Depressing/Infuriating Quote of the Day
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here.]
In a follow up to a post yesterday, we learn that Salman Rushdie spoke to Jon Stewart about including the unapologetic Islamofsacist Yusuf Islam in his Rally to Restore Sanity. This is Rushdie’s characterization of the conversation:
I [Rushdie] spoke to Jon Stewart about Yusuf Islam’s appearance. He said he was sorry it upset me, but really, it was plain that he was fine with it. Depressing.
You know, Jon, the issue isn’t a matter of hurt feelings, you jackass. It’s about whether you actually care about freedom of expression or not. And if you can’t be bothered to give up a performance of Peace Train at your stupid little rally in the name of freedom, then you “just believe in free speech, but won’t defend it.”
Note that the post that it this quote came from is down, but you can still see it on its cache.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
But, Aaron… don’t you see? This rally was about restoring sanity, turning down the hyperbole, and the language of hate.
THAT’S why he had Cat Stevens/ Yusuf Islam there.
The logic isn’t that hard to follow, man.
/sarc
Jewels (c7b6c5) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:37 pmRove has been served.
w (9df40f) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:40 pmRushdie’s characterization of his conversation with Stewart is not a “quote”. A quote would use Stewart’s actual words. That’s the whole point of a quote.
Stewart, you jackass, saying some unknown thing which Salman Rushdie characterized in a way that sounds bad but which might sound completely different to a disinterested third party but we don’t know one way or the other! What’s wrong with you!?
Leviticus (35fbde) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:41 pmStewart is a liberral scum traittor, America must have to wipout his ilke if it is be to survives!
The Anonymous Tea-Partier (0692b1) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:47 pmWell, considering that Stewart was willing to even allow Yusuf within a hundred yards of one of his mics makes me really not want to give him the benefit of the doubt.
The Departed (d027b8) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:48 pmWilliam Yelverton appears to be spiraling out of control. There is no end to the madness.
JD (2b4a42) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:48 pmHey, anonymous person. Nobody needs to be wiped out.
JD (2b4a42) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:49 pmWe’ll just let W and the Anonymous Tea-Partier cancel each other out, for anyone keeping score…
Leviticus (35fbde) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:53 pmw is spamming with incoherent nonsense.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:54 pmAnonymous person thing is a Moby, Leviticus.
JD (2b4a42) — 11/2/2010 @ 12:55 pmWhat’s funny is that the Anon Tea Partier thinks it’s the Tea Party that’s unreasonable, unable to make a good argument, and insane. I don’t see a lot of Tea Partiers spoof liberals into this cartoonish frothy fantasy.
I don’t need to wipe out democrats, Anon. This election is proof many Obama voters have joined the Tea Party. This is what democracy looks like.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:03 pmStewart, you jackass, saying some unknown thing which Salman Rushdie characterized in a way that sounds bad but which might sound completely different to a disinterested third party
Stewart poses as the preening intellectual lefty who apparently had no idea why Cat Stevens changed his name in the first place. I’d call that a Grade – A dumbass move on his part, among so many others:
– calling Harry Truman a war criminal;
Dmac (ad2c6a) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:06 pm– not knowing what Keynesian economics is;
– attempting to get John Yoo in some kind of infantile “gotcha” moment in the most painful “interview” I’ve ever seen;
– calling the POTUS “dude” in the second most painful “interview” I’ve ever witnessed.
Leviticus:
Unfortunately, the two aren’t opposites, like matter and anti-matter. It’s more likely the two will fuse together, Polywell-fusion-reactor-style, creating a moron (one of the densest materials known to humans).
Anon (f43943) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:06 pm“attempting to get John Yoo in some kind of infantile “gotcha” moment in the most painful “interview” I’ve ever seen;”
Thanks for the reminder. That was breathtaking, and I think it started personal cynicism that had hope of beating a lot of Jon’s arrogance back.
I don’t have a problem with Jon so much as those who think he is something much more than he is. He had some good things to say at his rally, too.
I do think Colbert is the paradigm of the paranoid, elitist, sneering, angry liberal. How do you keep up a stupid parody that long? It’s not accurate enough to piss anyone off… it’s just a display of stamina at this point. He’s restoring sanity? OK.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:15 pmI can’t believe I used to like John Stewart, and watched his show occasionally until quite recently. I few weeks ago he was making fun of the Chilean miners. I turned it off–didn’t even bother to try to figure out what the joke was supposed to be, since I don’t think that was approptiate to joke about.
I have lost all respect for John Stewart now that he has shared the stage with the lunatic Cat Stevens. Will never watch him again.
Melykin (d51161) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:27 pmColbert basically owes Stewart his job – without that show’s lead – in, it would die off quickly. But to be fair, Steven Carrell also owes Stewart (I watched the show religiously back in those days), and he was another brilliant Second City alum. I remember seeing Carrell on the stage for about four years, but Colbert never made an impression.
My main problem with Stewart is that he never took himself so seriously back when he took over from Kilbourne (who was a real ass at times) – but over the years the press faves got to his head, and now he fancies himself as something other than just another baggy – pants comic who endlessly mugs for the camera. The fact that Obama would lower himself to Stewart’s level really reveals how desperate he feels right now.
Dmac (ad2c6a) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:27 pmHeck, dmac. Barcky was on with Ryan Seacrest this morning. Stewart is about 7392684 steps up.
JD (2b4a42) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:33 pmThis election is proof many Obama voters have joined the Tea Party. This is what democracy looks like.
One of the Tea Party leaders is herself a Democrat.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (fb9e90) — 11/2/2010 @ 1:44 pmRushdie’s own words do not constitute a quote? You ridiculous person.
Jim Treacher (e041de) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:10 pmOh, the irony of this post…..
Kman (d25c82) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:11 pmReally, Kman? Because we’re noting how wrong it was to give a murder-censor a podium? I guess that’s ironic in some dull way, but the point is that it’s wrong to kill people over what they say.
Stewart didn’t seem impressed with that point. I think the irony is very weak if you’re saying we shouldn’t criticize Yusuf’s getting a podium if we hope to be true believers in free speech.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:15 pmReally, Kman? Because we’re noting how wrong it was to give a murder-censor a podium?
Kman (d25c82) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:16 pmYes. You’re noting how wrong it was to give a a murder-censor [huh/] a podium…. in a post about free speech.
That’s how I like my irony served.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:17 pmFair enough, Kman. It’s a little ironic, but I don’t see it as an absurd position.
No one is trying to kill Yusuf. No one thwarted his speech. We’re criticizing it. Giving him a podium shows insanity and intolerance. We do, in fact, tolerate Yusuf Islam’s speech rights in a way he doesn’t tolerate ours.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:23 pmYou forgot to switch handles on comment #22, dude.
The Departed (d027b8) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:23 pmAh. I see. Never mind. I see that it was merely a miss-send in an attempt to quote. My bad.
The Departed (d027b8) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:24 pmCat Stevens is Donovan in a skirt. So is Yusef Islam. Should I fear a fatwah?
Birdbath (8501d4) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:25 pmWell, I honestly don’t think he’s ever had a beef with your speech, Dustin. And there’s nothing to indicate that he would have a problem with it, either.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:26 pmI love how people like kmart intentionally mischaracterize the issue. Cat Stevens wished death upon someone for their words. We are simply criticizing him for his death wish on those that do not share his twisted views. That, and how leftist feel quite comfortable with him.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:26 pmYou’d be surprised. Honestly, I’m sure.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:31 pmThanks to the United States Military, and absolutely nothing else, you do not have to live in fear of this.
It’s election day and I get sappy about the people who gave us our rights, and are doing so right now, so allow me to make a trite sounding but serious point.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:35 pm“Morning Has Broken” makes me want to drive a power drill into my ears.
Birdbath (8501d4) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:36 pmWell actually, he stated that, according to his understanding of the Qu’ran, Rushdie should die. It’s not that different from (in fact, it is much more tamer than) a comment on here a few days by someone celebrating the death of Rachel Corrie and encouraging more like it.
I mean, it’s not NICE rhetoric, but someone making over-the-top statement on a politic matter? I’m shocked – shocked!
Kman (d25c82) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:38 pmIt is not remotely similar to anyone other than a dishonest interlocutor like yourself, kmart.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:39 pmSheesh, Jackson Browne had more testosterone than Cat Stevens. Leonard Cohen could have whipped up “Wild World” while he was taking his morning dump.
Birdbath (8501d4) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:44 pmWell actually, he stated that, according to his understanding of the Qu’ran, Rushdie should die.
He was asked if an effigy should burn, and said he hoped it would be Rushdie himself.
Actually pretty damn extreme.
I don’t get your comparison to Corrie. That’s just weird. She deployed a human shield, which is a war crime, and the human shield died, which is why her behavior was deplorable. She happened to be her own victim, but it’s not like Israel kills people because of their speech.
Is that just an attempt to change the subject? Well done!
But Yusuf Islam would kill my family if he could, and I’m not forgetting that.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:48 pmI think the very stupid and trivial reason stewie had Cat Fatwa there is that he wanted to maintain the (very lame and puerile) “Train” joke- Peace Train, Crazy Train, Love Train. If he could have gotten another artist with a Train song (Mystery Train? oh, Elvis is really dead) he might have.
My opinion is that’s why he had Stevens, period, to maintain that asinine joke he had built with dueling “train” songs. He would have had to throw out the bit, otherwise.
docweasel (5510fc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:49 pm^ Really?
hahahaha that is incredibly lame if you’re right.
Everyone should read Treacher‘s discussion of the Fear Rally. I’d link to the specific article, but really you should read everything he writes. Now.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/2/2010 @ 2:52 pmNext kmart will tell us how Obama didn’t really mean to say “enemies,” when referring to his political opposition. He really meant “opponents.” I often get confused over those two interchangeable words…don’t you?
Dmac (ad2c6a) — 11/2/2010 @ 3:04 pmNext kmart will tell us how Obama didn’t really mean to say “enemies,” when referring to his political opposition. He really meant “opponents.” I often get confused over those two interchangeable words…don’t you?
Comment by Dmac — 11/2/2010 @ 3:04 pm
As much as Obama’s gotten away with, IMO the “enemies” quote is one of a few which will hang around his neck among more than conservatives for a good long time. And I’m glad. It’s about time someone besides us “racists” made him accountable for his words.
I liked a comment by someone over at HotAir about the presser tomorrow: “What about this election enchanted you the most, Mr. President?”
no one you know (72db9b) — 11/2/2010 @ 3:30 pmSo, Obama meant to say “opponents” instead of “enemies”? Okay.
Of course, that also means he defines “core American values” as support for comprehensive immigration reform. So if you don’t support Obama’s vision for comprehensive immigration reform, you’re not really an American.
malclave (1db6c5) — 11/2/2010 @ 4:38 pmlev
> Rushdie’s characterization of his conversation with Stewart is not a “quote”. A quote would use Stewart’s actual words. That’s the whole point of a quote.
I had a good response, but Jim beat me to it.
> which might sound completely different to a disinterested third party
Are you saying he is biased against Stewart? Based on what?
Kman
So shunning a bad person = murder?
In case you missed it, Jefferson has long said that the correct answer to bad speech is counter speech. Jon Stewart should have boycotted stevens. That is the least he should have done. Or perhaps he could have mocked him, maybe to his face. Perhaps he could have welcomed Rushdie on stage.
And Rachel Corrie died to defend terrorism. I don’t care if an American radical, terrorist defending idiot dies if it will save the lives of innocent Israelis. I know that doesn’t fit “teh narrative” but there you go.
Mmm, I will have my pancakes with extra raspberry syrup, please.
> but someone making over-the-top statement on a politic matter?
Supporting the suppression of speech is not merely “over the top,” but its good to see you don’t believe in freedom of speech, either.
Docweasel
I have supposed the same thing.
Aaron Worthing (b8e056) — 11/2/2010 @ 9:04 pmThere is a simple explanation for Stewart’s behavior. Like most liberals, he believes that it is not possible for him to be in the wrong. Actually, not only impossible, it is illogical, since to be liberal is to be correct in all things. It’s so much cleaner than reflection, or that bothersome self-examination thing.
sherlock (62f2cf) — 11/3/2010 @ 5:36 pm