Continuing his assault on the western media’s so-called support for Charlie Hebdo and free speech, columnist Mark Steyn took aim at Jon Stewart and his role on the front lines of American satire.
In a interview with radio host Joyce Kaufman (850 WFTL-Florida), Steyn called Stewart’s widely-acclaimed take on the attack an “empty, hollow” routine while wondering “when was the last time Jon Stewart told a joke that mattered?” (RELATED: Mark Steyn To Western Media: ‘Man Up’ Before You ‘Retreat Even Further Into Self-Censorship’)
During the opening “The Daily Show” Wednesday night, Stewart said that comedy shouldn’t be “an act of courage,” adding that it “should be taken as established law.”
Steyn contrasted the “comedy” at hand between Charlie Hebdo and the type the likes of Stewart and Stephen Colbert are known for, sarcastically calling the pair’s comedy bits “cutting edge.”
“[Charlie Hebdo] do actually have quite a vigorous satire tradition. When you compare it to what Jon Stewart said last night on TV, and Jon Stewart did this more in sorrow than in anger,” Steyn said. “This sort of empty, hollow eunuch routine about how you shouldn’t have to have courage to be a cartoonist.”
“When was the last time Jon Stewart told a joke that mattered, or told a joke that made a difference?” Steyn railed.
“Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, they’re still doing their anti-Bush routine 30 years after Bush, Cheney, Rummy and the gang quit office,” he continued. “That’s cutting edge comedy for these satirist, and I’ll take these French guys over Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert any day.”
“Those guys knew the risks, and they took risks that people that American’s think of as edgy, dangerous comics like Jon Stewart would never dream of taking,” Steyn added.
The free expression proponent, who is currently embroiled in a free speech case of his own, also directed his ire at media types and faux-free speech advocates who are “holding all these weepy, teary candlelight vigils,” adding that they make him “want to vomit.” Steyn also added that he prefer’s The New York Times-types that are staying true to who they really are.
“These fellas at Charlie Hebdo were the others, and the fact is that these other people are now showing solidarity with Charlie Hebdo did not show solidarity when these guys were alive and when it might have counted for something. Anyone can get a stupid hashtag,” Steyn told Kaufman.
“I accept that fact that it can be a little insensitive to show a picture of Muhammad, but it’s also a little bit insensitive to take an AK-47 into an office and gun people down,” Steyn said. “If that’s the choice, then I’m with the guys who want to be insensitive over a bloke who died in the 7th century, rather than the insensitivity that seems to think that killing people is an appropriate reaction.”