Something incredible just happened.

It ended with Jon Stewart calling Tucker Carlson a dick.

Begala and Carlson thought they were going to have a fun, bubbly lite show, featuring the clown from The Daily Show. Jon Stewart sat there and called them hacks to their faces, told them this kind of pathetic journalism is horrible for the country, and pleaded with them to stop.

At first they were incredulous, and thought he was joking. He wasn't, and did not let up.

"I watch your show every day. And it kills me. Oh, it's so painful to watch. Because we need what you do. This is such a great opportunity you have here--to actually get politicians off their marketing and strategy."

"Is this really Jon Stewart," Tucker asked.

"Yeah, it's someone who watches your show and cannot take it anymore. I just can't."

Begala was smart enough to just mostly just keep his mouth shut. Tucker Carlson got really bitchy, and made a complete fool of himself, by comparing their show relentlessly to The Daily Show, and saying Stewart panders too.

Jon kept laughing at him, at the idea of comparing a news show to the journalistic standards of a comedy show.

After a heated, double-incredulous exchange about this, Jon finally shouted, "You're on CNN! The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls! What is WRONG with you?"

Later, Jon got specific, and challenged them on one of my pet peeves. Immediately after the debates, where do you guys go, he asked. Spin Alley. "Now don't you think that for people watching at home, that's kind of a drag? That you're literally walking to a place called deception lane?"

God, thank you Jon Stewart. That's my reaction every time. Why on earth would I want to watch a bunch of people lie, now? For either side? How pointless is that? Either figure out something else to do, or return us to regular programming.

If they had any journalistic integrity, they wouldn't be putting any of that shit on.

What was amazing about this whole thing was that he rips them up on his show all the time, but this time he went on their show, in front of their audience, and called them on what a disgrace they are.

Pretty potent. At least it felt that way watching. And so liberating, to hear a guest turn to them and say exactly what I had always fantasized about a guest saying to them.

Now here's the thing. I don't think Jon's intended audience was just Paul and Tucker. He was talking to all of us in this business. He's been talking about it for quite awhile now, but this was his boldest move yet.

Will the media ever pick up this topic and have a serious discussion and do anything? The hand-wringing I have heard from the media is typically 90% denail. We still don't get why most of the country despises us. What will it take? Will this make a ripple? Stay tuned.

Update:

Thank God for Salon, too. I just flipped over there and they have a new cover story--highly unusual for them to do mid-day. New headline--under photos of Jon and Tucker:

Jon Stewart to Tucker Carlson: You're "a dick"
In an eye-popping TV showdown, the "Daily Show" star rips the bow-tied "Crossfire" host for "hurting America"

God, I hope I'm not hurting any feelings by picking a favorite, but how often do you get a letter from a church lady in Idaho? Especially when you've just written about her without knowing it?

My Salon piece on Mary Cheney ended with this line:

I doubt very much that Mary Cheney gives a rat's ass if some church lady in Idaho knows she's gay. But her mother cringing at the church lady knowing -- that's gotta hurt like hell.

(Obviously, the last line of a story is going to work a lot better in context, but at least it provides context for the reply.)

So last night, shortly after it posted, I received this email:

Nice! I didn't want to use it publicly without her permission, so I wrote to her and just heard back. She says it's fine, she swears she's real (anybody out there w/ a Boise phone book?) and I beleive her. I don't see someone trying to impersonate an Idaho church lady using that voice.

Thanks, Kitt. You make it all worth it.

Many thanks to everyone who wrote. Really making my life pleasant this week. Helping me forget my outrage over the image of Karl Rove laughing his ass off at using this to change the subject. The media are such patsies.

Cathie from Canada addresses my salon story on her blog and the Atrios comment thread on my piece. She brings up a great point. (I'm going to take the liberty of posting the whole thing):

In the dispute over Kerry's so-called "outing" of Mary Cheney, Kerry's defenders are missing the point.

This Salon article John Kerry's lesbian moment sums it up at a personal level by contending that Lynne Cheney is embarassed that her daughter is gay. No doubt she is, but Salon misses the larger issue here.

Kerry has the temerity to state that the religious right is wrong. Kerry has challenged the right-wing conviction that gays are made, not born. And he uses Cheney's very own daughter as an example -- no wonder Cheney and his wife were mad. They really were hoping, I suppose, that no one would notice that Mary Cheney's very existence proves that one of the most heartfelt beliefs of their electoral base is wrong, wrong, wrong. No wonder the family keeps her under wraps at events like the convention.

Only if you believe, as the religious right do, that being gay is a "lifestyle choice" can you justify the hatefest of discrimination against gays which stains American public discourse and policies.
If America accepts that Kerry is correct, that gays are born not made, then discriminating against gays is no more justifiable than discriminating against blacks, or against people in wheelchairs -- and then, it's bye bye constitutional ammendment, bye bye workplace discrimination, bye bye sodomy laws, hello gay marriage.

And of course, it appears to be an Article of Faith for Republicans that they DARE NOT demonstrate any actual leadership toward educating or changing public opinion, but instead MUST pander to the beliefs of their base at all times, however hateful and misguided they are.

Very good point. Wish I had gotten to it. So many points I wanted to make, including one very much like that, but from a different POV (less about why the Cheneys hide her than how great it is when she's exposed to sunlight--which amounts to the same thing):

I think it's great for gays when politicos mention her. Convinces all those people who think gays only exist in horrible urban sodomite hells--and or people who think it's a choice; I always forget people still believe that; kind of mind-blowing--that hey, these are people in nice families, too, like your vice president's. And you don't really think they raised her that way, or that she chose that, do you?

1. In about ten minutes I'll be on RI/MA radio. It's apparently a big radio talk show out of RI, which also serves much of MA. WHJJ, I think the host is Arlene Violet.  3:30 p.m. EST, today. It's at 920 AM.

2. XM satellite radio, channel 169, "The Power" at 5:45 EST, today.

3. Next Monday, at 1:15 EST, Sirius satellite radio, the Out Q station, and I think it's the John McMullen show. For half an hour.

4. Salon's promotions coordinator is working on more, so check back.

And I won't be part of this, but Andrew Sullivan--who has been writing great stuff on this topic--will be on the Crossfire panel on CNN today.

Update:

Well, that was fun. I just got off the first one, and man, the time just flies. Twenty minutes and it was over in an instant.

Haven't done radio in awhile, and it's a refreshing change, where I'm all alone in my living room writing by myself. Fun to collaborate with someone for a change, even if it's just 20 minutes. And she was really sharp--great host.

Update2:

Speaking of Andrew Sullivan, he continues to offer fresh and astonishing insights into this whole Mary Cheney charade. This, I thought was particularly trenchant:

The truth here is obvious: Bush and Cheney are closet tolerants. They have no problem with gay people personally; but they use hostility to gay people for political purposes, even if it means attacking members of their own families. What they are currently objecting to is the fact that their hypocrisy has been exposed. To which the only answer is: if you don't want to be exposed as a hypocrite, don't be one.

Closet toerants. That's a new one to me. (It may be 20 years old, but you know, out here in the hinterlands . . .) It's perfect, though. Captures exactly what they are.

And hard not to love the closer: "if you don't want to be exposed as a hypocrite, don't be one."

Nice work, Andrew. Looking forward to your appearance today on Crossfire. I better go set the Tivo.