Children's Health Care Explained

Video clip from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on children's health care:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=109136&is_large=true

This clip shows Jon Stewart talking about President Bush vetoing the expansion of the children’s health care plan for low income children. The expansion would be funded through a sixty-one cent tax increase on cigarettes. Although Stewart repeatedly ridicules Bush is silly ways, like the way he compares Bush to cartoon villains, he also uses video clips in a way that enhances the validity of his arguments.

These clips often speak for themselves in their hilarity, but Stewart uses the clips and his humor to strengthen his argument that Bush’s veto is wrong. Stewart shows a clip of Senator Trent Lott, a republican representative of Mississippi, whom is of no coincidence on Fox News, making an argument that the tax increase on cigarettes will only make people stop smoking and thus the expansion wouldn’t be funded. Stewart reveals the ridiculousness of the slippery slope example Lott is trying to use to defend the president’s decision.

I also noticed that Stewart uses the video clips as an ad hominem. Although this is a fallacy of argument, I think that it is effective when considering his audience that consists mostly of democrats. Stewart often shows clips that blatantly mock the president. For example, Stewart shows Bush saying that, “My job is a decision making job…and uh…as a result I make a lot of decisions.” It’s things like that, that just make people laugh at the president's lack of eloquency in his public speeches. Stewart doesn’t even have to say anything. In fact, he looks as though he is stumbling for the right words to say, and instead he says “pass” because he knows how funny it is all on its own.

I think these types of clips help to strengthen Stewart’s argument. The clip continues with Bush’s validation for his decision. His first point is “Poor kids first,” which I’m sure left many audience members wondering to themselves “what does that even mean to you?” seeing as how that is all the explanation he gave for his first ingenious point. It shows Bush as someone who cannot explain his decisions very well and that reflects negatively on the basis for his decisions. If he can’t even tell us why he vetoed the expansion, in an intelligent and justifiable manner, why should we trust that he is making a knowledgeable decision? Stewart not only uses this clip to strengthen his argument, but it also works to show Bush’s inability to make an effective argument to defend his own points.