I will be there for sure!

cant wait

Heavy-weight clash :)

Interesting...funny...even intriguing. And yet, at the same time, I can't help but to hang my head in shame that so many Americans (certainly none on WebDip, mind you), actually use one or both of these comedians on Comedy Central as their sole and legitimate source of news...I boggles the mind the number of times I have heard Jon Stewart quoted or referenced as a source of information/opinion on a matter of vital national policy.

...and yet, by the same token, I guess when CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc. are all so insanely partisan it seems pointless to watch any of them. (And for those about to agree and bash FOX exclusively as partisan, then *man up* and admit they are ALL unabashedly partisan...)

I would point out that *anyone* who references a sole source for information is an idiot. Using comedians isn't any worse than some of the maniacs on either - and they're a lot more transparent about what axes they may have to grind.

Krellin-

I will freely admit that they are all partisan, what with their slavish promotion of the pro-corporate line. Not one network has the independance to question corporate personhood. That said, Fox is more brazenly a Pravda of the far right than any of its rivals.

@Stratagos - You do understand that comedy often uses whatever partial facts are available to fit the joke...they use things like exaggeration, modification and fabrication to take some one thing and turn it into humor. How you can suggest that a comedian is a legitimate source of news is beyond me. God help us all if you are in any position of power.

I will grant it that yes, *sometimes* a comedian will tell the truth about a matter because it is so absurd as to be funny...but since, as I stated above, their purpose has **nothing** to do with actually reporting news and/or truth, you can *never* rely upon them as an accurate source of information.

If you did, you would actually believe that the Bush Administration sent people hunting with Dick "Vader" Cheney to get shot when they got out of line....

@Bob - agreed, FOX is the mouthpiece of the political Right, just as MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC are all equally skewed to the LEFT.

I suspect you will argue against this - thus showing your (obvious) bias.

@Bob - Remember when Dan Rather produced an *obviously* forged document about Bush...and when it was clearly identified as a forgery, NONE of the major networks, or CNN or MSNBC called him out on it and derided him as an obvious political hack in newsman's clothing. IMAGINE if the same had happened on the other side. So, to argue that there is any neutral ground to be found in the listed networks is simply to bury your head in the sand.

I'll grant you that I am a leftist. Hell, I'm proud of being leftist; we're the ones who keep this country from turning into a third world oligarchy. I do not grant that any wide-audience televised news in America, all owned by gigantic corporations, are leftist. They may appear to be so in comparison to Fox, but they are not. If they were, during the health care dustup, one might have expected at least one journalist or commentator to ask why we as a society need parasitical middlemen like for-profit insurers at all, instead of just blindly accepting that they serve a socially useful role. Again, it seems farcical to me to call any of the gigantic media corporations anything but pro-corporate in outlook. The difference is between far right and right, not right and left.

krellin - its not just about partisanship. its about facts vs FICTION. what faux noise peddles is FICTION!!! its called lies bandied about for the economic gain of a few, presented to an ignorant portion of the American public as fact.

in the end, the highest rated and watched fox show (still O'Liely) gets 3mil viewers on average... 4 mil on his best nights... the population of the U.S. is 330mil so that should put things into perspective.

as for the rest of your meandering thoughts put on the digital page - I wont even bother with the ridiculousness of them... you can be a hack, but there is a reason that Fox viewers are the least informed of all news programming.

and there is a VAST ocean of a difference between Rachael Maddow - a Rhodes Scholar with a PhD who addresses facts, uses things called logic and rational reasoning, allows her guests to speak and challenges them with probing and informed questions vs. clowns like O'Liely or Beck who are glorified circus monkeys with the intellectual heft of a dining room table.

VAST difference. if you cant tell them apart, thats YOUR problem.

@krellin - I didn't *claim* a comedian was a legitimate news source - I claimed, in fact, that they just as disreputable as the O'Reilleys - my statement was that their biases are more obvious than someone like Beck.

Don't put words in my mouth. I'm willing to bet I have a much more diverse information palate than you do.

People who watched the Daily Show were better informed than people who watched Fox shows.