« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

John Yoo vs Jon Stewart

"Take Down" FAIL

By: Martin Knight (Diary)  |  January 13th, 2010 at 05:54 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

[H/T: Michelle via Ace ]

So Jon Stewart invited John Yoo – who is promoting his new book; Crisis and Command – to the Daily Show and proceeded, using his own inimitable mix of smirking, mockery, sarcasm and outrage, to "take down" the torture-justifying fascist and show him for the thoroughly evil henchman of the Bush Regime he was, leaving him a sputtering sweating wreck begging for mercy, confessing to his myriad crimes and tearfully apologizing to the world before heading back to the green room to hang himself …

Well, that was what every liberal breathlessly waiting for the show fantasized was going to happen. One can only imagine their excitement as the minutes ticked by; the popcorn popped, post-slaughter champagne placed in the ice-bucket, clothes loosened, flies unzipped …

Only to watch John Yoo cheerfully wipe the floor with Jon Stewart. Over at the American Prospect, they’re wailing and gnashing their teeth at Jon Stewart’s "failure". Adam Serwer whines;

… Stewart failed to make Yoo look like he had done anything wrong. In fact, he made him look entirely reasonable.

Maybe … just maybe, it could be that Yoo was actually a knowledgeable and reasonable public servant who did a difficult job in a difficult time as best he could? Amazing how the side that prides itself on its "tolerance" and "open-mindedness" consistently demonstrates the opposite isn’t it?

Anyway, after getting his dirty old clock looking as good as new thanks to his affable guest, who actually turned out to prefer the role of predator over that of his assigned role as prey, Jon Stewart had to issue an apology to his dejected and angry fan base for his "failure. "

I must confess, I’m angry too.

I’m finally watching a member of the Bush Administration, even if a somewhat junior (even if very consequential) one, standing up to a critic and vigorously defending the Administration’s decisions and policies without any quarter given and letting nothing slide. And confidently pounding on his opponent.

And I’m wondering; what happened two, three, fours years ago? Why couldn’t the Bush Administration have done this when it would have made a difference in public opinion? When it could have saved us some House and Senate seats in 2006 and 2008? When it could have saved itself?

As much as I continue to have a soft spot for George W. Bush, his failure to defend himself and his decisions even as his poll numbers and credibility along with that of his party crashed, is the one thing Republicans should never forgive him for.

Anyway, watch the full interview here …

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • mbecker908

    And here’s the video.

    <td style=’padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;’ colspan=’2′Daily Show: Exclusive – John Yoo Extended Interview Pt. 1
    The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
    www.thedailyshow.com
    Daily Show
    Full Episodes    		 Political Humor Health Care Crisis

    And you are so right about GWB. Not only were his policies the right ones – although I think he leaned too far to the left on many – they were, and are, eminently defensible and the criticism of them is, in large measure, indefensible.

    Obama presides from his throne with a filibuster proof Senate and a huge majority in the House because Bush hid under his desk for the last four years of his administration. Heck, the only reason he won in ’04 was because of the SwiftVets, who he (and McCain) told to shut up and go away.

    Yoo is exceptional here. It’s not often that you see such a clear win.

    • aesthete

      Good sense of humor, very congenial, and yet, he gets the point across in a more effective way than if he had gone in hard-nosed and angry or defensive-sounding. I wish that more Republicans and conservatives adopted this style, which I’ve only seen Liz Cheney and John Yoo, so far, use. We as a movement come across much better when we’re not angry or irked, and progressives will always use the “angry Republican” clips out of context (or sometimes, in a testament to Republican media ineptitude, in context) to show that we’re just a bunch of kooks.

      Also, Jon Stewart is an absolute hack. He intentionally blurs the line between satire and news on his show, and when he gets pounded on a mischaracterization, he claims that the show is merely “entertainment”, despite the fact that most of his segments criticize the media, and try to place the Daily Show on parity with, if not superior to, the news.

      • mbecker908

        And, the reason I’m so permanently pissed at Bush. Stewart may be a hack but he’s better at argument that 99.9% of the Left. Every time there is a discussion based on fact the Left gets clobbered. It’s a bloodbath. All Bush had do to was put up a defense of his policies and he’d be in his third term right now.

        • furious

          …selves about Jon Stewart. He’s on COMEDY CENTRAL for chrissake. It’s like caring about the deep thoughts on Jersey Shore.

          The only thing more pathetic would be hitting back against SNL Weekend Update…

          …oh, wait.

          • redohio

            didn’t conservatives and Sarah Palin get all hot and bothered about SNL skits.

            This is NOT the best article to portray my point and I am tired and don’t feel like properly searching for an appropriate article:

            http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2132

          • furious

            …for an appropriate article”

            Too bad, I’m not going to do your heavy lifting for you. You obviously need your rest, as this isn’t your best work. Your citation makes the exact opposite of your point. In fact, it shows Sarah Palin (and SNL, for that matter) to be good sports able to laugh at themselves.

            And, in any event, your assertion is apples-to-oranges because CNN is a broadcast news network rushing to Obama’s defense, not the target of the Obama satire.

          • redohio

            Where did I mention anything about CNN? Where does the article I linked to mention anything about CNN?

            Comparing SNL to Comedy Central? Apples to apples.

            In any event, Yoo was freaking awesome.

        • aesthete

          It bothers me that someone with such obvious talking points still came out the victor in a fight against Bush’s (mostly) sound policies. I favor a more realpolitik foreign policy, but Jon Stewart should have, by all rights, had has head handed to him by the Bush administration time and again. As Yoo demonstrated, it’s eminently doable, and should have been done when it would have mattered.

        • neyney

          I used to seethe whenever I’d hear these leftist’s trashing Bush and his administration but I would be absolutely furious that Bush did nothing to defend himself or his policies. He and McCain are cut from the same cloth. They get absolutely trashed by their political opponents and instead of fighting back they say “well I know my worthy opponent is a good man/woman” *spit!!!

          I’m sick of our side fighting by the Marquis of Queensbury rules while their side is fighting a dirty street fight. Enough with the civility. Have the Dems been civil over this last year? When the R’s asked for bi-partisianship weren’t they told by the O “I won” How do we respond? By going on talk shows and whining about it. Stop whining and start fighting. Heck this is a lesson my son learned years ago when he was being picked on by bullies. He didn’t whine, he got a black belt in karate and stood up to the b–tards!

          Until and unless our side mans up and responds to criticism from the left in a strong, decisive way nothing will change. This is why the Tea Partiers are such a force to reckon with. We are responding with disgust to Republicans who cannot or will not stand up for conservative principals. If W had only made the case for his policies I think the whole Democrat takeover would have never occurred. G-d help us if we don’t start electing R leaders who have a spine!

  • joliefleurs

    some snpt-nosed Bay area student? I’d love to see her and Yoo on Matthew’s or Maddow’s shows sometime…..

    • piratecoastbucs

      Snot-Nosed Bay area?? Isn’t that Berkley??

      First, Matthew’s gets a pain rushing up his leg when he thinks about having anyone who isn’t a liberal on his show, especially one more intelligent than him.

      Second, if you actually wanted to advertise for a book, you would get more people at a Barnes and Noble book signing than watch Maddow’s show.

      • Third Street

        What is this, 2003?

  • http://twitter/CherylAnnCA Cheryl

    seriously, I never watch this show and I see I’m not missing much. Wow, I’m just shocked. What an idiot.

    Yoo was great, I’m going to Borders.com to get his book.

    • mootzu

      …so much as feigning ignorance. I think he was overblowing his lack of knowledge in order to get John Yoo to talk more, explain more, and hopefully say something incriminating that he can jump all over. I think it was especially obvious in the first segment when he was asking John Yoo about how he decided torture was ok. Yoo was trying to explain that his task was to determine what fell into the grey area between fully acceptable interrogation techniques and torture as banned by the Geneva Convention.

      As Yoo was trying to explain that his task was figuring out what was torture and what wasn’t torture, Stewart was asking his questions very deliberately making the presupposition that what Yoo approved (i.e. waterboarding) WAS torture. I think he was trying to get Yoo to say something like “But waterboarding isn’t torture and I explained that in the memo” so that Stewart and the netroots could jump all over that.

      By pretending to not understand Yoo’s entirely reasonable (and unincriminating) explanation of what the purpose of the memo was and how his opinion was formed, Stewart was trying to frustrate Yoo so that Yoo would not be so careful with his words.

      In other words, Stewart is a mental ant who was going against a mental giant. An actor probably shouldn’t try to go up against a lawyer in a debate and expect to win.

  • piratecoastbucs

    John Yoo = EPIC

    Jon (I’m ashamed of my jewish heritage) Stewart = EPIC FAIL

  • Vannek

    “I?m finally watching a member of the Bush Administration, even if a somewhat junior (even if very consequential) one, standing up to a critic and vigorously defending the Administration?s decisions and policies without any quarter given and letting nothing slide. And confidently pounding on his opponent.”

    Cheney’s been doing a good job of this.

    I knew something was up yesterday afternoon when I saw the Code Pinko people congregating outside of Boalt yesterday evening. They always show up when Yoo is in the limelight somehow. I wish I’d stuck around to see their reaction to seeing Yoo swat away that fly, John Stewart.

    • Martin Knight
      • aesthete

        Liz Cheney.

  • dvdmsr

    and that is if the President does something questionable under the claim that the Constitution grants him heighten power and descretion during war time, then what recourse does the Congress, the Supreme Court, or the people have to check or stop him?

    If he had, thennYoo would have put his troubled mind to rest, but I suspect he already to knew the easy answers to those questions, and was simply avoiding expressing them to further promote the impression that Republicans and Conservatives are scary people who seek excessive and unjustifiable power as a norm.

    • theduck6

      The please include what “we the people” can do, short of waiting for the next election, if the President and Congress are pursuing a course that is blatantly and clearly unconstitutional. What are our immediate remedies short of an angry e-mail. That is the UNs usual weaponry and it has failed miserably.

      When asked where in the Constitution the right to mandate health care purchase or half of the recent plans both parties have proposed, the smug condescending pols poo-poo without answer. Throw all da bums out. We may loose a few good people but a whole lot fewer than you would imagine.

      • dvdmsr

        faction, not cures because the cures are often worse than the disease or impractical and unwise. That being said, the recourses include: elections, injunctions, impeachment, civil disobedience, succession, and insurrection.

  • furious

    …to Liz Cheney…

    …and the network gotcha interview judo hilarity that would ensue.

  • rbdwiggins

    in precedent (legal and historical), and contrary to Stewart’s disbelief, is entirely consistent with our Founding principles and original intent.

    Stewart’s response, ?My mind is blown, quite frankly.?

    He should have known better. Left-leaning minds don’t do “logic” very well. You could clearly see toward the end of the interview that he was in great pain.

    Martin, I must take issue with this one statement.

    “As much as I continue to have a soft spot for George W. Bush, his failure to defend himself and his decisions even as his poll numbers and credibility along with that of his party crashed, is the one thing Republicans should never forgive him for.”

    It is “Republicans” who should hang their collective heads in shame and seek forgiveness from President Bush, because too many congressional “Republicans” and media talking-heads abandoned him when the political atmosphere got too tough and demanded that they stand on principle. President Bush paid a wholly unnecessary political price for making an apolitical Executive decision to keep America safe.

    • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com Beaglescout

      But as President Bush was defacto head of the Republican Party and had the responsibility to defend himself and his policies convincingly so as not to fatally wound the Party and his allies. But he didn’t do this. And they were fatally wounded as a result, leaving the Dems with filibuster proof majorities in the legislature.

      I don’t see how the legislators’ job is to run interference for the President and his agenda, so much as to serve constituents and attend to legislative duties. The President is supposed to take care of his agenda, and definitely to be the CinC when it comes to warfare. Who is best placed to handle the communication tasks surrounding warfare and the President’s other powers? The President? Congress? Someone else?

    • mbecker908

      When the Chief won’t return fire, offers mealy-mouthed responses and actually agrees with those shooting at him (16 words) and makes his spokesman apologize for an appropriate smackdown of a wise ass and empty headed reporter just why should anybody stand up and defend him.

      The apologies owed are one from Bush to the American people for hiding under his desk for three plus years and thus laying the groundwork for the disaster that is upon us.

      • rbdwiggins

        President Bush failed to properly politicize national security and the war on terror…

        But… Congressional Republicans bear full responsibility for their electoral woes in ’06 and ’08. They abandoned even the pretense of conservative principles, and the president. They simply refused to fight, and they paid the price at the ballot box.

        McCain ran his presidential campaign the same way he legislated. He refused to identify the media constructed image of Obama. He refused to set the record straight. He silenced Gov. Palin. He refused to fight.

        The American people elected President Obama, a man Sen. McCain said they “have no reason to fear.”

        • mbecker908

          You want to knock McCain for not fighting, a correct stance by the way, and give Jimmy Carter GWB a pass. And as far “abandoning conservative principles”, that statement should be on GWB’s headstone.

          Make sure you get the sand out of your ears when you can see daylight again.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            It’s not as if GWB set himself apart from conservatives and implicitly bashed us by playing up Democrat slanders that we’re uncompassionate or anything.

            And it’s not like he’d sign every awful bill with McCain’s name on it that got sent to the White House.

          • mbecker908

            Rule 1: The Moderator is always right.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I’m not allowed to be sarcastic anymore?

            That’s no fun. :-)

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I hated Bush and would bash Republicans every chance I’d get for nominating such a squish.

            I can bash him with the best.

            Even though by now I wish he were President instead of the current officeholder. More character.

    • Martin Knight

      He had the Bully Pulpit. If he or his administration needed to explain something, they had multiple options and opportunities to get their message across. Certainly more than Reagan had, and Reagan was still able to beat the Democrats without breaking his stride – all without the internet or talk radio.

      Ultimately, no one in DC had the power to improve the political atmosphere more than President Bush. I started complaining about the hideousness of the Bush White House’s communications operation in 2005, back when his approval rating was at a healthy 55% and it looked like Karl Rove’s Permanent Republican Majority was here to stay.

      I fault Congressional Republicans for deferring leadership to the White House and forgetting that when the President is of your party, your fate is irretrievably tied with his. In fact, I wrote something in the aftermath of the thumpin’ of 2006 calling for Congressional Republicans to go to the mat and defend the Bush Administration, even if … especially if, the White House seemed disinclined to do so itself.

      President Bush paid the political price for his “New Tone” obsession and the failure to change course when it hit the rocks of the Democrats’ bad faith. So it is almost entirely his fault that we’re where we are right now.

  • redohio

    but the one, I repeat ONE, decent argument Stewart made was that the idea of expansive power by the executive branch (i.e., the gov’t) does go against the the conservative principles of limited gov’t.

    • mbecker908
    • aesthete

      From James Madison to James Polk, US Presidents under the Constitution have, in practice, wielded authority greater than that which was Constitutionally proscribed to them. Having Congressional oversight and possible veto power is the best that we can hope for, in those circumstances.

  • throwback59

    speechless!
    Woo Hoo for Yoo!

  • harlan

    Jon Stewart is a relatively bright guy trying to play “gotcha” with a brilliant guy.

    It’s like the University of Southeastern New Hampshire taking on the Crimson Tide.

  • nessa

    …unbelievable. Obviously they’ve never read it, I won’t even get into understanding it.

    After watching the videos I could almost convince myself that Stewart was intentionally allowing Yoo to concisely explain his points, that was the most objective interview I’ve seen in a while. is John Stewart of the comedy channel more of a journalist than the rest of journalism in America?

  • ModernAgeFan

    Jon Stewart just got a healthy helping of what he usually dishes out.

  • erod
  • hickorystick

    His failure to break down Yoo after a half hour of on television questioning leaves the Bush Administration arguments for what they did, on solid ground. Most, if not all of Bush/Cheney policies on the War on Terror are still being used, or can continue to be used in a future Administration. President Bush left the Republic much stronger in this area than what he inherited. What John Ashcroft did to create the Patriot Act and get it through a ACLU-mentality Senate that already hated his guts, was extraordinary; and it stands intact today. I know our Party paid a very heavy price, but it was good for the Republic and the commen defence. President Bush did pick out some very talented people, some of which I look forward to coming back after ’12

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      … and then squinched up his mouth and made a silly face. I swear that is the total extent of his talent. When did the left go batcrap crazy and decide this no talent hack was the funniest thing ever?

      • hickorystick

        But when they enter the arena of logic, reason, and responsibility, they fall apart. Their purpose is not to improve America, but to gather political power. Stewarts job is to make Republicans look so bad that a Democrat candidate seem reasonable. Remember, the Democrats ran on nothing in ’06. Same for ’08 “Change that you can believe in”; what the heck is that. The Democrats wailed about the Patriot Act and sattelite intercepts, making all kinds of personal attacks, but when the nuts and bolts of the legislation were turned over in public, the bill always passed. We are better at logic and debate than the other side. We are better at governing than the other side. Since the time of McCarthy, they are better at creating villians in the public mind. At the end, even McCarthy will be proven right as well.
        http://www.amazon.com/Blacklisted-History-Senator-McCarthy-Americas/dp/1400081068/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263490037&sr=8-1

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    Stewart was coming from the assumption that waterboarding IS torture and that they went straight to it.

    Yoo was explaining that his job was to show what WAS allowed and not torture.

    The problem is defining waterboarding as/as not torture. We’re back to that problem. Some will define that procedure as torture, others not so much, and others as JUSTIFIABLE torture.

    Torture has many levels. We had to decide where to stop.