The Daily Show
Keith Olbermann cedes the high ground and wallows in the swamp of baseless name-calling. (06:54)
more from The Daily Show:
The Daily Show: Fox News Covers Scott Brown’s Victory
In our political establishment, constantly threatening Iran, with WAR, or with “crippling” sanctions (=collective punishment = crime against humanity) – these are considered ‘civil’ policies and discussing them on that assumption is considered civil. No doubt many leaders and pundits in history have similarly discussed horrific policies very civilly. There’s some kind of weird miasma that takes hold in ‘polite’ society that seems to presuppose that horrific intentions, discussed politely, are somehow cleansed, dipped in civility, clothed in banality…
it’s very important that we not call fascism, or warmongering, or any other wrongdoing by its name, just as we must never call Waldemort by his name.
See if we called things by their names, people might actually notice what’s going on and we certainly can’t have that. So let’s continue to normalize discussions that should never be normalized. Speaker one has a perfectly reasonable sounding argument about why certain anti-establishment points of view should not be tolerated and why military force should always be threatened in order to further policy. No one should ever say anything mean about speaker one, for speaker one is very reasonable and well dressed and smiles very nicely. Now speaker two, can you explain for our audience why you think idealistic notions like peace and justice should hold an equal place in a discussion with more robust ideas?
Very good, Phil.
Stewart has been going to extreme lengths to pander to Republicans these days. He’s starting to seem like almost as much of a parody as Colbert.
Pingback: Disdain Versus Democracy by Joel S. Hirschhorn « Dandelion Salad