|A small circle: We and They: The Polarization of America|
9 comments30 Mar 2006 @ 17:55 by Hanae @184.108.40.206 : John Stewart on Crossfire:
After his browbeats of CNN's Crossfire hosts for their "PARTISAN HACKERY," comedian John Stewart become my hero of the day at the time (10/15/2004.) Many suspect this now-legendary appearance prompted CNN to remove the show from their line-up.
Remember this, anyone:
STEWART: But the thing is that this -- you're doing theater, when you should be doing debate, which would be great.
BEGALA: We do, do...
STEWART: It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it.
STEWART: You know, the interesting thing I have is, you have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably.
CARLSON: You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think.
STEWART: You need to go to one.
The thing that I want to say is, when you have people on for just knee-jerk, reactionary talk...
CARLSON: Wait. I thought you were going to be funny. Come on. Be funny.
STEWART: No. No. I'm not going to be your monkey.
BEGALA: Go ahead. Go ahead.
STEWART: I watch your show every day. And it kills me.
CARLSON: I can tell you love it.
STEWART: It's so -- oh, it's so painful to watch.
STEWART: You know, because we need what you do. This is such a great opportunity you have here to actually get politicians off of their marketing and strategy.
CARLSON: Is this really Jon Stewart? What is this, anyway?
STEWART: Yes, it's someone who watches your show and cannot take it anymore.
STEWART: I just can't.
CARLSON: What's it like to have dinner with you? It must be excruciating. Do you like lecture people like this or do you come over to their house and sit and lecture them; they're not doing the right thing, that they're missing their opportunities, evading their responsibilities?
STEWART: If I think they are.
CARLSON: I wouldn't want to eat with you, man. That's horrible.
STEWART: I know. And you won't. But the thing I want to get to...
BEGALA: We did promise naked pictures of the Supreme Court justices.
CARLSON: Yes, we did. Let's get to those.
BEGALA: They're in this book, which is a very funny book.
STEWART: Why can't we just talk -- please, I beg of you guys, please.
CARLSON: I think you watch too much CROSSFIRE.
We're going to take a quick break.
STEWART: No, no, no, please.
CARLSON: No, no, hold on. We've got commercials.
STEWART: Please. Please stop.
----------- COMMERCIAL BREAK -----------
Now back to CROSSFIRE.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
We're talking to Jon Stewart, who was just lecturing us on our moral inferiority.
STEWART: ...let me ask you guys, again, a question, because we talked a little bit about, you're actually doing honest debate and all that. But, after the debates, where do you guys head to right afterwards?
CARLSON: The men's room.
STEWART: Right after that?
STEWART: Spin alley.
STEWART: No, spin alley.
BEGALA: What are you talking about? You mean at these debates?
STEWART: Yes. You go to spin alley, the place called spin alley. Now, don't you think that, for people watching at home, that's kind of a drag, that you're literally walking to a place called deception lane?
STEWART: Like, it's spin alley. It's -- don't you see, that's the issue I'm trying to talk to you guys...
BEGALA: No, I actually believe -- I have a lot of friends who work for President Bush. I went to college with some of them.
CARLSON: Neither of us was ever in the spin room, actually.
BEGALA: No, I did -- I went to do the Larry King show.
They actually believe what they're saying. They want to persuade you. That's what they're trying to do by spinning. But I don't doubt for a minute these people who work for President Bush, who I disagree with on everything, they believe that stuff, Jon. This is not a lie or a deception at all. They believe in him, just like I believe in my guy.
STEWART: I think they believe President Bush would do a better job. And I believe the Kerry guys believe President Kerry would do a better job. But what I believe is, they're not making honest arguments. So what they're doing is, in their mind, the ends justify the means.
BEGALA: I don't think so at all.
CARLSON: I do think you're more fun on your show. Just my opinion.
QUESTION: Renee (ph) from Texas. Why do you think it's hard or difficult or impossible for politicians to answer a straight, simple question?
STEWART: I don't think it's hard. I just think that nobody holds their feet to the fire to do it. So they don't have to.
----------Full transcript here
12 May 2006 @ 12:58 by Cyberotter @220.127.116.11 : Polarization
I thought this was very well done article. I would like to get your opinion on some pieces we have been working if I could>?
Thank you for the consideration
26 Jun 2006 @ 00:44 by Nasir Al-Subaai @18.104.22.168 : Is there a precedent?
Thank you for asking.
How did a small group at odds with most of the U.S. foreign policy elite, Republican as well as Democratic, manage to take over Washington and steer the U.S. into a Middle Eastern war in Iraq unrelated to any plausible threat to the U.S. and opposed by the public of every country in the world (with a few rare exceptions and, of course, Israel)? After the al-Qaida attacks, any U.S. president would likely have gone to war to topple bin Laden's Taliban protectors in Afghanistan. But everything that the U.S. has done since then would have been different had America's 18th century electoral rules not given Bush the presidency and had Cheney not used the transition period to turn the foreign policy executive into a PNAC reunion.
"Who does the promotion of prejudices that accentuate stereotypical images profit?"
"Who is supporting all the divisive propaganda?"
Those questions are germane to the issue.
I also like the lighted matches in your article.
Tapping into the resource of religious zealotry, those who feel that God created the U.S. specifically for them and who feel that atheists, secular-humanists and yes, even Satan himself are standing in the way of their prophesied kingdom on earth, is not new!
It's no accident that its counterpart can be found in the Middle-East.
Note: See relevant comment dated 25 Jun 2006 @ 21:49
by Nasir Al-Subaai, Willful near-sightedness on related
entry, "Pulling Back from the Brink."
Should the relevant blog become unavailable, a snapshot
of Nasir's comment is also available here: link
It would now appear that the "divide and conquer" strategies that were put to the test in the Arab World, and in Central and South America also, for similar reasons, are now at work in the U.S., turning people against people.
Or maybe it's just human nature.
The politics of hate permeate deeply into the collective psyche of people anywhere in any place. I've heard otherwise good and decent people fall prey to its lure.
Hate begets hate.
It's what those to whom hate profits counts on and cultivate.
Those who manipulate hate out of short-term domestic or international political and economic calculations are playing a dangerous game because there is no more time for hate. The writing is on the wall: Humanity must wake up.
In the long run hate will profit no one, not those, in America, who steer up the fears and stereotypical prejudices within the Christian right to turn people against each other in the U.S., nor those, in the Arab world and in the Middle East, who have been stirring up hatred amongst their people, nor those, in Israel or in the West, who have been its duplicitous instigator, and least of all the poor souls lost in the middle of the conflict, especially those who are losing all faith in the world and do not even care anymore because they have come to believe that they have nothing to lose.
Thank you, Nasir!
Please note that, since part of your lengthy (but welcomed) comment was a repetition of elements you had already covered in the more immediately relevant entry about the Middle East posted by Jeff Starrs, Pulling Back from the Brink, I have, for the sake of clarity, taken the liberty of snipping that part of your comment above to replace it instead with a link to your earlier comment on the said entry.
4 Jul 2006 @ 07:24 by Hanae @22.214.171.124 : Willful nearsightedness
Thanks for the snapshot link of Nasir's comment, D. It helps. I had missed it the first time around as the related entry, "Pulling Back from the Brink", on which you said it is posted does appear to have been temporarily taken off line.
Nasir's point that so called realpolitic is "how such policies always are justified by people who subscribe to the philosophy that 'the end justify the means' or that 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'" is one of the not too subtle topic of Lord of War (I just finished watching the film, just a few minutes ago.)
It's not in the same class as Syriana, but it touches to some similar geopolitical issues----and, mainly, that it is a game in which (without even having to bother about talking about conspiracy theories) it is obvious that not all the players play at the same level, or with the same chips.
As the main character of the movie, Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage), a global arms dealer, is eventually apprehended by Interpol and told to expect a long jail sentence, he proclaims:
"The reason I'll be released is the same reason you think I'll be convicted. I *do* rub shoulders with some of the most vile, sadistic men calling themselves leaders today. But some of these men are the enemies of *your* enemies. And while the biggest arms dealer in the world is your boss--the President of the United States, who ships more merchandise in a day than I do in a year--sometimes it's embarrassing to have his fingerprints on the guns. Sometimes he needs a freelancer like me to supply forces he can't be seen supplying. So. You call me evil, but unfortunately for you, I'm a necessary evil."
The movie ends simply stating that the U.S., the UK, France, Russia and China (the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council) are the world's leading arms dealers.
The film also claims to be "based on actual events."
In 2004, the United States ranked first in arms transfer agreements with developing nations at $6.9 billion.
Russia ranked second at $5.9 billion.
The four West European suppliers, as a group (France, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy) registered a significant increase in their collective share of all arms transfer agreements with developing nations between 2003 and 2004. This group’s share rose dramatically from 5.5% in 2003 to 22% in 2004. The collective value of this group’s arms transfer agreements with developing nations in 2004 was $4.8 billion compared with a total of $830 million in 2003.
28 Nov 2014 @ 03:38 by Geraldo @126.96.36.199 : Geraldo
Love the site-- extremely user pleasant and whole lots to see! In the event you adored this short article along with you would want to acquire more info relating to horizon treadmill reviews ct5.2 i implore you to go to our webpage.| http://findyourtreadmill.com
29 Apr 2016 @ 09:28 by Bandar Togel @188.8.131.52 : brilliant! I would like to share this ar
Togel Online Singapore
Togel Online Hongkong
Bandar Togel Singapore
Togel Online Terpercaya
Bandar Togel Online Terpercaya
Agen Togel Online Terpercaya
Agen Togel Online
17 Oct 2016 @ 15:11 by yakuza4d @184.108.40.206 : togel online hongkong
After read a couple of the articles on your website these few days, and I truly like your style of blogging. I tag it to my favorites internet site list and will be checking back soon. Please check out my web site also and let me know what you think.
28 Nov 2016 @ 19:02 by trio4d @220.127.116.11 : togel online
was very helpful and very useful
articles that you provide very helpful and nice to everyone thanks
11 Feb 2017 @ 14:47 by Paperomatic @18.104.22.168 : deliver your message
Best way to deliver your message! In this world, where the polarization of America is dominating the World - this was much needed & marketed accordingly.
Other entries in Opinions
19 Sep 2006 @ 00:09: My God’s better than your God…
13 Jul 2006 @ 23:06: The Law of Attraction?
4 Feb 2006 @ 04:45: The Unfeeling President - An essay by E. L. Doctorow
10 Oct 2004 @ 05:39: Consistently Dogmatic
20 Jul 2004 @ 00:59: Racism, Oppression, Poverty and Social Injustice
7 Apr 2004 @ 13:10: What would you ask?
25 Mar 2004 @ 13:17: Candles in the Sun - A culture of hidden violence