From The CC Insider…
I don't know about you, but when I get sick, I don't do a goddamn thing. I filed a short-term disability claim a few weeks ago for a case of lotto fever. It's just one more reason why Jon Stewart is an altogether better human being than me. He was suffering from a wicked stomach bug yesterday and he not only showed up for work at The Daily Show, he also made it over to The Rachel Maddow Show. If you missed it, here it is in all of its 49 minute and 26 second uncut glory:
Tags: CNN, Fox, Jon Stewart, MSNBC, Rachel Maddow
Fox News' Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck More Influential Than Whoever Those People Are on MSNBC, Which Apparently Is a Channel of Some Sort
So, as we head into these midterm elections which will decide whether the country despises Barack Obama and all his fellow members of the Socialist Party or merely hates them, we have to wonder, what cable news outlet do you suspect is most shaping the way that voters think about the candidates.
Trick question. There's no thinking involved. It's Fox News…
Fox's opinionated personalities were also rated as having the greatest positive impact on the political debate in the country. Bill O'Reilly was rated as having, by far, the greatest positive impact, with 49 percent of respondents rating him positively, and 32 percent negatively.
Glenn Beck was the second most-positively rated personality, with 38 percent of respondents saying he had a positive impact, and 32 percent saying he had a negative impact.
Wow, I didn't realize that Glenn Beck was really all that influential. This probably explains why so many people will be crying after Election Day.
Anyway, Fox News isn't the only channel in town, right? There's gotta be some counterbalance from MSNBC, don't you think? You know, MSNBC? That one with Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman and that other guy, Ted Something or Other?
MSNBC's personalities were largely ranked as unknown by respondents: 70 percent said they had never heard of Ed Schultz, 55 percent said they had never heard of Rachel Maddow and 42 percent said they had never heard of Keith Olbermann.
Oh, well, um… That's… Look, here's the thing… Uh, okay, in a way this is good, because it means they're more like everyday Americans. Everyday Americans who nobody cares about. They can use that to their advantage.
Here's the thing. Not everybody can be a media darling like Jon Stewart…
Although Comedy Central's Jon Stewart was ranked as having more of a positive than negative influence on the debate — 34 percent said positive compared with 22 percent for negative — 34 percent of respondents said they had never heard of him.
Oh my God, if 34 percent of people never heard of someone like Jon Stewart, then that probably means — lemme do my math here — approximately 376 percent of people have never heard of me. Which means that you are not reading this right now. So, I guess that means I don't really need to come up with a joke for the end here.
I think it also probably means that I don't actually exist. Which actually kind of works for me.
Tags: Bill O'Reilly, Ed Schultz, Fox, Glenn Beck, Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Midterms, MSNBC, Polls, Rachel Maddow
Unfortunately, this case untreatable. It's brought on by some sort of inoperable blockage of ethics and rationality in the objective lobe. So long as Fox News is fed a steady stream of stupid from the heart of America — which, let's face it, will not be cut off anytime soon — it will continue to present symptoms of chronic assholeishness.
But the good news is that in its present condition it can live a long and extremely profitable life as a make believe news organization providing make believe news to people who just don't give a shit. Note the particularly ratings-bloated tumor named Bill O'Reilly that Rachel Maddow confronts her in this clip from last night…
The patient's history on this matter can be observed after the jump. Make sure to scrub up first. The patient's immune-to-criticism system is badly compromised.
Tags: Andrew Breitbart, Barack Obama, Bill O'Reilly, Brian Kilmeade, Fox, MSNBC, NAACP, Rachel Maddow, Racism, Robert Gibbs, Shirley Sherrod, Steve Doocy, Tom Vilsack, White House
Somehow or other — just one day after crushing it in the Kentucky GOP primaries for U.S. Senate and hurling himself into the national spotlight — the Tea Party's newest new savior Rand Paul found himself on The Rachel Maddow Show defending his position against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
First of all, um, what?
Second of all, for real?
To be fair, I'm not a political strategist, so maybe I'm not seeing the long game being played here, but going on the most liberal television show on cable news and allowing yourself to get dragged into a conversation about whether or not you support segregation* does not seem like a super smart idea for a Republican at the very start of his political career.
Rand Paul is probably not a racist. My guess is that he's as not racist as a guy who is vocally opposed to civil rights legislation can be, for whatever that's worth. What he is, really, is his father's son and a member of The Ron Paul Revolution , which is to say, a bit out there in the ideology department.
Today, in an effort to mop up the whoops, he appeared on Fox News (of course) to set the record straight. Or something…
Apparently recognizing the dangerous political waters he put himself in, and trying to stop the story from growing out of control, Paul reiterated: "In no way do I favor any type of institutional racism or segregation or discrimination or any of that."
Paul repeatedly carped that it was the "loony left" that was after him. But the conservative Ingraham, in an otherwise sympathetic chat, asked Paul why he had agreed to an interview with MSNBC's liberal Rachel Maddow in the first place.
"You're right," he admitted. "It was a poor political decision, probably won't be happening anytime in the near future."
Now, that's some good political strategizin'.
Tags: Civil Rights, Fox, Kentucky, Laura Ingraham, MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, Racism, Rand Paul, Senate
I wish they'd stop comparing the size of the Gulf Coast oil spill to different US territories. First it was the size of Rhode Island, then Delaware, then New Jersey, then Puerto Rico. But I went to public school, so I don't know what any of that means. Puerto Rico is bigger than New Jersey? News to me. Also, what's a Delaware? Can't we get a more useful metric? Like if you told me the spill has grown from 1000 Costcos to 80 Disney Worlds then I'd know exactly what you mean.
For more coverage of the Gulf Coast oil spill, check out Stephen Colbert's take at CC Insider.
The Daily Show airs Monday through Thursday at 11pm / 10c.
Tags: Barack Obama, BP, Energy & Oil, Environment, Fox, Gulf Coast, Jon Stewart, Mary Landrieu, New Orleans, Rachel Maddow, Sarah Palin, The Daily Show, Wyatt Cenac