UPDATE I-Yeah, I've been watching this train-wreck on C-Span. Interesting guests, though. Ozzie. Sam Waterson. The O'Jays. The Myth Busters guys. A few other people. Who else has thus far appeared on this "Rally For Sanity"?
How about this for a get? The artist formerly known as Cat Stevens, and then Yusef Islam-and now, apparently, just Yusef-the singer songwriter who created such hits as Wild World, Moonshadow, and Peace Train. Oh, as well as the following "hit"-
“Salman Rushdie or indeed any writer who abuses the prophet, or indeed any prophet, under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death. It’s got to be seen as a deterrent, so that other people should not commit the same mistake again.”
–Cat Stevens
Yep, at the "Rally For Sanity". Well, after all, the show is intended to be part comedy. Kind of ironic though that this, the funniest thing I've seen here yet, hilarious though it was, was unintentionally so.
End of Update I, fibnal update(s) at the end-
I have to agree with this article about Jon Stewart and his so-called "Rally For Sanity". It's nothing but a self-serving vehicle on a road paved with Stewarts hopes that he will build a legacy to his own damned ego. If he can legitimately claim that he has swayed this election (and you know that's what he's aiming for), then he can pat himself on the back and say he made a contribution towards making America a better place. Damn those evil Republicans for being so nasty and negative to begin with, and damn those stupid Democrats for taking the bait and playing by their rules. Stewart is going to show them how it should be done. The Democrats, and Obama, can thank him on the morning of November 5th.
You can't manufacture much more hubris than that, which is why I think Stewart is heading for a big fall. Sure, the only thing that will suffer is his ego, but with somebody like him that can be a bitter pill to swallow.
The independents and moderates aren't going to buy it, and the people that will be laughing the most and the loudest, and with the most genuine mirth, will be the conservatives. Granted, they will be laughing at Stewart as much as with him. Liberals, who are for the most part humorless in their lack of introspection, can only pretend to be self-effacing. But give them this, they at least know when to laugh the loudest-on cue.
So who is going to be at this mess? It's pretty telling that Arianna Huffing is going to be busing crowds to the event in Washington, which will also feature Sheryl Crow as a warm up act. For God's sake, whatever you do, bring your own toilet paper.
There can't be much doubt as to which political party this thing is intended to help. So isn't it obvious what type of people the bulk of the audience will consist of?
That's right. The "Rally For Sanity" is going to be attended primarily by the craziest motherfuckers you could ever imagine gathered in one place at any one time.
UPDATE II-Oh my God, I hoped they were kidding when they said Sheryl Crow would be there, but there she was for real, singing about peace and love, and what do I see in the crowd while she's singing? Some guy holding up a sign that said "Everybody Poops".
Gods, I swear, if you can see your way clear to make me a world-famous rock star, I'll never sing a pretentious song about peace.
UPDATE-Well, now we're at the meat and potatoes. During the "debate" between Stewart and Colbert (who is determined to restore not sanity, but fear), Kareem Abdul Jabar was introduced on stage to convince Colbert that not all Muslims are bad people. A pretentiously cornball road to Damascus moment on the part of Colbert ensues, after which he expresses a fear of robots. Cue entrance of R2D2.
Later, a montage is presented by Colbert, which demonstrates the hatred and negativity that is being promulgated by both the left and the right. It's at least nice to see that Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and Ed Schultz are receiving the same degree of criticism as Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck.
But, after Colbert (and his paper mache' puppet) is "killed" by a character in a Peter Pan costume (I don't know his name but I recognize him from the NBC sitcom Community) Stewart makes his overall point.
Americans are not like the people who deign to speak for them. They tend to work together and cooperate, despite party or religious labels, etc. The inference was, I guess, that politicians and pundits should do the same, for the good of the country.
Which begs the question-since Americans do already get along so famously, what difference does it make?
The difference of course is that, as long as politicians and pundits engage in such negativity, nothing will get done over and above the American people being at odds with each other.
What Stewart doesn't seem to get is, a lot of things that would get done if politicians did "work together and crossed party lines to get things done for the American people", are in a great many cases things that not only shouldn't get done-they shouldn't even be on the table.
Stewart maybe means well, from a liberal perspective. But what he doesn't get is, he is asking for parties to merge despite their differences, and for people to follow them, blindly and sheepishly, for the good of peace, love and progress. And no doubt for the children.
Even more importantly, the main thing he doesn't get is-our politicians fight, kick, scratch, and claw each others eyes and genitals on our behalf-so we American citizens will, hopefully, not have to.
