The "Sanity" Rally. Is Jon Stewart naive?

[sandinista]

good for you yah...like I suspected..."My point was not based on any part of the political spectrum." no ideology there

Oh cut the bull. Politically, I'm a left-of-center Democrat. But I did not invoke politics. Maybe you aren't capable of understanding it, but it was not a political rally. It was a social rally, a commentary on the state of discourse in the US and how we treat those who disagree with us.

bullshit it wasn't political, pure crap.

[Warren Dew]

It's whole theme was to call attention to the fact that rational, polite public discourse of the non-hyperpartisan variety is getting pushed to the sidelines.

How, by providing a venue for hyperpartisans to carry signs lambasting the opposition?

narrow-minded Tea Party type

I guess insulting people for disagreeing with you is a great way to demonstrate by example that "polite public discourse" is dead.

At least sandinista has the courage of his convictions.

[eXcommunicate]

How do I know that none of you have the first damn clue what you're talking about? Because I was there.

With the majicks of the information age I can watch the whole thing--all the music, the awkward skits and other shenanigans, and Jon's insultingly naive closing speech--on the web. To say this rally is not a reaction to Glenn Beck's rally is naive to the extreme. I saw the signs. I know people who went to both rallies. I watched the interviews. Mixed in with everything else was a healthy dose of "fuck you" to the Tea Party from many at the rally that day.

That'd be all three of you who have bothered to whine about this gathering. Exactly the kind of people who "don't get it" and wouldn't have fit in at the rally.

Dude, I "get it" as far as the message goes. It's not that difficult to "get" and not exactly an original idea. I used to think like Jon, until I realized that in my "moderation" I was tacitly accepting the continuing dismantling of our democracy. Yes, take a "chill pill" everything's gonna be "okay." Meanwhile Prop 19 is going to lose, right-wing reactionaries are going to win big this cycle, the banks, which should have been nationalized and chopped to pieces for resale, are even larger and continue to gamble our economy away, and we're stuck in two costly wars. Do you think I've come to my ardent beliefs through accident, or just because I like to yell? I've had plenty of calm discussions with people of differing beliefs. The agenda and posturing of the people who are going to win this election are anathema to the very concept of compromise.

You guys could've done well to attend such an event.

Spare the condescension.

[Ian]

good for you yah...like I suspected..."My point was not based on any part of the political spectrum." no ideology there

Oh cut the bull. Politically, I'm a left-of-center Democrat. But I did not invoke politics. Maybe you aren't capable of understanding it, but it was not a political rally. It was a social rally, a commentary on the state of discourse in the US and how we treat those who disagree with us.

bullshit it wasn't political, pure crap.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. I can see how you can only assume that it must have been.

But as I stood in the middle of a quarter-million people, I could only guess about the political leanings of various people around me. I looked at lots of people and could only guess. Most were probably liberal-leaning, but I know that wasn't the case for all of them. People of all ages, many colors, and many parts of the country (I even met two groups from Alaska). And I personally know several Republicans who were there as well. Why did they show up? Because they're sick of seeing angry, irrational partisans dominating the political news as much as any Democrat.

[Ian]

It's whole theme was to call attention to the fact that rational, polite public discourse of the non-hyperpartisan variety is getting pushed to the sidelines.

How, by providing a venue for hyperpartisans to carry signs lambasting the opposition?

Look around for those "hyperpartisan" signs. You'll find them very, very, very few and far between. Most of those directed at the Tea Party were based on satire, not insults or anger. And IMO they deserve the response.

[eXcommunicate]

Why did they show up? Because they're sick of seeing angry, irrational partisans dominating the political news as much as any Democrat.

Yet those that need to hear this message the most will not listen. Do you remember what CNN used to be like before Fox News came onto the scene? Boring, stade, news.

[Ian]

How do I know that none of you have the first damn clue what you're talking about? Because I was there.

With the majicks of the information age I can watch the whole thing--all the music, the awkward skits and other shenanigans, and Jon's insultingly naive closing speech--on the web. To say this rally is not a reaction to Glenn Beck's rally is naive to the extreme. I saw the signs. I know people who went to both rallies. I watched the interviews. Mixed in with everything else was a healthy dose of "fuck you" to the Tea Party from many at the rally that day.

That'd be all three of you who have bothered to whine about this gathering. Exactly the kind of people who "don't get it" and wouldn't have fit in at the rally.

Dude, I "get it" as far as the message goes. It's not that difficult to "get" and not exactly an original idea. I used to think like Jon, until I realized that in my "moderation" I was tacitly accepting the continuing dismantling of our democracy. Yes, take a "chill pill" everything's gonna be "okay." Meanwhile Prop 19 is going to lose, right-wing reactionaries are going to win big this cycle, the banks, which should have been nationalized and chopped to pieces for resale, are even larger and continue to gamble our economy away, and we're stuck in two costly wars. Do you think I've come to my ardent beliefs through accident, or just because I like to yell? I've had plenty of calm discussions with people of differing beliefs. The agenda and posturing of the people who are going to win this election are anathema to the very concept of compromise.

You guys could've done well to attend such an event.

Spare the condescension.

Apologies for the condescention. I like your points a lot more than the two curmudgeons who insist on being angry and ignorant.

It wouldnt never say it wasn't a response to Glenn Beck's rally. It was very much that. But it was a lot more than that. His had a very specific political/religious bent in one direction, and on blaming others for his list of problems. Jon Stewart's was a mostly lighthearted commentary on everyone, and on the media.

[Ian]

Why did they show up? Because they're sick of seeing angry, irrational partisans dominating the political news as much as any Democrat.

Yet those that need to hear this message the most will not listen. Do you remember what CNN used to be like before Fox News came onto the scene? Boring, stade, news.

Yeah, Stewart and Colbert were mostly preaching to the choir. But they voiced a very real problem present in our culture today. Maybe they spread the message just a little. Nobody can possibly be against the rally (against sane, polite discourse?), but people gripe about how it must have been something else.

[eXcommunicate]

Sure, and the point of my original post was not that Jon's rally was too political or anything like that, but rather its potential effect upon liberal politics and the American Left. You kind of ignored my entire original post.

[Coito ergo sum]

After some thought and some reading from various corners of the Internet about the recent "Sanity" Rally in Washington DC thrown by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that it was all a useless and counterproductive farce.

1. The Right was not listening. For one thing the Right is not and has never been part of Jon Stewart's demographic. In other words, no matter how loudly Jon Stewart screams about "civility" and "sanity" in our discourse, approximately 75% of the people that need to hear this will not have been listening in the first place.

Two points - one, I love the Daily Show and Jon Stewart is funny as hell. So, hopefully, that will add evidence to my assertion of not being "right wing" despite accusations to the contrary....

Two - I think, playing Devil's Advocate, the other side would argue that the civility and sanity that is being requested is one way. The "left wing" is hardly "civil" or "sane" towards the right. I see, all the time, here and on facebook, very extreme namecalling, ridicule, bashing, and other uncivil verbiage toward right wingers, tea partiers/baggers, etc. I don't think either side has a monopoly on incivility or insanity.

2. His demographic consists primarily of Center-Left young people, generally well-off and apathetic. I saw nothing in the rally and even in Jon's speech to energize these young people to change the political process or to even participate in it!

Since I was a kid there has been talk of energizing young people Young people just never seem to get involved. They talk about stuff, but then sleep through the voting, and open another beer instead of rushing over to the polls. I know. I was young once.

3. Left, Progressive, and (what I like to call) Liberal-tarian forces are already marginalized in our political process. Any radical or revolutionary elements of the Left have long since vanished, while reactionary elements of the Right have been ascendant for the past 30 years. The rally presented a false dichotomy or false-equivalency between current Left and Right voices in our media and political process.

I'm not sure I understand what you've said here. I think the rally was Stewart's and Colbert's attempt to garner ratings by targeting the market of folks that react against the Tea Party movement. They didn't do it for political reasons. They did it for ratings. IMHO

4. The 'silent majority' or the "Great Centrist" or "radical centrist" coalition has been part and party to every single fascist act perpetrated by our government, either through apathy or through direct involvement. Why should we put our hopes in some kind of great "middle" when they are so easily lead astray?

Agreed. The "middle" are folks that voted for Obama and were surprised that he pushed Obamacare, unions, and the other issues he championed. I mean - these are folks that were inundated for 18 months of Obama's campaign wherein he promised to do all the things he's done and tried to do, and then are now surprised that he did them? People are fucking idiots.

Any "independent" who voted for Obama and is NOW pissed off, ought to be ashamed of himself or herself and have his or fucking head examined. What the fuck did they expect? Obama won the Independents by a landslide in 2008 - and now they hate him? What -- the -- FUCK?

5. The call for "moderation" will be felt more keenly by left-liberal minds, further weakening the resolve of an already weakened left, while further emboldening right-wing elements of our society. Does anyone really think Jon's rally will have any effect on the likes of Fox News or the Tea Party? While the Left frets about civility and moderation, the Right goes further to the right and the rapid pace of the corporate takeover of our government accelerates.

I disagree that there was any call for moderation. It was an opportunity to mock the Tea Baggers and that sort. It was funny, and it bolstered the ratings of the Daily Show and Colbert Report, and solidified Stewart and Colbert as leading public figures. This guys - as funny as they are - are leading political commentators of our day. That's a sad fucking state of affairs. I like both of them - as comedians. But, I think it says something not-so-good about our culture today that they are looked to for serious commentary -- and they are. The President of the fucking United States was on the Daily Show on Comedy Central. Are you fucking kidding me? (rhetorical)

At first blush it would seem such a rally would appeal to me. I have a very liberal mind. Sitting around together and politely discussing politics and policy, coming to an agreement on what's best, then deciding upon an implementation is what I'd prefer to do. Unfortunately, the current political and human realities just don't allow for that. What does extending an olive branch to the other side gain when the other side simply throws it back in your face? One of Barack Obama's famous phrases was something along the lines of, "We will extend our hand, if you unclench your fist," and we all saw how that turned out--his centrist/center-Left coalition is shattered and the Right is poised to take control.

Politely? There was nothing "polite" about the rally to restore sanity. Just look at the oceans of "best pics from the rally" wherein it is sign after sign ridiculing their opposition as idiotic and ridiculous. That's fine and dandy, in my book. Ridicule has its place and the Tea Baggers and other factions have much to be ridiculed for.

And, yes, we'll extend our hand, if you unclench our fist was what he said to Ahmadinejad....he also said the other day that he will "punish his enemies," and "reward his friends." If you're not with him...your agin' 'im.... now where have we heard that before?

[Coito ergo sum]

...dupe

[Ian]

Sure, and the point of my original post was not that Jon's rally was too political or anything like that, but rather its potential effect upon liberal politics and the American Left. You kind of ignored my entire original post.

Sorry to drift off your point, but I sort of disagreed with it. I don't think it was (or will ultimately prove to be) counterproductive. Liberal politics will go on without Jon Stewart leading it, and I'm sure he doesn't really want to.

[sandinista]

Sure, and the point of my original post was not that Jon's rally was too political or anything like that, but rather its potential effect upon liberal politics and the American Left. You kind of ignored my entire original post.

Sorry to drift off your point, but I sort of disagreed with it. I don't think it was (or will ultimately prove to be) counterproductive. Liberal politics will go on without Jon Stewart leading it, and I'm sure he doesn't really want to.

so...it was political now?

[Ian]

Sure, and the point of my original post was not that Jon's rally was too political or anything like that, but rather its potential effect upon liberal politics and the American Left. You kind of ignored my entire original post.

Sorry to drift off your point, but I sort of disagreed with it. I don't think it was (or will ultimately prove to be) counterproductive. Liberal politics will go on without Jon Stewart leading it, and I'm sure he doesn't really want to.

so...it was political now?

Um, NO.

ExCommunicate was talking about the effect (or lack of effect) it might have on young people and/or liberals. A football game or a church picnic could conceivably have an affect on people as well.

[sandinista]

Sure, and the point of my original post was not that Jon's rally was too political or anything like that, but rather its potential effect upon liberal politics and the American Left. You kind of ignored my entire original post.

Sorry to drift off your point, but I sort of disagreed with it. I don't think it was (or will ultimately prove to be) counterproductive. Liberal politics will go on without Jon Stewart leading it, and I'm sure he doesn't really want to.

so...it was political now?

Um, NO.

ExCommunicate was talking about the effect (or lack of effect) it might have on young people and/or liberals. A football game or a church picnic could conceivably have an affect on people as well.

still? You still say that rally was not political? Of course it was. In fact everything is political in some sense, including a football game or church picnic, even more so when it is a political rally. liberals?