this is the 1st part of the unedited interview.
part 2 is here.

I Said: How dumb can you be?

I suspect you'll get some excellent examples here in a few minutes.

Is this a Theissen Steel Theissen, steel makers for the Nazis?
/sorry to Godwin.
//couldn't be helped

Kurmudgeon: Is this a Theissen Steel Theissen, steel makers for the Nazis?
/sorry to Godwin.
//couldn't be helped

Fritz Thyssen was in league with Prescott Bush and Harriman in backing the nazis.

But I dunno if there's any connection. The names are spelled differently. but that's not a confirmation either way.

"but that's not a confirmation either way."

Thanks, the similarity of the names just caught my attention.

i'll just leave these here for Mr Theissen:

Eddie Adams from Torrance: You know what other conservative douchebag was just a speech writer?

Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller? Bueller?

this guy was in way over his head with Jon.
Jon doesn't let you come on his show and pimp your book then let you spew your propaganda for 5 min without being called on it.

this guy interjected his opinion as fact,posited a false choice fallacy then when getting called on it he tried to talk over Jon. then he played the victim card and made an appeal to the (refs) audience like he'd been fouled.

total loser

Yeah, lawyers providing representation for Gitmo detainees are just like mob and drug cartel lawyers. Right. Horrible comparison there, douchebag.

Let's see... he's full of shiat when he claims Stewart didn't let him make any points. He got to make his points. He wanted to fill up all the air time with his points so they couldn't be adequately debated.

He complains that some of the five hundred or so detainees released from Gitmo previously under Bush went back and attacked Americans. He doesn't bother explaining how many people it's acceptable to detain indefinitely with no proof of their guilt just in case a few of them may attack us later. Is there a handy ratio? 1 terrorist, 3 innocents is okay? 1 terrorist, 50 innocents? 100? What's acceptable? And how long? The "War on Terror" is a war without end. There's no peace treaty that's going to be signed to end it leading to the POWs being released. He sounds like a man who would have argued in favor of the Japanese internment during WWII.

It's like he has a copypaste function in his brain.

all the good names are gone: Stewart made him look just plain stupid.

I think he did pretty well all by himself.

MaxxLarge
Ugh. And then on top of it, to sit there whining that he got talked over, pouting, shaking his head and throwing up his hands when Stewart went to commercial? What a greasy little cock-wad. Stewart gave him WAY more respect than he deserved, there...especially towards the end.

Pretty much. He basically argued that he was persecuted by the nasty, left wing talk show host. My first thought was that Bill farking Kristol even says Stewart will give you a fair shake, go ahead and go on his show.

SphericalTime
Someone hire a real journalist, give them credentials, and you'll get viewership from all demographics.

The right wing Fox News watching crowd will claim the host is a dirty, commie lefty from the Lamestream Media.

If that were me and not Jon Stewart hosting the show, it would have gone like this:

Marc: WHARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGOAGOAIOAFGUIOAFSUIOIOUADGOUIAGDUIOIOY UDGUIOGADIOUGIOUADGUIOGARRBL

Me: Wow. um, yeah. This is just too stupid. I'm sorry, I can't allow this on my show. I don't think it's morally responsible to let me give you a soapbox to infect my viewers with that poisonous idiocy. Get the fark off my show.

END INTERVIEW.

But Jon's way better at this than me.

Liars lie. Film at 11.

\Do people really still get enjoyment out of this?
\\Yes, I know shiat's farked up
\\\Tell me what you're going to do about it

AzDownboy: I couldn't watch the whole interview last night. But it did make me wonder what Theissen's Fark handle was

Phil Herup

I wonder how long until he appears on Fox to have his wounded dignity licked and balls fondled?

DamnYankees 2010-03-10 10:09:15 AM

I just want to repost this, since it should be plastered everywhere. This is the Convention against Torture, a treaty Reagan himself signed and championed:

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

The next time *anyone* tries to defend the use of torture under any circumstances, you need to remind them that we have explicitly signed treaties which specifically say torture is literally unjustifiable. The moment you allow any justification, you are completely undermining the entire point of banning it.

TORTURE IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WE WOULD RATHER DIE THAN COMMIT. People who forget this are cowards of the highest and most despicable order.


Thanks, Pollyanna.

Jon Stewart worshipers, on Fark? No way!

Guy is funny, but Jesus you guys, take your nose out of his ass once in a while.