If you haven't seen it, last night Jon Stewart opened The Daily Show by launching one of his most incisive and blistering attacks in years -- and that's really saying a lot.
Stewart is always at his best when he's doing something as simple as running past video clips to expose hypocrisy in politics or the media, basically allowing people to hang themselves with their own words, and this time around he used this tactic to turn a question Fox News is currently repeating ad nauseam against it. While Fox News has spent the past year-and-a-half asking, "Where is the outrage?" over Benghazi, Stewart asked Fox News where the outrage was over 9/11, pretending to assume that Fox News would have been just as tenacious when its political interests weren't served. (Our own Bob Cesca treaded the same water earlier today.)
The result was predictably brutal.
You can tell Stewart's punches landed with authority because Greta Van Susteren is actually responding to the segment. In a very quick post at her Gretawire blog, Van Susteren writes:
Last night Jon Stewart opened his show with a segment about Fox News Channel’s aggressive coverage of Benghazi.
Stewart’s criticism of Fox News Channel is that Fox News Channel is more aggressive about President Obama and Benghazi than it ever was about President Bush and Iraq.
Besides the obvious — that almost all the Democrats in Congress voted for the war in Iraq and other media reporting – is my simple note to Stewart: 2 wrongs don’t make a right.
As Egon might say, very good, Greta -- short but pointless.
Setting aside the idea that it matters one bit who voted for the war in Iraq or what the rest of the media were doing throughout eight years of the Bush administration -- and they eventually did come around to hitting the Bush people with questions that should have plagued them from the very beginning -- the best Van Susteren can do is try to scold that Fox News would be wrong not to run Benghazi into the ground because, what, it was wrong not to do it the last time? Is she really admitting that Fox News spent almost a decade fucking up 9/11 and Iraq?
See, the argument that two wrongs don't make a right is what gets hauled out when someone responds to a wrong act with another wrong act. It's not something you get to say when both the wrong acts belong entirely to you. If Greta really believes that Fox News was wrong not to relentlessly harp on the failures of the Bush administration that were exposed in the wake of 9/11 and Iraq, I assume this means that the next time a Republican administration lies outright to the American people or ignores intel and gets thousands killed for no good reason, Fox News will be leading the charge to hold that administration accountable, right? Right?
Yeah, that's what I thought.