Jon Stewart on Net Neutrality and Gambling Bans

From last night's show. This is hilarious. Thanks to BigDumbChimp for the link.

More like this

I forgot to mention this from last night's dinner conversation. Don told a joke, actually an old Jewish proverb, that is absolutely hilarious. Here it is: 4 Rabbis are out golfing and as they play, they're arguing about some fine point of interpretation about a Hebrew scripture. After a while it…
In good Denialism blog form, the San Francisco Chronicle's C. W. Nevius has urged readers to just ignore this week's anti-abortion protest in San Francisco. He makes a good point: This is the fifth year in San Francisco for the "Walk for Life." Bolstered by supporters who are bused in from all…
Thanks to everyone who bloglinked to me--I added you last night. If you're interested in trading links, or if you already link to me, let me know below. So stop by these joints and say hello: Jon Swift Divine Afflatus cannablog Independent Bloggers' Alliance The Thermal Vent The Burned Over…
This is classic. Reader Pieter B. found this and left it in a comment. Bill O'Reilly is whining like a schoolgirl over Letterman telling him he's full of crap the other night. But here's what O'Reilly was saying back in 2001 about Letterman: The late-night program hosted by David Letterman is the…

[Uttered during a submission blackout on]

"You broke an internet tube! Now nobody can get an internet!"

That was hilarious. I only heard the first part of his speech. Ridiculous.

By FishyFred (not verified) on 13 Jul 2006 #permalink

This guy is in play with making very important decsions about the future of how the internet is regulated.

He's also the Senator responsible (or at least partially) for the pork flavored Bridge to nowhere

Do a search for Ted Stevens and tube and there are longer transcripts of his whole speech. He's a riot or at least a small public disturbance.

Paraphrasing a post on Slashdot:

This problem would all go away if everybody would just support Senator Stevens in his "Expand our Infrastructure by Building an Internet to Nowhere" campaign...

By Troublesome Frog (not verified) on 13 Jul 2006 #permalink

You have to understand... Alaska is home to the Alaska Pipeline, which is...? A giant tube! Since that's what he's familiar with, Stevens needs everything explained to him using tube terminology.

By Anonymous (not verified) on 13 Jul 2006 #permalink

Man I heard about this speech last week, but I never saw what John Stewart did with it. This was the downright funniest thing I have seen in awhile!!!

Just watching stuff like this makes you realize how politicians have much control over our lives despite being completely ignorant of almost everything they are in charge of.

I agree, Matthew, and it reminds me of allowing legislatures to muck up the science curriculum. I still think we should require that they have to pass an AP biology exam before they can vote on any law that affects biology classes.

Give the Senator a break, why don't you? He's been hired to do a job, and he's doing it the best he knows how. The people who bought him want this, and who is he to reject their demands.

He's jus' 'nother workin' stiff, and doin' wha' 'is massars tells 'im.

By goddogtired (not verified) on 13 Jul 2006 #permalink

In Stevens' defense:

He misspoke when he used the word "internet" when he obviously meant "e-mail." So what?

Internet pathways are commonly compared with pipelines, so why would his tube analogy be any more outrageous?

You can disagree with Stevens' position on the issue, and you can chuckle at his off-the-cuff sentence construction, but let's keep this in proportion. He's not a 'tard.

Yes, I have heard the dance remix.

LOL. That was hilarious. I loved the horse "running" through the tube.

And Grumpy, I don't care how close he was; the point isn't that he's retarded, it's that the man in charge of regulating something as important as them internets tubes can barely articulate a coherent thought on the subject. Clearly, we *could* do better.

I've heard the "tube" argument from people who are against net neutrality before, so I doubt it's a product of his original thinking. The way he explained it suggested it had been borrowed from constituents who told him to be against net neutrality. He couldn't explain it very coherently.

Rev Chimp, it's probably for the better that Stevens' bill hands off the issue to the FCC, no? Obviously Ted Stevens has no great grasp of the issues, and that problem certainly extends to senators on both sides of the aisle. I'm involved with this debate myself, and I have to say, the best thing is for the Senate to let the FCC police the matter. I don't trust any regulatory bureaucracy the Senate might set up -- expecting them to get it right is just crazy.

On it's surface Net Nutrality seems like the absolute only way to have things. I don;t want some numbskull like Stevens or the lackys at the FCC making the decisions on this either way. I don't trust either option. Just look at what the FCC is doing with broadcast tv. The moral police have got thier panties so far in a bunch they have the FCC going back and reviewing comments made from the crowd and from players at live sports events to try and assess their new gigantic obscenity fines. With this type of distorted logic who knows that the FCC might do once it is in their hands.

He misspoke when he used the word "internet" when he obviously meant "e-mail." So what?

I don't think that's the core of the problem. It's just another observation in a mountain of evidence.

Internet pathways are commonly compared with pipelines, so why would his tube analogy be any more outrageous?

The point is that his butchering the explanation lends creedence to the idea that he was just parrotting an argument that he clearly didn't understand about a topic with which he has only passing familiarity. Stevens has a history of being a technology numbnuts, and the fact that he has any say in regulating such things is depressing. Why doesn't he just come clean and say, "The people who support my campaign say no, so I'm saying no."

You can disagree with Stevens' position on the issue, and you can chuckle at his off-the-cuff sentence construction, but let's keep this in proportion. He's not a 'tard.

No, certianly not. A typical (well, actually, well above average) corrupt porkbarrel politician, yes. An *enormous* jerk, yes. Stupid? I'd definitely say not. That being said, I definitely don't trust him to make this call, even without his idiotic ramblings driving home the point. Hell, I have degrees in computer engineering and economics and I wouldn't trust myself to predict half of the fallout that would come from regulations like net neutrality. At this point, I think we're all just laughing instead of crying.

I am one of the unfortunate souls who feels shame on behalf of those who cannot feel it for themselves, so I squirm when I see Stevens on TV. It's why I don't watch American Idol, and watching a bunch of people who can't check their email without help from their grandchildren decide on technology regulations is a lot like watching a tone deaf guy with no rhythm up on a stage convinced that he's the next King of Pop.

By Troublesome Frog (not verified) on 14 Jul 2006 #permalink