More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
MJ Rosenberg

MJ Rosenberg

Posted: March 22, 2011 02:41 PM

Jon Stewart: Not Intimidated by the Lobby


For several years now Jon Stewart, host of The Daily Show has shown himself to be the only major media figure to fearlessly challenge the official "line" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Repeatedly, he has slammed the occupation and has even mocked the pretensions of AIPAC which (along with the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee) works hard to keep media figures, like Members of Congress, from addressing the conflict in an honest way.

Last night, Stewart did it again. He and Daily Show correspondent John Oliver did a routine in which they described America's hypocrisy in addressing human rights disasters (like the one in Libya). Their point was that in order to get U.S. assistance, rather than mere equivocation, people struggling for freedom need to meet certain criteria. For instance, it helps if the offending government is America's enemy and if it has oil. (Sudan was offered as an example of the kind of country — poor and without natural resources we need — to which we offer words of support, and not much else.)

The bit ended with the list of criteria an oppressed people must meet in order to get the kind of assistance we are providing Libya. It was a long list, delivered rapid fire like the side-effects described in a pharmaceutical commercial.

But the offer was not for a particular pill or medicine but for America's help in throwing off the bonds of oppression.

And then the kicker:

The audience erupted in applause.

As is usually the case, Jon Stewart is the voice of a younger generation (including Jews like himself) that does not buy into the conventional wisdom accepted and delivered by its elders. Uncritical and unconditional support for Israel, and acceptance of the horrific 44-year occupation, is one example.

Of all the icons that the iconoclastic Stewart chooses to smash, this is the one that gets media figures in the most trouble, which is why Jon Stewart is all alone out there. But not for long.

 

 

 

Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjmediamatters

 
 
  • Comments
  • 187
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thecannula
Noodles not Needles
01:22 AM on 03/27/2011
A Different Stewart was in NYC tonight giving a concert at MSG-critique:

There was an old singer named Stewart.
Whose voice was so thouroughly through- "What?"...
Did he just utter?
Hummingbird flutter?
It's time that he take up a new art!
12:00 AM on 03/27/2011
"Of all the icons that the iconoclastic Stewart chooses to smash, this is the one that gets media figures in the most trouble, which is why Jon Stewart is all alone out there. But not for long".

Just me or is the final sentence cryptic? Who is joing the "challenging of the official line" toward Israel. Our official position has been hypocritical and disingenuous for decades. That's going to change? When? By whom?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
white mende man
Ask me if I care about your prejudice
10:55 AM on 03/27/2011
Ditto that I was about to make a comment along those lines.
09:53 PM on 04/01/2011
He's probably referring to the up and coming youth, who are merely waiting for the old to die
photo
ThePeoriaKid
We're All Bozos On This Bus..
04:08 PM on 03/25/2011
Truth in broadcasting.. rare and golden.

Long Live The Daily Show..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
02:43 PM on 03/25/2011
"Offer not valid in West Bank or Gaza"
The applause erupted because it was the end of the skit and they probably had lights flashing on the set---indicating a cut-away to commercial.
This was the ONLY reference to the Israel/Palestine controversy in the entire video, yet, it becomes the tag line of the article. I do not watch the Daily Show very much so I can't say if the article is accurate in its contention that Mr. Stewart really is "the only major media figure to fearlessly challenge the official "line" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict . . . . slammed the occupation and has even mocked the pretensions of AIPAC . . "
However, using MJ's exponentially overstated remarks on the embedded video as a guide to Stewart's other statements (those not referenced), one has to seriously question if Mr. Stewart is to be more accurately described as a "Zionist".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mmkay
Holy Sith! 'mkay?
06:36 AM on 03/26/2011
No, one does not have to seriously question Mr. Stewart on this issue at all. He has been consistent in not falling for the lobby.

Yes, it was the end of the routine, but both my wife and I caught "the kicker" watching at home and it added to the hilarity for both of us. The version of US hypocrisy being lampooned is not valid in West Bank or Gaza. We have other hypocrisies for that purpose.

Trollstein, indeed. Truth in advertising is very commendable because it is rare. I tip my hat to you sir.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
10:05 AM on 03/28/2011
Yet, only one (exceedingly weak) example of Stuart's alleged 'independence' has been referenced. Do you have other actual examples (quotes)? Stewart is known (above all) for poking at any and all forms of entrenched power. While it is clear that he leans decisively to the left (on many fronts) his show is not immune from jabbing the mid and far left as well. That is precisely why he has a very high trust and faith ratio among Americans. These are (mainly) people who are tired of the fables and also know that fables come from all political avenues.. If Stewart did not jab at the pro-Israel movement, it would be about the only major power structure not so jostled by him. Given that fact, his single (disclaimer style) reference to WB and Gaza hardly supports your point (not by light years). You apparently would prefer Stewart to be on your side so badly that any murmur is sufficient to convince you of same. Plus, you use an underlying (imaginary & omnipotent) AIPAC to rationalize why Stuart must (at most) speak in cryptic undertones about a 90+ year old complex multi-national, multi ethnic, multi religious controversy. If Stewart were to state in a news interview that his sympathy was with the Israelis, you position would then be what? That 'they got to him after all'? What a convenient rationalization.
08:24 PM on 03/30/2011
He also read the most violent parts of the Old Testament to decry allegations of Islam as an inherantly violent religion.

Jon doesn't like racism/ethnism PERIOD
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
02:28 PM on 03/25/2011
MJ is absolutely fixated (if not obcessed) with "the Lobby", as if the sun rises and sets on it.
The world contains about 6.8-billion people. Of this number, I would be surprized if more then 25% ever heard of the Israel/Palestine conflict and equally surprized if more then 5-10% ever heard of AIPAC.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mmkay
Holy Sith! 'mkay?
06:38 AM on 03/26/2011
False analogy here. But again, commendable because of your username and your comments. You are having a good day!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
08:52 PM on 03/27/2011
My handle (BTW) is sarcastic. Like calling a poodle "T-Rex".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
03:15 PM on 03/28/2011
PS> For a guy with a South Park icon, you are one to talk. The only difference between us on that front is:
1. I do not lack originality and
2. I do not start up personal effronts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:52 PM on 03/24/2011
Jon Stewart is awesome. I share his views. He is able to do so, because, as mentioned in the article, he is Jewish. A public figure coming out with the same views who is not Jewish is deemed anti-semitic. That's the way it is. Thank goodness for Jon Stewart.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trollstein
Once you go Schwartz, you never go back baby
02:47 PM on 03/25/2011
That would be the simple and typical conclusion. Anti-Semitism is not entirely dependant on the race (or religion) of the anti-Semite. Arab/Muslims can be so called "Zionists" and Jews can be anti-Semitic. It depends on their views and how factual their points of historical fact are or are not.
08:27 PM on 03/30/2011
Arabs are Semitic.
FreeAmerican7
It's hard to soar like an Eagle around Turkeys!
04:57 PM on 03/24/2011
Could it be that

Jon Stewart is to the Palestinians under OCCUPATION & SIEGE
thus UNDER the bus?

what Martin Luther King was to the African Americans in
the Back of the bus!

Wouldn't it be out of this world;
if following in the Footsteps of Moses;
Jon Stewart would lead the Palestinians from the
Diaspora/BONDAGE in the Refugee Camps
back to their Native HOMELAND: Palestine?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
messy
artist, writer, adventurer
09:32 AM on 04/03/2011
Silly silly silly silly silly.
FreeAmerican7
It's hard to soar like an Eagle around Turkeys!
11:36 AM on 04/03/2011
Funny!
That was what Pharoah said to Moses!
photo
tallen
panem et circenses
04:02 PM on 03/24/2011
Hilarious.
They the disclaimer about the west bank and gaza indicating US non involvement in the palestinians seeking democratic reform and elections they have been denied by Fatah and Hamas was quite clever.
photo
Aussieposter
And so it begins
07:15 PM on 03/24/2011
Actually, and I understand why you did not mention it. The Palestinian in the West Bank and Gaza are under Military occupation and under seige. In order to have an Election they need the permission and cooperation of Israel to do it.
photo
tallen
panem et circenses
07:57 PM on 03/24/2011
Hamas and Fatah were both ELECTED.
Since they came to power they have not allowed any further elections.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AtlantaIconoclast
10:12 PM on 03/24/2011
Um, the reason Fatah has denied new elections is because it is Israel and America's lackey, and does not want to upset the two. So what is your beef with Fatah? They are certainly not engaged in trying to get their needs met via violence, though in reality, that might be the only alternative given Israel's arogance and moral blindness.
04:39 AM on 03/24/2011
I saw this bit lasts night and it was funny as much as it was the truth. Kudos for Jon for going where other media figures do not want to go. I love the Daily Show.
DrSnuggles
You label me and I'll label you
04:44 PM on 03/23/2011
What never ceases to amaze me regarding the Israeli / Palestinian conflict are the people who seem to think one side is just 'right' and the other is just 'wrong'. This applies to both sides of the argument. As in all issues of this nature, it exists in a huge gray area; and that gray area is by the vast majority populated by average people trying to make their way through lives that most of us can't even imagine. But it remains that these are average, ordinary people, who for one reason or another are constantly being told by exterior and interior forces that their homes are not their own (again applies to both sides).

Guess what? Numbering among the Palestinians are terrorists and people who seek to destroy the entire nation of Israel and numbering among the Israeli population are people who see the entire landscape as a 'god-given' right and are willing to throw people out of there homes to achieve this.

Guess what else? These numbers are incredibly small.
05:08 PM on 03/24/2011
I honestly respect your effort at even handedness. No question, both sides have made mistakes and have violent zealots. But I hope you can also be even handed to the possibility that one side has more violent zealots. The Palestinians elected a government -- in a clear majority -- sworn to destroy Israel in its entirety. Israel has not elected anyone -- since the PLO declared its support of the peace plan -- opposed to exchanging land of peace. Those fact may not sit well with those of us who hope for reconciliation, but it is still a fact.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AtlantaIconoclast
10:19 PM on 03/24/2011
are you serious? It was the Palestinians who agreed to every jot and tittle of the Road Map for Peace, not Israelis. If Israel was serious about peace AND justice, it would end the settlement enterprise immediately. There is no security benefit from it though theoretically one could argue that the occupation is still necessary. However, even that is a ruse, for until yesterday, there had not been a major terrorist attack within Israel in several years. What Israel has proven is that Palestinian nonviolence will be met with continued obstincance, aned more land grabs.
DrSnuggles
You label me and I'll label you
09:19 AM on 03/25/2011
Changing the fallacious argument from 'one side is wrong' to 'one side is worse' is mincing words, and not helpful.
JacksonJones
Absit iniuria verbis!
07:17 PM on 03/24/2011
Dude, you nailed it.
DrSnuggles
You label me and I'll label you
09:24 AM on 03/25/2011
Thank you! As I just commented to Atlantalconoclast below - this conflict has gone on too long and their is too much blood on everyone's hands. There are three sides to the situation; Israel, Palestine and peace. We can only pick one.
photo
Kramerica-Industries
And with Darren’s help, we’ll get that chicken
04:36 PM on 03/23/2011
The reason the west is fighting in Libya is simple. Western world leaders saw what happened in Tunisia, saw what happend in Egypt and after seeing initial rebel victories assumed its inevitable that they would take hold of power in Libya. As in every place else once they were sure who the winning side is they decided to back the rebels and talk smack at Gaddafi for all the times he humiliated the west, starting with Switzerland and that whole affair with his son in which he twisted their arm, to Britain forcing them to free the Lockerbie bomber for oil deal and so on.
But suprise suprise they were all wrong and it turns out Gaddafi was going to win this thing.
Now Europe and mostly the UK and BP can't go on to deal and trade with Libya as if nothing has happened after how the just a few days ago described Gaddafi as a brutal dictator guilty of killing his own people, how could they look to their voters in the eyes? Yet they can't afford to loose those oil deals. So there was no backing up now, they spoke too fast and placed their money on the winning horse after only a quarter of the race and turns out they were wrong, there is only one option left take out the winning horse and attack Gaddafi's forces.
photo
Kramerica-Industries
And with Darren’s help, we’ll get that chicken
04:23 PM on 03/23/2011
How many more wars will America have to fight to protect Arab interests?
Why Isn't the Arab Leauge fighting their own wars?
Nothing like going to war to help out the people of Kuwait, Iraq, Libya only to get your flag burned in return.
12:55 PM on 03/24/2011
America ISN'T fighting for Arab interests.

She's fighting for control of their oil.
05:09 PM on 03/24/2011
So the Arab League supported a no-fly zone in order to protect America's oil?
03:58 PM on 03/25/2011
And how is that working out????
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AtlantaIconoclast
10:20 PM on 03/24/2011
i agree with you

I am a huge critic of Israel, but equally critical of these corrupt Arab fiefdoms
11:19 PM on 03/25/2011
And which one of those are the people of the Arab states and Iran now revolting against? It seems that the people in the Arab street have figured out that Israel was a distraction from the region's true problems.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheLonelyGod
The oncoming storm
04:22 PM on 03/23/2011
Mr. Rosenberg, this is now the second article you wrote about "that rare individual" who "stands up to The Lobby." In fact articles of this kind are one of your most common topics.

Have you considered that maybe "the Lobby" just isn't as scary and/or oppressive as you think it is?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AdamWest1313
Hardcore Agnostic
03:11 AM on 03/24/2011
Ever heard of Citizens United?
photo
tallen
panem et circenses
04:04 PM on 03/24/2011
He completely misread the humor in the piece.
He's so focused on demonizing Israel that he misread the intent of the "disclaimer" in pointing out how the palestinians have been denied democracy an freedom by their own rulers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BcemXAHA
Yerushalaim shel zahav
03:18 PM on 03/23/2011
I liked Stewart's piece on the ever delightful Ms.thomas.
12:56 PM on 03/24/2011
You should have SEEN his riff on the violence in the Jewish holy books. It was part of an anti-Islamophobia segment.
03:41 PM on 03/24/2011
Something for every taste! That's our Jon!

No wonder he's one of the best-loved entertainment people in the country. AND one of the most influential.
photo
Vlady
Better Late
01:50 PM on 03/23/2011
>>And then the kicker: Offer not valid in WB or Gaza

For a very good reason. Long live US Israel friendship
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shingo
04:50 PM on 03/23/2011
>> For a very good reason. Long live US Israel friendship

It's not a friendship when you are paying them.
FreeAmerican7
It's hard to soar like an Eagle around Turkeys!
01:44 AM on 03/24/2011
Americans who support Israel are -in effect- stealing our
Tax dollars (Billions EVERY YEAR) to give them to a FOREIGN COUNTRY: Israel
Billions of Dollars that should be spent on the American POOR & HOMELESS!
05:29 PM on 03/24/2011
Why not, is it not a marriage just because one of the partners works? America may have the money, but its support of Israel proves its commitment to freedom, even when it is difficult.

Americans should be PROUD of their support of a democratic state that rose our of the ashes of war; one that defended itself; built a prosperous economy (with health care for all, including the Arabs); and stands willing to make peace with its neighbors, if they will just stop trying to annihilate them.

Is that too much to ask? What do other countries do when terrorists sworn to undo a regime attack? See Britain/IRA, Russia/Chechnyia, US/Afghanistan-Al-Quaeda, etc. etc.
ydrittmann
Vitter patronizes women.
12:24 AM on 03/24/2011
And USS Liberty for all.
FreeAmerican7
It's hard to soar like an Eagle around Turkeys!
01:46 AM on 03/24/2011
NEVER forget the USS Liberty!