After Jon Stewart very publicly went after lawmakers pussyfooting around the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (see here and here), we can't say we were too surprised to see the seemingly dead bill jump back to life before Congress finished its lame duck session. You might even say we were overjoyed. But boy do we wish it didn't mean another round of "does this mean Jon Stewart isn't a comedian?"

We bring this up because last week Daily Intel thought about the question out loud when Stewart half-answered it for them (“What’s been misconstrued there is the idea that I’m saying I’m just a comedian,” he told me. “I’m not saying I’m just a comedian. I’m a —") and then this weekend the Times went and declared Stewart the new Edward Murrow—who was most certainly not a comedian.

Sure, we see the point they are making. Murrow was directly involved in the ending of the McCarthy hearings in the 50s and was a tremendously influential newscaster. And Stewart has a strong following and was certainly influential in getting the Zadroga bill passed—who are we to argue with Mike Bloomberg? Hizzoner wrote an e-mail to the Times that "Jon shining such a big, bright spotlight on Washington’s potentially tragic failure to put aside differences and get this done for America was, without a doubt, one of the biggest factors that led to the final agreement.” But why can't Jon Stewart and the Daily Show just be Jon Stewart and the Daily Show? Everything does not need an exact historical counterpoint.

And for what it is worth, we're pleased that Stewart wouldn't comment to the Times about the bill or his coverage of it at all. Of course, for better or worse, lots of other folks are more than happy to attach their names to it now.

Like the law firm of Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern. It represented many of the 10,000 9/11 plaintiffs (earning about $150 million in fees from the tragedy) and apparently bought the link for before it even passed. Now they're buying up AdWords and offering "free consultations" to those looking to gain from it. And if such internet-style ambulance chasing weren't enough, the firm reportedly also text messaged their existing 9/11 clients regarding the act! Once upon a time lawyers as a rule didn't even advertise. And now they text message? It isn't illegal and it isn't necessarily unethical. But it certainly is tacky.