If someone is putting forth a moronic premise in a book I'd expect any thoughtful interviewer to call him on it. It's up to the author to sell his book- I don't tune into The Daily Show to watch an infomercial. Funny how so much of Republican commentary, and I'd put this book in that category, is pure fiction dreamt up to support some horrendous agenda. These Heritage Foundation and AEI toads stake out these laughably extreme positions and in doing so are able to move public opinion in their direction.

Speaking of which, John Fund was on Bill Maher's show Friday and informed us all that the economy is doing fine, "there's a 5% unemployment rate", he said. When asked about the massive national debt incurred by the war, and by the agenda of the president and the previous Repub congress, Fund said the debt is going down and that the problem was not with the war but with "Medicare and Medicaid spending". Sadly, Mr. Maher had no information at hand to confront this blatantly partisan lie so once again an extreme position staked out by a Republican toady went unchallenged and public opinion was affected. I really wish Bill would spend a bit more time preparing for his show (insert bong reference here); laughs are great, but if your show is ostensibly political, then a bit of research on subjects likely to come up would be in order. Fund is a Republican operative and no one showed him up for the lying sack that he is. Jon Stewart allows an idiot to expose his idiocy for all to see, and makes us laugh while he's doing it.

Rachel, I have to agree with pizzmoe concerning your segment on Abrams' show last night. I actually prefer adversarial, argumentative reporters. The general public pays lip service to civil behavior, but the "Sam Donaldson" method of reporting serves a purpose as well.

Even though I didn't agree with your comments, you are still the hottest of hotties...

The problem with people like Goldberg and Dinesh D'Souza is that they are so far off the reservation that any interviewer will have to start with Adam and Eve to establish any kind of common ground. Even after watching three hours of D'Souza on C-Span I could not tell if the guy really means all those nutty, completely insane things he is saying, or if he is just cashing the check from the American Enterprise Institute and laughing all the way to the bank.

So no wonder Stewart's interview was so choppy.

Rachel, I agree with other commenters that you should come out with your own commentary more forcefully. And maybe don't post until you actually have a response by Goldberg or any other news to report.

Yes, I saw the interview and the cuts did catch my attention after the 2nd one. Goldberg seemed like Mr. Magoo trying to explain his book to Jon and the audience. What really made me laugh is when Jon pointed out Jonah's point about "organic food" being fascist. Fucking hilarious. Jonah is a great comedic stylist.

... or - the Daily Show could have decided that they could possibly extend the interview segment in the event that they didn't have a lot of material given the state of writing strikers. At the end of the day, they may have decided that anything that they produced (sans writers) at the drop of a dime would be more worthy of airtime then Jonah and his unfortunately malfunctioning frontal lobe cortex.

The video is not working for me...

Rachel, you were GREAT on tonight's episode of Dan Abrams. I love the show, and I respect their individual opinions, but tonight I thought these MSNBC commentators acted like a bunch of total M$M BOOBS. I sure hope you blog about the insanity of THAT episode! Unreal.

I agree with sconset. You always choose interesting topics and always fail to make a coherent commentary about them. I suspect that may have been the same problem for Stewart. It probably took 18 minutes to get 6 minutes of even marginally comprehensible utterances from this nut job. It was obvious that Jon Stewart had read the book and thoroughly prepared for a "normal" interview. Unfortunately, Goldberg is clearly more abnormal than even Jon could have anticipated. And yes, Jon Stewart totally shredded this guy, pointing out the absolutely absurd and factually bereft rantings of Jonah, the Right-wing Whale.

Having edited many interviews down for time, making someone like Goldberg sound coherent was probably interesting. The editors did a fine job. (Wait till NABET goes on strike) As far as the "Doughy Pantload" getting back to you, Rachel, if it was you he met, I am sure he'll use any excuse to talk to you again.

Rachel--you are annoying as hell. On any given night, John Stewart spends about 6 minutes MAX with his guest. You, as usual, are making a mountain out of a molehill.

By the way, Stewart shredded Goldberg and his nonsensical little theories.

Grow up.

The essential problem with only seeing a third of the interview is that the viewer is left with the feeling that
they are talking past one another because Goldberg has gone off into mixing USA and continental politics, substituting fascism for the liberal defense against social Darwinism. Stewart fails to call him on this
lapse of logic, and ends up just saying Goldberg is not being sincere in what he is saying, which is not true. The selection is limited but at least this much is apparent -- the book will find its way to the remainder
section soon enough!