Measuring the "Colbert Bump" 674
An anonymous reader writes "Democratic politicians receive a 40% increase in contributions in the 30 days after appearing on the comedy cable show The Colbert Report. In contrast, their Republican counterparts essentially gain nothing. Moreover, even a cursory analysis demonstrates that despite being a comedy program The Colbert Report appears to exercise 'disproportionate real world influence' — likely due to the 'elite demographic' of its audience." In my home we refer to Stephen as "Loud Daddy" because my child would scream bloody murder when we paused him (and only him) on screen. Even at 8 months old the kid has strange taste.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Balls (Score:5, Insightful)
The first person to actually question the Bush regime said it right to his face at the press awards banquet.
And he gave Scalia the finger and made him laugh.
And then he basically called the sheep like media whores to their faces.
And everyone who had been keeping their mouths shut woke up
I know why. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
So it leaves what is probably a largely left leaning audience watching a Democrat "handle" the over the top Republican insanity in a humerous way.
Re:Colbert (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:2, Insightful)
That's the problem with conservatives, they can't approach things without an intensely partisan mindset. I'm sure plenty of them think the people behind the Daily Show and Colbert Report take the same approach as they do; have a goal to promote an ideology, then after that come up with humor to support it. Never even crosses their mind that the shows pick things that you can make fun of, and just because it's a lot easier to make fun of republicans than democrats, that's what the shows do more of.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Have there been many attempts at "liberal humor". I don't think the Daily Show counts. Jon seems to make fun of whoever would be...er... funny. It is not surprising that Bush fits the bill most of the time. Any show that plans on being funny in a "conservative" or "liberal" way is probably going to be terrible. Picking a side just reduces the possible objects of ridicule.
Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good. All he does is bring it to the front.
Also, many democrats are younger and don't have 'time' for politics, but do have time for comedy. If they're watching the Colbert Report, then they get a dose of politics in with their laughter (or laughter with their politics?).
Perhaps this is the only way to get young people interested in Politics - to make the stupidity that goes on at capitol hill equally accessible to everyone... through satire.
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:5, Insightful)
And he's not a diplomat.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Democracy (Score:3, Insightful)
I forget, which party is the one that runs un-democratic caucuses during their primaries?
Re:bring on the flamefest (Score:4, Insightful)
Be fair, it's not slashdot that's the problem.
It's the corrupt assholes that pay lip service to the electorate during campaigns and then go right back to screwing them for money the minute it's all over.
The big two party systems is the problem, not the people that it's driven to cynicism.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Limbaugh's success is almost entirely due to his sense of humor. He was basically a Colbert/Stewart of the Right, before Comedy Central was a political humor channel. Now, humor is somewhat subjective, and Limbaugh has a mean streak that comes out at odd times and spoils the party. His mask only slips occasionally though, and he can usually convince his loyal listeners that he was joking or that the monster they saw was just misunderstood. (for example, when he made fun of Michael J. Fox's Parkinsons Disease, or expressed glee at the suicide of Kurt Cobain.)
Even so, Limbaugh has a great sense of the absurd, and his selective reporting of the news has been great at finding things that are both idiotic and obviously "left-inspired." Now, he's dishonest to a degree, so he'll lie, exagerate or misreport when it suits him. Still, it's actually fairly easy if you go to the right places to find some absurdity related to environmentalism or feminism. Shooting fish in a barrel, it is. Frankly, he doesn't outright lie that often, because he doesn't have to. Clowns attach themselves to any political movement that has any power.
The new young Turks of Right Wing talk haven't been humor oriented, they've been revenge oriented. So people like O'Reilly and Hannity come across as hate-filled trolls without anything resembling a sense of humor. This is all to the good, because people with no sense of humor make perfect straight men victims for satirists.
Re:Dem elites! (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
"In contrast, their Republican counterparts essentially gain nothing."
Well there's a shock. I've always thought that Republicans going on Stewart's or Colbert's show was a complete waste of time, unless their aim was to be mocked mercilessly with no benefits whatsoever. Stewart at least tries to be somewhat balanced (as much as his politics will allow him), but Colbert wastes no time with such ideas.
It'd be like a liberal Democrat going on Rush Limbaugh's program. Just what do you think you're going to get out of it? You're certainly going into hostile territory with little hope of reward. You're not going to sway that audience's opinions... they're pretty well set. I think a Republican going on Colbert's show is not only a waste of time, it's worse. He has a young liberal audience, and if anything changes their opinions, it'll be time and experience. Nothing you say is going to sway them.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait till the Dems get into power in November (unless there's some awesome economic news in the next two months; they got it.). Then these shows will start making fun of them.
Also, many democrats are younger and don't have time for 'politics', but do have time for comedy.
(I moved the quotes). Politics these days is about distraction. It's about focusing on non issues, or at least, focusing on issues that a very small minority finds irrationally important. And even then, whatever comes out of any candidates mouth during a campaign is just pie in the sky.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
I assume appearances on the Colbert show are correlated with increased campaigning which results in increased contributions. I like Colbert, but to me, this sounds like exactly the sort of meaningless pompous statistic he would have fun with and mock.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, they're the joke. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, the joke is on us.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
That, and the Republicans are in power. Being in power normally provides a lot more comedy material than being in opposition. William Hague, Ian and Duncan Smith, and Michael Howard, and anything involving Boris Johnson notwithstanding.
Re:Relevant (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the problem with conservatives, they can't approach things without an intensely partisan mindset. [...] just because it's a lot easier to make fun of republicans than democrats, that's what the shows do more of.
Funny, because that's the same thing I hear Conservatives say about Liberals and they both back it up with the same "proof".
See the point yet? They're both wrong.
The greatest thing that's wrong with politics right now is this team sport cheerleader mentality. You're either a Democrat or a Republican. You have to show up to games wearing your team colors or be chastised by the other fanatics (aka "fans") of the team. And god forbid that you might actually be a fanatic of the other team! That will result in nothing less than the tossing of stereotypical derogatory chants back and forth which, of course, will lead to some parking lot brawl.
Don't dare try to have a different opinion other than the teams party lines, otherwise, they'll try a hostel take over of your position. Just ask Joel Liberman, who supports the Iraq war and some tax cuts and was attacked by his own party by them running and financing another Democrat to take his seat.
Don't dare try to say you support the right to abortion, gay marriage or that you're agnostic or atheist, as a Republican. You'll be similarly cast down from the rank and file.
The point is, the problem with politics are people you the parent. Those people who actually THINK one side is better than the other by default. That one side a bigger joke than the other or what have you. Sadly, the true joke are these people and these are the people that Colbert and Stewart make fun of. These people are blind to the obvious and sheep of the proverbial Shepard. These are the people who make easy targets for jokes because others can clearly see their blind ignorance and stupidity on ISSUES, not political affiliation.
People who think like the parent are the one's who think with an intensely partisan mindset. They're the one's, are there are a lot of them, who keep these political charades going. Nothing is going to change until we break down the walls of party affliction and the team sport mentality. Politics are not a game that's played on Sundays and Monday nights. Competition and competitiveness only amongst people only lead to a loss for everyone as important issues get ignored for a few small mindsets of a minority of people who are bullied and repressed into taking the same stances as the party out of fear or reprisal. This is the true killer of independent thought and critical analysis, yet it'll be the last thing anyone will be willing to "fix".
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:3, Insightful)
Either that or the Republicans can take a joke. I'm pretty sure they knew exactly the type of material Colbert would go for.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought it was painfully obvious that his Republican character he portrays is a joke to espouse his actual Liberal views. It scares me that this might not be obvious to some.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, it is pretty safe to conclude causation here as there are /very/ strictly monitored limitations of PAC funding. The limitations are so low that the difference between what "one nutjob billionaire" can give compared to the average mortal is less than you're likely to spend on a decent meal in Penn Quarter.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
He mocks everyone constantly, but there is a bit of a difference in how he does it that betrays his bias.
His mockery of republicans is usually along the lines of "what are those crazy people thinking?"
Whereas against democrats he tends to be more "come on, guys, I was counting on you and then you sucked."
He doesn't give anyone a free pass (which I greatly appreciate) but he does betray his bias a bit.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good.
Nah, it's not a Republicrat/Democan thing. Both sides are equally stupid, and equally easy to make fun of. It's just easier to make fun of the party in the White House, because they're the most visibly active.
Back when Clinton was in office, Rush Limbaugh was often hilariously funny with the way he made fun of the Democrats. After Bush got into office, he had to switch to supporting his side rather than making fun of the dems because there was so much less material available. At that point, he became a lot less funny.
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, *lighten up*. Stephen Colbert is a comedian and satirist. Is roasting China along with everyone else in the room him being undiplomatic or him doing his thing?
If China can't take some ribbing from a comedian, what kind of super-power does that make them? Remember when that guy got a monkey to throw up just like Bush? Hilarious! Did we get on his case for lacking in diplomacy?
The only "misstep" diplomatically was putting Colbert in the room with that many powerful people, and then handing him a mike and asking him to do his thing. If the people in that room couldn't handle some humor, then he shouldn't have been asked to do the speech.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of everyone pussy-footing around China. Welcome to the World stage, China! You wanted to be a super-power? You wanted recognition and a bigger say in how things go? Well guess what, my Chinese friends? Along with greater visibility and decision making power comes a lot more criticism, outrage, and being mocked.
Welcome to our world. People have been beating on the US for years. Sometimes it was just whining (hey, I wanted to be in charge instead of you!), and sometimes it was because we used our power to run rough-shod over people. Regardless, the world didn't spare us anything--and they shouldn't.
But China? Oh, poor China! Everyone is so insensitive, so judgmental! Poor, poor China! They only own everyone on the planet through trade imbalances or by owning the country's debt. When people start to complain about China's policies, a Chinese representative reminds them that China owns them lock stock and barrel, and then an apology along with copious amounts of back pedaling ensues (see US toy makers after the lead paint fiascos).
So pardon me if I don't feel sorry for them. No one in the rest of the world is treated with as much fear and trepidation as China. And when they don't feel they get enough respect, they come down on people hard. They are big-boy country. They can clearly take care of themselves.
Comparing Colbert to Nothing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Mayor is fine...the splatter damage area is greatly reduced to maybe no more than the tri-county area. Regan fscked us with onerous debt and Sonny Bono gave us unconstitutionally long copyright terms.
consider the bigger picture (Score:5, Insightful)
Could the appearance on Colbert's show be part of a wider ranging media blitz by some of these candidates? Could they be appearing on Colbert, Leno, Letterman, Meet the Press, The Muppet Show, and Larry King all over the course of a week or two? Then following it up with a few high profile public publicity events coordinated with a few big fund raising events?
Its called a media blitz.
If there is a 'Colbert Bump' then we need a controlled experiment. Have a Democrat and a Republican appear on Colbert's show, and make no other public appearances for a month after word. Then measure the outcome.
I think it is just an artifact of campaign style differences between the two parties. The Democrats have been fond of the Madison Avenue marketing blitz style for a while (lots of flash and no substance). Republicans are more of the smoke filled back room style. (Have third parties funded by wealthy friends and talk radio media figure-heads smear your opponent with a constant feed of lies and innuendo).
I really doubt the bump in donations is attributable to an appearance on Colbert's show alone.
Nice way to further media narratives here (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice job feeding into the media narrative that Republicans are pushing: That liberals are elistist snobs. Slashdot should not do politics.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course it won't; the show's liberal beliefs won't let it. The show will simply drop in popularity as making fun of out-of-power Republicans won't be as funny. The new big political satire show (which probably has yet to be created) will make fun of the Democrats.
Re:This is a surprise? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think you quite understand Stewart and Colbert. They aren't at all like Limbaugh, who is more of a propagandist.
They're not mocking conservatives. They're mocking mainstream news coverage. Where stupid issues are treated with such seriousness. "Did Barack Obama not wear underwear as a child? Stay tuned to CNN and find out more about this important revelation!"
Most people who go on the show find it refreshing and since they have a sense of humor, they play along.
But many conservative politicians are so used to the media playing deference to their stupid issue ideas, that they're confused at why they're being laughed at.
But at the core, what they're do is mocking mainstream news broadcasts. Nothing more.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill Clinton's policies were fine
Including the Communications Decency Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
liberal policies aren't any better. George Bush provides great material, just like Bill Clinton did (and still does)
Jokes about Clinton rarely had anything to do with policies (except when they were republican-lite policies, like NAFTA).
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
...Also, many democrats are younger and don't have 'time' for politics, but do have time for comedy...
I think you are making a very good point
I hope not. Often his over-the-top portrayal of some conservative policies does fail to indicate there's another side to the story. Colbert is sometimes more evenhanded than Stewart in that regard, but if it's the difference between a laugh and accuracy, it's a laugh every time.
This show should only be watched for comedic value, lest one runs the risk of being the left wingnut to counter Colbert's right wingnut.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps this is the only way to get young people interested in Politics - to make the stupidity that goes on at capitol hill equally accessible to everyone... through satire.
The reason I watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report (as someone from the younger generation) is that underneath their hyperbolic lies, they seem more honest. The current state of American news seems to be geared towards irrationally demonizing liberalism or leftist view to such an extent that it makes the bile rise. I can understand being fiercely against raising taxes for social projects (hey I hate taxes too), but when the foundation of an argument boils down to they're liberal, it loses all sense of weight and content. At least on those comedy shows, they back up their absurdity with a logical chain of examples to show that their comments have some grain of truth. For instance, they might show a series of clips of newscasters copying one another as a comment on the laziness of news in general. I like those shows because they're a bit more honest and because my faith in the quality of other (American) news channels has been degrading. (Though, I've found CNN and BBC news ok from time-to-time.)
8 months old watching TV? (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one bothered by an 8 months old being close enough to a TV for long enough to be noticeably affected by it?
That's a growing consumer, alright...
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
I would rather vote to Stephen Colbert and John Stewart than either Barack or McCain. At least they are honest and actually answer questions and don't try to play the people. I would definitely trust them in the position of power over the choices we have now. Which is actually kinda sad that politicians have disappointed us that much.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
The funniest thing that Limbaugh ever did was call for harsher penalties for drug users then get himself busted for being an oxycodon addict.
The icing-coated irony was delicious for everyone.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm watching the video again right now, and the video shows people laughing quite a bit. I'm only half-way through right now, but I've personally witnessed Bush laughing several times at his own expense. So far, the only time crowd seemed offended was at the China crack.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought it was even funnier that his doctor shopping got a slap on the wrist, thus illustrating the way the law operates differently for the Haves and Have Mores than for the rest of us.
Well, no, that wasn't funny... that was more stomach turning than funny.
News (Score:2, Insightful)
I get almost all my news from the Daily Show and the Colbert Report. So do most of the people I know around my own age.
Yes, really.
CNN is basically useless - how much are they really allowed to say? Between the watered-down news plus the extraneous fluff (shouting head matches and scandal of the week) they don't actually show much news.
Fox News should be called Faux News - these are the guys who basically got the courts to say it was okay to lie to people about the news, remember?
and local news channels are a joke - something caught on fire? ORLY? In a city with a million plus people, something catches on fire EVERY DAMN DAY. Get over it. Oh, good, that leaves more time for water skiing dogs and other junk news, right after that report about the great festival this past weekend that was so awesome. You know, the festival? The one they DIDN'T TELL YOU ABOUT until it was too late to attend? Yeah, it rocked.
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:3, Insightful)
The funniest thing that Limbaugh ever did was call for harsher penalties for drug users then get himself busted for being an oxycodon addict.
What's scary is that little episode didn't really cost him many viewers or respect. I guess Republicans only care about hypocrisy if it's the gay kind [senate.gov]....
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Daily Show has been experimenting with making fun of Democrats. They started doing it this past Spring, and their audience doesn't seem to like being shown their own absurdities. I, for one, hope The Daily Show forges on to become "make fun of the people in power and the media that enables them" instead of "make fun of the Republicans in power and the media that enables them."
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
Although he makes fun of both sides, it is much easier to make fun of the republicans - since their politics (under introspection) aren't very good. All he does is bring it to the front.
It's sad that people actually interpret the situation this way, no matter what you think "introspection" means. It has been easier to make fun of republicans because, for the most part, they've been the ones in power for the last 8 years. That's what Jon Stewardt has been saying forever now, and I'm sure Colbert is in the same line of thinking but you never see him talk out of character.
I think left-leaning politos should put a check on themselves with their self-indulgent tripe.
Lets be clear: humor is most often, but not always, about laughing at absurdities. Now, what a person happens to consider absurd depends on what they've been accultured to. Liberals, suprise suprise, simply have different standards on what they consider absurd and normal than conservatives. Trust me, conservatives have their moments when they can be funny also. The sad thing is when someone from one side simply can't find any humor in the jokes of the other side. Liberals: Just so you know, Ann Coulter is funny! And I don't even mean in that overly sarcastic way you mean it.
And the first one to assume I'm a conservative/Republican is a doofus.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nah, it's not a Republicrat/Democan thing. Both sides are equally stupid, and equally easy to make fun of.
Sorry, but that's just not true. The democrats are not a perfect liberal party, but insofar as they are liberal they are less stupid than conservatives. The majority view among intelligent, educated people always supports liberal positions which is why it is liberal, not conservative, politics that shares the label "progressive." Historical trends through the last two centuries have born this out worldwide: liberal views/values/norms steadily become adopted over time while those of conservatives are abandoned. It is overwhelmingly likely that this trend will continue. Just as we now think it was barbaric and grotesquely stupid to enslave black people and deny women the right to vote 150 years ago, we will progress to hold similar views about gay marriage and religion 150 years from now. Any person of nominal intelligence will grant this as indisputable.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
And even then, whatever comes out of any candidates mouth during a campaign is just pie in the sky.
Screw their stance on terrorism or gay marriage. If a candidate can promise pie in the sky, I would vote for him or her. Especially if it's strawberry-rhubarb! Yum!
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if Colbert (The Character) is going to switch sides. I could see him leaning whichever way the wind is blowing. He might turn into a hippy Air-America pot smoking liberal after the elections in November.
Re:Colbert is the only Liberal in America with Bal (Score:3, Insightful)
What's disgusting is your ridiculous hyperbole. Being respectful doesn't mean you don't have balls, it can often mean you're just more careful about choosing your battles. If you think problems in this country are honestly 90% the result of simply not calling people hypocritical lying murders (ooh - to their faces!), the size of your balls is irrelevant because you're a pea brain. That's right, a tool, a moron, a putz, a fool. The value of giving people your opinion of them is vastly overrated. Seriously. Lack of voting, political corruption, moral corruption (I'm sure that one will be popular on slashdot), stupid kids, shaky economy. These are only 10% of reason why this country "is in a mess right now"? Or, better yet, all these things are caused by people simply not speaking their minds?
Whatever.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
And make sure John Hodgman is chosen as either Press Secretary, or Secretary of State.
While we're at it, he might as well appoint Larry David as our delegate to the UN.
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Colbert asked Kevin Costner if he would run for office and Costner laughed and said something like, 'No... I've lead a colorful life."
I think that would probably be the issue with *most* people like Colbert and John Stewart. The facts of Bush's "colorful" youth were largely ignored when he was running for election. I couldn't believe he got away with "I haven't used cocaine since January of 1987." but more power to him since i think cocaine and pot should be legal. I'd never do cocaine-- taking something that has a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it isn't my thing. But wise men throughout history have altered their conciousness. And suddenly we disallow it and insist that only the most prissy, straight-laced people who don't even match 90% of the population in actual behavior should be our political leaders. Basically-- PRIESTS should be our leaders. The kings and lords and barons of industry had strong passions and lead bold lives and it gave them the strength of character needed to truly do the right thing.
Perhaps it is time to stop throwing away good leaders because they lead "colorful" lives and aren't priests. I imagine most leaders throughout history were alpha males and lead colorful lives filled with fighting, boozing, womanizing, and drinking. Since our memory is now much longer and much more through, it may be time to adjust the rules to the new "no privacy" reality.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's face it, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are both the equivalent to the Fox channel shows for the Democrats. Before you flame me, know I'm a Democrat.
Of course they are.
They are making a mockery of the media. The difference is that DS and CR freely admit that that's what they're doing and the majority of their viewers know that.
Fox, pretends that they're a legitimate news source when they're nothing but anti-American propaganda and their viewers do not get that.
Re:Colbert (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not a big Republican demographic on Comedy Cent (Score:2, Insightful)
Clearly you aren't a regular viewer.
Stewart invites Republicans on, even reads their books if they have it, and asks real questions on why they've chosen to do what they've done at certain junctions. He'll even agree with some decisions and offer counters and give examples of other directions they could have taken.
What he's doing is an actual interview. What the "REAL" media should be doing instead of stupid Crossfire-type programs. The only difference is he throws in jokes. It's still Comedy Central afterall.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem with balance is this: name one popular, over the top liberal pundit. I don't know of anyone who comes anywhere near the extremism of O'Reilly, Hannity, or Glenn Beck. Considering Stewart is primarily satirizing cable news networks that doesn't leave them much to satirize on the left.
That said, I do remember at least a few times when John got in a well deserved jab at the Democratic leadership.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
At least they are honest and actually answer questions and don't try to play the people.
Which is of course another way of saying "they aren't running for President". Anyone who is seriously trying to win an election is of course going to spin what they say to maximize the number of votes they get. Even the ever-popular "I'm a straight talker who never spins" spin is still just that... a spin, calculated to appeal to voters.
It's silly to go to a mud-wrestling match and then criticize the wrestlers for getting muddy.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:2, Insightful)
It's going to be interesting to see what Colbert and Stewart do if and when the Democrats start calling the shots.
Stewart has the harder job, because his stated intention is to make fun of whoever's in power. Which I'm sure he'll do, but his audience is overwhelmingly Democratic, and might not be able to take a joke. He *has* thrown some jabs at Obama and Clinton lately, but audience reaction was not great. (After making fun of Obama for flip-flopping on public financing: "It's okay to laugh at him, y'know.") He may be forced by his audience to veer left.
Colbert (and most of Stewart's co-stars), on the other hand, aren't mocking the politicians: they're mocking the media. And the nice thing about the media is that they never lose the limelight, they're always there to be ridiculed. So long as Hannity and O'Reilly are on the air, Colbert has a show.
they seem more partisan now than they used to be (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't detect much of a partisan air back then---they made fun of Clinton a lot, but it didn't come across as if they were conservatives or anything. And in 2000 they were pretty equal-opportunity in attacking both Gore and Bush. These days they come across as distinctly left-leaning; even as a left-leaning person myself it's sometimes a bit uncomfortable when they seem to lapse from humor into some sort of political monologue. So I'm not sure they can successfully, given the corner they've painted themselves into, go back to the previous, less-partisan approach of just making fun of whoever's in power.
Re:8 months old watching TV? (Score:4, Insightful)
Given the alternative (Sitting in a playpen with much LESS stimulation), sitting a kid in front of the TV (where they hear music, language, however low quality it may be) is actually better from a developmental standpoint!
Vitriol only hurts your case (Score:3, Insightful)
I think being "respectful" is 90% of the reason this country is a mess right now. The fact that the public is too scared of calling their politicians and politicians of other countries hypocritical lying murderers to their face out of fear of being called "disrespectful" or worse "un-American" is disgusting. Maybe you sir need a ball transplant since yours have obviously failed.
And I think that the general inability to forcefully disagree with someone without being disrespectful is, in fact, the biggest problem. If you think calling someone a hypocritical lying murder is a good way to get your point seriously considered, you are mistaken.
Courtesy and respect are fundamentals of civilized, intelligent debate and discourse. They're what's missing from our politics, and general policy discussions. They're not as much fun to read or say as ad hom attacks, of course. That's why you see and read and are reported so much of the sound bites and attacks. Sure, it feels good to accuse someone of being a liar or hypocrite, but it's much more productive to offer an attractive solution. The perception that anyone unwilling to denigrate the other side to make a point is a lack of balls contributes to the morass. If you can eloquently make a persuasive argument, you will advance not only your position, but the discourse. And advancing will get us out of the mess we are in right now.
In short, I disagree with your premise. I believe your position to be unenlightened, and generally contributing to the problem, rather than helping it. But if you read this, you'll see I didn't have to call you anything to get my point across. It's a shame this is too far down the page to ever get read.
Re:Colbert (Score:5, Insightful)
Colbert asked Kevin Costner if he would run for office and Costner laughed and said something like, 'No... I've lead a colorful life."
I think that would probably be the issue with *most* people like Colbert and John Stewart. The facts of Bush's "colorful" youth were largely ignored when he was running for election. I couldn't believe he got away with "I haven't used cocaine since January of 1987." but more power to him since i think cocaine and pot should be legal.
It's unfortunate, however, that our status quo is one which makes a large portion of our culture into criminals, and then, they can get elected to office, so long as they claim that's how it should be.
I'd never do cocaine-- taking something that has a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it isn't my thing. But wise men throughout history have altered their conciousness. And suddenly we disallow it and insist that only the most prissy, straight-laced people who don't even match 90% of the population in actual behavior should be our political leaders. Basically-- PRIESTS should be our leaders. The kings and lords and barons of industry had strong passions and lead bold lives and it gave them the strength of character needed to truly do the right thing.
Umm...Priests have gotten away with things no politician could ever be forgiven for. Make no doubt about it, our politicians have to live up to a much higher standard than our clergy.
Re:I Can't Find a Reasonable Conclusion (Score:4, Insightful)
Several of Bush's aides and supporters walked out during Colbert's speech, and one former aide commented that the President had "that look that he's ready to blow". Although President Bush shook Colbert's hand after his presentation, Colbert received an icy response from First Lady Laura Bush.
I believe there was other stuff about the media not picking up the story, etc, that I had read, but I'm not in the research mood, just the foggy memory and talking out of my ass mood. In fact, it's right there in the wiki article as well.
People mistake satire for news (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the shows are very thought provoking, they are very funny but they are not news and they are nowhere near unbiased (which is ok as they are a comedy show). People up to and including political science professors at my alma matter (wish I could find it on line, Ive only seen the editorial in the alumni rag I get via snail mail) have praised the show as real news and are not bothered by the fact that its becoming a *primary* news source for some young people.
On party discipline (Score:3, Insightful)
"So, yes, the Republicans are more effective at betraying the country and completely screwing it up because they don't let facts get in the way of their "disciplined" assault on this nation and their support of their party over the interests of their country."
If you'd take your lithium for a minute and use some reason, you'd recognize that whatever your party, whatever your ideology, if your party's leadership can't crack the whip and line up the votes, they're not going to get anything done in Congress. Sloppy anarchy isn't a virtue in politics. If you want your party to be noble, free spirits that can't get their agenda passed, hey, best wishes and good luck. But most people actually want their political party to accomplish something. This is simple politics 101; if you don't have some unity in your political organization, you're not going to get jack squat done.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:2, Insightful)
> The problem with balance is this: name one popular, over the top liberal pundit.
Whoa, nelly! Never heard of Larry King?
He said liberal, not moderate conservative.
Oh right, you must be from America, where Richard fucking Nixon is a "liberal".
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that it is false to state that "The majority view among intelligent, educated people always supports liberal positions which is why it is liberal, not conservative, politics that shares the label "progressive.""
In my opinion, liberalism is labeled progressive because liberalism promotes change. Progress occurs because of change. Conservatism, on the other hand, promotes stability. You have established correlation, but not causation. It could well be that intelligent, educated people support liberal/progressive positions because there are fewer opportunities for personal power under the status quo and change is the mechanism by which they seek to obtain power and prosperity for themselves.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
Damn right. He made accumulating national debt the national pastime.
Congress sets the budget, not the president.
Re:Colbert (Score:4, Insightful)
Sonny Bono gave us unconstitutionally long copyright terms.
Inigo Montoya would like a word with you.
With all due respect to the Supreme Court, if copyright outlives both the author and his peers, that effectively is an eternal period for anyone who was alive at its creation and would care enough to want to copy it, let alone ephemeral works which may cease to exist in any material form in under a year.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:2, Insightful)
Modding me troll doesn't make my argument less true, it just proves you have no counter-argument.
You were modded "troll" because there is no "clueless" moderation.
Sweeping generalizations aside, you apparently forgot that Republicans are responsible for ending slavery in the US. With LBJ's help, they also overcame the opposition of the Democratic leadership in the House and a Democrat filibuster in the Senate to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
As an independent, I see the hypocrisy in both major US political parties. Neither are immune to authoritarian behavior -- the only difference is what subset of beliefs they want to impose on everyone else.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:1, Insightful)
Ha! Or how about this one?
Oh man, I still crack up when I hear that one. And this next one is even funnier now!
See? It's even funnier now that he was caught cheating on his wife! Ouch, my side hurts... cannot... breathe...
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:5, Insightful)
He *has* thrown some jabs at Obama and Clinton lately, but audience reaction was not great. (After making fun of Obama for flip-flopping on public financing: "It's okay to laugh at him, y'know.") He may be forced by his audience to veer left.
Oh I don't know, he lampooned the whole Obama vs Clinton campaign pretty regularly. (Both shows did actually.)
And Bill Clinton in particular has been pot-shotted a fair bit, as has Congress's non-binding resolutions, giving into Bush, and so on.
But Obama, its true, he hasn't taken the same beating the other canditates have on Stewart/Colbert, but quite simply, that's because Obama HAS managed to appear less ridiculous less often, and more importantly, the ridiculous stuff he does do is so thoroughly overblown by the media that the comedy shows are almost forced to lampoon the media, indirectly siding with Obama.
I mean the 'terrorist fist bump'? 'barack HUSSEIN obama' repeated ad nauseum? the loony drama with his preacher?... I think these would have been fair game for Stewart/Colbert punchlines but after the mainstream media got through with them, the media was the much more juicy and pathetic target.
Kid-friendly Colbert? (Score:4, Insightful)
In my home we refer to Stephen as "Loud Daddy" because my child would scream bloody murder when we paused him (and only him) on screen. Even at 8 months old the kid has strange taste.
Now that I think about it, this makes sense. Babies love faces, and Colbert's broad satire comes with some really broad facial expressions. Angry, hurt, sad, gleeful, and more angry. It's probably the only grown-up show on TV which spends most of its time showing a big full-screen shot of a man making goofy faces. Even the Daily Show doesn't compare: Stewart has to deliver most of his punch lines with a newsman's straight face.
Re:So what, liberal media is still dying. (Score:2, Insightful)
Obama only wants you to think that that reason so many are opposed to his retarded ideas is because he is black. The fact of the matter is, being black has helped Obama way more than it has helped.
Since all blacks vote Democrat, and then vote for the black Democrat, it guaranteed that Obama would win in his districts first as a state senator and then as a US senator. Then, in the primary, Obama won by carrying all the black votes while the white vote split evenly for Obama, Hitlery, and Edwards. Oh, how I wish Edwards would have been selected to be Obama's VP.
But really, the only reason Republicans are opposing Obama is because we know that he and his ultra-liberal collegues want to destroy American society and replace it with a commy-crap fiesta with themselves as Orwell's uber pig on top. It's nothing about race, its about his stupid economic ideas of stealing from the capable to give to the losers, always, keeping a cut for himself and his buddies in government.
You just wait, until Putin shows up on the Turkish border again, and see just how little President Obama does nothing for you.. arguing that NATO is an "idea", not a military alliance. Kinda tough to defend Turkey in our alliance, when President Obama stuffs the army with all of his homo buddies and arms the soldiers with flowers and cicero.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
Both sides lie about drug use and abuse, I'm not sure why anecdotal evidence from those that have an incentive to promote the use is more reputable than the alleged anti-drug conspiracy.
The fact of the matter is that unfortunately, none of the drugs are well studied enough at this point to suggest that they are truly safe, and in most cases, people wouldn't be abusing them if they were.
In all honesty, a joint a couple of times a year is unlikely to cause serious non-legal consequences, but as long as the pro-drug boosters are pretending like it can't be addictive, it's unlikely that they'll get much traction on that. The definition of addiction at no point states that pot can't be addictive, if you've got the symptoms of addiction, it really doesn't matter what the substance is, you're still addicted.
Re:Colbert isn't republican... (Score:4, Insightful)
And you seem to forget that these are not the Republicans of the 1860s. Or even the 1960s. There was a time when Democrat = southern state (and all that implies), and that time has passed as the parties traded politicians and values.
Re:Colbert (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd never do cocaine-- taking something that has a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it isn't my thing.
Not that I disagree with you, but a 1/100,000 chance of killing you the first time you use it doesn't sound all that scary. . . ever had peanut butter? The odds of that killing you the first time you use it are 10 times greater. (1 in 10000 chance of death, with 1 in 200 being allergic).
I just cant tell when Coulter is serious. (Score:2, Insightful)
If the sentence...
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. .. Is a joke, then yes, it is pretty funny.