answer:Political parties have to disclose the names of their donors. However thanks to an overly conservative supreme court breaking hundreds of years of precedent a few months back, charities that fall under a certain tax bracket no longer have to disclose the names of their donors, and those donors can be private businesses. As a result, conservative “charity” groups have suddenly received a few hundred million dollars in money from “anonymous” donors with nothing but the best interests of the people of the US in mind I’m sure. Stewart was playing on Roves “outrage” that the Democrats were suggesting the money might be coming from nefarious sources or giant businesses (which it almost certainly/entirely is) and saying its outrageous they should have to disclose the source of the donations….. whilst just a few months ago Rove was DEMANDING to know the source of the private funding for the “mosque” at ground zero, whilst heavily implying it was likely from terrorists (hence stewarts comment). The irony being that when it was revealed who the donors of the mosque were, Fox “news” second largest owner turned out to be the primary donor (a Saudi prince) and Fox STILL tried to paint the guy as a terrorist whilst avoiding saying his name or showing his picture. Stewarts accent may have been a step too far, though I’m sure he meant it purely for comedic purposes and didn’t mean to paint the south as a bunch of racists. But his point is incredibly good.