Late Night Video — The Narrative of Conservative Victimization
Jon Stewart breaks it all down for you. Again. Responding to Chris Wallace’s lame attempt to recover from the pretty definitive smackdown that Stewart delivered to him on his program, Jon Stewart gives us the rundown of how conservatives get their victim on. Because they don’t really have arguments or fact — they just have “another side” which consists of conspiracy theories and discredited views of the world:
Tags: Late Night Video
Stewart (Stuart Leibowitz) still riding high off of his interview with an idiot? Always amusing when the left looks to comedians/entertainers for their news and talking points.
Never amusing when someone finds it necessary to highlight the Jewish name of a popular entertainer. Spare me the denial, thanks.
I merely find it curious that many liberal Jewish entertainers are still in ashamed, or in denial, of their heritage. Any theories or believable history lessons? I’d like your take on the topic.
You’re welcome.
Oh… and, go fuck yourself if you don’t like it.
Google it, dipshit.
Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz was born on November 28 1962, in Lawrence, New Jersey. It is not uncommon in entertainment to change one’s name, but there is a slight mystery surrounding Stewart’s metamorphosis. His father, Donald Leibowitz, a physicist, left the family when Jon was just nine and Stewart has hinted that is why he shed his surname. His father has still never seen Stewart perform live.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/feb/26/broadcasting.oscars2006
Should that be the truth, it’s a rather limp dick reason, in my opinion. Not unlike your response.
I merely find it curious when someone, apropos of nothing, feels a need to point out the Jewishness of a media figure of whom he apparently has a negative opinion. And then turns nasty when this is pointed out to him. And then shows his obsession with and fear about the potency of his man parts by insulting other people’s man parts.
C’mon, Mis. You were showing such progress.
The deflection of Jon Stewart’s name change I guess is meant to steer everyone from the genuine smackdown evident here. But hey — changing your name is an entertainer’s tradition of long standing. As Eleanora Fagan or Caryn Johnson could tell you. Look it up. Hint: neither are Jewish.
“Negative opinion”? I think Stewart is hilarious, and rarely miss the show. He’s especially good when he’s not shoving his political views down everyone’s throats (Getting excited at that imagery, Geezer?), which is rare. I just don’t use him as a source of news and information. It’s unfortunate that you need to have your news “broken down” by a comedian.
Furthermore, I didn’t “point out his Jewishness”. I merely brought up his name change, then you made an… assumption. Hell, my first wife is Jewish (and a lawyer), and an amazing woman I might add. We’re still the best of friends. She was also a critic of those who changed their names to hide their heritage.
Why did you bring up his name change? What did that add to your point?
No, it doesn’t excite me. The question is why impotence is such an issue for you.
“Why did you bring up his name change? What did that add to your point?”
That’s been explained. Perhaps you need an entertainer to break it down?
“The question is why impotence is such an issue for you.”
It’s certainly not my question, but you seem to keep bringing it up.
“That’s been explained. Perhaps you need an entertainer to break it down?”
Maybe I do (I don’t watch Stewart, though). Your point was that liberals need entertainers to explain things to them (so do conservatives, apparently, given the size of the audiences for Rush and O’Reilly and Hannity). In that context, bringing up his name change was…I dunno, sort of beside the point? I took it as antagonistic on your part because it came from left field.
You have offered two possible reasons for this name change: Jewish entertainers are either ashamed of or in denial of their heritage. You don’t need me to point out that there are other, more practical reasons for entertainers to choose stage names. Yet you focused on those two. Again, to what gain for your argument?
AS for me bringing up impotence, you actually were the one who chose “limp-dicked” as an insult. Rather than “bring it up,” I merely pointed out that your insults often involve potency or its opposite. If I employed your methods, I could speculate that you fear your own possible impotence. I leave it as a question because you’re the only one who can answer it.
When media types complain that comedians should be held to their standards (which they don’t follow anyway), then you know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they have totally failed in their job.
That’s wallaces point, isn’t it? That steward is just like them. It goes with the whole victimization canard.
Give me Ted Baxter’s real name and I’ll give you a golf clap. Whogivesafuck?
Well I shouldve said Ted Knight.
You know what I’m sick of? The lame, non-clever, Mad Libs approach that conservatives use for a response or put down. The first comment of this post is a prime example….
“Always amusing when the left looks to comedians/entertainers for their news and talking points.”
To
Always amusing when the right looks to millionaires/billionaires for their news and talking points.
See? That was rather easy!
Do you have these awesome quips ready to go in a text file or something?
No, he just has antagonism towards some imaginary “liberals” that he has to release. It’s the intellectual equivalent of farting.
Should that be true, then I fart in your general direction.
I already knew that. Seriously, though, you normally only take your shots at the folks here. It just seemed an odd thing for you to point out.