Jon Stewart on John McCain: "This Has An Awfully Tired And Dusty Feel To It"

Last night Larry King hosted "Daily Show" host Jon Stewart in advance of Sunday's Oscars, and King asked him about a wide range of topics — including the just-broken story of John McCain's alleged "ethical challenges" in the New York Times which had broken little over an hour earlier. Stewart hadn't read the piece, but King asked him about it anyway, as someone who had hosted McCain on "The Daily Show" so often that McCain topped the list of most-frequent guests. We've bolded a few especially pertinent comments. Here's the exchange from last night's transcript:

KING: We're back with Jon Stewart. And a lot of this show will be devoted to you.

But this isn't funny. It's a major story. It's going to break tomorrow morning in "The New York Times". And it deals with the possibility of a relationship between John McCain some years back and a female lobbyist who he apparently traveled with. It was done by a bunch of reporters, include Jim Rutenberg, a very respected reporter for "The New York Times".

And also that apparently favors were done of a kind dealing with favors for a lobbyist.

A statement has just been released from the McCain campaign. I guess we're just in the embryonic stages here, so we're touching on it, because there's a lot more that's going to happen with this.

The statement says: "It's a shame that 'The New York Times' has lowered its standards to engage in a hit and run smear campaign. John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He's never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election. Americans are sick and tired of gutter politics and there's nothing in this story to suggest that John McCain has ever violated the principles that have guided his career."

Your thoughts?

STEWART: Well, me? You point to me?

KING: We now turn it to you. Well, what do you think? You've had John on. We've had John on. I've known him for years.

Story continues below

STEWART: I think John McCain is someone who I have great respect for. And I think it's just sad that that kind of boilerplate response even has to be drawn up to something. And this is a strange time to be injecting it into the race. I mean I haven't read "The New York Times" story...

KING: It will be in tomorrow morning.

STEWART: But if it's concerning his relationship with a woman, it's -- it's very unfortunate. I'm not suggesting that public figures don't have to be held to certain standards of behavior and things. But this has an awfully tired and dusty feel to it, in terms of the way that political reporting has been going. If this is about lobbying and things like that, certainly that's very much in the public interest. And it's certainly very much -- but I think the general parasitic nature of lobbying to government is pretty out there for everyone to see and there should be no shocking revelation. The appearance of impropriety in terms of lobbying and government is...

KING: What's new?

STEWART: ...is out there in spades. And I think this sounds like a pretty hurtful personal thing.

KING: And both parties deny a romantic relationship, by the way.

STEWART: Right.

KING: Both parties did.

STEWART: Well, I'm glad, then, that he had to answer to something that both he and the woman deny and that that gets injected into the campaign. It's just -- it's a shame and I feel badly for him and I feel badly for his family, because they're lovely people.

KING: One other thing on it. The thing that makes it -- sets it apart is "The New York Times". I mean...

STEWART: And that sets it apart how?

KING: It's not "The Globe."

STEWART: Yes. You know, I think it's all -- there has been a certain blending. You know, "The New York Times" does some pretty amazing reporting and "The New York Times" puts stuff out there that is as sort of spurious at times. You know, Judy Miller's reports in "The New York Times" were about as fictional as James Frye's, you know, "Million Little Pieces."

(LAUGHTER)

STEWART: So, you know, I think you -- at this point, unfortunately, you have to judge each piece of material. There are very few organizations left that have a credibility savings account that they can draw on anymore -- except, of course, for CNN, that has the best political team on television.

KING: Do you think we have the best political team on television?

STEWART: No, I was told I have to say, that every seven minutes...

(LAUGHTER)

KING: Good (INAUDIBLE)...

STEWART: ...or Wolf Blitzer would come in here and beard me.

KING: That's right.

You can always be on this program, as long as...

STEWART: Oh, that's very kind.

KING: ...you (INAUDIBLE).

STEWART: No, I just -- that type of thing is upsetting and it's also, you know, I'm assuming they're talking about a relationship from years ago.

KING: Yes.

STEWART: And I'm assuming they're talking about it now and it's -- he's at a thousand delegates. I'm sure Mitt Romney is sitting at home right now going well, that's very nice. I'm glad I dropped out of the race and...

(LAUGHTER)

STEWART: Yes.

KING: That is a good point.

Comments

[verlaine]

Rachel Sklar is the most clueless, inept, empty-headed, and dim-witted blogger on the Huffington Post. Only someone as brain dead as Rachel Sklar would write a column saying that Clinton's plagiarism charge against Obama has any merit. Eat the Press is the most vacuous, worthless, pathetic excuse for media criticism in the blogosphere.