Slashdot Log In
Colbert New Comic-in-Chief
Posted by
Zonk
on Mon May 01, 2006 12:31 AM
from the that's-the-word dept.
from the that's-the-word dept.
scottzak writes "Hail to the Chief! Stephen Colbert addressed the White House Correspondents Dinner Saturday (attended by the President, the elite of Washington politics, and the White House Press Corps) and told the truth. Jaws dropped. Eyes popped. The live audience gasped. Scalia laughed his ass off. You want to see a brilliant comic display some real courage? Look no further. Enjoy the reaction shots, and Colbert's audition for Press Secretary job." The BBC covers the act just prior to Mr. Colbert's, where the President and a look-alike took turns making fun of his speaking skills.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Poor Colbert? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's sad is, once he does say it how it is, he loses the room...
Re:Poor Colbert? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Poor Colbert? (Score:5, Informative)
By the way, as I am in old foggy Blighty I did not see it, but here is the full transcript: http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/30/1441/5981
And all I can say, applause, applause...
Parent
Worth a watch (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Quotation from Will Rogers (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Poor Colbert? (Score:5, Interesting)
CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?
STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls. What is wrong with you?
and
STEWART: If you want to compare your show to a comedy show, you're more than welcome to
Parent
It's a classic dilemma (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems like a standard dilemma to me. Comedians such as Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart have nothing to lose. They're certainly not going to lose popularity with their audience, and if anything will gain more followers. They'll probably never have another chance to do what they've done, but they probably wouldn't have anyway.
For journalists and news networks on the other hand, the nature of how the competition works means they have everything to lose. If a journalist steps too far outside the bounds of what the government considers "acceptable" for a journalist, they probably won't be allowed in again... unless everyone does the same thing at once making it impossible for the press secretaries to ignore, which seems unlikely. Access to high government officials is everything to many news networks, especially the larger ones, so getting the network rejected could spell a big demotion if not the end of a journalist's career.
Parent
Bzzzzzt history says you are wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Old science fiction story (Score:5, Interesting)
Physical science papers and textbooks were only in the 90-95% range. If you said the age of the Eath was 4,388,765,309 years, for example, that might be 100% true but you'd never get published. In other fields, the socially tolerable level of truth was far lower.
The story's punch line was that only two groups of people were socially permitted to make 100% truthful statements: research mathematicians, and comedians.
(Also look up the history of "court fools").
Parent
Full Footage on youtube (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcIRXur61II [youtube.com]
The transcript is also available here:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/30/1441/5981
The BBC? (Score:5, Informative)
Cajones (Score:5, Funny)
Big, brassy, get-put-on-a-no-fly-list, cajones.
And kudos for being kinda funny too.
Re:Cajones (Score:5, Insightful)
Somtimes the truth gets to be so rare that you are shocked and praised for speaking it at a public forum. Sad but true.
Parent
It's really quite fascinating (Score:5, Insightful)
Well done.
Re:It's really quite fascinating (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:It's really quite fascinating (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this is Stephen Colbert's Crossfire appearance. Jon Stewart played Crossfire the same way: pointing out all the faults of the people he was with. Stephen Colbert's audience was even more prestigious than Jon Stewart's. I didn't know about this appearance until after it happened (so I download the video last night) and I was amazed that he had the opportunity to chew out the president... right to the presidents face!
Unfortunately, I think some of the humor was lost on people who didn't realize the character Colbert plays. However, I also think he has made a lot of new fans this weekend.
Parent
Re:It's really quite fascinating (Score:5, Insightful)
On a level deeper, though, Steven gets to say thing as the commentator that he couldn't just stand up in front of that crowd and say. He gets to say what he really believes, only say it in a way that's funny when coming out of the mouth of Colbert the pundit.
Example: he's asking the president why he wasn't considered for the part of the white house press secretary. At which point, he stares right at the audience and says "I have nothing but contempt for these people". Look at his face when he says it. He's playing it for laughs, but he's deadly serious. He has nothing but contempt for those people. Meanwhile, they laugh... they LAUGH... because ha, ha.. he's lampooning O'Reilly. Except he's not.
You can see that same mechanism in effect in several of his "jokes". He really is pushing wickedly vicious attacks at the president and the press, and they can't decide whether to laugh or not, because they aren't sure what level to take it at.
I thought it was brilliant -- he was able to attack them savagely, and still come across like he was tossing softballs. Amazing.
Parent
Re:It's really quite fascinating (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank God for people like Colbert, who hasn't let himself be intimidated into silence like so many in the media and even the general public have.
Parent
Isn't it funny? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Isn't it funny? (Score:5, Interesting)
1. The press is, generally, in Bush's pocket. Part of it is 9/11. Part of it is that war makes news organizations (and their parent companies) money. Its well known the Jack Welch pressured NBC news while he was CEO of GE. I would wager this has continued and expanded. (aside - It really says something about a president who can have such backing in the press and still manage to go down to the thirties in approval rating.)
2. Colbert skewered the press as much as the president. He called them on not raising a fuss, not making waves. Why would they want to bring attention to their own short-comings?
"But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!"
A real journalist would probably recognize Colbert's performance as the only news-worthy thing to happen during the event. Here Colbert is providing the best politically satirical speech in years (a generation?) right in front of the bubble boy president. Of course, a real journalist would probably not attend these sort of "buddy up to the administration" events. The fourth estate (ideally) should provide a check on those in power.
P.S. I love Colbert, but whats this doing on slashdot? I guess it is "news that matters" but not in any tech sense AFAICT.
Parent
NY Times (Score:5, Insightful)
The Times can hardly be called a part of the great right wing conspiracy - so one must conclude that Colbert has pissed off the media establishment, rather than the conservative political establishment. Wait, I mean "as well as" the conservative political establishment.
When you think about it, he's the only guy other than John Kerry who's had the opportunity to stand (effectively) face to face with Bush and tell him what he really thinks of 6 years of lousy policies. And he did a much better job than Kerry.
Parent
Watch it, enjoy it, believe it (Score:5, Informative)
The Colbert Report is really high quality political humor, like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart - it is funny because so often it is true.
What I find most interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
It wasn't just embarassing for Bush (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
The best part about this (Score:5, Insightful)
Too bad that nobody will hear about this except the people who read Slashdot, the people who watch Comedy Central, and the people who watch C-SPAN on saturday night. In other words, the exact people who are most likely to already agree with what Colbert is saying. Everybody else, well, everybody else will just hear about that part the BBC covered-- you know, the bit where Bush demonstrated what a down-to-earth, wouldn't-you-just-love-to-have-a-beer-with-me kind of guy he was by getting up on stage with a body double and deliberately mispronouncing words.
Which means Colbert's little song and dance here doesn't really matter. All right, so somebody criticized the president to his face for the first time in four years. (No, Kerry at the 2004 debates doesn't particularly count.) Okay, so what? The 32% who still approve of Bush's job-- who are, after all, the only people who matter-- won't hear about this, and if they hear about it, they won't listen. The 2006 elections still will go to the Republicans, because even if everyone gets pissed off at Mr. Bush, they still won't like the incompetent, spineless democrats any better.
The Republicans will continue to hold congress after 2006; nobody will ever investigate any of the laws Bush has broken; Bush will quietly leave office in 2008, Iraq will someday eventually get electricity and running water, and talk show hosts and revisionists will nostalgically talk about what a great leader Bush was until nobody remembers him as anything other than a second Reagan. (And how well do you remember the Reagan administration? Yup, that's what I thought.) Nobody will remember that freakish, depressing third half of the Bush presidency where major american cities were destroyed and the President was admitting to impeachable offenses on national television and nobody did anything about it. Everyone will just remember that first, inspiring part of the Bush presidency after september 11, when Bush said that God told him how to lead the country, and everyone believed him.
Political Parties Aren't Not Where It's At (Score:5, Insightful)
Political Parties are not where it's at. It never was and never will be. And by "it", I mean answers for the future.
In his farewell address as President, the other George (Washington), warned us against political parties. And since then, we promptly split into party lines:
http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democra
Have political parties ever spearheaded any worthwhile movement? Woman's suffrage? Civil Liberties? Hell, even Slavery? Not, if it cost them votes or it became the "right thing to do" with the public, meaning they got so late into the game as not to make a difference any longer. Look what parties make of issue these days to see the lack of courage in Washington to take any definitive action.
Have political parties caused you to stop looking at who you are voting for, and instead make you vote down the party line? Congratulations, you played into their hands. Are all Republicans really that bad, as to be always worse than their Democratic counterparts? Or the other way around?
Will it matter if the Democrats come in? Other than unions, won't they get funded by the same corporations as long as they follow corporate interests? And they will.
Hell, Jesse Ventura was one of the better Governors that there was in a long time. I wouldn't have believed it if I haven't seen it, but he was. And he was independent and not a career politician.
Why can't we vote more people like him in?
Think Independent. And Vote Independent. The parties won't fix jack shit. They have all their fingers smeared by the same pie and are beholden to the same interests.
Parent
Re:The best part about this (Score:5, Funny)
You know, it scares the hell out of me that we've reached the point that we're glad only 1/3 of the population is composed of these fuckwits...
Parent
Stephen was bang on... (Score:5, Funny)
"Wow, what an honor...to sit here, at the same table as my hero, George W Bush. To be this close to the man. I feel like I'm dreaming. Somebody pinch me. You know what? I'm a pretty sound sleeper, that may not be enough. Somebody shoot me in the face...is he really not here tonight?" (in reference to the Vice President) "The one guy that could have helped."
That killed me. Later:
"I believe in democracy. I believe that democracy is our greatest export. At least until China figures out a way to stamp it out of plastic for three cents a unit. As a matter of fact, Ambassador Zhou Wenzhong, uh welcome. You're great country makes our Happy Meals possible."
Huge groan from the crowd on that one.
He got some huge laughs, but some got no reaction and I can only assume that either those in attendance were brain dead and didn't get it or offended by his frankness. Either way, he was dead on and hilarious.
Re:Stephen was bang on... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they didn't laugh at what Colbert said because a lot of it cuts pretty close to home for those sitting in attendance. Case and point - when Colbert thanked the press for all the hard work they did during Bush's first term ignoring all his lies and misdeeds.
Parent
How bad has it been in the past? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm all for a skewering of authority, whoever happens to be at the helm. But, after viewing the whole video, while some of it has got to make some of the audience decidedly uncomfortable (note the camera cutting to Joe Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame!) I got the feeling that this is de rigeur for this kind of event, simply that we're paying more attentino because it's featured on Slashdot, BoingBoing, and wherever the hell else.
So, how accurate is that perception?
Has anyone seen one of these from years past? Even last year, with the war in full swing, there would have been sufficiently biting grist for a ballsy comic. Is older video of these annual press club dinners on C-Span or somewhere else? How biting is that commentary? How was it during Clinton's run? Or Nixon's?
That's what the 'net is so great for... putting something like this into a very broad context, not just believing that Steven Colbert doing a bang up job here is the first and last time it's ever happened.
This cracked me up (Score:5, Insightful)
Colbert on 60 mins (Score:5, Informative)
I Watched It Live... And Wasn't Impressed (Score:5, Insightful)
medioc
I watched the bit live on TV after I got sick of listening to the draft coverage. I don't blame most of the dignitaries for not paying much attention. His whole presentation must have gone on for 20 minutes or more, with 6-7 minutes of it being about that crazy (and fugly) White House reporter that always asks really stupid questions. Well this bit had him running across the entire Eastern seaboard just to get away from her questions about Iraq. Ok... I can understand turning that into a 30-60 second clip, since there were a few funny parts, but the remaining 5:50 was just him running and screaming. It was very underwhelming. There was actually almost a minute of him fumbling with his keys, trying to get it unlocked and started, just for the punchline of realizing he had remote keyless entry (funny, but not worth 60 seconds of leadup).
As for the rest of his jokes, there were a few good ones, but they came after listening to a handful of poor ones. I actually wondered outloud to my wife that his normal writers must have been unavailable.
Keep in mind when you watch the video that 99% of the guests at the press dinner were press, meaning they probably agreed with most of the things he said. However, there was audible laughing only a handful of times during the whole presentation. It was really a poor comedy routine to say the least, even if it did "stick it to the Administration".
Re:I Watched It Live... And Wasn't Impressed (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Not unlike Jon Stewart at the Oscars... (Score:5, Insightful)
Colbert's routine reminded me a lot of Jon Stewart's performance at the Oscars (one of the only times I've ever even watched). What I saw that night was a decent and funny performance delivered to a crowd that was so full of itself that it could not emit a laugh. They were present for awards sans comedy.
In Colbert's case, though, the crowd was most certainly attending for comedy. However, I think their blank stares were the result of hearing something they'd rather not. The dinner is always a roast and fun is always "poked." But... I think perhaps this went to a new level.
I see one of two possibilities. One is that Colbert misjudged his audience and that's why his routine did not do well. Or, Colbert recognized that he was given a rare opportunity to speak directly to the President, in a public setting, and in a place where the President could not simply leave. *If* that is the case, then yes, it did take balls. Huge balls.
Of course, unless Colbert actually comes out at some point in the future and makes known what his intentions were that night, we may never really know.
I have to wonder what I might do in such a situation. Like many Americans, I do hold a certain respect for the office of the President, or for any elected office, I suppose. It's that respect which keeps most (though it seems less so lately) political discourse civil. But surely there comes a time when transgressions like Bush's reach a point where you need to take a stand, respectable office or no.
Maybe this dinner was one of those times.
Colber and Stewart should not be needed (Score:5, Interesting)
No media coverage on Colbert EXCEPT (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, Fox News.
The whole dinner is rather insulting... (Score:5, Informative)
The whitehouse bit with Helen Thomas stalking him wasnt that funny. Stephen was funny overall though. It was interesting to see him be polite towards the president after having just said "the country doesnt like you and this whole thing is a mess"
Stephen did well considering the audience...
And thats what i'm really insulted by... (I'm not insulted by Stephen, i loved it) but the audience, the members of the press, the celebrities, the politicians, lawyers, judges, lobbiests...
Something just feels off when the press has a dinner with the whitehouse administration, plus celebrities. It just seems like a big get together of the wealthy and powerful for no reason.
For example, anyone that watched it on C-span, you would have seen George Clooney surrounded by 10 or more girls at a time after the dinner. There were no guys around Clonney, and i just found it histerical because they let 30minutes pass before showing clooney on tv again, and there he was with another 10 girls surrounding him wanting pictures
OK Clooney has political motives, but what about Phil Simms? Tiki Barber? Ludicris?... What could they possibly have to do with the whitehouse reporters?
It just seems like a slap in the face to the public. I dont think the Press should be "hanging" with the press. And i certainly dont think it should be a big celebrity dog and pony show.
What i found histerical is the number of old white men with young hot dates
The whole thing is rather phoney, and by that i mean the government, and the press
Re:Funny? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ignore the fact that Bush violates the law and constitution.
Kill the messenger, ignore the message. I'm sure those are tomorrows talking points.
Parent
State Secrets Privilege + EFF v. AT&T = (Score:5, Insightful)
One witness, one expert, and a few internal documents filed, and Bush asserts a State Secrets Privilege; the lawsuit cannot continue. What did he not want us to know?
I don't know how to connect the dots any more obviously. If you don't smell a rat, I suggest you update your BS detector.
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/ [eff.org]
Parent
I totally agree (Score:5, Insightful)
Right on man. If he had lampooned Clinton for screwing up the war in Iraq, having a low approval rating, or generally being incompetent, no one would have found it funny. It's such a total double standard that it doesn't apply the other way around.
Seriously though, you don't need to *disguise* a GWB bash-o-thon as humor. It *is* humor.
Parent
Re:I totally agree (Score:5, Insightful)
If Clinton was in the same situation as Bush I think the press would be pretty harsh on him. We are talking about a President that was impeached because he lied about getting a blowjob. Also people make jokes about Clinton to this day, until Bush he was the most lampooned President. However if he had made the same mistakes as Bush he would have been impeached and convicted, I am pretty sure of that.
Parent
Filter motherfucker, do you speak it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Wasnt that funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Wasnt that funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:watch Colbert Report instead (Score:5, Insightful)
He made some brilliant remarks up there - and he held no punches. The "Scott McClellan can say nothing like nobody else" was terrific.
I hope this inspires more people to have the balls to say what they feel and know about the tyranny that has strangled this nation.
Parent
Re:Torrent link (Score:5, Funny)
25,000 people using bittorrent to download an hour-long C-SPAN special
That should go down in the history books as "the day that the anti-filesharing lobbies collectively went: WTF??"
Parent
Re:Liberal Bunk (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, fuckwit, who are YOU to tell God what to do? DEMANDING of God something? The PROPER phrase is, "MAY God bless XXX".
That is key. Anyone who demands things of God is a shithead. Whenever you see someone saying "God bless" without the proper qualification... well, you can safely discard anything else they have to say, for they are truly spiritually retarded, and are probably nothing more than a drone.
Parent
Re:Those are some incredible special effects! (Score:5, Interesting)
There are none so blind as those who will not see. When you get done patting yourself on the back for your cleverness, perhaps you'll scan the commentary that accompanies the video from this source. And then ask yourself, why select such a slanted site to present it? I mean, as someone else pointed out, it's not even the complete video - the complete video is available elsewhere. But then you wouldn't have the commentary. So, let's all stop and ponder whether the video is really the thing you're supposed to be interested in.
Take off the blinders for a moment and pretend it's President John Kerry, with video selections and commentary provided by Little Green Footballs or Free Republic. Is that still cool, or do you want to award some more Oscars?
Parent
Well what the fuck did they expect? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, you ought to know this when you book him. This is what he does, so this is what you are going to get. Getting pissed that he ripped on the administration and the media is like getting pissed becuase you book Carlos Mencia and get racial humour. Of COURSE that's what you get, that's what he does! If that's not what you want, book someone else.
This was Colbert doing what he does best. That it fell flat on the audience because they don't like being made fun of is of no concern. If you can't laugh at yourself, don't hire a satirist because they are likely to pick on you. This goes double if you are already a favourite subject for them. I have no idea what the Whitehouse was thinking booking him. It's not like it's hard to find out what he's about. He's on national TV 5 nights a week for you to see.
Parent