New York Times says Jon Stewart is today’s Edward R. Murrow. Keith Olbermann hardest hit.

That pathetic sound you hear is Keith Olbermann whimpering over in the corner. The New York Times has undoubtedly devastated the left wing lunatic by naming someone else as this generation’s Edward R. Murrow.

We don’t want to get in the middle of this little spat, so we’ll just let the Times explain its own bizarre designation:

Did the bill pledging federal funds for the health care of 9/11 responders become law in the waning hours of the 111th Congress only because a comedian took it up as a personal cause?

And does that make that comedian, Jon Stewart — despite all his protestations that what he does has nothing to do with journalism — the modern-day equivalent of Edward R. Murrow?

… Though the scale of the impact of Mr. Stewart’s telecast on public policy may not measure up to the roles that Mr. Murrow and Mr. Cronkite played, Mr. Thompson said, the comparison is legitimate because the law almost surely would not have moved forward without him. “He so pithily articulated the argument that once it was made, it was really hard to do anything else,” Mr. Thompson said.

How dare they? Why, this is an insult to Olbermann, MSNBC’s self-styled heir to the Murrow legend. Look for him to demand satisfaction. A duel at sunrise, perhaps. The Times’ choice of weapons.

In lieu of a duel, we certainly expect the Times to be named Worst Person in the World. And they deserve that title.

After all, does Jon Stewart sign off his show by saying, “Good night and good luck” like Murrow did? No. Does Jon Stewart remind his viewers that he is the heir to Murrow’s courage and tenacity? No. Is Jon Stewart a pompous ass with no viewers? Oh, wait. That’s an entirely different subject.

Source: New York Times