Rumsfeld has Alzheimers. He remembers nothing…is responsible for nothing…wants nothing…except to make money on a book. File it in G. Bush’s library.

At least you know you’re getting propaganda with Fox TV news and their airhead commentators. I quit watching Stewart and Colbert way before their idiocy on the mall last summer. Stewart interviews outright criminals like Yoo and Rumsfield? This is a comedy show? Giving these human monsters a voice?

I guess we are a third world country after all.

The Daily Show did the world no favors in giving this man an outlet. Is it once or twice a
week that John S. or Steven C. have someone from the defense establishment on? And
how often do they have an anti war voice on?

The fact that Rumsfeld chose to come on the show tells us all we need to know.  These people leave nothing to chance.  Talk about stage management! Debate was definitely the big loser.  Stewart plays the role of “official skeptic” (it’s all about channeling dissent, you see).  The questioning is bland and he carps over petty nonsense.  In his effort not to offend Rumsfeld, he becomes tongue-twisted and boring with the audience chuckling moronically.  Stewart achieved the impossible - he made Piers Morgan look genuinely dangerous.

I switched off early on when Stewart let Rumsfeld get away with the comment about SH paying $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers, as if SH were targeting the United States.  Classic-half truth.  In fact this money was paid to Palestinian families.  How did that constitute an imminent threat to American security which required the massive invasion of Iraq?

I thought JS had more integrity but this farce just shows he is washed-up.  But at least he can put “interviewed a war criminal” on his resume.

Stewart was way too kind to Rumsfeld. This was a perfect opportunity to talk about Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, what with all the hubbub about Mubarak and Gaddafi. Remember when we had Mubarak torture him into drawing a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda or when Gaddafi conveniently “suicided” Al Libi after he
overstayed his welcome? This was under Rummy’s and Gates’ watch—the duplicitous pricks.

Rummy and his Rand Corp ilk forged a new approach to military analysis.  Neocon strategy which - is now the norm, is based on the “possibility” of a threat - not actual evidence of a threat. “What if” becomes “what is”. Whatever means necessary to neutralize the “possibile threat” is then justified. Some type of “intelligence” will be sprinkled into the equation. Contrary intel is disregarded. The possibilites are endless - the potential danger is never ending. The war can never be over. WTF?

@john from ojai

Stewart is morfing into a defender of the status quo and authority.  He certainly made his show as a critic of Fox and the Bush admininstration, but now he attacks those who in a direct and fundamental way stand up to the status quo and authority.  He hides it behind the cloak of civilivity and “consistency”. 

It is not now surprising that Stewart would not take on Rumsfeld.  Stewart after all told essentially the left to not accuse Bush of being a war criminal as that was “divisive”.

His whole self-appointed role as the Miss Manners of debate (really dissent) has caused him to start censoring content and demanding a subdued language which in fact does not challenge the status quo and authority in either manner or content—his attack on Code Pink shows as much.  In response, the leader of Code Pink called him a “slacktivist”.

RedwoodGuy, that’s crazy talk! Name another interviewer that gets the kind of guests Stewart gets and asks the tough questions. I think he’s one of the best.

The most ill prepared, soft interview I’ve every heard Stewart give on a serious subject. It was as if he had been paid to not bring up embarrassing issues: all the events showing that Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq, the fact that most of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, the fact that the UN inspector showed there was no evidence of WMD before we attacked.

It looks like Stewart sold out.