Jon Stewart Has A Question For Rand Paul: 'What The F**k Are You Talking About?'

NACBA

NACBA

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
784
Jon Stewart began "The Daily Show" on Thursday night with an apology for saying on Wednesday night's show that no one involved in the death of Eric Garner had been indicted.

As it turns out, the person who recorded the video of Garner being choked was indicted on weapons charges.

"They got the shooter... of the video," Stewart said. "Let that be a lesson to you kids out there. Photographing crime does not pay."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/05/jon-stewart-chokehold_n_6273864.html
 
I like what Stewart said about "photographic crime does not pay". But he was wrong in his analysis of what Rand said. Here is my response.

Jon Stewart totally missed the point of what Rand Paul was saying. We have too many laws that lead to too many arrests. And every arrest MIGHT lead to a bad result. Yeah the little woman from Jersey Shore didn't get killed. But it was easier for police to manhandle her and put her in handcuffs. Really, is the black community better off with nicer cops or less laws causing the police to arrest people or how about a combination of both? That is why Rand Paul applauded the move in California to take arrests off the table for a whole slew of non violent crimes. This isn't simply about being "anti tax" as Stewart tries to imply. People shouldn't be arrested for marijuana either.

Jon's quip that "He could have been out there selling mix tapes or squeegies or snow cones and the same thing could have happened to him" get's close to understanding the problem. And that is that there are two many ways what you are doing can be deemed "illegal". A "mixtape" could be considered copyright infringement and a reason to be arrested. Selling snow cones? Do you have a business license? Same with selling squeegies. Any time someone can call the police over something you may or may not have done, it increases the possibility of a bad police encounter.

Yes the officer most certainly should have been indicted. And Jon Stewart is 100% right that prosecutors always get indictments WHEN THEY WANT THEM! The Ferguson case would have ended in an indictment IF the prosecutor had done what prosecutors usually do and denied the defendant the opportunity to testify, not sought to undermine the witnesses that testified against him, not covered up the inconsistencies of witnesses that were testifying in his behalf, and put forward an overturned law for the jury's consideration. And in the Garner case, so far the grand jury transcript has not be released, but if does I suspect the same malfeasance in it.

But back to Rand Paul. Why is Stewart singling out THIS particular clip? Oh yeah, it's to smear a Republican and to gain laughs at the same time. Is Stewart aware that Rand has caught hell from conservatives for saying that as a teen if he was walking down the street he might have smarted off to a police officer that told him to get off the sidewalk but he wouldn't have expected to get shot (like Mike Brown was)?
 
Jon Stewart totally missed the point of what Rand Paul was saying. We have too many laws that lead to too many arrests.

Nope, HE KNOWS, he is simply fine with it. Oh he will fuss and gripe and mock when appropriate victims run afoul of cops, but the root of the problem? That we have too many cops enforcing too many laws... pay no attention to that.
 
JustinTime said:
Jon Stewart totally missed the point of what Rand Paul was saying. We have too many laws that lead to too many arrests.

Nope, HE KNOWS, he is simply fine with it. Oh he will fuss and gripe and mock when appropriate victims run afoul of cops, but the root of the problem? That we have too many cops enforcing too many laws... pay no attention to that.
Click to expand...

I think Jon Stewart falls into the trap of reading his teleprompter without thinking about the content at times. He has a lot of writers, many are progressos... I think this is one of those times..
 
Reason defends.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/05/liberal-shocked-that-making-everything-i

You know what's also a cause? Overcriminalization. And that one is on you, supporters of the regulatory super state. When a million things are highly regulated or outright illegal—from cigarettes to sodas of a certain size, unlicensed lemonade stands, raw milk, alcohol (for teens), marijuana, food trucks, taxicab alternatives, and even fishing supplies (in schools)—the unrestrained, often racist police force has a million reasons to pick on people. Punitive cigarette taxes, which disproportionately fall on the backs of the poorest of the poor, contribute to police brutality in the exact same way that the war on drugs does. Liberals readily admit the latter; why is the former any different?

If you want all these things to be illegal, you must want—by the very definition of the word illegal—the police to force people not to have them. Government is a gang of thugs who are paid to push us around. It's their job.
Click to expand...
 
dannno said:
I think Jon Stewart falls into the trap of reading his teleprompter without thinking about the content at times. He has a lot of writers, many are corporate sponsors... I think this is one of those times..
Click to expand...

FTFY
 
Stewart deflects the causation that lead to Garner's death. Perhaps Rand Paul is right, perhaps victimless crime like cigarette snugging had something to do with it, but Stewart knows race baiting gets views so I guess anythinggoes.

There was a time Ron Paul himself though of Jon Stewart as an ally for the cause of liberty, and it wasn't that long ago. Too bad as Stewart gets older, he's becoming a sad and bitter progressive that acts hypocritically because of irrationality. Just last week he told Judge Napolitano that capitalism should be abolished, and the Judge fired back saying he's the richest person on TV. Stewart just move on to another topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top