As much as I like and admire Jon Stewart, one thing I grow tired of is his attempt to pretend to be above the the media pundit circus. The Daily Show is NOT bipartisan in it's beliefs/statements/attitudes/etc. As self-righteous as MSNBC sometimes comes off, the concerns addressed about the increasingly alarmist tone coming from the right from Olbermann et al are not without virtue. The criticism would have more weight if they (TDS), admitted their own place, wading through our cultural media sewer and yielding to the same 24 hour news cycle for generating their material. I have no problem with criticism of the left by any means and applaud people like Bill Maher's recent remarks about Obama's reticence to quit the "nice guy" routine and go big, but honestly, when the decks have been stacked like they are, I for one appreciate MSNBC for being a necessary voice for helping foment some opposition to the constant drone of Limbaugh etc. Are they perfect? No. Do they sometimes get longwinded and preachy? sure. But to lump their criticism as being no different from the current extremist right-wing hyperbole is, coming from someone like Stewart, disingenuous at best.

And he's not above criticism either. I'm actually a big fan, (love everything he does- love the fake correspondents etc) ,but this particular issue is more complex than a few people demagoguing an issue like health care. No one was saying Limbaugh is directly responsible for some nutbag going and shooting people, only that everyday braying on the right these days is helping contribute to an environment conducive to motivating people on the fringe. That's all. Stewart was conveniently sidestepping that for a cheap joke pretending that Olbermann actually believes Rush Limbaugh is responsible for that shooting.. Which is worse?

O'Reilly's grandiose posturing about Dr. Stiller to me was borderline criminal. The exchange between Joan Walsh and Bill-O might've gotten silly only because Joan made the mistake of walking directly into Billy's shooting gallery, but she still is right about his helping contribute in part to the Doctor's murder. Spin it anyway you like, some things just can't be glossed over with a smirk and a wink.

Yes this is what a good leader does; claims that criticism is damaging their ability to lead? How's that again? This does not bode well for a presidential run. It certainly wasn't sexism that brought this house of cards down. It was a case of ambition outstripping character and accomplishment.

to her initial statement. And of course her reaction to THAT. (when is she going away?)

I have yet to sit down to finish IJ but I must say that in spite of DFW's style, (the almost fanatic attention to detail, the footnoting etc), I always found him eccentrically brilliant, intuitive and incredibly funny. He was also capable of the kind of profundity gleaned from cataloging the minutiae of modern life. Only an obsessive/compulsive could do that so well. I guess we can all agree that he's an acquired taste? This project sounds like a good idea, actually as I've never met anyone who finished it who didn't think it was great, (and not in the same way people say that Gravity's Rainbow and Naked Lunch are freakin' "Awesome"!)

How do these two (non) issues even relate? Only in the mind of the ever prevaricating-Cheneys.

Repulsive.

There used to be a time when hacks like these would be shamed off the air. Where are the people with ANY integrity left in the media or in the rank and file of the GOP?

Honestly, I think it's the fact that much of your criticism of Rush has involved dissecting his weird obsession with equating the Obama Administration with anal rape/poisoning that got under Rush's err... skin. It pierces the armor of braying braggadocio he so hides behind and exposes him as the scared little bully-boy that he is. As often as not these days it probably comes down to a personal vendetta rather than a disagreement about politics and ideas. But then again, there's your republican party these days in a nutshell.

That's how these things work, after all, right?

But really, anything that puts a burr under Mr. Bombast's considerable backside is worthy.

I have the same reaction to Hayao Miyazaki's films. I love the whimsical nature and the pacing is really interesting in terms of the way he allows a scene to unfold, -a great example is in My Neighbor Totoro wherein a long stretch of time is given to allow the children to run about and discover their new house, it's quite a magical scene. It's something you don't find much in American animation, (although there is definitely a similar quality to the opening scenes in Wall-e). I dare say that there are many such scenes buried within all of his films. I just find them rather extraneous and episodic overall that in the end erode their "magical" appeal. He just seems to be so intent on following the nooks and crannies and wallowing in the details he so slavishly devotes himself to to be concerned much with story arc. I too am left a bit cold by a certain generic quality to all of his character design (admittedly something endemic to anime-style in general). I know that I'm supposed to be wowed but I'm usually fascinated, then bewildered and then bored. I guess that I have no soul.

I can't wait to hear Glenn Beck weigh in on this pressing issue!

the same reason the Franken vote was so damned close. We'll vote a wack job like Bachmann in because she's so presentable and nice looking, but whoaa... Al Franken is craaazy!

'nuff said.

good succinct article. We need this discussion we need it now. I see far too many in the media making excuses for and/or rationalizing the boorish, unexamined behavior of the likes of Wilson and Bachmann.