John Gibson Mocks Jon Stewart’s Emotional Reaction to 9/11 Attacks. Obviously Republicans Were the Only Victims.

John Gibson Mocks Jon Stewart’s Emotional Reaction to 9/11 Attacks. Obviously Republicans Were the Only Victims.

As the 6th anniversary of the September 11th attacks approaches, we can prepare ourselves for an onslaught of partisan vitriol and claims of personal victimhood. The Republicans will bend over backwards to remind us that we were attacked by Iraq on that day and that Democrats are tearing the country apart with calls for appeasement and hugs for our enemies. The Republicans are the only ones who suffered that day, the only ones who could see the true threat.

And that’s what they’ve been telling us since September 11th, 2001. But I remember a time when much of the nation saw hope for a new camaraderie among Americans and a renewed solidarity with our global allies. I never personally expected it. With the political climate of the times, I saw only one possibility: the Bush administration was going to milk the goodwill for all its worth and then use it to create a fetid, gaping divide between those who are with them and those who are against them.

Sadly, my pessimism was well founded and played out over the following months to be prophetic. Not only that, it’s been so much worse than anything I imagined possible at the time. And it seems to be getting worse.

Today I read this on Media Matters. John Gibson, a Fox News anchor, mocked and derided Jon Stewart‘s post 9/11 return to air as phony and disingenuous. It’s a new low. Not much lower than the previous low, but it does continue the awful trend of treading on social taboos. You don’t mock someone’s heartfelt grief. Or at least you didn’t used to. But now it’s out there and soon it will all be game.

If you have any doubt how genuine Jon was on that episode, watch this clip:

Digg has it

13 thoughts on “John Gibson Mocks Jon Stewart’s Emotional Reaction to 9/11 Attacks. Obviously Republicans Were the Only Victims.

  1. before anyone jumps on me, “That, and you’re…” in the last full paragraph should actually be “That, and your…”

  2. Frankly Edited, your criticism is spotty and hard to follow. Your grammar borders on unreadable. If you break down the sentence structures, you’re saying things like “You… has merely degraded yourself.” You constantly use sentence fragments, starting in the middle but leaving out the beginning. Spaces are to be used after periods so that it is clear you are starting a new sentence (albeit just a fragment of one). There should be a comma after “verifiable”, separating it from “son” as you are addressing somebody. The use of archaic words such as “opine” does not excuse these other mistakes.

    Also, nowhere in the definition of the word “prophetic” does it say that you must verbally express a prediction. In fact, you can even write or simply think prophetically. Not to mention the fact that you incorrectly quote the original poster (he said “prophetic,” not “nearly prophetic”).

    Of course, with the age of the internet upon us, anybody can leave poorly written criticisms on the “spindles of the ol’ interweb,” but if you’re going to live by the critical and editorial sword, you should be prepared to die by it as well.

    To state my point more bluntly, give your own posts a proofread before you use them to criticize the way others write. That, and you’re entire argument against the poster is based solely on his use of the word “prophetic,” which somehow links him to the likes of John Gibson (who I must assume has made similar claims to prophecy and fortune-telling?).

    Take your own advice and think before you hit “submit.”

  3. And with the advent of computers and internet and blogs, any person in the world can leave their heartless, weak, and unsupported diatribe on the spindles of the ol’ interweb.

    “nearly prophetic”???

    It’s prophetic is you say it’s going to happen, then it does….Operative word – say. Needs to be verifiable son. You in your ill fated attempt to create a name for yourself, or opine has merely degraded yourself to the same level of those you are frustrated with. Congrats for thinking before hitting “submit”

  4. John Gibson is openly stating that he supports another catastrophic terrorist attack. Correct me if I’m wrong but if you want 1,000s of Americans dead either to revitalize fear mongering or accomplish a jihad-ist victory doesn’t that make you a traitor/enemy to Americans. Whose the patriot Jon Stewart who makes fun and belittles divisiveness that riddles our country, or John Gibson and other Neo-cons that believe America needs to live constant fear with successful and massive terrorist attacks happening on American territory.

  5. What a fool, at least he’s toothless enough to wait a few years to mock him. this callous, meaningless jab is just further evidence that all you seem to need to succeed in fox news punditry these days is a flexible interpretation of good taste, and an inexhaustible abundance of hubris.

  6. When we Americans stop handing over the power of our country over to imbeciles like Gibson and those who follow the same ideology?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *