All Episodes
Previous Next
April 28, 2023 - Lionel Nation
13:18
Shadow Government Hostage Jon Stewart and His Compelled Recycled Message
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Disaster can strike when least expected.
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes.
They can instantly turn your world upside down.
Dirty Man Underground Safes is a safeguard against chaos.
Hidden below, your valuables remain protected no matter what.
Prepare for the unexpected.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off and secure peace of mind for you and your family.
Dirty Man Safe.
When disaster hits, security isn't optional.
The storm is coming.
Markets are crashing.
Banks are closing.
When the economy collapses, how will you survive?
You need a plan.
Cash, gold, bitcoin.
Dirty Man Safes keep your assets hidden underground at a secret location ready for any crisis.
Don't wait for disaster to strike.
Get your Dirty Man safe today.
Use promo code Dirty10 for 10% off your order.
When uncertainty strikes, peace of mind is priceless.
Dirty Man underground safes protects what matters most.
Discreetly designed, these safes are where innovation meets reliability, keeping your valuables close yet secure.
Be ready for anything.
Use code Dirty10 for 10% off today.
And take the first step towards safeguarding your future.
Dirty Man Safe.
Because protecting your family starts with protecting what you treasure.
I think I've told you before my sense of fascination over Jon Stewart and the reason why he's very simple.
Jon Stewart was at the top of his game right before Trump took office and he quit.
I don't know why.
He pulled a David Caruso.
He pulled a Shelley Long.
He decided, I'm going to go off.
And I think he was dispatched to some petting zoo in Jersey.
I don't know.
He was at the top of his game.
He really created that late night kind of a thing.
And it was a message that was...
For some particular reason, looking back, it didn't bother me as much.
It didn't seem so radicalized.
Yes, it was kind of leftist, but it was funny, it was articulate, and he did have at least something theoretically important to say.
At least it seemed like that.
And what was interesting that I find fascinating is specifically that he just disappeared.
And Colbert came along, and Carell, and Samantha Bee, and Some people tried and they came along and then he...
I still don't know what he did.
Something about animals.
Who knows?
Who knows?
He's some rest stop off the turnpike.
I don't know.
And then he came back.
And this is something which is very interesting to know.
It's kind of like with Tucker.
When you leave the gravitational pull of fame for a while, if you stay out too long...
You might not snap back.
People forget you.
Like Gore Vidal says, we are the United States of amnesia.
And if you leave too soon, if you do, if that's your thing, oh my gosh.
Oh my gosh.
Big, big problems.
Big problems.
Lionel Merch, available online.
So the other day, he was talking to someone, I don't know who, And he was making two points.
And he was very edited because the person he was talking to was befuddled.
He made two different points.
First of all, let's get something out of the way.
In my opinion, in my opinion, there has been what you would call drag entertainment since Julius Caesar, since Shakespeare, since Hasty Pudding, Milton Berle, Flip Wilson, Some Like It Hot, Jack, you know, Lemon, Tony Curtis.
The movie with Leguizamo and Patrick Swayze and that other guy.
Whatever.
I mean, so it's, you know.
There were also some times there was Tropic Thunder where Robert Downey Jr. somehow escaped The racist label, because he did blackface, but it was so well done, and I think brilliantly done, that he got a pass.
So sometimes people will pretend they'd be different races.
Remember the book A Black Like Me?
Remember that?
And then there was two white girls, and then whatever.
So there's always been some presentation of somebody pretending to be something that they're not.
So nobody's arguing that point.
Nobody's saying that.
Drag performances or impersonation should ever be verboten.
I told you there was a place in New York.
I don't even know if it's still open.
It was called Lucky Chang's.
And I went there, oh God, years ago.
And I could not believe.
I mean, I always thought, you know, there were...
You know, like Mae West kind of reviews and, you know, where men sometimes would dress up.
And you knew they were men.
For lack of a better word, you could say, okay, that's a man.
This was a different story.
The amount of time, the amount of effort, the amount of makeup and styling.
I mean, this was, this was, this, if anybody saw what I saw, and these were men.
No surgery, they might be transgender, but these were men dressed as women.
Believe me when I tell you this, in terms of almost CIA disguise level, it was incredible.
And it would make you think that, you know, it makes you sometimes think about how much of what we see that is feminine is in fact feminine.
I'll leave it at that.
I'll leave it at that.
So nobody is arguing about that as an art form.
I will also tell you, as a lawyer and a constitutional scholar, some of this legislation is really overbroad.
I understand the intention.
I understand what they were trying to do.
They were trying to say, let us protect children.
From displays that might be inappropriate for their development or whatever it is.
But nobody wants to ban any kind of particular performance art.
And it could be construed by virtue of this very sloppily drafted legislation that that could be the case.
So I've got a problem with the legislation.
Not in protecting children.
Never.
But in the legislation.
See, I'm not doctrinaire.
I just don't say...
And even if you have, you know, they call it the don't say gay legislation in Florida.
That's really not what it is, but it could be so, so broadly interpreted that no reference of human reproduction can be mentioned.
So you have to be careful.
So there's two different issues so far.
The legitimacy of drag art, if you will.
As an art form, which I agree with, 100%.
Number two, the problem with overreaching legislation, which I agree with.
But then there's something where you confuse Milton Berle with some cases where some people in some drag shows, in some performances, have been inappropriate.
Not because It is a drag, and I'll just use that term, not because it is a drag performance, but because a particular type.
Okay?
I can do Punch and Judy.
Remember the old days?
Remember those puppets?
But I could make it so artificially bloody that it would also be inappropriate for children.
And I'm not suggesting we are therefore going to ban puppets or Punch and Judy.
You see what they do?
They always want to...
Extend this.
So it's not about puppetry.
And there was a Broadway show involving the word puppetry, and I'm going to leave it at that.
So you see what's going on?
You've got to be careful with this.
It's not about speech.
It's about what is inappropriate.
Let me take another example that would be inappropriate for kids.
Do you know that right now the divorce rate, I don't know, could be 50%, could be less, more, whatever, but it's really not good.
Put it this way.
You would not get into a car where the brakes failed as much as marriages do.
Okay?
I don't think it would be appropriate to tell kids either about divorce rates and have them go home and think that mommy and daddy are going to break up.
I don't think it's a good idea to talk about certain diseases because there was a case I knew.
Where a teacher tried to explain to his class, I forget what year they were in, that one of the students had diabetes, and the reason why she would sometimes go to the bathroom, or the ladies' room or girls' room, to come back was not because she was being rude and getting up, but because she had diabetes, and sometimes when you have diabetes, you have to go to the bathroom.
So the next day, the principal was flooded.
With complaints from parents because their kids said, I've got diabetes.
Why?
Because I go to the bathroom.
So kids don't understand things.
Kids don't even know their favorite color.
So kids are in this weird, very, very strange landing pattern.
Okay, that's my introduction.
That's the pro-am.
That's the prolegomenon to this.
Enter Jon Stewart.
Jon Stewart, in my opinion, from what I see, is desperately trying to get back into something.
His Apple thing didn't work.
Some things just don't work.
It's like Orson Welles.
Do you remember Orson Welles' talk show?
Oh, dear God.
Oh, my God.
You've got to see.
Man, he's a genius.
Citizen Kane, whatever.
Evil.
Horrible.
Anyway.
So, Jon Stewart makes this case.
He says, do you know the number one cause of death or damage?
And he mentions gun violence regarding kids.
And I think that's an important point.
Gun violence, violence, anything, whatever it is, whatever it is, anytime you talk about violence and kids being hurt, I want to talk about it.
You're absolutely right.
But his argument ostensibly was, that is our number one environment, but you as a, I guess, ostensibly a conservative, you want to talk about drag shows or whatever.
So therefore you're foolish or stupid or no sense of priority.
That's not what happened.
That's not what happened.
And it goes to show you the other part too.
This is Jon Stewart trying so hard to land on something.
Tucker Carlson could very well fall into that.
John Stewart is trying to land on something, land on some position of some kind of something in which he's, hey look it's me, I'm back, I'm relevant again.
People are, please listen to me.
You got what I'm saying?
Please listen to me.
Okay?
Okay?
You understand me?
Good.
That's all.
The moral of the story is, Make sure you understand the issues.
Make sure, Jon Stewart, that when you and I are talking, you don't throw something in.
What if I were to say, for example, you have a concern and you say that there is, let's say, there's too much violence on TV.
Okay, fine.
And I come along and say, do you realize how many kids die every year because of aspirin overdose?
And you're wasting my time with kids programming?
And you say, what?
I'm not, wait, what?
That's what Stewart does.
He throws up the image nobody's talking about and then claims that you think what you're saying is more important.
I mean, what?
John Stewart, it's sad.
It's sad.
Especially when he comes out and he tries to claim with the Zadroga thing, which, by the way, they were going to get anyway.
But he ticked off so many people on Capitol Hill by yelling at them.
That it actually hurt the people he was trying.
But that's a different story.
Jon Stewart, it's sad.
He just, he's lost his fastball.
And he's trying desperately.
And that's what Tucker Carlson's going to worry about.
Because right now, he's making his whole thing to be, this is about free speech.
Well, kind of.
It's about speech, alright.
Your speech.
But not what was done on TV.
Okay.
Please, how pathetic is that?
Please like this video.
Please subscribe to the channel.
And please, I want to see what you have to write.
Your thoughts.
Tell me, am I right?
Am I wrong?
What do you think?
I want to hear from you.
▲
Export Selection