For those of us who saw the interview with Judge Napolitano last night, it was refreshing to allow the Judge to eviserate stewart. So Stewart(more likely his lincoln worshipping writers and producers) setup a “Game Show”(seriously) to “correct” the Judge.
The Judge held his own, but it was terrible to watch the Professors pull all sorts of rhetorical and logical tricks to declare victory over the Judge. My personal favorite including dismissing the Tariff issue or the fact that Lincoln tricked South Carolina into shooting first.
For everyone who saw the interview, can we get a breakdown of what the Daily Show writers and the Establishment Professors got wrong?
I know I’m a bit late in chiming in, but to answer your (rhetorical) question, Dr. Gutzman, it was odd for Stewart to make that move. Stewart’s interviews at the end of each episode are virtually always one-on-one, even with guests that are conservative. That said, most of his “conservative” guests are well within the mainstream “3×5 Card” as Dr. Woods describes it, so perhaps he didn’t want someone to get away with telling truths that Americans aren’t supposed to hear. It was a heavily stacked deck, so hopefully a few people will realize that and do their own research on the issues that were discussed.
I thought about this some more, and realized that this was more from Stewart’s writers, than stewart himself. Stewart and the Judge are good friends, so I expect no mailce on his part. His writer’s however, have been given the standard pro-government education, and wanted to smash this person who is so critical of their beloved lincoln.