« Druids are Dumb | Main | Black-billed Magpie »

Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview

Part 1

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 1
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorTea Party

Part 2

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 2
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorTea Party



"You think that one step after another, we're simply wandering down the road to serfdom?"

I'm not sure how Brooks got this from Jon's point; I'm guessing that it's something he posits in his thesis.

From my perspective, we are getting a creeping return of feudalism, but it's not the government taking over businesses, but the rise of corporatism and the influence big businesses have on our government. So, we the people/government are beholden to the large corporations in a grand pyramid scheme.

As a side note, I'm pretty certain my best friend replaced Arthur in the Annapolis Brass quintet, although wiki lists another horn player who was the "only female" in the ensemble's history. I may have to send in a correction - phone call is in the works.

I don't think Jon really got to the heart of how intellectually dishonest his arguement is.

No... he started to go there and started to break it down (and was doing a very good job of it, imo) but I wish he would have gone further.

As much as I love Jon as a comedian, I also think it's fantastic to watch him in this kind of situation. He's very intelligent and I think he has a pretty solid grasp on what's going on in governmelt.

that was a typo, but I decided to leave it.

Excellent typo.

He let brooks moderate his language for TDS audience. He should have had a few quotes to throw back at him.

That's what tds is good for, calling people on lying to the camera when they are on record saying the opposite.

Why does he even bother to give this twit a forum for his childish views that are completely ignorant of history?

If they didn't let people air their ignorant, childish views then they'd never have a conservative as a guest.


Just curious, but how is being a conservative childish? I would think childish would mean a person is naive, stubborn, selfish and immature. I mean, isn't every side "childish" to some degree and not just conservatives?


It is not so much in the guise of a logical deduction, but more as a Gestalt-type recognition, an intuition, this: yes, conservatism is more childish, yuppies e.g.were returning emotionally to pre-school as selfish adults (or pairs/groups of adults). There is also the "real American" good/evil-doer dichotomy, and the order-of-things pampering of the privileged (who deserve it, well, just because), and the acceptance, on principle, of the status quo, the taking of it for granted, and the flat perspective on history, and an obtuse illogical self-centeredness/interestedness, not to not mention "Family values", under which "values" one is either a functional child who accepts authority reflexively, or one is an authority oneself, by virtue of being condescendingly parental, fatherly. There are only the pampered and the patriotic, the patriarchal and the faith-centered ....well, childish, sheepish followers of tradition, tractoring away re-plowing the same well-rutted furrows. Service to one's country is "patriotic": the Childish is the father of the Manly. Naive Native Natures, con"servative" natures.

Unlike, well, me, mine, ex amplitudinally. I'm... totally rad: centripetal trip/adult.

It’s childish to ignore the facts. Libertarians are incredibly childish in their thinking that unchecked capitalism is the answer to all our problems. Take a look at the top health care providers in the world and then try to tell me that we shouldn’t be imitating a more socialist system here in America. To do so is completely contrary to the facts. Go to Holland or France or Germany and tell me what is so wrong with their way of government.

I don’t think that libertarians are even the least bit concerned with building a livable society. They seem to be more of the “We’ll all live out in the woods like the Unabomber and we’ll all be free with our guns” school of policy.

P.S. The American Enterprise Institute and its ilk are the most intellectually dishonest organization under the sun. They begin with a conclusion and work backwards.

Arthur Brooks drove me crazy. Who are the people he is talking about that want European socialism? Never answered the question. And even though Europe has some social programs, they still have a free market system. He used that term to imply that if a government has social programs, they no longer have a free market. A buzzword. If he uses it, people will say, "Oh yeah. I want a free market." Basically, he was doing the same thing that McCarthy did in the 50s. "We have socialists in Congress. We have to root them out!"

Our government is made up of locally elected people. They have a vested interest in spending money in their district, because they have a better chance of being reelected. That's what drives up the budget. They aren't there thinking, "How can I wedge in some more European socialism?" All you have to do is think a little, and his arguments fall like a house of cards.

There are some 30,000 lobbyists in Washington D.C. and most of them serve corporate interests.

Both the Bush prescription drug plan and the recent health care plan were corporate bills (health care stocks outperformed the rest of the stock market in the March 6, 2009 to April 2010 period when the health care plan was fought over and passed.

During the "last eight years" when - supposedly - the government took this so-called turn towards socialism, both income and wealth inequality grew from already wide margins to level not seen since before the great depression.

In all of the big socialist bailouts over the past two years, the government loaned corporations- banks, insurance companies, big automakers - much more money than their collective market capitalizations - nd yet, the government does not own controlling interest in any of those companies!

What is childish is calling that socialism - and that the kindest interpretation. If in fact one is fully aware of these things, and one still calls it socialism - when it is really and obviously corporatism - well, then one is a lying propagandist.

In the case of GM, I stand corrected - gladly, I might add.

Conservatives couldn't care less about the vast income inequality in America. They feel that it is the fault of poor people.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives