SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Reuters tells us:
As Jon Stewart winds down his 19-year stint as host of Comedy Central's The Daily Show, he and Stephen Colbert sit at the peak of American punditry despite their left-leaning view of life, the universe and everything.
In an era of diffused voices and divided politics, they are well known, widely admired, and speak to Americans in ways that no one else does, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll.
This poll tracks 10 different pundits. Split evenly between conservative and liberal. It is also worth noting that four of the five on the liberal side are comedians, while none of the conservative pundits are trained to tell jokes.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Jon Stewart Stands at the Peak of American punditry
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 94 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Can anyone remember when the times were not hard, and money not scarce?
(Score: -1, Troll) by jmorris on Monday May 11 2015, @06:02PM
Wow, everything I say about the prog left is confirmed by this poll. That the progs are creatures of emotion, repulsed by serious reasoning, incapable of thinking much. That the left has practiced Entryism to conquer the 'Commanding heights of the culture' so as to push their propaganda through mass entertainment instead of serious debate. All of it.
First lets look at the Right's punditry, taking this poll as accurate for purposes of discussion. With the exception of the embarrassing Bill O'Reilly, the others are first rate intellects, capable of and regularly producing serious discussion along comedy and the showmanship required to attract and sustain a mass audience. Limbaugh, Coulter and Beck mix varying degrees of humor with the serious discussion but their programs and books are driven by serious discussion of current events. In Beck's case the humor is mostly limited to his radio program as the TV show is almost always serious... often too much so. Limbaugh and Coulter actually write their own material.
Now look at the left. The only serious intellect those poor saps have is Maddow who, while about as funny as Ebola in a kindergarten, is a serious thinker on the progressive left. As for Colbert, Stewart and Oliver they are merely readers of other Party member's jokes.... and are usually only OK themselves in comedy potential and have the intellects of children if left to their own devices. Maher does have the occasional flash of intellect but his average is also sub par.
Progressivism is indeed the marching morons. The power of ranked masses of mediocrities yelling slogans in unison. Progressivism can't allow excellence even among its own visible leadership because the very idea some might be smarter, funnier, better causes too many badfeelz in the rank and file. The actual thinking leadership must stay quietly offstage.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by snick on Monday May 11 2015, @06:23PM
Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and Rush Limbaugh
Whole-ly Fuck. That is messed up. If I had to make a list of the most cartoonishly moronic folks on the right ... that might be the list. To complain about progressives being "creatures of emotion" and then wax lyrical over a list of folks who are at the top of the heap when it comes to spewing fear and hate ... My hat's off to you, mr. troll.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 11 2015, @10:10PM
Adding empathy to the emotional spectrum is, apparently, a weakness to be mocked by the Reactionaries.
It strikes me that if Wrong-Wingers do actually put thought into the decision-making process, that consists of WWJD?--then doing the opposite.
...but maybe I'm just jaded after 3-plus decades of Reaganism.
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday May 11 2015, @06:23PM
"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results." - Milton Friedman
Back when Obamacare was being debated, the left didn't frame the debate as something that would work, but that those that opposed it were heartless, merciless beasts. It was the right that had principled stances, such as the right not to buy insurance, or the comatose doctrine of limited powers.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday May 11 2015, @06:32PM
Back when Obamacare was being debated...
But wait, according to jmorris the right's pundits don't use slogans! How is it possible that people refer to the Affordable Care Acts by such a name?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Joe Desertrat on Monday May 11 2015, @06:35PM
It was the right that had principled stances, such as the right not to buy insurance, or the comatose doctrine of limited powers.
The only "principles" involved were that Obama must not look good, that no government programs should prove better than private industry (might put to lie the "it's better to privatize" myth) and that nothing even remotely like socialism should succeed. Any other principles such as those you mention are immediately cast aside when it benefits the interests of those on the right.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday May 11 2015, @06:48PM
The only "principles" involved were that Obama must not look good,
jmorris is trying to be funny! It is the only possible explanation. This is the point of the FA: conservatives are incapable of humor, the best they can do is be racist, they mistake making fun of others for being funny. jmorris is an excellent example of this. Too bad about Bill O'Reilly.
(Score: 5, Informative) by snick on Monday May 11 2015, @06:36PM
So ... that whole Death Panels thing ... We're just dropping that down the memory hole?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 11 2015, @10:37PM
The actual Left (not the Dems who are a tiny bit less Wrong-Wing) recognized Obamacare as Romneycare rehashed.
It was|is a giant giveaway to the most inefficient insurance corporations on the planet and actual Lefties didn't|don't want any part of it.
What an actual Lefty wanted was for Bill Clinton to have started ratcheting down the age of eligibility for Medicare[1] by 5 years with each Congressional session.
If such an effort had been sustained, by now every American would be 100 percent covered from birth by a single public system, the way they do it in the Advanced Countries.
[1] The most cost-effective heath insurance program in the USA.
-- gewg_
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Tork on Monday May 11 2015, @08:22PM
That the progs are creatures of emotion, repulsed by serious reasoning, incapable of thinking much.
Heh.
Limbaugh, Coulter and Beck mix varying degrees of humor with the serious discussion but their programs and books are driven by serious discussion of current events.
HAHAHA!!
The only serious intellect those poor saps have is Maddow who, while about as funny as Ebola in a kindergarten, is a serious thinker on the progressive left.
Heh.
As for Colbert, Stewart and Oliver they are merely readers of other Party member's jokes.... and are usually only OK themselves in comedy potential and have the intellects of children if left to their own devices.
Hahahahaha!
The power of ranked masses of mediocrities yelling slogans in unison.
HAHAHAHA!!!
Progressivism can't allow excellence even among its own visible leadership because the very idea some might be smarter, funnier, better causes too many badfeelz in the rank and file. The actual thinking leadership must stay quietly offstage.
Heehee.
I have to admit, this is the best work of satire I've read in a long time. Kudos!
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Non Sequor on Tuesday May 12 2015, @01:19AM
Here's the thing: you are the mirror image of the things you hate. When you see the other side as emotional and unmoved by reason at the very same time, they see the same in you.
The truth is, you see right through each other, but you can't see through yourself. The truth is, the human intellect grapples with and fails to subdue the deeper problems that society faces, and political ideologies are just a way of maintaining the delusion of control needed to maintain sanity.
Competing ideologies are stable in the sense that both sides genuinely believe they have enough credible evidence supporting their side and discrediting the opposite side and as new information is generated both sides either accept the information or mark it as somehow tainted by the opposing camp. This process is self reinforcing and maintains the stability of the frameworks while doing nothing to resolve any persistent disputes.
Write your congressman. Tell him he sucks.