Jon Stewart Compares Hillary, Obama to Ted Williams and DiMaggio

Photo of Tim Graham.
  • Bookmark and Share

As often happens when he’s interviewing a Democrat, Daily Show host Jon Stewart dropped most of his smart-aleck routine when he interviewed Hillary Clinton on Monday night. Instead, Stewart took the opportunity to hail the “historic race,” comparing Clinton and Barack Obama to baseball stars Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio, and that the country might not appreciate “watching two historical figures battle it out.” He also hailed Clinton, Obama, and McCain as people who might serve in each other’s Cabinets, causing Clinton to claim mysteriously that she’d like to appoint a bipartisan Cabinet and thinks there are “good ideas across the political spectrum.”

As the interview wound to a close, Stewart declared that the American people ought to be gearing up to remember Hillary vs. Barack as this century's Lincoln-Douglas debates on the scale or sheer momentousness:

The thing that people I guess shouldn't lose focus of is either way this is an historic race. You have done better than any woman in the history of this country running for the highest office of this land. (Applause.) Barack Obama has done the same for African-Americans. It's almost whoever wins or loses, it's almost like in 1941, this is a stupid analogy so bear with me. In 1941 Ted Williams hit .400. Nobody has done that since in baseball but that year he didn't win the Most Valuable Player because Joe DiMaggio had a 56-game hitting streak. I feel like we as Americans are watching two historical figures battle it out. I don't know if people will be able to appreciate that because it's unfortunately one of you guys is going to have to yield to the other."

Hillary was pleased with the statement and agreed: "It is historic. I'm honored and thrilled to be, you know, part of what is a history-making campaign." Stewart added that the whole race can only help both campaigns:

STEWART: However long the campaign lasts, however long the battles last, it probably just strengthens whatever candidate comes out of it. You know the other thing I find interesting, whether you be the victor, obama or even Senator McCain ultimately, I feel like the three of you, I would not be surprised to see any of you working in each other's Cabinets, and it's been so long in our country that you could say that. I think people might find inspiration in just that very fact.

HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I've said many times that I would like to have a bipartisan Cabinet and White House. You know, a lot of our problems have nothing to do with Republican or Democrat. We've got to start acting like Americans again and roll up our sleeves and solve our problems. There are good ideas across the political spectrum.

Who took away liberal Hillary and replaced her with Ross Perot? In the first half of the interview, Stewart also lamented that Ohio has been neglected by the federal government, and is the victim of an “abusive relationship with politicians.”

I always feel bad for Ohio. I'll tell you why. It seems like every four years, people fly in and they criss-cross the state. They go, "Ohio, you are the salt of the earth. You are the blue collar people." Then the election is over and they disappear. Nobody in Ohio gets to hear from them. How do you convince people that have been in this abusive relationship with politicians for this long... how do you convince them of the sincerity of what's going on there?

Stewart, as long as he was lamenting the apparent lack of ever-flowing subsidies into Ohio, asked what a lot of liberals are thinking, whether Hillary is comfortable with crushing the Obama dream and mocking idealism:

I keep wondering because when I look at the speeches sometimes, it almost makes you feel like this idea between experience and hope, as though in Washington those two are mutually exclusive. That if you've worked in Washington for a long time, if you have the experience, it kills the hope inside you. Does that place you in an awkward position? You're someone that I think probably values yourself as an idealist. For all those years. Are you uncomfortable in the role of chastising someone's idealism? Is that an uncomfortable place for you to be?

Hillary assured Stewart that she cherishes Obama's idealism, but wants to bring realism to accomplishing liberal objectives like "universal health care."  

The only really funny moment happened when Stewart mocked Hillary at the beginning for coming on his show on the verge of such an important election and Hillary deadpanned: "It is pretty pathetic."

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Bad analogy Jon

Ted Williams was a war mongering USMC fighter pilot in two different wars and was almost killed in Korea.

Gloria Steinhem would not be pleased.  Something about a person being trained to kill people.  Can't have that for someone whose highest responsibility is the safety of the country and its people.

Jon Stewart

Jon Stewart said that! You mean THE Jon Stewart?-- the COMEDIAN,  the snarky "liberal" who pretends to be funny? THAT Jon Stewart? WOW! Put his words in the National Archives, keep them for posterity! WOW!

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal" 

Not Exactly War Mongering

I read Ted's biography which was written by Boston Globe writer Leigh Montville. Ted in fact wasn't exactly thrilled about being called up to duty during the Korean War but went out of patriotic duty.

Baseball Reference

You have to cut the humor-challenged "comedian" some slack.  He was actually comparing Hillary and Obama to Mitch Williams and Vince DiMaggio (granted that's a huge insult to Mssrs. Williams and DiMaggio)...and their campaign battle to that of the 1962 Mets. 

fitz... Jon "racist and sexist" Stewart

Haha.... :)

But in all seriousness, it's outrageously both sexist AND racist to drool and fawn over these two because they are a woman and a black person. THAT should have NOTHING to do with our glorifying them, but rather whether they are two top-qualified candidates.

No way would Jon equate two white men in a hotly contested Democratic primary race with Williams and DiMaggio.

What a knee-jerk, pandering, white/jewish-guilt liberal idiot.

But still, a funny knee-jerk, pandering, white/jewish-guilt liberal idiot.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

The "fawning" isn't because

The "fawning" isn't because Jon is surprised that a black man and a woman are the top two candidates in the Democratic race. It is because they are the first that have a shot to win, making it an historic occasion.

bal

I never claimed or assumed he was "surprised" by both of them. Yes, it is historical as far as sex and race, of course.

I still think he -- like so many -- is making the analogy largely based on them, in his eyes, subconciously, being also "great" candidates by virtue of them being "different".

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

No, bal.  The fawning is

No, bal.  The fawning is because Jon Stewart is under the ignorant misconception that either of these two self-important windbags are fit to be President.  As a result, he will continue to overrate (and overstate) the significance of their "achievements".  The tortured comparison he made to Williams and DiMaggio was simply the funniest thing Stewart has ever said...and it was unintentional humor.

Thank you, fitz. I'll let

Thank you, fitz. I'll let you do the talking/debating here. You said it best.

Jon is not unlike my own brother. Someone so smart, and yet, so not-smart at all. It fascinates me. I've seen him grappling with people on his show, who have a totally different view of things from him, and he's so absolutely sure of himself. Beyond smug. The truly great minds question everything, including themselves.

Jon, with all of his faux-modesty/humility -- that's just for show (and MAN, is it faux) -- while he makes me laugh, is not one of those great minds.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

double

double

That doesn't make a lot of

That doesn't make a lot of sense. If someone has strong beliefs, that makes him smug? If so, this whole website's knee-deep in smug. It's a smugfest. Thick with smugnicity. Smugtastic.

»→ Smugma

You just gotta realize smugness is as much a defense mechanism as it is a state of mind.  Maybe more so.

♣ a seal

Wow Bal and Ca

You guys are createing words today.Cool I hope webster gives you credit.That is what I like about NB.You are always learning something new. 

bal

Are you, then, calling NewsBusters the "smuganator" ?

:)

Yes, there are hard-headed people on both sides of the aisle, sure. But Jon is so hardcore that he can't even stay cool and do his job as a "comedian-with-talk-show" and check his political opinions at the door of his studio, when it comes to his guests. THAT's smug.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

I don't think he has to

I don't think he has to check his opinions, does he? He's not claiming to be impartial, he's just looking to mock.

And I have to say that while he disagrees with many on the right who come on his show, they almost always have good discussions. The only bad interview I've seen him do was with Ann Coulter.

Bal, go to

Bal, go to www.thedailyshow.com and do a video search of "Liberal Fascism" and/or "Jonah Goldberg". He makes this poor guy so uncomfortable, it's awful.

Also, search for "William/Bill Kristol"... now yeah, they "get along" basically because Bill is a really cool customer and takes Jon's ribbing. But watch how Jon is so impatient when Bill answers his questions. He's been on many times, btw.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

I've seen the Kristol

I've seen the Kristol interviews, and while they obviously disagree, I don't think there's any animosity. Just a healthy disagreeing.

I wish I could see the whole Goldberg interview, since they showed an edited version. I think Stewart made some great points, but I would've liked to have seen more.

Oh, you saw the Goldberg

Oh, you saw the Goldberg one. But Bal, don't you see how agitated Jon got? He's doing more than cordially disagreeing. He's almost repulsed by him, really. And in turn, Goldberg wants to walk out of there.

That WAS clear animosity, and with Jon running a show and booking people who come on to sell there wares and/or share their diverse opinions, I think Jon oversteps the line. You don't agree? (say you agree... I command you!) :)

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

Oh Jon clearly got

Oh Jon clearly got agitated, and Goldberg with Jon. But again, I think it was a healthy discussion. I don't think it was over the line because I think Goldberg was able to get some of his points across, and ultimately it was a great attention-getter for his book.

Bal

I would of like to seen all 18 minutes but to me it seemed Jon was  doing alot of nitpicking.I guess I will have to wait for reruns.Without seeing the whole thing it is hard to understand the full context of it.

Actually, bal, I've never

Actually, bal, I've never thought Jon Stewart was even remotely funny...and this goes back to his painful MTV days.  His sarcasm and "mocking" would be fine, if they were funny.  But he uses his sarcasm as a substitute for humor.  And as bad as his Ann Coulter interview may have been, could it have been worse than his Chris Matthews interview (granted, that wasn't really his fault)?  The only time I ever found Jon Stewart entertaining is when he showed up on Dr. Katz, Professional Therapist...but even then, Katz and the animator were most responsible for the laughs. 

His sarcasm and "mocking"

His sarcasm and "mocking" would be fine, if they were funny. But he uses his sarcasm as a substitute for humor. -fitzfong

fitz, I really hate to be the one to break this to you, but to liberals, that is humor. They just spew all their usual venom and then yell "Just kidding!" And the audience laughs. When the audience is a little dumbfounded if they go over the line, they yell, "I'm just kidding! It's a joke for cryin out loud!!"

That's liberal humor.

Is today the day that

Is today the day that everyone just makes up more crazy stuff about liberals than usual and I just didn't get the memo?

Memo

It was emailed to you via 2.9 modem.You should be getting it any week now.

I didn't "make up"

I didn't "make up" crazy stuff about liberals. That's their humor:

Today terrorists bombed a camp in Afghanistan

The bad news is Dick Cheney had already left. HAHAHAHAHA

To liberals, that's just side-splitting.

And then the explanation of it, by Bill Maher, is that it's a valid statement because....well you know the story...but at the time it was supposed to be funny

If conservatives told the same kind of "joke" about a liberal, it would be called "hate speech."

Jon Stewart says all kinds of stuff about everyone, some it hateful, and then justifies it with "hey it's a fake news show!!"

If that's going to be his line and his excuse, he shouldn't make a pretense of doing real interviews. He should do SNL types, with actors impersonating politicians and writers etc.

EVERYONE uses that form of

EVERYONE uses that form of humor. These sweeping, wild, far-reaching generalizations are just silly. You guys use it to explain Rush and Ann all the time. 

This is one sweeping, wild,

This is one sweeping, wild, far-reaching generalization I'm going to stick to and not apologize for.

Motherbelt is spot-on. That's the culture of the left/liberal's world of humor: to say something -- anything -- outrageous or not based in any fact, and then laugh and chalk it up to "it's a joke anyway".

Besides, they're the "it's all relative and God doesn't exist, so who cares what I or anyone says" people. They can be as irresponsible with words as they feel like being, and it's all good... it's cool.

So, I respectfully disagree, and counter that everyone does NOT use that form of humor -- or let's be more specific, everyone does not use that form of humor on a regular basis, the way they do. That IS humor to the left, not to others.

 

* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *

For REAL Change

It's true Maher's and

It's true Maher's and Stewart's formats are more entertainment/political satire based than those of Limbaugh and Coulter.  But those conservative pundit/icons--and even O'Reilly to a lesser extent-- will frequently make provocative remarks and then duck behind the "just joking" veil [and claim liberals lack a sense of humor].

The fact is there is too much line crossing engaged in by both sides.

Jer

Rush Limbaugh and Ann

Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter don't call themselves comedians like Stewart et al do. They sometimes inject humor or sarcasm into their political commentary.

Jon Steward does a "fake news show" as he calls it, for comedy purposes.  Stewart and Maher purposely write hateful "jokes" to smack at people they dislike.

That's the difference.

C'mon, mb. You don't think

C'mon, mb. You don't think Ann and Rush try to belittle people they're opposed to? And then when someone on here says "That's outlandish," you guys say "Oh you just don't get Rush's/Ann's humor."

You don't think Ann and

You don't think Ann and Rush try to belittle people they're opposed to?

Where did I say that? I didn't.

What I DID say, that you completely ignored, is that neither one calls him/herself a "comedian." And that is what Maher and Stewart are...they are comedians who have turned their comedy toward politics.

If you can't, or won't see the difference, nothing I can say will change your mind.

I'll repeat what I said about Stewart: If he's going to be a "comedian" joking about politics, he shouldn't pretend to do serious interviews. He's trying to straddle the line and come down on whichever side benefits him with any given situation.

 

 

I know the difference

I know the difference between Rush and Stewart. Stewart is straddling a line, but I think it's one that's possible to stradle.

Stewart and Maher purposely write hateful "jokes" to smack at people they dislike.

This is the line where it appeared you were inferring that Coulter and Rush don't do this, although I wouldn't characterize any of these guys as "hateful."

delete double

delete double

Potatoe, potahtoh

Potatoe, potahtoh

Let's call the whole thing

Let's call the whole thing off?

Thanks, Mr. Shy.  Love the

Thanks, Mr. Shy.  Love the Socks the Cat Video, by the way.

That's nothing

Olbermann compared the Obama-Clinton debates to the Lincoln-Douglas debates! I just about had a heart attack.

Well, maybe not a heart attack...

But that WAS ridiculous.

Even the Williams/DiMaggio comparison was giving them far too much credit.

Personally, I see this as "The Rock 'em, Sock 'em Robots" pair.

http://www.backtobas...

Just flailing away until one or the other gets his/its 'block knocked off'.

 

Daily Show

The more I watch the Daily Show the more I understand Jon Stewart's work in "Big Daddy." Thanks for making the Oscars unwatchable...wait...that wasn't Stewart who did that.

I agree with Jon

It is a stupid analogy.I really liked what he did at the Academy Awards.When he brought up about the anti war movies.I think he is way off on this.Ted Williams was a class act.Not a self serveing politician. 

http://www.tvgasm.com/newsgasm/news/newsgasm/in-case-you-missed-it-jon-stew.php 

About 6:16

Both Ted and Joe hit the bottle pretty hard

Is that what Jon means about Hillary and Obama?

He was particularly

He was particularly Smugnasty 

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985

these posts make me laugh

all your these posts have me almost rolling on the floor. i mean what did jon stewart do you to all you? it appears jon and his show really get under the skin of some NBers. pretty funny posts guys.

i thought the analogy was pretty good actually. i don't think stewart was refering to williams or dimaggio's military service, drinking habits, etc. it was more to do with two great baseball players making history in the same season. and like it or not clinton and obama are making history in the same primary race. that's all the analogy was, but im sure many of you will go to any length to bash someone who thinks differently than you and has a comedy show...which makes for a hilarious read. thank you.

»→ Jon Stewart scripted?

FOX News just threw out a tease the Stewart/ Clinton interview was scripted.

Imagine that.

♣ a seal

Oh my goodness...who would

Oh my goodness...who would of guessed.

»→ More fun

Obama camp claims Hillary ad "darkened" picture of Obama.

♣ a seal

RO... ROFL... Wonders

RO...

ROFL...

Wonders never cease!

»→ Loving it

Guess Hillary's giving him the OJ treatment.

♣ a seal

CA... ...and to

CA...

...and to think she is just getting started....

»→ I know bigtimer

I was sure hoping she could provide Sinclair's limo driver by now.

♣ a seal

Okay Cool... You lost me

Okay Cool...

You lost me there...refresh my memory.

Please.

Sounds like their teasing

Sounds like their teasing you to stay tuned...

 

Those who fail to learn from History, are destined to repeat it.......

Begging to Differ

Williams and DiMaggio???  Puleeeeze.  More like Bob Uecker and Marv Throneberry.

Actually,it's a sad

Actually,it's a sad commentary on American political affairs that programs like The Daily Show and 'hosts' such as John Stewart are given such credibility in the media. Sure, its good for a few and I mean few laughs, but little else.

 

 

Let's watch reruns of Firing Line......

Poor Ted Williams ...

... is turning over in his ... cryogenic chamber.

:)

:)

Its not a pretty sight

It would appear that Stewart is in direct competition with Alan Colmes for the most prominent position on Hillary’s butt as both of their mouths seem to be super-glued to it.

Colmes has really been

Colmes has really been outdoing himself lately. He's absolutely painful and embarrassing to watch.

I would say its more like

I would say its more like grossly sickening.

Mr. Graham could have used

Mr. Graham could have used a more accurate lead to this story, since the comparison was not man-to-man but what each accomplished during one season, and how both were firsts, but it was the hitting streak of DiMaggio that got the MVP award. It also is a misrepresentation to say

 

“As often happens when he’s interviewing a Democrat, Daily Show host Jon Stewart dropped most of his smart-aleck routine when he interviewed Hillary Clinton on Monday…”

 Anyone who watched the entire show would have seen in the first ten minutes and lead up to the interview where Jon was in his smart-aleck routine about Hillary, and continued with his in house guest Ralph Nader.

 

Those who fail to learn from History, are destined to repeat it.......