Hillary Clinton On The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Hillary Clinton appeared (via satellite from Texas) on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on the eve of the crucial Texas and Ohio primaries. The segment began on a humorous note before turning to campaign themes. Stewart opened the interview by saying that "this election is about judgment, and tomorrow is perhaps one of the most important days of your life, and yet you've chosen to spend the night before talking to me." Clinton responded, "It is pretty pathetic." The interview then turned more serious and focused on the race for the Democratic nomination.

Watch the video from Comedy Central below:

Comments

[Zyzzygowski]

.


EMBARRASSING!


.

[Galvanized]

AGREED.

[mix2007]

Hillary can't catch up. It's mathematically impossible short of a landslide (65% or more) in all the remaining contests.

If she hangs on after today, she will only harm the party's chances. She has gone increasingly negative, throwing everything but the kitchen sink at Obama. This will take a toll if it continues for months. She won't win even though she's playing dirty, but it will give plenty of material for the GOP to work with.

She has gone negative: The muslim smears, attacking Obama as a foreign policy novice, the racebaiting, the "plagiarism" fiasco, and on and on.

It is a choice of putting personal ego ahead of the party. Does Hillary really want the Democrats to lose just to spite them if she can't be the nominee? Is Hillary really a Nader-like figure, who would rather the whole country go down i nflames than let a rival like Gore win in 2000?

This is dangerous for the party and the coutnry. We can't afford four more years of GOP rule. Is Hillary going to damage our nominee and make that happen? Does she want to be responsible for destroying America only out of spite, out of being a sore loser?

If Hillary doesn't bow out on March 5th, the party should, as Bill Richardson said, come together around whoever has a substantial lead in the delegate count -- Obama. We need to end this as a party and not let Hillary's personal ego ruin 2008 for us.

The GOP wants this to go on. The media loves bloody conventions for ratings. The Dems should be smart and wrap this up. We can't lose the country just because one woman doesn't know how to lose with honor!!

[democraticjack]

Thank you David Axelrod. Now that the Bush/Clint­on/Bush/Cl­inton thing fell flat on it's face, this is the new tact. This is one of those talking points which instead of becoming conventional wisdom becomes boring and then insulting to the voters in states who have donated time and money in order to have a say so in the process. How unpatriotic can the Obama camp be? Let's go ask Canada!

[Proud2BIndy]

I have to say I agree with you. Most primaries go until summer. it IS unpatriotic to tell voters their voice is irrelevant.

Just ask Russia.

[Galvanized]

She's not even close to losing. You towering intellect.

[Krispi]

Would you expect a true fighter to do anything less?

[Jaradan]

Such a wonderful comment!! In the last two weeks, I've come to the conclusion that Hillary is still in this race for three reasons:

1. She needs to continue to raise money to pay back her creditors. (After all, she is broke.)

2. She's angry that the majority of America isn't voting for her, so she'd rather screw Obama's chances at being President than bow out gracefully. (Bitter, ain't she?)

3. The media loves a contentious race. (Better sales!)

Hillary has already shown that she doesn't care about the country when she refused to run in 2004. What was stopping her then? Maybe she was building up her "experience". Maybe she didn't want to run against her business buddy, Bush. Maybe she's afraid of fighting a fight that she might lose. Who knows what's going on in that logic-defying brain of hers??

[LionelMandrake]

You Clinton supporters love to accuse the Obama supporters about having their heads up their collective asses, because in these troubling times, we need a real "proven" leader.

Tell us, how exactly has she proven herself? By surviving politically with a national 46% negativity rating after 16 years of unrelenting right wing attacks? Meanwhile, her campaign couldn't even answer the question, asked by Slate, of what crisis she has faced, based on her dirty little "red Phone," ad.

Just out of a purely objective stance, and for just a second trying to forget race and gender, who would you all rather have as your candidate in a general election?

Candidate A: coming in with a decades long, steady 46% national negative public opinion, or
Candidate B: one who has brought millions of new voters into the process?

If that's not obvious enough for you, how about the fact that after only two years in their co-presidency, the Clintons managed to lose a substantial 40 year old democratic majority in the senate and the house? And, that if she does claw herself to the nomination, she will have broken the newfound spirit of the democratic party.

Now, if that's not leadership, what is!?

[fredamae]

But WHO is HE? What do WE know about Obama beaides what the MSM wants us to know...the Bias is clear with MSM....

What do you know about HRC besides what the MSM chooses to show us? If she was sooooo bad, why are they elaborating the BS, nit-pickin' crap?

[Independent voter]

1) hillary clinton has more secrets locked away than Cheny.

Where are her tax returns
Where are her list of earmarks
Where are the secret healthcare meeting records
Where are the first lady records
Where is the list of foreign contributors to the clinton fortress

bill clinton has done a very effective job at hiding hillary's past.

You know less about hillary than you would like to admit

2) This ongoing whining about MSM anti-hillary bias is malarkey.
hillary is on SNL, Stewart, talking heads etc.
The MSM would love for this contest to be a nasty bitter fight and that's exactly what hillary gives them


Please step back and take another look. You don't know hillary at all

[Jaradan]

Fredamae, I know lots about Obama and Clinton because I actually go do my own research (which includes pouring over voting records, bill sponsorship, speeches, positions on issues, biographies, etc.). And you would know lots about Obama and Clinton, too, if your research included more than watching TV. So don't assume that there isn't anything to know just because YOU don't bother to go find out.

[Proud2BIndy]

"By surviving politically with a national 46% negativity rating after 16 years of unrelenting right wing attacks?"

You scoff, but that's an incredible achievement if you even stop to think about it.

Now, I'm not say int qualifies her to be president per se, but holy $@%#, it takes a top shelf scrapper to have that much against her and she's almost holding her own against what could be called "a black Bono".

[democraticjack]

I love that "dirty little red phone ad", which Obama promptly promptly stole and used for his own "dirty little red phone ad". Does he have an original thought?

[libran38]

yeah, this aspect of Hillary has been very inspiring. You have to stick it out.

With Obama I don't' know whether he is going to pursue a liberal agenda (as evidenced by his voting record) or a post-partisan, centrist agenda. He talks about reaching across the divide to do things. That's well and good. However, I wonder what he will give up in the spirit of bi-partisanship. Someone mentioned about Blackwater and mercenaries; I hadn't heard that before. But it's stuff like this that bothers me. I don't really know what the guy stands for.

Being a scientist doing research in physics, I am interested in his science policy. His website was underwhelming, to say the least.

[treadway123]

You want the flag Proud2b1ndy Don't call any one a black bono. That is insulting. I see Bush right now pushing the same fear button that Hillary did with her ad. on t.v. right now. Thanks to people like Bush Venazuala threatening war. They scream and yell at each other all the timle, and no one thinks about sitting down and talking out thier differences' A lot of these problems is because Bush doesn't talk. He demands every one does as he says, or we will punish them. This is what Mccain supports, and it's the same way the Clintons talk. We'll I'd rather have a cool, level minded head in the white house at 3;00 in the morning who's will defuse a War Cry--------not committ to a War on the spot becaus she re fuse's to simply read and stay cool through the situation.

[Jaradan]

So Hillary's a "scrapper" because she LOST her front-runner status to an upstart? No, Obama is the real "scrapper" in this situation because he came from behind as a virtual unknown candidate to gain large numbers of supporters. That means that he has persuaded people who were initially SUPPORTING HILLARY and that Hillary has TURNED OFF HER OWN SUPPORTERS throughout this campaign.

ILet's examine this in terms of a track meet. Let's say we have 8 people in the race. One person has been given a head-start (in this case, Hillary, because she came into this race with extreme name recognition and is married to a former president). Another person, let's call him Runner 4 because Obama was actually behind Edwards and Kucinich in terms of odds and name recognition at the beginning of this race. If Runner 4 manages to surpass Runners 3, 2, and 1 to take over the top spot...he is the fighter. He is the one who has worked harder and smarter and deserves to be in the #1 spot. If the original Runner 1 (Hillary) has lost so much ground that she's now 2 laps behind the current Runner 1 (Obama) with only 5 more seconds to go in the race, she's not a "fighter". One can argue that she "has heart" for not quitting even though there's no chance in hell of her winning. Let's give her that. Now let's add in that Former Runner 1 is now throwing eggs at Current Runner 1, trying to get the crowd to boo him, complaining that her lane doesn't have the same amount of gravel as her opponent, speculating that Current Runner 1 has air pumps in his shoes, etc. This person is not a "fighter". This person is a sore loser.

[Krispi]

She shows up for work and is a lot smarter than many of us.

[fredamae]

Who really knows WHO Obama is? the one thing that Clinton has in her favor; like her or not, WE DO KNOW HRC. Every scandal and on, on, on and on.

To Me it seems Obama comes out of nowhere a year ago, but Who is he, really?

[lechatnoir]

good point. The Senator from Illinois really DID pop out of the wood work, didn't he? I remember watching the 2004 Democratic Convention, all of a sudden, they were "predicting" that Obama would be sth to watch for in 2008...how did they know that? Was it the same astrologer Nancy Reagan consulted, or is Obama just a pre-fab stooge? And then, there is the question of Brzezinsky's nose poking out of the curtains..­.sth smells doesn't it

[Jaradan]

Obama didn't just "pop out of the wood work". As a matter of fact, 16 years ago, he helped bring out a record number of voters in Chicago for the '92 presidential campaign. Guess who he helped win the state of Illinois? That's right - Bill Clinton.

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-1993/Vote-of-Confidence/

Barrack has been politically active for a very long time. Just because you're just now hearing about him, that doesn't mean that he hasn't been around.

In 2004, a woman wearing a Barrack Obama pin on her shirt was escorted away by Secret Service at the request of a visiting President Bush. He thought her pin said OSAMA. When she explained that her pin said OBAMA, President Bush said he doesn't know who that person is...She replied, "You will." Bush hadn't heard of a man who was running for the U.S. Senate. Does that mean that Obama didn't exist? No! It means that Bush is uninformed and ignorant.

[azyuwish]

I have been for Obama for a long time. However, I heard something yesterday on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman in a news story about private mercenaries like Blackwater. They played a clip of Hillary saying it is PAST time for Blackwater and all private mercenaries to be OUT of the picture in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. Obama, on the other hand says that he will consider using private armies. WTF?? I know he has a history of reaching across the aisle and working with the Right, but private armies?

I was deeply distressed to hear this and am now reconsidering Hillary. Additionally, you make a good point. We KNOW HRC backwards and forwards. Obama, inspirational as he is, IS an unknown quantity. How about he runs again in 8 years?

[signifyingnothing]

What amazes me is not that either candidate is shady or corrupt, but that so many people have so zealously taken to whitewashing any potential negative stories on Obama. The idea that one candidate = good and the other candidate = bad is ridiculous. I don't know anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton is an angel, but it's creepy to me that people on this website imagine Obama bringing about some enormous change in government or something. Presidents can't do that, unless you're FDR and there's a depression, a world war, and lots of talk in the nation about how democracy is maybe a bad idea whose time has come and gone. It's also sad that Huffington Post has so downplayed the Obama-Canada-NAFTA story, which other, more responsible sites are running with it.

[treadway123]

How about he run now, and stomp Hillary. How Dare Hillary gets on T.v. and say Mccain is better than Obama. How dare she say she supports women when she refuse's to return170,000 to a iLLinoise firm that is under investigation for Sexual Harrasment,sexual assault and degrading behaviors toward women. i'm sick of hillary screwing the Demacrate's chance to win the white house. She acts like if she can't have it she'll screw Obama so he can't get it. It's time the DNC put a end to her dirty tactics and right now. She goes to darn far when she gets on National T.V and say Mccain is Better than her Own Demacratic runner! This is the END-------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­if people don't denounce her now-------­----------­THEY GET WHAT THEY DARN WELL DESERVE IF SHE'S NOMINATED. MAYBSE, THE REPUBLICANS WILL WORK WITH HER-------------I HOPE THE DEMACRATES BOYCOTS HER!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!

[bumpersticker]

I couldn't help but hear Don McClean singing American Pie as the sound track behind Hillary's appearance on The Daily Show. Somehow her mean spirited, fear mongering campaign behind her happy/yuck-it-up situational persona was a moment the music died.

[KyleCope]

This Hill spoof is funnier than anything on SNL. LOL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGMgxFE6bms

[iPolitics]

@enoughalready13

"Obama is a complete unknown who is just too risky for this country at this point in time."

If after a year of campaigning in a very important election you haven't taking the time to learn more about the candidates, I don't suggest you adverstise that ignorance. Obama has been an elected official for a longer period than Hillary Clinton (4 years longer).

I guess you'd support Laura Bush in 2012. 8 years of executive experience!

[hank48188]

If you want to know about Obama just go to the Chicago Tribune and read some of the 30 pieces thay have on file about Obama. If you want to read ALL the details if the Obama House deal go to a site called NO QUARTER and look in the FEB archives for a piece called "How To Buy a Mansion You Can't Afford" It tells of how Michelle found the House, how Obama and Rezko looked at the House and can up with the idea to split the parcel so Obama could buy the House and Rezko would buy the lot. PLEASE READ IT!

[iPolitics]

Already read the Tribune's articles. Same stuff for months. The Hillary corruption would take you months to read:

http://prorev.com/wwindex.htm

[BDW]

No Quarter isn't a legitimate news site. It is a right wing propaganda site. This is the second time I've seen you post basically an ad for this site. And the story has been touched on by the MSM. Whether it has legs will be determined by the trial beginning.

[iPolitics]

Vote Obama!

[NotGuilty]

Ahh no, I wouldn't support Laura Bush for a brain transplant.

[Proud2BIndy]

"I guess you'd support Laura Bush in 2012. 8 years of executive experience!"

Bad comparison. Laura Bush is an empty suit. Even if you hate Hillary, you know she's not an idiot. Laura Bush is a shallow, vacuous all together waste of electrons idiot.

[catalysis]

Hillary is not an empty suit, she is a total failure at everything she does. At least you know what you are getting with Hillary. She will try to do something, whip up a bunch of scandal, then fail. She does it time and time again.

[Jaradan]

Too bad Jackie Kennedy didn't run for president after her husband was assassinated. Apparently, being married to the president means you have the same experience.

I've listened to my hubby go on for hours about what he does at work. I've even visited him at work many, many times. Tomorrow, I'm going to tell my husband's patients that I can perform brain surgery on them. His resume is my resume now.

[mtrav]

It was pathetic.

[ColoradoDan]

Hillary was disgusting on Stewarts show. The more we have seen of this empty pant suit, the more lame she appears.

I hope Obama does not consider her as VP material. The days of the Clintons running over the Democrats needs to end ASAP.

[dill]

"Empty pant suit"!! I love it! No, definitely not Hillary for VP. People dislike her too much.

[Jonny38103]

If he gets the nomination, it would be the smartest thing he could do.

[Proud2BIndy]

So if Hillary is the nominee, you're voting for McCain then? Or are you staying home, i.e., voting for McCain?

I hear all this talk about Hillary fracturing Party unity by staying the race, but listening to you and your ilk, your hatred for Hillary is what's tearing the party apart.

Nice going.

[ClaudiaJean]

This is the most disturbing trend coming out of the Obama campaign -- the legions of devoted morons that render their candidate less than stellar the more they continue to represent him online. For a campaign built on unity, change, positivity, optimism and the future, the overwhelming "Obama or NoOne" mentality and the threatening venom with which that message is delivered is truly frightening. It's clear who is fracturing the party and the nation, and it's the people who have swallowed the message of change by the trough, and are now regurgitating it completely assbackwards and dangerously anti-Democratic, anti-American and anti-ObamaEsque. Ah, sweet irony would be sweeter if it wasn't so poisonous this time around.

[Jaradan]

Get it right. Hillary's (and Bill's) wrongdoings is the horse. Our dislike of her is the cart.

[LionelMandrake]

This new comment system is a joke.
Who do you, "15 real humans", think you are, censoring comments you don't like?
There was no profanity in my post, (not that you censor that), no ad-hominem attacks, yet where is it?
There are posts already here, made fifteen minutes after mine was submitted.
This is not the first time this has happened.
You should post every single comment that does not include hateful ad-hominem attacks.
Yet, you pick and choose them like demi-gods.
I have been reading HuffPo since its inception, but I am sick and tired of my comments not appearing.
Is this happening to anyone else? (Assuming this one gets through...­)

[enoughalready13]

Yes. I have actually been "banned" from commenting in some blogs for no reason. There is something fishy going on here. And this new format is really hard on the eyes - who was the consultant who suggested this new format was good?

[LionelMandrake]

Clearly, I am not banned as this last comment somehow made it's way through.
I guess there was nothing in it worth censoring.

I'll try and include my closing lines from my "banned" post, and see if it get's through...

So, after the cities have burned ala' Newark in 1968, and Hillary loses in '08 because none of us will vote for her if she doesn't win fair and square, I hope you, and the rest of those who are helping destroy the first glimmer of hope in the democratic party in 40 years, will be happy.

...Sen. Clinton suggested yesterday that while McCain brings 50 years experience, and she brings 35 years of experience to the campaign, all Obama brings is a speech he made in 2002. Nice democratic unity there! (What experience is that anyway? The kind that led us to where we are today? Great!) So, if Sen. Clinton wins by using super-delegates to overturn the pledge delegate count, and any other monkey business, like seating Michigan delegates, I will hold my nose and vote McCain in November. When given a choice between republican, and republican lite, I'll take the republican. I will not vote for a democrat who uses classic Rovian tactics to win against another democrat, all while using the same Rovian tactic of accusing the other candidate of doing what they are doing!

She has a slim chance at best in the general election if she gets there this way. And, even if she does manage to claw her way there, all it will be is more of the same, and a Jeb Bush candidacy 8 years from now. And, then Chelsea 8 years from then. Say goodbye to your democracy people, but wave big and high because it left a long time ago.

Here's to Windsor/Tu­dor/Windso­r/Tutor/Wi­ndsor/Tuto­r... I mean Bush/Clint­on/Bush/Cl­inton/Bush­/Clinton..­. for the rest of our lives.

[Jaradan]

My entire blog on Hillary's site has been erased TWICE! And all I did was post her record vs. Obama's record - using legitimate websites (e.g., official senate websites, presidential campaign websites, and the congress library's website).

How's that for censorship?

[Nivramel]

It'll be okay,just don't speak too negatively about the good Senator from Illinois

[fredamae]

I cannot say a disparaging word about Obama, I dont know a thing about him.

I live in one of the States that has a late primary. It will most likely be "all over" by the time We get to vote. I am undecided, but as i consider points of interest i realized "I do not know a Thing about Obama". this is not to infer there is something "there" but rather, "there is Nothing there" that concerns me. Obama seems a nice fellow, he gives wonderfully inspirational speeches. He leaves me wanting to get up and get busy. But get busy doing what?
HRC talks business and ideas....b­oring, but real.

[dsm]

(Yes this is off topic)

But yes, the thought police has gone rampant since this new system has been in use.
Shouldn't a political website, you know, welcome dissent?

I had previously posted that it's delusional to expect any real change from either Hillary or Obama because the system makes sure similar people are elected...­that comment was removed without anyone even having the change to challenge it.

My other username has been banned for some reason. I've mailed them, they better have a very good reason for doing it..

[NYDamien]

Gotta agree.....­.....went looking for my posts.....­nowhere to be found. Let's hope it's a mechanical glich during this changeover. My comments are straight vanilla, no cursing, no ad hominem, no nuthin. What's going on? Even the New York Times just posts all comments and lets the readers decide who to flag. It is a little offensive to have people you don't know pick and choose what and when to post our comments. I really hope this is temporary.

[Jaradan]

I wish the system were stricter and didn't allow for comments that have blatant lies in them to get through.

[Krispi]

Maybe its' because you got a funny name Lionel.

[Noble]

If the Democrats lose this November, then America deserves what it gets. I thought maybe BushCo was an aberrant, abhorrent anomaly, but watching the bitter disgusting feud tearing this party apart, or more aptly tearing apart those that want a change of GOP rule, I really believe we might be just as responsible for all that has happened.

We deserve the corruption, the environmental devastation, the economic slide into oblivion of the middle class, health care policies that will break not only individuals and families but also our businesses, 100-year wars and mind-numbingly pathetic foreign policy, FISA and all the other encroachments on civil liberties, and on and on and on and on,

The hate will give this election to the Republicans. And no other individual is responsible for that but you.

[JakeEasy]

You seem to be right. We can't blame the Bushies when we can't even talk civilly to each other. After watching the feckless Democratic congress and the gullible way we have fallen for the Rove tactics time after time, we must accept the blame for the crap we endure. It's probably not fair to blame the republicans since, like the crocodile, being soulless and selfish and cruel is a part of their nature. They never really claimed to give a damn about anybody but themselves (and unborn fetuses), but we proclaim our humanity and concern for people and the environment. Then we can't even go two days without slugging each other.

The only solution is to put Obama, Clinton, and Edwards together for some kind of coalition candidacy.

If you keep calling Obama an ambitious, empty suit or calling Hillary a war mongering bitch, then you are the problem. Despite hope, despite experience, the neocons aren't going to wake up and change. Their evil is part of the world we must work in. So we are the ones who have to make it work. If we don't then, we are the failures.

[Jonny38103]

That's right, they're not going to change. That's why we need a fighter, not a "hopeful" conciliatory approach. And more Dems in Congress!

[Krispi]

Stay strong people and keep fighting to keep your freedom. We must continue to move forward and not put so many demands on our elected democratic representatives. We just need a majority in both houses and then we can start the cleanup. Down with republicans like Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and all that right wing stuff that Hillary mentioned while she was first lady. Remember Ken Starr? Who wouldn't want to keep their extramarital affairs secret? They impeached Clinton for that and that is all they could pin on them.
Republican­s..those idiots want to privatize Social Security just as soon as Wall Street gets through this latest crisis of sub prime loans. Carnivors that is all they are, sucking the life out of us with this stupid war and fear mongoring.
Think Democratic, lets replenish the Social Security funds and put back the money that all these years of borrowing from it have made it unstable. Lets' insure everyone by using the Medical Plan already in place called Medicare.
I can't spell right I'm so upset....V­ote Democratic no matter who wins. They will both still be serving their country because they are who they are

[enoughalready13]

I find it AMAZING that now, all of a sudden, MSNBC is distancing themselves from their blind goo-goo googly eyed support of Obama ... except, of course, Chris Matthews. He is really showing what an old stubborn ornery man he really is.

It is about time the press started to ask questions, but it is woefully too late! I can't wait for them to have egg all over their face should either Hillary win the nomination, or Obama stumble greatly. And I, with so many others, will be the first to point this out. It is shameless how MSNBC has been substantatively absent in this entire process. They have been covering nonsense news - who can speak better, who dances well, who's commercials are "better" - all the while, the issues go unexamined and the content of these people's character and plans go unchallenged.

Charisma can only go so far. Did we not all learn this in HIGH SCHOOL? Please. We need competence, compassion, and real work to change the tides in this country. And we can't rally the American people behind a scandalized man like Obama. At least with HRC we know what we are getting. Obama is a complete unknown who is just too risky for this country at this point in time.

[mcfried]

I'm confused by this argument. Clinton is completely corrupt but we know she is completely corrupt. So we should vote for her so we are not surprised when all the new dirt comes out on her Tax returns and white house papers. We won't be surprised when the Repugs bring up all the shady dealings of the Clinton administration. This is ridiculous. Clinton lies and manipulates every time she gets caught and that's ok. Sorry no but I can't understand putting forward this kind of candidate and expecting people to take the Democrats seriously

[DRPike]

Exactly mcfried!

enoughalready13 identified her/himself with "we can't rally the American people behind a scandalized man like Obama." Scandalized? In what way except the misleading, and mostly utterly innacurate attacks by the HRC supporters?

[KarenZipdrive]

She's completely corrupt? There's no law that requires any candidate to show their tax returns, silly. Your hyperbole smacks of youthful naivety.
Obama used his recently indicted pal Rezko to help him shave $300,000 off the price of his million dollar mansion--that's not corruption?
Vote for whomever you want, but there's no need to lift your leg and pee on anyone.
ALL politicians have some degree of corruption.
You're living in a dreamworld if you think otherwise.

[grannysharp]

Another stump speech on prime time by Hillary and a free one at that. I usually like the daily show but this sucked.

[bbbbmer]

mc cain as a cabinet officer in a democratic white house???? when did john stewart become such an apologist for the right????? he's either on drugs, or doesn't read, or has no clue what mccain's republican party has done to america over the past few decades, let alone the past 8 years... what's pathetic is stewart's pandering to the mccain campaign and republicans in his audience to curry favor with his corporate bosses and parent company, who are most certainly republican­s... what a sell out!!!

and his hosting duties at the academy awards SUCKED!

[lechatnoir]

well, given the countless appearances of god ol' Billy Kristol on Stewart's show, I'd say he has ALWAYS been an apologist for the right. How about we call a spade a spade and admit bi-partisan is newspeak for one-party system?

[CountryBeforeParty]

Oh stop it. Stewart is not an apologist for the right. Can you please speak with the slightest bit of rationality? You're as embarrassing as the Bible thumpers.

[ClaudiaJean]

Oh, get off it. Stewart is not an apologist for the right. If YOU think Stewart was the champion of YOUR political preferences, that was easy enough to believe. BUSH & CO are evil criminals and liars and due very bit of brilliant skewering comedy attacking them... but if you really believe that's because The Daily Show was proDemocrats and antiRepublicans, you're choosing to be a clueless viewer. Stewart and his righters will equally attack whatever assclown in politics provides them with the best story to mock. You think he won't attack Obama or Clinton - whichever one would be President should the Democrats take the election? You're delusional. He has had McCain on many, many, many times and McCain knows he's going into the lion's den but Stewart, his show and his in-studio audiences are classy and don't lower themselves to the cesspool standards debate here on HuffingtonPost tends to decline into... At the end of the day, Stewart is a comedian and The Daily Show is a comedy half-hour covering politics and pop-culture. Just because Stewart as the jester has been the individual who has best skewered the mockable doesn't mean he should give up being jester and pretend to be an intrepid political commentator, activist, journalist or campaign director.

And, you're choosing to miss the point -- Stewart was noting that while all the candidates have their differences, there is a genuine respect among the candidates (true it is all but forgotten during campaigning) that would enable whoever the winner is to work with other people across the aisle for the betterment of this nation on a whole, regardless of party (and whether or not McCain was asked to be part of a Cabinet in a Democratic White House.) If YOU can't accept that as a positive step foward in bring this country together and leading ALL of us foward, you are the problem.

[ched]

Rush Limbaugh wants you to vote for Hillary Clinton.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334669,00.html

[ClaudiaJean]

Rush Limbaugh eats babies and puppies.

[iPolitics]

Nice of Jon to give Hillary lots of free airtime with endless clip today on the cable news channel after Hillary basically called his viewers delusional fools for supporting Obama. That is his core audience: Obama supporters.

[KaraMiaa]

Hillary is beginning to look like a chipmunk. Maybe she's been shacking up with Alvin and his buddies.

[naturesway]

His core audience ...Obama supporters­..........­..........­.. That's ridiculous. First off, how would you even know that ?? and

2nd. Hillary received great applause and cheering last evening. I would say his audience is more mature and probably Hillary supporters.