Jon Stewart addressed head-on the specter of censorship looming over U.S. late night talk shows on Thursday with an over-the-top portrayal of a politically obsequious television host under authoritarian rule.

Stewart hosted the Comedy Central program one day after ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show indefinitely following comments he made about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and two months after CBS said it would cancel the show hosted by one of President Donald Trump’s fiercest critics on TV, Stephen Colbert.

The show opened with a voiceover promising adherence to the party line.

“We have another fun, hilarious administration-compliant show,” it said.

Stewart lavished praise on the president and satirized his criticism of large cities and his deployment of the National Guard to fight their crime.

“Coming to you tonight from the real (expletive), the crime ridden cesspool that is New York City. It is a tremendous disaster like no one’s ever seen before. Someone’s National Guard should invade this place, am I right?” Stewart said.

“The Daily Show” set was refashioned with decorative gold engravings, in a parody of gold accents Trump has added to the fireplace, doorway arches, walls and other areas of the Oval Office.

Stewart fidgeted nervously as though he was worried about speaking the correct talking points. When the audience members reacted with an “awww” he whispered: “What are you doing? Shut up. You’re going to (expletive) blow this for us.”

He took on a more stilted tone when he started describing Trump’s visit to the United Kingdom, calling the president “our great father.”

“Gaze upon him. With a gait even more majestic than that of the royal horses that prance before him,” he said.

Stewart’s featured guest was due to be Maria Ressa, the journalist and author of “How to Stand Up to a Dictator.” Ressa also shared the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize for her fight for freedom of expression in her home country of the Philippines.

all 53 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 86 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Full bit, https://youtu.be/_GXNJ3V9lzg (23 minutes)

I also highly recommend the interview with Maria Ressa, https://youtu.be/Tsb1I7hqaJ4 (17 minutes)

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 1 year ago

    At first I thought having a woman who's won a Nobel Peace Prize 🏆 was just a great dig because Trump wants one so badly. But as she talked I realized how significant and prescient everything she said was. Damn, she's right.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago

    "Why won't you fight back!?" said the people not fighting back. "Sacrifice your career to stick it to the Nazis!"

    And then the people went back to their day jobs.

    See, if people were going out and picking up trash, then I could see getting pissed when some rich fuck doesn't help out. But pointing to some lone wolf picking up litter and acting like that's you is weird.

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago* (26 children)

    Yeah, funny, clever. But the time for funny and clever might have passed. I think I would've honestly found this more impressive had he gone on there and plainly said what needs saying, presumably resulting in being taken off air.

    What needs saying being "The Trump admin is using the murder of Charlie Kirk as an excuse to get rid of the first amendment." along with other dry but important truths about Israel's ongoing genocide, ICE raids, etc.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (25 children)

    more impressive had he gone on there and plainly said what needs saying,

    "I announce my candidacy for President of the United States"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (24 children)

    No, no more celebrity politicians

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    So just more of the same career politicians that have brought us to the point we're currently at?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah cos if I'm being honest mate Trump, the celebrity politician, has done a hard right into a police state... That's sort of a 100% hit rate, to me, for "celebrity politicians are nutjobs".

    Zelenskyy was a celebrity, but I know nothing about his actual political leadership so I can't really judge 🤷‍♂️

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    Name someone better.

    No, seriously. Name someone who can:

    1. Get elected

    2. Do the job better than Jon Stewart.

    When you can do that, you won't have to convince me to support them; I'll already be on board.

    Until you can name someone that can meet that criteria...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    What does the "get elected" criteria mean? Anyone who runs can "get elected", right? Am I wrong? I don't know if there's any disqualifying factors that I'm not aware of other than like, convictions or something (not that that bothers the current dictator)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    So, no actual name springs to mind?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (15 children)

    I was being genuine about not understanding the criteria, sorry - I can't point to a name if I'm unclear on the criteria :/

    But yeah, how about Bernie Sanders? AOC?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Bernie is too damn old. He's not a viable candidate anymore.

    AOC's policies are good, but she has the same problem that Hillary had: the GOP has been running against her for 2-3 election cycles now. Her nomination will bring more opposition than support.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (13 children)

    Oh right fair enough 🤷‍♂️

    are those two failures by criteria 1? Is that what criteria 1 meant?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

    No, those are both failures of criteria 2. Both Bernie and AOC are electable. But Stewart can do the job better than either of them.

    You could potentially do the job better than Stewart, if you really wanted it. But you aren't electable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (11 children)

    No, those are both failures of criteria 2. Both Bernie and AOC are electable. But Stewart can do the job better than either of them.

    You could potentially do the job better than Stewart, if you really wanted it. But you aren't electable. Come back to me when a significant percentage of the voting population knows your name, and we can further explore your capacity to do the job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    ..what? Where did I say I wanted to do the job? I'm not sure I've done anything to warrant the snarky replies honestly mate.

    Also, wait, Jon Stewart can do the job of being president better than two career politicians? I'm not sure I understand why that would be the case?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

    Also, wait, Jon Stewart can do the job of being president better than two career politicians? I'm not sure I understand why that would be the case?

    Easily. Stewart can exert far more political pressure on either the left or the right than AOC or Bernie.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    Is the amount of political pressure you can apply, what the job entails? I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but I had the perception that a president had to do more than just apply pressure - I thought there was something more to the job, that would require a better understanding of politics and the consequences of policy, a clear and consistent viewpoint, the ability to pick an effective cabinet, that kind of thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Is the amount of political pressure you can apply, what the job entails?

    Yes.

    I had the perception that a president had to do more than just apply pressure

    Not really, no.

    I thought there was something more to the job, that would require a better understanding of politics and the consequences of policy,

    Understanding is important, but understanding the consequences of policy is meaningless if you can't actually enact policy. Enacting it requires the ability to apply political pressure.

    a clear and consistent viewpoint,

    Your viewpoint is meaningless if you are powerless to enact it, which requires the ability to apply political pressure.

    the ability to pick an effective cabinet, that kind of thing.

    Sure. Picking a cabinet requires the advice and consent of the Senate, which means your political pressure comes into play.

    Regardless, Stewart's understanding of politics and policy consequences is as good or better than AOC, Bernie, Mamdani, et al, and his viewpoint is certainly clear and consistent. Your criticism doesn't seem relevant here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Oh, right. Okay. Well, personally I don't think Stewart's understanding of politics and policy consequences is as good or better than those named politicians, but I guess we just disagree. More celebrity politicians I guess 👍 Maybe we'll get Dwayne Johnson in next!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Well, personally I don't think Stewart's understanding of politics and policy consequences is as good or better than those named politicians

    You indicated here that you were unqualified to make such a claim. You said you didn't even know the guy. You claimed ignorance. (You also said that your opinion was based solely on the "track record" of previous celebrities. This was a "hasty generalization" fallacy, also known as "stereotyping".)

    Since your "ignorance" comment, though, it seems you have developed a definite position on Stewart's policy competency. What have you learned in the past two days that justifies this new opinion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm unqualified to claim that I don't think he has a better understanding of politics than Bernie Sanders? 😂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm unqualified to claim that I don't think he has a better understanding of politics than Bernie Sanders?

    Based on your previous claim of ignorance and your acknowledged reliance on stereotypes, that is correct: you have indicated you are not qualified to make a meaningful claim regarding Stewart's policy competency.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    what? Where did I say I wanted to do the job?

    You didn't. I was trying to provide you with an understanding of a criteria 1 failure. Should you choose to run, you would collect fewer votes than Vermin Supreme, who is himself unelectable.

    Name an electable candidate who could actually do the job better than Stewart. Show me someone better. If you can't name someone better, don't drag down the best candidate you know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Ah okay I see, criteria 1 is about likeability and public awareness?

    to be totally fair, I did name two candidates 😂 how about Mamdani? I like Omar's Green New Deal work and her anti-ICE stance is good. Tlaib's advocacy for the working class is nice too.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    The garish gold set and graphics were amazing.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    Not bad I guess, but I was hoping he’d not pull any punches and would get taken off air as well. We need more hosts to get censored, imo, so the point is really driven home. Slow censoring gives people enough time to accept the unacceptable.

    Lets see what John Oliver will do.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

    What punches do you think he pulled?He himself highlighted the absurdity of what Trump wanted while at the same time he and his correspondents, basically called Trump a greasy, discolored, micro-dick, moron. Then going on to have an extremely relevant And intelligent conversation with an an appropriate guest. What is it that you would have had him do differently?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    He hasn’t talked about Kirk murder, has he?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    He is addressing to the overarching issue. Kirk is just the latest distraction and side circus. The fascists want you to engage and rail against every little thing. In the next week or two. There will be a whole new outrage. Anyone still talking about old, fashy Kirk. will be out of the loop and irrelevant. Even Donald Trump doesn't care about ballroom Kirk.

    The most attention we should give Charlie Kirk is looking for an oversized latex Charlie Kirk head with a blown out neck to wear as a mask for Halloween. And the new holiday we now have celebrating a fascist every year. pelting each other with bullet-shaped candy corn.

    A quick post script. Kimmel was not fired because of what he said about Charlie Kirk. Go watch what he said about Charlie Kirk. It was about the most milquetoast and minimally respectful thing you could say about Charlie Kirk. He was calling out Donald Trump and has been calling out Donald Trump for a long time. Donald Trump announced two months ago that Kimmel was next. Kirk was just the excuse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    What is it that you would have had him do differently?

    Announce.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Announce what? He called out the problem directly. Skewering and ridiculing him.

    This was never about Kirk. Trump announced months ago that Kimmel was next. And will you look at that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It would be foolish to announce that more than three years out. When we're not even sure if there's even going to be an election. It would give Trump three straight years to slander and target him. Possibly getting him killed or arrested. As the fascists stir up their packs of lone wolves. Stewart shouldn't announce until the start of the Democratic primary at the earliest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    hahahahaha the democratic primary, funniest joke in this entire post. Love the visual of everyone jumping up like gophers when the dnc alarm rings and everyone comes running. I really need to cancel my internet and cognitive abilities before the next election rolls around.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Oliver will quit, and move to an online resource. There is no other option for him. It's amazing he hasn't been deported already.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Citizenship has not stopped the Trump administration from deporting people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    True but he hasn’t deported a celebrity citizen yet

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    There is nothing stopping these late night guys from self publishing a show. It is not like it is that expensive.

    Maybe youtube could be leaned on to remove the content too though idk but there are other platforms.

    Colbert needs reuptake his satire schtick. He should have maga conversion, quit network early, and self publish the colbert reported. Or colberted report or something, new character.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It is not like it is that expensive.

    How expensive is it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Homemade 3 for a gallon of whole milk, 2 for 2 lbs brown sugar, maybe 8 or 9 now for a pound of midshelf coffee, all at aldi of course

    At starbucks it is what, 5 for every 16 ounces or more. About 16 servings of half coffee half milk. Idk 80 bucks minimum savings minus 14 so 66 saved.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago