I am going to miss these two men together, doing things like this, but hopefully they will still do things together now that Stephen will be over at CBS.
here from the future Jon retired a a legend while Colbert went from being one of the greatest satirists who ever lived to a political hack whose jokes basically boil down to "Republicans are bad".
@@enigma1028 it really is crazy how the world fell apart aint it. used to be a united country. used to have some sanity in our country. I guess the rally to restore sanity failed. definitely a lot more fear today.
I love these two guys who have the greatest gift for satirical political comedy. As long as there are two, there is hope for the U.S. A. A fan from the "old", "socialist" Europe (Germany) ^ ^
This guys should do more shows together because they help a lot to the news to have politics in perpective of decency & fairness, I'm not from USA but I thanks them anyway since we're all connected and what ever good they do over there ripple waves to me some how and with some intensity, thanks you Steve & Jon.
I like how comedy has become the new medium to check corretness in media. Before it was Media checks Politians and then other media check them but since media has started to take a turn for the worse a new player has entered the game and that is comedy. So much funnier to watch as a bonus :P
Jon steward I bealive in u I share your point of view so strong! I'm going to be a part of making this world a better place. Their are not a lot of wonderful humans like u man. I will spend my life trying to be
They are so determinedly avoiding answering the questions - but I guess they're being treated like some kind of political candidates and they're trying to make the point that they're not. I guess they just point to the ridiculousness of the system but it's up to others to do the work of changing it. But even that role is important in that process.
benedictify Why bother organizing a rally then? That seems unnecessary and like a step in a different direction, hence the press asking them questions about what the hell all this was about.
After hearing Colbert explain his thoughts at Google about the presses reaction to the rally, it becomes very obvious why he's constantly chuckling when people ask them questions.
The media is so dumb! They keep asking real political questions but they're not listening...IT WAS A SHOW! These guys are comedians. The people at CNN are so dense.
i dont think they will ever even think about running because jon stewart sees too much corruption and ill-intent in politicians and leaders of the US. there are too many warped ways to become a powerful POLITICIAN not a comedian and as a comedian first jon stewart inspires the people but chooses not to lead or really REPRESENT them. to try for a political role would seem like a doublecross and hes too honestly an average human being for anything like that.
Damn, if Stephen talked more, this would've been better. Other than that though, this was great. loved how this was just Jon and Stephen as themselves answering a bunch of questions both seriously and cracking jokes.
Look at Swartzenegger and Ventura...they both cracked me up in the 80's and they were both Governers. Ventura as a WWF comentatory was as funny as Arnolds famous 1 liners.
Surprising to hear Jon Stewart say he leaves every interview wishing he had done better when I always think he's just PERFECT. Stewart for Prez, Colbert for VP, Ventura for Secrtary of State, now that would fix things!
And when you have several posters urging you to independently confirm what they are saying-and prertty much imploring you to become educated and informed, that might make you pause, and think. If you feel inclined to respond with insults and inappropriate language-fine. But people far more educated than you are saying you seem to be confused. With all due respect-please get informed.
14:28 This surprises me. I can't believe Jon didn't say he believed people should vote. I guess this might be because he was such a George Carlin fan and George didn't believe it mattered.
America is a lot about the show, since the wild west. Unfortunately, in this case as well. A nerve was touched, there were important issues brought up. But it all was just a show, and all was just for the show. A 'No Minder'.
I feel sad when people are interrupted. Colbert had a shake. I suppose that the Colbert Report is now gone? Probably not going to have another Satire to replace him on that one.
Yeah, I watched an interview with Colbert and he said that Jon was more serious. However, both of these shows are firstly a comedy show. They just take the news and spin it to be comedic. In a way you are learning something, because most of the events are really in the news. He said that he was more of a character than Jon. The news being offered on his show is sometimes a lie though, more so than Jon's. Colbert's character is ignorant and he tells his guests to be honest with themselves.
1. It won't improve or degrade but it does distract and waste the reporters' time that they could be using to ask important questions, and wastes the entertainers' time that they could be using to entertain. 2. Neither Stewart nor Colbert holds elected office, that is what I meant by "power". They have no ability to directly affect legislation, much like Congress (ba dum tish). 3. I was using "losers" in a purely pejorative sense.
It always surprises me to read people's responses, and their interpretations as to political philosohies and/or theories. I would suggest, as several others have, that you research these political and economic modalities, and then, if possible, discuss your research with a professor of political science. Most universities have a political science dept. Unfortunately, you are sorely misinformed. And for the record-yes, I have a degree in political science from the number one school in the country
4:03 I really dislike that they dodged that question a bit, because I'm a frustrated individual that really wants to work to change government and politics in a more rational way. What can I do?
I wouldn't want them to run for office, not because I don't like them, not because they're not suited for the job. It's not their place, it's not what they're meant for. I believe that these two will help shape the future of our youth, not to guide them down a certain path but to open their minds and see more then what's in front of them. They're not leaders, but I believe they help us see the world in a more honest way and I think that's where they will be happiest.
That is like saying which one you like: the right nut or the left nut. You are missing the point. The point is that both nuts comes together to support the pillar of truth and justice that points towards the heavens.
Why is all the questions are only directly to Jon? Don't get me wrong I love Jon but he is not alone, for example the guy in 14:26 said "Hi Jon, do you think guys...?" what the f***?
He seemed like he wanted some attention. Jon Stewart is definatly looked upon as being the more responsible of the two. The satire show who actually gets serious and works on the issue. In the arena Stephens in I think he shoots him self in the foot..
Colbert is gracious and humble, but Jon kind of comes off as bit of a hardass...I'm a huge fan of the daily show, but he comes off slightly holier than thou / domineering
Pretty sure that the South was originally Democratic, only now is it republican, because of the breaking up of the Democrat-Republicans and how republicans adopted the ideology that the D-Rs had originally. So if he wants to call the south Democratic, he can.
Then you don't understand Colbert... he cares more about the point he is making about the news -- but he is masterful enough not to lose any of it in his comedy.
i was kind off distracted and irritated by the fact that the blue and red back ground did not intersect the middle single star perfectly... america has no democracy!!
I'd agree if it wasn't for the simple fact of name change. I mean, we couldn't very well call Steven's half North America and Jon's half South America, they're already taking. Maybe we could call them North-North and South-South America......
I'm glad someone observes the amorality of the free market, and doesn't see it as a living, benevolent (in the case of libertarians) or malevolent (in the case of socialism) organism. Ron Paul cannot be called a "Neo-classical" liberal though. His opinion is either "neoliberal" or "classical liberal". What makes him different from for example John Locke and classical liberals in the 18th and 19th century?
