only people who work for my favorite non-profit (which recieves all its funds from anonymous corporations) are people.

10/5/2010 10:16:20 AM

Quote :

"Well, here we are again, with an "Rally to Restore Sanity", with the implication that whoever doesn't support John Stewart is insane."

No. The implication is that people are insane when their idea of political discourse involves calling the other one a nazi/socialist/war criminal/secret muslim/stalinist. For God's sake, Stewart has called Bill O'Reilly a "voice of sanity" or some such at Fox News.

10/5/2010 1:02:30 PM

I believe the term was "thinnest kid at fat camp."

10/5/2010 1:31:58 PM

Quote :

"do you really think that a "person" should not be able to donate money to whatever political cause he deems fit?"

Sure but corporations should not be "people". There's a reason you had to use scare-quotes.

10/5/2010 1:37:29 PM

Quote :

"Sure but corporations should not be "people". There's a reason you had to use scare-quotes."

Again, it depends on context. In almost every instance, corporations are only people in the sense of simplification. If I am suing GE for back-pay, it is annoying to list every shareholder on the court papers. Best I can tell, the only instance of a corporation actually being treated as a person is in criminal proceedings where corporations* have been charged with manslaughter. This is different because in the case of contracts or campaign contributions, it is logical to argue the corporate agents are acting on behalf of living breathing shareholders, which even you would agree are people.

As such, I agree, corporations should not be people. It makes no sense to ever charge a corporation will a crime. If a crime has been committed, the police need to find the person that did it and charge them, whether it is the shareholders (a conspiracy) or an employee. Everything else is perpetrated through the rights of shareholders, no corporate person-hood needed.

10/5/2010 4:45:18 PM

lol at fox news

Quote :

" It is supposed to appeal to people who are not politically involved or are otherwise too busy in their lives with social activism."

10/5/2010 5:29:33 PM

Quote :

"social activism"

aka job

10/5/2010 7:02:25 PM

There are going to be so many people busted for weed at this rally. You will also be monitored by the FBI upon your return.

The only difference between Nixon and Obama is Nixon was more afraid of queers.

10/6/2010 1:12:34 PM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/2010/10/president-obama-to-stop-by-the.html

I'm really hoping for a 5 part, internet only extended interview

[Edited on October 20, 2010 at 4:28 PM. Reason : that's better]

10/20/2010 4:23:50 PM

Quote :

"There are going to be so many people busted for weed at this rally. You will also be monitored by the FBI upon your return."

Have you ever been out in DC? As long as you aren't homeless, you're fine.

10/27/2010 4:54:22 PM

Stewart actually looks really intimidated right now...

10/27/2010 11:23:28 PM

^ why wouldn't he be?

It was still a very good interview. It's good to see the president himself have to respond to very direct concerns that people have been having. And he did well too. I wonder how much prep TDS staff gave him on the lines of questioning.

10/28/2010 12:00:43 AM

Well, I was planning on going to the rally, but my fellow travelers dropped out and I'm not willing to drive 10 hours in a day alone.

10/28/2010 2:19:53 AM

Watching the Stewart/POTUS interview. Bleh.

I like how it was never a question of letting the banks fail. Obama said it himself, if you let one fail, will it start a cascade that the taxpayers will have to pay for. The fuck?

I like how the President also clearly told us that one of the goals for them has been to stabilize the stock market. A clear message that it's about 100% likely that they have intervened in some form in the stock market.

Also, Stewart hasn't asked any tough questions. Any. But that shouldn't surprise any of us.

10/28/2010 7:11:32 AM

Not Impressed...what a load of shit

10/28/2010 9:07:59 AM

Quote :

"but my fellow travelers dropped out and I'm not willing to drive 10 hours in a day alone."

TWW Road Trip! Get Organized!

10/28/2010 9:14:39 AM

Give an example of the tough questions you wanted Stewart to ask then.

"Why aren't you living up to your campaign promises?"
"Why are Democrats running away from you in this election?"
"Why is our government so ineffective?"
"How long are we going to have so many unemployed Americans while Wall Street is doing fine?"

Seemed like relatively tough questions to me.

10/28/2010 10:42:11 AM

I'm impressed that he managed to squeeze in a few knocks at Bush.

10/28/2010 12:20:53 PM

I would have asked a different set of questions, but given where Stewart is coming from politically, I don't think he was tossing softballs. The Larry Summers thing was awkward. I think Stewart speaks for many misguided statists that actually believed Obama could uproot corruption in Washington. There is a structural bias towards corruption, though.

What "the left" expected of Obama was never a possibility, and as long as they look to government to solve problems, they will be disappointed with every single politician, no matter how grand their pre-election promises. It seems the only truly acceptable president would be the one that could act as a dictator (on behalf of the poor, minorities, women, and other downtrodden classes, no doubt), immediately and permanently implementing "progressive" programs. Then, and only, would we have a moral society, and anyone that disagrees can leave, be arrested, or be killed.

[Edited on October 28, 2010 at 2:21 PM. Reason : ]

10/28/2010 2:20:47 PM

Libertarians might not be so big on God, but they sure like to nail themselves to the fucking cross...

10/28/2010 6:06:40 PM

starting right now. live stream on comedycentral.com

10/30/2010 12:00:17 PM

Quote :

""Why aren't you living up to your campaign promises?" "Why are Democrats running away from you in this election?" "Why is our government so ineffective?" "How long are we going to have so many unemployed Americans while Wall Street is doing fine?""

1. Republicans are stopping me.
2. Republicans are scaring them.
3. See #1.
4. Republicans are stopping the regulation we need.

(please see http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=601591&page=1#14260389)

10/30/2010 1:48:09 PM

there are a shitload of people there. i tuned in about 20 minutes ago, and i was amazed at the size of the crowd. i wonder what the final numbers are going to look like.

10/30/2010 1:50:12 PM

^I saw 150K somewhere. Looked like more on tv. Couldn't tell how far they were from the capitol building so I don't know how to estimate.

10/30/2010 4:04:28 PM

I managed to tune in for part of it. Towards the end, Stewart turned off the satire for a bit and tried to convey to the crowd what his intentions were when he planned all of this. I agree with a lot of what he said. He really targeted the media - specifically, the cable news networks. Sure, the purpose of the media is to investigate and report current events/issues in a comprehensive way. Cable news doesn't do that. They pick up on things that are polarizing to the general public, but not meaningful. For instance, the "ground zero mosque." It wasn't worth a single minute of air time, yet it probably got more air time than any other issue for about two months straight. And, as Stewart has been harping on for probably years now, that style of misdirection is harmful to the country as a whole.

10/30/2010 5:24:19 PM

kdogg, I was simply paraphrasing the questions that *were* asked.

10/30/2010 9:17:15 PM

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/10/30/HP/R/40153/Rally+to+Restore+Sanity+andor+Fear+Today+in+Washington.aspx

10/30/2010 11:15:29 PM

Quote :

"Give an example of the tough questions you wanted Stewart to ask then. "

Why are you muslim?

What did your mom do about the dry Nigerian air when she took you home from the hospital?

What is your plan to subjugate the white race?

10/30/2010 11:58:10 PM

Quote :

"4. Republicans are stopping the regulation we need."

ahahahahahahaha

No.

Clearly you have no clue how regulations are written.

10/31/2010 12:22:30 AM

Jon Stewart Rally Attracts Estimated 215,000

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20021284-503544.html

Pretty large rally...

Quote :

"CBS News also commissioned AirPhotosLive.com to do a crowd estimate of Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally in August. That rally was estimated to have attracted 87,000 people. Amid criticism from conservatives that the estimate was low, CBS News detailed the methodology behind it here. "

Progressives++

[Edited on October 31, 2010 at 12:56 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2010 12:53:39 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/30/rally-to-restore-sanity-attendance_n_776547.html

Quote :

"The Rally to Restore Sanity has come to a close, and crowd estimates are beginning to trickle in. It is clear that a huge number of people attended the event (see photos from the rally here), but the calculations vary among sources. According to CBS News, 215,000 people showed up for the rally on Saturday. By comparison, CBS estimated that 87,000 -- just 40% of the Sanity Rally estimation -- attended Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally in August. Canada's CTV, meanwhile, wrote that 250,000 people were estimated to have partaken in the Rally to Restore Sanity. Earlier on Saturday, Brian Stelter tweeted that the Parks Service approximated that "well over 200,000" attended Saturday's rally. For full coverage of the rally, check out HuffPost's comprehensive live blog of the event, including videos, photos and more."

This rally was apparently between 200 & 250k. Beck's rally was 87k according to the same source, so presumably same size estimation techniques. Pretty funny thinking of that, and then the video that showed Michelle Bachmann saying something like "don't let anyone try to convince you there were less than 1 million people at this rally" and Beck claiming there were 500k people at the rally.

Fox of course estimated there were 60 k people there to make it smaller than Beck's rally. "Comedy Central's park permit puts the crowd estimate at 60,000." This of course goes by what the permit says and has nothing to do with the real number of people that showed up.

CBC numbers: Beck 87k, Stewart 215k
The right's numbers: Beck 1 million, Stewart 60 k

10/31/2010 8:20:19 AM

Quote :

"Progressives++"

You may be over stating your case. Jon Stewart is undoubtedly leftist but Colbert draws a more center-right crowd and, nevertheless, I suspect a large number of people came to this because they enjoy the Daily Show and DC would be a cool place to be for Halloween.

I think it is pretty safe to say that the number of Beck attendees going to the polls Tuesday will significantly outweigh the number of Stewart / Colbert attendees.

10/31/2010 8:24:34 AM

Quote :

"Give an example of the tough questions you wanted Stewart to ask then. "Why aren't you living up to your campaign promises?" "Why are Democrats running away from you in this election?" "Why is our government so ineffective?" "How long are we going to have so many unemployed Americans while Wall Street is doing fine?" Seemed like relatively tough questions to me."

1) Why have there been no criminal charges against any Wall Street individual?
2) Why were private companies saved with public money allowed to continue paying huge bonuses?
3) Why did you say we have a problem with banks that are too big to fail, and then allowed them to get bigger?


Stewarts questions

1)

Quote :

"Stewart: — you’re two years into your administration, and the question that arises in my mind: Are we the people we were waiting for? [laughter] Or, does it turn out those people are still out there and we don’t have their number? How are you feeling about that?"

2)

Quote :

" Now, how did we go, in two years, from “Hope and Change: We are the People We’ve Been Looking For” to “You’re not gonna give them the keys, are you?” Is it — are you disappointed in how it’s gone? Are you surprised that other people — even your base — can be disappointed? Or do you reject that narrative?"

3)

Quote :

"Have you convinced your own party that the legislative progress has been enough, and how do you feel about their reaction to it?"

4)

Quote :

"so much of what you said was, “great leaders lead in a time of opportunity,” “we’re the ones we’re looking for” — yet legislatively it has felt timid at times. I’m not even sure at times what you want out of a healthcare bill."

Clearly note he is (slyly) talking about congress here, giving his idol an out.

5) This might be the toughest one

Quote :

"It feels like some of the reforms that have passed, like healthcare, have been done in a very political manner that has papered over a foundation that is corrupt. And I thought that —"

And the answer

Quote :

"Obama: If the point, Jon, is that overnight we did not transform the healthcare system, that point is true. Stewart: [laughs] When you put it that way, it seems so petty!"

So the toughest question was "you didn't completely turn health care upside down overnight". Might as well ask Bush whey they didn't overthrow Saddam without dropping a bomb or the cost of an American life.

6)

Quote :

"Stewart: And I remember when you hired Larry Summers [laughter] — I remember thinking, “Well, that seems like the exact same person,” and why would you — so, in some respects, I get your frustration with this idea that, “Well, geez, are you never satisfied?” but again, the expectation, I think, was Audacity, going in there and really rooting out a corrupt system. And so the sense is, has reality of what hit you in the face when you first stepped in, caused you to back down from some of the more visionary — like bringing in a guy like Larry Summers, like —"

7)

Quote :

"Stewart: It’s just really hard not to talk! [audience laughs] Just one thing: if they had told you the same thing: stabilize the banks, stabilize the Dow, unemployment will be near 10% — would you have taken that deal?"

Basically, not why is unemployment still high, why did it take public dollars to save private institutions, but "hey, you had a really tough task, and ugh, no comment on how well you did"

8)

Quote :

"Stewart: Do you believe government is nimble enough to handle these 21st-century crises? Is government agile enough — you said, “We want to build a 21st-century regulatory regime for business” — by the time government builds that, obviously it’ll be the 22nd century, but won’t they have already started trading molecules in some sort of weird — Does government still have the ability to be agile enough to handle these types of things?"

Again, note he is asking more broadly about the government and the legislative process, not specifically about what the President has done.

[Edited on October 31, 2010 at 8:49 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2010 8:48:19 AM

Hilarious, on thisweek Dick Armey is on being rather non chalant about this rally and trying to say that what Stewart does every night is being derisive. Then later he repeats the now gospel "progressives are trying to destroy America line" (maybe he said it more than once, I'm not actually watching the debate). Thanks for proving a point dumbass.

10/31/2010 9:48:11 AM

hmm... 87k come out for a political rally. 250k come out for entertainment... wonder which one means more politically...

10/31/2010 12:35:35 PM

Quote :

"kdogg, I was simply paraphrasing the questions that *were* asked."

disco, I know. I was just paraphrasing the President's answers he has been giving since January 2009.

10/31/2010 2:01:23 PM

Quote :

"Stewart: Do you believe government is nimble enough to handle these 21st-century crises? Is government agile enough — you said, “We want to build a 21st-century regulatory regime for business” — by the time government builds that, obviously it’ll be the 22nd century, but won’t they have already started trading molecules in some sort of weird — Does government still have the ability to be agile enough to handle these types of things?"

The fact that a progressive is asking this strikes me as a great thing. Can we really expect to regulate away the problems that are structural in nature, or are we "papering over" the problem, as he says?

10/31/2010 3:32:33 PM

Just to follow up on the theme that, while progressive, this wasn't a particularly political rally, here is a link to "the 100 Best Signs": http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-100-best-signs-at-the-rally-to-restore-sanity


Undobutedly far wittier, grammatically correct and original that those at most Tea Party rallies, but not radical, energetic or focused. The prime motivation here seems to be the desire to hang out with a bunch of folks who like Jon Stewart.

I'd say that it is interesting political commentary that a rally largely supporting the status quo, coalescing around a comedian with no real agenda draws more people than a political rally, but entertainment and sports do that all the time . . .

11/1/2010 8:51:03 AM

Jamie Kilstein on twitter: "All of these people could be marching against the war and death of millions. That would have been dumb huh?"

11/1/2010 9:43:21 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_23Nt5XumaU

11/1/2010 10:53:57 PM

ahahahaha, the economist in me loves that.


From a more substantial standpoint, I thought this article in the Economist nicely sums up the dichotomy between the "New Elites" and the "Tea Party"

Quote :

"I DIDN'T watch this weekend's "Restore Sanity/Keep Fear Alive" rally, but Peter Beinart did. He isn't impressed. Mr Beinart's contention is that the Stewart/Colbert rally neatly encapsulated "what the American left did wrong in the early Obama years". One doubts reality so perfectly suits the needs of opinion columnists, but Mr Beinart makes one especially excellent point worthy of emphasis. First, the somewhat less excellent points. Mr Beinart says the rally hit "wrong notes" when it ridiculed voters' fearfulness and pretended to bipartisanship. There is, Mr Beinart maintains, ample reason for fear, and nobody's dull enough to think the gathering wasn't a pep rally for downcast Democrats. Fair enough. But Mr Beinart cuts deep, I think, when he observes that the focus on "sanity" is demeaning to the tea-party movement and its sympathisers, and reflects the left's failure to engage broad swathes of the electorate by arguing for the liberal agenda in terms of liberty."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/11/condescending_left

11/1/2010 11:38:49 PM

^^, ^

those are both great

11/1/2010 11:51:45 PM

Quote :

"I'd say that it is interesting political commentary that a rally largely supporting the status quo, coalescing around a comedian with no real agenda draws more people than a political rally, but entertainment and sports do that all the time . . ."

I tried to find some numbers on all the recent washington marches/rallies I've heard about to put things in context.

Here's an example for comparison that I posted in another thread comparing to Beck's rally a while back:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929747,00.html

Quote :

"The march on Washington that gays staged Sunday on the National Mall drew something like 200,000 people — that's a good guess based on conversations with many of the organizers and local authorities, although estimates of Mall crowds are notoriously unreliable."

moron's response:

Quote :

"^ it’s strengthened even further when you consider that no major network was promoting the march like Glenn Beck/Fox."

I'd say the Beck's rally benefit some from being closer to election season, and maybe Stewarts benefited even more. Another comparison is the Reclaim the Dream commemorative march held the same day as Beck's rally. I can't find specific numbers for that, only saying it was in the thousands, which leds me to believe it was the smallest of the bunch. The 10/2/10 progressive/liberal One Nation Working Together march

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/01/AR2010100104440.html

Quote :

"A wide array of progressive groups drew tens of thousands of activists to the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday for a rally aimed at firing up their members and showcasing the diversity of their movement. "

That's not very specific. Event organizers say more 175k to 200k, but they obviously have a vested interested in inflating the numbers. So while its hard to talk in absolute numbers, it seems possible to order the rallies roughly size-wise.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/21/AR2010032100956.html

For the Immigration Reform March for America the Washington Post says 10s of Thousands, other sites say nearly 200k in an unattributed way

Reclaim the Dream commemorative march - Thousands (to me I'd think that implies between 2k & 9.9 k)

One Nation Working Together march - Tens of Thousands (to me I'd think that implies between 20 k and 99 k)

Immigration Reform March for America - Tens of thousands (possibly higher, from the sources it seems to be between 20 k & 200 k)

Beck's Rally - 87 k

National Equality March - 200 k

Rally to Store Sanity - 215 k

The real question is how effective were these rallies at exciting or angering voters enough to actually vote. Its not the size, its how you use it. And I'm betting Beck/Fox wins that one. Although lots of the others maybe have a slight left lean, so in the end maybe it'll all balance out to a lot of wasted bus trips to DC.

[Edited on November 2, 2010 at 12:22 AM. Reason : .]

11/2/2010 12:21:34 AM

Supp, where are you getting the 87K number for the Restoring Honor Rally?

11/2/2010 12:30:43 AM

The CBS link moron provided. They rated Stewart & Beck, so hopefully there's some inter-rater reliability. I've seen ppl claim a quarter of a million+ for Stewart, but I think CBS is probably closer to right.

11/2/2010 12:34:39 AM

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/126673-poll-at-stewart-rally-finds-overwhelming-dem-majority-but-not-the-2008-enthusiasm

Quote :

"A straw poll conducted on attendees at the rally hosted by comedians Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert on the National Mall Saturday found an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters, but sapped enthusiasm as compared to 2008. According to the poll conducted by Lake Research Partners & Revolution Messaging at the "Rally to Restore Sanity," 86 percent of participants surveyed said they planned to vote Democratic this week, with eight percent undecided and just one percent voting Republican. Only one in four surveyed said they more excited about this election than 2008. Thirty-nine percent said their enthusiasm had diminished. A full 90 percent of rally attendees approved of President Obama, with 56 percent approving of him strongly. Only 10 percent disapproved of the president, just 2 percent strongly. The USAction Straw Poll was conducted by text message on cell phones. Participants Texted SANITY or FEAR to 228466 (ACTION) and received a short survey about their views on President Obama, Tuesday’s election, and which issues they think are most important for the country. Forty-one percent said the most important issue is jobs, while healthcare came in with just 11 percent. Eighty-seven percent said Obama should prioritize "investing in programs that put people back to work" as opposed to "focusing on cutting spending instead.""

Total shock at that one!!!

11/2/2010 12:35:36 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_23Nt5XumaU&feature=player_embedded

This is great. I esp love the comment about the woman being a public school teacher. Probably.

11/2/2010 10:28:00 AM

You think there were only 87k at the Restoring Honor Rallly?

11/2/2010 11:55:19 AM

me?

11/2/2010 1:46:09 PM