I have watched Rachels' interviews. She is one of the smartest people I've seen on TV. She has her facts straight. I love her skits. (popcorn) But the truth is, she does not do well interviewing anyone! She seems to shriek and unable to bring her point into fruition. Frankly, she appears to be intimidated by the people she interviews.

As for John, very disappointed in him, his statements appeared choppy for lack of a better word, loose. I found it difficult to follow him. As for his attempt to explain Bush, give me a break. He IS a war criminal, simply put.

Hey. one thing as a philosophy helpline (joke - philosophy chatroom) person that was unsettling, & i am not going to trawl back through the interview - one thing that was unsettling about Jon (i love the guy) Stewart's idea/philosophy of truth was that HE'S A SUBJECTIVIST/RELATIVIST! that was crazy, but not surprising in a "i've seen this a million times" way. working in a (well the largest) philosophy chatroom, it is not unlike a helpline, someone comes in, they give their conundrum & the rest of us work to make sense of what their aporia is (like what their problem is =P) - what their hangup is; a million times, someone has come in & said (after a few comments / conversations) "that may be true TO YOU, but not to him/me/them. to us it's NOT true!" other than a legitmate subjectivist situation, like "that painting is beautiful! ... well to me it is, to you it might not be", *subjectivism is the demise of empirical evidence based reality*. this is the best & most obvious way to describe it. you go to the doctor. he says "you're healthy, good." you say "i'm not sure, i've got all these symptoms" - this is a case where, had the subjectivist/relativist - here Jon Stewart (is it John? ... -) - this is a case where someone like Jon Stewart, given the "their truth" (as i interpreted him / his intention last night) argument - the republicans have their own truth, & they are entitled to it - the doctor would be right in his way, & you (at least your suspicion) would be right in that way - you're both right, there's a truth for each of us, la la la - now i love Jon Stewart & think he's a huge benefactor to modern society, but this idea is nefarious & noxious - here is the conclusion to that situation: YOU have *an opinion* about your health.. perhaps it's even knowledge (true justified belief) - YOUR DOCTOR has *an opinion (or choose a synonym)* about your health.. perhaps that is knowledge; BUT YOUR BODY HAS A REALITY, it has a REAL IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH - & THAT is what your opinions, beliefs, knowledge & arguments are over. THERE IS NO "YOUR TRUTH / MY TRUTH" outside of pop lyrics (just kidding) - there is no "YOUR TRUTH / MY TRUTH" - there is ALWAYS - ALWAYS ALWAYS (except in the weirdest of special cases (like some kind of self-referential idea or something.. - not important for practical real politics) THERE IS ALWAYS ALWAYS *THE IDEA*, & *THE THING*, 2 separate things, that are matching when we are right.

let me revisit what seems like an exception (& this is IMO an advance in the philosophy of theory of truth) let me revisit what seems like an exception to REALITY & TRUTH - the two separate things (your body has a REAL health, & there is a true idea (& more & less true ideas) we can have of your body's health... this is not namby pamby land to quote a recent commercial (haha)) - the exception, or apparent exception, is this. "that painting is beautiful." it seems, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" & *i am not disagreeing* - but what is the case with this idea of the place subjectivism (x is in the eye of the beholder) is "it is true you think it is beautiful" or it is not true - THERE IS A REALITY to your opinion of something, no matter how ethereal & unpin down able beauty is - & THEREfORE THERE IS A TRUTH TO WHETHER YOU THINK IT'S BEAUTIFUL. this makes subjectivism *A REALISM* - a theory of truth that says, "There is a reality, & there's a truth about that reality." the truth of "is it beautiful" is sort of a meaningless "view from nowhere" - fictional objective subjective assessment, & therefore is meaningless.

there. i've solved that problem - now to solve the problem of how to get a girlfriend when i am a massive massive nerd lol. no - here - this is important: Jon Stewart ROCKS & he made (or is making) an everybody-makes-it (i would say) mistake as he's getting into philosophy/upper-intellectuality etc or whatever word he uses for it - this is not saying he wasn't before, or he was dumb, but this is a common trap i (i sometimes say "1-800-PHILOSOPHY, what's your dilemma?" when someone joins =P) he fell into a common trap in philosophy & i'm not getting high & mighty (i don't feel like i am) correcting him, it's more of a intolerable view of which i have many & i watch his show to cleanse myself of, too ;)

this ends the Joe V show, tune in next week, when he.. comments on Maddow's blog =PPP

joe

Hey. one thing as a philosophy helpline (joke - philosophy chatroom) person that was unsettling, & i am not going to trawl back through the interview - one thing that was unsettling about Jon (i love the guy) Stewart's idea/philosophy of truth was that HE'S A SUBJECTIVIST/RELATIVIST! that was crazy, but not surprising in a "i've seen this a million times" way. working in a (well the largest) philosophy chatroom, it is not unlike a helpline, someone comes in, they give their conundrum & the rest of us work to make sense of what their aporia is (like what their problem is =P) - what their hangup is; a million times, someone has come in & said (after a few comments / conversations) "that may be true TO YOU, but not to him/me/them. to us it's NOT true!" other than a legitmate subjectivist situation, like "that painting is beautiful! ... well to me it is, to you it might not be", *subjectivism is the demise of empirical evidence based reality*. this is the best & most obvious way to describe it. you go to the doctor. he says "you're healthy, good." you say "i'm not sure, i've got all these symptoms" - this is a case where, had the subjectivist/relativist - here Jon Stewart (is it John? ... -) - this is a case where someone like Jon Stewart, given the "their truth" (as i interpreted him / his intention last night) argument - the republicans have their own truth, & they are entitled to it - the doctor would be right in his way, & you (at least your suspicion) would be right in that way - you're both right, there's a truth for each of us, la la la - now i love Jon Stewart & think he's a huge benefactor to modern society, but this idea is nefarious & noxious - here is the conclusion to that situation: YOU have *an opinion* about your health.. perhaps it's even knowledge (true justified belief) - YOUR DOCTOR has *an opinion (or choose a synonym)* about your health.. perhaps that is knowledge; BUT YOUR BODY HAS A REALITY, it has a REAL IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH - & THAT is what your opinions, beliefs, knowledge & arguments are over. THERE IS NO "YOUR TRUTH / MY TRUTH" outside of pop lyrics (just kidding) - there is no "YOUR TRUTH / MY TRUTH" - there is ALWAYS - ALWAYS ALWAYS (except in the weirdest of special cases (like some kind of self-referential idea or something.. - not important for practical real politics) THERE IS ALWAYS ALWAYS *THE IDEA*, & *THE THING*, 2 separate things, that are matching when we are right.

let me revisit what seems like an exception (& this is IMO an advance in the philosophy of theory of truth) let me revisit what seems like an exception to REALITY & TRUTH - the two separate things (your body has a REAL health, & there is a true idea (& more & less true ideas) we can have of your body's health... this is not namby pamby land to quote a recent commercial (haha)) - the exception, or apparent exception, is this. "that painting is beautiful." it seems, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" & *i am not disagreeing* - but what is the case with this idea of the place subjectivism (x is in the eye of the beholder) is "it is true you think it is beautiful" or it is not true - THERE IS A REALITY to your opinion of something, no matter how ethereal & unpin down able beauty is - & THEREfORE THERE IS A TRUTH TO WHETHER YOU THINK IT'S BEAUTIFUL. this makes subjectivism *A REALISM* - a theory of truth that says, "There is a reality, & there's a truth about that reality." the truth of "is it beautiful" is sort of a meaningless "view from nowhere" - fictional objective subjective assessment, & therefore is meaningless.

there. i've solved that problem - now to solve the problem of how to get a girlfriend when i am a massive massive nerd lol. no - here - this is important: Jon Stewart ROCKS & he made (or is making) an everybody-makes-it (i would say) mistake as he's getting into philosophy/upper-intellectuality etc or whatever word he uses for it - this is not saying he wasn't before, or he was dumb, but this is a common trap i (i sometimes say "1-800-PHILOSOPHY, what's your dilemma?" when someone joins =P) he fell into a common trap in philosophy & i'm not getting high & mighty (i don't feel like i am) correcting him, it's more of a intolerable view of which i have many & i watch his show to cleanse myself of, too ;)

this ends the Joe V show, tune in next week, when he.. comments on Maddow's blog =PPP

joe

dang it - i suffer the (scooby doo like) curse of The Haunted Newsvine. everything i say gets posted twice. why do you give me an error message saying to try again if it's going to post twice? i think there's something fishy here', skoobs. like, totally fishy.

like let's get out of here!# *bedloboodoboodeboop!*

=P (sorry would delete it if i knew how)

"The most valuable person in the world is a turncoat" was the probably what Obama was thinking when Stewart also called the Democrats, not the Republicans, the abused lover going back for more during his interview on TDS. Maybe it was accidental, but the way Obama leaned back as Jon finished his thoughts(that continued to b!!ch-slap Democrats) seemed to say "traitor!!".

There is no more reason to watch Jon Stewart.  
Conan is on TBS at the same time every night.  

I watch the first part of Conan and then watch Colbert.

Jon is gone!