Jon Stewart | News | Piers Morgan | Royalty

Jon Stewart Mocks CNN's Coverage of The Queen's Jubilee: VIDEO

Queen

Jon Stewart and John Oliver mock the "orgy of excitement" that was CNN's coverage of The Queen's Jubilee, with its flotilla, flyover, fireworks, the royals and of course Elizabeth herself.

"60 years on the throne? Get that woman some fiber!"

A must-not-miss Daily Show segment, AFTER THE JUMP...

 

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Funny segment but Stewart's the louder you scream the funnier it is delivery has always kept me from being a regular viewer. He and Dennis Miller should be locked up together until they're both deaf.

    Posted by: MarkUs | Jun 5, 2012 9:28:05 AM


  2. Freakin hilarious!! Jon Stewart at his best.

    Posted by: Paul | Jun 5, 2012 9:30:47 AM


  3. A run-up to the Olympics!

    Posted by: anon | Jun 5, 2012 10:33:19 AM


  4. I absolutely love Queen Elizabeth II.
    She has always taken so seriously the sense that she serves her country, and has put her duty to us (I am Canadian) before herself for 60 years -- elected politicians look crass, callow and short-sighted by comparison. She is amazing.

    Posted by: Strepsi | Jun 5, 2012 10:38:35 AM


  5. Don Lemon was particularly derisive about this entire thing.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jun 5, 2012 11:05:45 AM


  6. a jubilee is every 50 years which they did celebrate 10 years ago

    this is the 60th anniversary and they need to stop calling it a jubilee

    also with jubilees they are supposed to forgive all debtors their debts otherwise it isnt a jubilee at all but rather just an advertisement / propaganda campaign

    Posted by: say what | Jun 5, 2012 11:12:46 AM


  7. I think Canadians 'love' the queen more than the English or certainly the Scottish. Why?

    Nothing personal against the nice old lady, but the concept of a monarch who is the HEREDITARY head of state and considered superior to 'commoners' is beyond ridiculous. We did the right thing by kicking them out 235 years ago.

    Posted by: ratbastard | Jun 5, 2012 11:21:45 AM


  8. A jubilee is not limited to a celebration marking 50 years doing any one thing. It is a celebration of a significant event and the marking of a particular passage of time. The first milestone traditionally labeled a jubilee is 25 years (silver), then 50 (golden), then 60 (diamond), then 70 (platinum). Given the queen's remarkable longevity, good health and sturdiness (as well as the fact that her mother lived to be nearly 102) It would not be a surprise if she did end up celebrating a platinum jubilee. The king of Thailand has been on his throne for 65 years and is actually two years younger than the queen. So such milestones are very possible.

    Posted by: James C | Jun 5, 2012 12:04:42 PM


  9. @Ratbastard: I don't know if it's true that Canadians love her more than prople of the UK. But if it is, my guess would be that it could have something to do with the fact that her palace, staff and royal jewels are paid by the UK taxpayer. In Canada, she's a symbol of historic ties to a now-friendly founding country, and since she has no actual political power or cost to Canadians, there's nothing much to resent about her.

    Posted by: Gregv | Jun 5, 2012 2:17:42 PM


  10. James C

    thousands of years of human history state jubilees are 50 years apart and all debtors debts are forgiven and slaves set free

    It is possibly even older if the Jews took it from egyptian tradition and gave it a Jewish flavor

    at least it is thousands of years old and an early jewish tradition

    every 50 years and forgive the debts of debtors

    anything else is not a jubilee

    Posted by: say what | Jun 5, 2012 2:22:06 PM


  11. Say What, you can hold on to a very narrow definition of the word if you see fit. That does not mean millions of other people around the world have to agree with you despite your confident assurance of infallibility. Marriages were once mere legal contracts between families meant to create binding ties, carry on blood lines, divide property, get rid of the burden of providing for daughters, etc. In addition, they traditionally did not involve consent from the actual participants (or at least the women/minor girls) in the union. they were frequently devoid of romantic attachment and were not limited to two people. An ancient marriage would bear little resemblance to a "traditional" one today. Definitions change, expand, narrow and are entirely rewritten by the times.

    Posted by: James C | Jun 5, 2012 2:43:56 PM


  12. To me she's the personification and living link to centuries of colonialism, exploitation, slavery, ethnic cleansing, murder and theft.

    Just saying.

    Posted by: yonquersconquers | Jun 5, 2012 6:11:39 PM


  13. the emperor has no clothes

    im with yonquersconquers

    someone put a fork in this charade. over. o-v-a-h

    Posted by: gomez | Jun 5, 2012 9:30:37 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Obama 'Sings' Carly Rae Jepsen's 'Call Me Maybe': VIDEO« «