In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Obama on the Daily Show with John Stewart

21 thoughts on “Obama on the Daily Show with John Stewart”

  1. So he goes on COMEDY Central!!!
    The home of Southpark..omg. A show you wont let your children watch.
    The intro includes 148 of the most diehard Barry fans there clapping.
    Who offered food for them to show up?
    He cheapened the Office and degraded the name. He has appeared on
    ESPN twice , the View, Oprah, Lenno, Rolling stones and Myth busters,
    So why have a press conference or work?
    Dont forget the 52 plus rounds of golf and the parties and him killing our lobster supply. What a guy.

  2. Obama the humble: We have made a lot of progress over the last 18 months that from an historical perspective ranks up there with any legislative session we’ve seen in history.

    Heh, not even US history, but world history. I’ll have to check with Victor Davis Hanson on this.

    Keith, do I get an award for listening to the whole thing?

  3. Jon Stewart is one of the smartest people on TV, so it’s not surprising that the President would appear there. But the show demonstrated precisely Obama’s “problem”: He’s a very smart, serious guy leading a major country, who sees issues in a nuanced fashion — which does not fit well in the current political gotcha atmosphere in which everything is a sound bite and subtlety is seen as weakness. Indeed, for folks to claim that he “cheapened” the office by appearing on Jon Stewart or that he has not accomplished much demonstrates this radical partisanship. What they mean to say, more subtely, is “He hasn’t accomplished what we agree with” and “he should only appear on those shows we like to watch.” Indeed, last night he wisely appeared where his base is — watching an intelligent, sophisticated program.

  4. George, can you give me proof of Obama’s intelligence? I just don’t see it. I see a man spouting talking points with or without TOTUS who has no original thoughts and no sense of humor. Furthermore, he has a closed mind when it comes to people who disagree with him. He lacks intellectual curiosity. Don’t tell me about the Harvard Law Review. He didn’t do the actual work but left it to subordinates. That’s well-documented.

  5. Props to MrStewart for asking questions that the Press seems to avoid.

    The President allowed himself to be seen as a beleagured and defeated figurehead whose only explanation is that he needs more time to get it right.
    His claim that the forces against him are formidable and have prevented him from his agenda only make him sound weak.

  6. George, can you give me proof of Obama’s intelligence?

    Was going to say the same thing, Gran! I read someplace his IQ was 137–not off the charts. If you mean by nuanced, on both sides of everything, then I agree. Sophisticated? that word would never cross my mind unless he is carrying his copy of Reinhold Niebuhr. We are STUDENTS of this man over here…so expect some pushback.

  7. Kieth,

    Thanks for posting the vids. I’m one of those tight wads that won’t pay for TV, therefore I do not have cable, so this was a great help.

    As far as Obama’s IQ, 137 is considered high gifted or very superior (not genius but close). However, when you look at some other notable’s IQs, you have to wonder. GW Bush – 125, JFK – 119, Jimmy Carter – 156, Ike – 122. Seems to me that the higher the score, the less common sense and understanding of human nature they had. And the more willing they were to be condescending to others.

    Then you have the likes of James Woods (actor) – 180, Madonna (whatever she is now a days) – 140, Steve Martin (actor) – 142, and Sharon Stone (who in my opinion is still hot at 52, but still a bit of a freak)- 154, all high IQs, but do you really want one of them being the leader of the free world.

    Ronald Reagan’s IQ was reportedly 105, yet the man had the ability to connect with people unlike any one I have ever seen. Plus, he brought about the fall of the Soviet Union, and one of the greatest economic booms in American history.

    We need not have the smartest in the class leading us as a nation, but rather the most principled. Unfortunately, we have not the latter.

    1. Shofar – thanks, I agree entirely. Only thing I would doubt is that Reagan’s IQ was 105 – that’s pretty low. I’ll tell you, I went to a school with lots of smart kids, and I came away with a vastly diminished esteem for the value of a high IQ.


      Thanks for the comment.

  8. And don’t forget the doctors lopping off feet and yanking tonsils, the stupid Cambridge police, you can keep your health plan, Obamacare will cut costs, the Slurpee-sucking ditchside Republicans, all the “gonnas,” all the “folks” references, the pathetic gun-clutching clingers (also known as Americans), the scared stupids in the backseat. Oh, now I need a cosmo. See what you did, George? (hey, if Hoda Kotb can start at 2 PM her time, who’s to judge?)

  9. Is it true? was the TOTUS embedded under the plastic/glass table in front of the Prez/
    The Prez keeps looking down and on several occasions Steward moves his hand over the area as if to keep the Prez’s eyes up.

  10. I would think more of his IQ and more importantly, his book larnin’, if I heard words like industrial policy, failed Keynesian economics, new world realignment, asymmetrical warfare, and big words like that coming out. We have never seen his transcripts or papers. When he does invite experts in, he stays for half an hour, prances around Socratically, then leaves..

    1. Janice, thank you for posting Taranto’s piece. I had read the NY Times article and was trying to figure out what to make of it. Such a slavish, uncritical treatment by the New York Times. And people wonder why Fox News was invented . . .

      And you’re right, the standardized IQ tests mean nothing. My mom used to give the individualized IQ tests, which are the standard. Not sure where his number is coming from – or any of the other presidential numbers, for that matter.

  11. I watched the interview in its entirety (s/p) and to be honest (dont hit my face), I thought Obama did pretty good. He’s a nogoodcommunistanticapitalistprig but on the whole, I thought he came across jovial, smiling and had some funny quips in there, and took the jabs and barbs from Stewart quite well. Granted the crowd was stacked in his favor . . .

    The “heckavu job Larry” comment was ridiculous —-> but no one in the rightwing media picked up on it, except for Savage and Hannity. Once more the old, rich, upprer crust, golf-club-weilding-yet-bumbling Republican machine (which needs oil, and bad) is slow, so very slow off the starting line. Obama should be eviscerated for that comment . . . as payback for the mauling our own fool took when he was in office.

    Although Obama’s comments were ridiculous (there is simply too many to list) on the whole I thought he came off quite personable. What irked me most was the RIDICULOUS comment Stewart made calling the President, “dude.”

    Someone teach that boy some manners.

  12. Agreed that Stewart should have had the decency to show Obama proper respect. What was intriguing was Obama’s refusal to say that some Americans are mad at the administration. He repeatedly used the term “frustrated” and Stewart failed to pick up on that. Seems Obama is calculating that to publicly acknowledge a segment of the public is pissed off would allow the media to hit him hard with new headlines like, “President Admits Voter Anger Days Before Democratic Waterloo.”

  13. 12347 614488Maintain up the great piece of function, I read couple of posts on this internet web site and I believe that your weblog is actually fascinating and holds bands of wonderful details. 941501

Comments are closed.