there still characters like that around?

STEWART: Ralph Nader is a character like that. Back in those days, a guy like Norman Thomas was viewed as a corroding member of society. But if you look at almost every aspect of the New Deal, that’s where it came from. It just had to come through a process of mainstreaming before it could be accepted.

ROLLING STONE: Conservative ideas have been mainstreamed during the past thirty years.

STEWART: You know, the wonderful thing about conservatives and government is they seem awfully interested in running a thing they despise. The president is very fond of saying "I don’t trust the government to keep money. It’s your money." As a matter a fact, isn’t it all our money? Not just the one tax rebate. Pretty much the whole f—ing thing is ours, isn’t it? [Emphasis in magazine.]

Conservatives have this idea that you can trust government to protect national interests overseas militarily, but not to pass out cheese. It’s this idea that corporations function well, but governments can’t. But they’re made up of the same atomic material, are they not? Isn’t government us?

Stewart also bashed conservatives early in the interview. He tried to sound optimistic notes, or at least ameliorate the idea that America is a hopeless police state. He said for the most part, America is an "incredibly civil society," prompting the Nazi talk:

ROLLING STONE: Germany in 1932 was an incredibly civil society.

STEWART: I’m not saying we’re not one economic disaster away from being demagogues. Or that the line between acts of madness and acts of goodness isn’t tenuous. But people’s general tendency is to not want trouble. If you were to give Iraq a choice right now between the freedom to assemble and the ability to shop without shrapnel going through their skull, my guess is they’d give up freedom of assembly. Freedom is overrated. I’m a law-and-order guy. I’m not anti-authority. There’s a big difference between not trusting institutions blindly and just being against authority. Some people believe we’re going after conservatives on our show just because they’re conservatives. That’s idiotic. We go after what we think is absurd.

If it sounds weird for Stewart to suggest he’s Mr. Law and Order, there’s also a passage where he seems to praise Fox News boss Roger Ailes. Asked about what’s wrong with TV news, Stewart says it should be a public service with different rules.

STEWART: Roger Ailes has shown that you can exercise editorial management over the process. I may not agree with the way Fox is exercising it, but it shows that it can be done. News should function as our digestive system.

ROLLING STONE: That sounds disgusting.

STEWART: It is disgusting. What I’m saying is that they should take the fruit and entrees that are presented by the politicians and the corporations that process it, and come up with turds of wisdom, as you will. You either bring clarity or you bring noise. The media should be filters, and they can only be that if they exercise editorial judgment. It infuriates me when people say, "That’s elitism." No, it’s not. That’s expertise. That’s like saying to doctors who diagnose people, "you’re being elitist, telling me I have heart disease. I don’t want to hear that. I want to eat cake and ice cream."

Stewart doesn't consider the idea that doctors have specific scientific expertise, and journalists often don't have solid expertise in anything. Are they the "doctors" who can explain the physics of climate change? Are they the "doctors" who can diagnose recessions? Are they even the "doctors" who could tell you Hillary's health plan would pass?

Stewart is fighting a straw man. It would be nice if journalists could achieve expertise, and many do. (But often, they parachute in on stories and tell us what they've learned in the last four hours.) He's not getting that what's "elitist" is the idea that the news media is an intelligentsia that breathes rarified air and that whatever it prescribes for more government control is in the public interest -- and of course, that it thinks the average American doesn't have the brains to know what's in his or her interest, so the media has to educate them.

Share this

About the Author

Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow Tim Graham on Twitter.
  • Ann Coulter
  • Jon Stewart
  • Rolling Stone
  • Tim Graham's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Donate to NewsBusters

Donate to NewsBusters Today!

This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead

User Shortcuts

Log in

  • My account
  • My buddylist
  • Log in to check messages
  • RSS feed
  • About NB
  • Contact us
  • Jobs
  • Advertise on NB

 

 

 

  • Idea of the Democrats better than the reality (Wisc. State Journal)
  • The cynical and self-contradictory Gospel of Obama (Krauthammer)
  • Video: Protesters at CPAC admit they're being paid to protest (Daily Caller)
  • Does the drug 'ella' cause abortions? (Weekly Standard)
  • Does income inequality cause global warming? (Power Line)
  • Jay Carney gets snippy about Super PACs (Verum Serum)

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Recent comments

  • "Silly women. Professional
    2 min 16 sec ago
  • Like OJ said
    10 min 23 sec ago
  • Gotta luv a simple, one page menu
    14 min 46 sec ago
  • ⇒ One trick fillies
    16 min 26 sec ago
  • Back to Tex Mex
    20 min 37 sec ago
More >

Try a Sweater Vest, Mitt
more cartoons
  • Weekend General and Sports Open Thread
  • Mitt Romney's Full Address to CPAC
  • Daily Kos Week in Review: Confusing Ground for Religious Haters
  • Newt Gingrich's Full Address to CPAC
  • Newt Gingrich: As President I'll Repudiate 40% of Obama's Government on Inauguration Day
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Lachlan Markay
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Editorial Associate
Aubrey Vaughan

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2012 NewsBusters. Terms of Use.