# Colbert on Bush



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Steven Colbert lampooned Bush at the annual White House correspondents dinner and apparently Georgie wasn't too impressed - dsepite the fact that this is an annual tradition.

I've watched the first part of Colbert's speech and he is very funny in his Bill O'Reilly persona - but let's face it, a child could lampoon Bush without too much effort.

And the video is available here:
https://thankyoustephencolbert.org/wordpress/archives/3#comments

You'll be disappointed to see that the usually impeccable Colbert appears to be wearing a notch lapel DJ.

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gmac,

I am just happy we live in a country where the president can be insulted to his face and the comedian not have to worry about a 3 AM knock on the door. I think several European countries still have laws that make it a crime to insult a foreign leader. I am just glad that they don't enforce in regard to Bush, otherwise most of Europe would be in prison!

Karl


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

My respect for Colbert, which was already pretty high, just skyrocketed.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

I just watched the entire dinner via C-span streaming video. Colbert's act was very good, though his video ran out of steam at the end, in a silly anti-climax. The audience should have started on the adult beverages much earlier. They didn't seem to have much of a sense of humour. About two dozen people did 90 per cent of the laughing, it seemed, and the rest just had blank stares.

Overall, one of the better events, but bad audience.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by JLPWCXIII_
> 
> I just watched the entire dinner via C-span streaming video. Colbert's act was very good, though his video ran out of steam at the end, in a silly anti-climax. The audience should have started on the adult beverages much earlier. They didn't seem to have much of a sense of humour. About two dozen people did 90 per cent of the laughing, it seemed, and the rest just had blank stares.
> 
> Overall, one of the better events, but bad audience.


Did you see who laughed the most though? None other than your favorite Supreme Court Justice and mine, Justice Scalia 

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by odoreater_
> 
> Did you see who laughed the most though? None other than your favorite Supreme Court Justice and mine, Justice Scalia


 Who is that?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

'standing on a bank of computers ordering men into battle'?

https://www.defenselink.mil/bios/pace_bio.html

Colbert, "you can't handle the truth!"


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by odoreater_
> 
> My respect for Colbert, which was already pretty high, just skyrocketed.
> 
> _I fought the law and the law won._​


To each their own. I had none for him already and it plumetted.

To me, it has to be true to be funny. I think W proved this with his skit. I laughed only about three times during Colbert, but I also went "OMG!" about 10 times. The reactions of the audience show he was way over the line even in their opinions. It makes W look really good that he put up with that crap so well. Of course, W really has to put up with it. It's not like anyone in that press room is going to stand up and correct the lies. I think throwing Helen Thomas in his face over and over is wrong. Regardless of if you agree with her or not - she's rude and she's disrespectful to the President. I think a person can disagree, but should still show respect for the President. Unfortunately, the WH press corp seems unable to understand they appear to behave like hyennas to many of us out in the real America.


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

The only "Hollywood Types" American Presidents like are the ones who sing them "Happy Birthday Mr. President" (especially if they're blonde and attractive).

_Deny Guilt, Demand Proof and Never Speak Without an Attorney!_​


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Poor gmac.

As much as you'd like to revel in this report that President Bush was really, really miffed, I don't believe he was too upset. He's heard it all before and worse.

The President poked fun at himself throughout his own speech. This article notwithstanding, I watched his handshake/greeting with Colbert at the end of the ceremony and it seemed perfectly cordial. He always conducts himself as a gentleman.

One of the things that infuriates the lefties is this President's ability to laugh at himself, because then those like yourself can't enjoy their hee-hawing half as much. I love that about him.

While the left rails against him, he smiles back at them. Boy they hate that.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

That's very true, Relayer.

When he did his skit, I thought "Wow, that was pretty good. He really went after himself and he performed pretty well. The imitator was a smoother W than he was, but he can't do better than that."

Then he sat through Colbert,shook his hand, smiled, and said "Good Job." and surprised me again.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very well put. Why do we so frequently equate disrespect with humor?


----------



## Concordia (Sep 30, 2004)

It was one of the funniest bits I've seen in a long time, and as an outsider to Washington, I can't help wondering if the press corps didn't need to be reminded of how badly cowed they've been by this administration.

OTOH, there is a time and a place for such things-- and I get the impression that the Correspondents' dinner isn't really supposed to be a venue for much besides frivolity.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> I think several European countries still have laws that make it a crime to insult a foreign leader. I am just glad that they don't enforce in regard to Bush, otherwise most of Europe would be in prison!


Which laws in which countries Karl?

------------------


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gmac,

France for one (though perhaps it has been repealed since 2001) -

_In June the ECHR found that the prosecution of two journalists under the 1881 press law prohibiting insulting foreign leaders was unjustified, and the court criticized the law as outdated. The ECHR found that the Paris Court of Appeals interfered with the freedom of expression of two journalists in its 1995 ruling that they had insulted King Hassan II of Morocco. In a separate case, three African heads of state invoked the same law in their suit against the author and publisher of the book, "Noir Silence." In 2001 a French court dismissed the case on the grounds that the 1881 law restricted speech in a manner incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The plaintiffs appealed, but in July, the Paris Court of Appeals dismissed the case. _

I believe that the UK and Denmark also have laws that prohibit insulting religion, which is smiliar in scope to a ban on insulting a foreign leader.

Gmac - a question. Why must everyone provide proof of every statement they make or risk having you brand them a liar? Stop it already. Try and be polite, I am sure your parents taught you better, and that you teach your children better, than what has been witnessed by your recent behavior.

Karl


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by eagle2250_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you guys kidding? I'm glad that we live in a country where if a president has a 30% approval rating you can tell him right to his face that he's doing a horrible job without having to worry about being respectful. My family comes from a country where even if the President was doing a s**tty job you still had to be respectful and tell him that he's doing a good job. That country ended in civil war and misery. Maybe if people were constantly telling the president of that country that he is really doing a bad job then things wouldn't have turned out that way.

Of course the President is going to keep his cool and smile and shake Colbert's hand and tell him "good job," but that doesn't mean he didn't get the message, and I for one, am glad that our comedians and our press corps are so disrespectful to the President. The press corps isn't there to poo-poo the president, they're there to keep him honest and to get answers and information for the American people and I want them to be as aggressive and unrelenting as they can possible be and let the president know what people are saying about him.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by eagle2250_
> Very well put. Why do we so frequently equate disrespect with humor?


Because it was a roast? And that's what you do at a roast?


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by MER_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think some of thesse guys fuss a bit too much.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Gmac - a question. Why must everyone provide proof of every statement they make or risk having you brand them a liar? Stop it already. Try and be polite, I am sure your parents taught you better, and that you teach your children better, than what has been witnessed by your recent behavior.


Please show where I said that.

Ha ha, only joking! As you know, I don't always ask for evidence, only when the claims made are patently untrue or are matters of opinion being presented as fact. The only person I have called a liar is FlatSix and I only did that because he was rude to me first (and because his story was so ludicrous). And you of course, but I apologized for that pretty quickly.

Karl, don't be such a baby - you dish out plenty of insults, learn to roll with the punches.

------------------


----------



## jbmcb (Sep 7, 2005)

On a related note, Clinton's 'lame duk' video at the W.H.C.D. a few years ago was genius.



I've forgotten about the red-haired guy from that Nickelodeon show that did all the stupid dot-com ads. Name your own price for a smoked ham. Heh.


Good/Fast/Cheap - Pick Two


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gmac,

How many bar fights have you caused? Or do you become charming after five or six pints?

Karl


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Gmac,
> 
> How many bar fights have you caused? Or do you become charming after five or six pints?


Worse. Much, much worse.

------------------


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

One big issue I had was his remark about dealing with that handful of generals making statements by not letting them retire. Then he actually called out Gen. Pace and said something about 'anyway how hard is it for generals standing on computer banks to order men into war'.

Now in some circumstances that might be telling truth to power, but it would have to be true. And it is not true.

Frankly, only a total coward would say that to Gen. Pace in that circumstance.

Gen. Pace's record of service is and should be beyond any of that partisan attack BS. The man celebrates 40 years of service next year that started *with leading a Rifle Platoon in Vietnam in 1967 * AFTER graduating Annapolis. So 40+ years counting his time at Annapolis.

I found it to be an insult to both Gen. Pace, the Marine Corp., and all those that have fought and died for our Country. None of which were there to be roasted or insulted.

I'm sure if Colbert would like to meet Gen. Pace one-on-one and insult him, Gen. Pace would make himself available


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

ksinc, I don't think you realize that this was a roast and done in a character. The reason why it was funny was because the character was being so disrespectful and dismissive of the generals. You laugh at the character for being so ridiculous and not at the general. And it is common fare at a roast to first go after the person you're honoring, and then the members of the crowd.

So if my friend is a neurosurgeon who is being honored for his skill and professionalism i might make a bunch of cracks about him, then open it up to the room and say say "oh come on, how hard can it be? You just crack that thing open and scoop some out with a putty knife. You want to see skill and dedication you should see me with a coconut. I crack that baby open with my machete and I scoop all of it out! I even drink the juices."

So it is tasteless and offensive but in the context of a roast and for the purpose of humor. Unlike the kerry service smears, but that would be opening a whole other coconut


----------



## 16128 (Feb 8, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by MER_
> 
> ksinc, I don't think you realize that this was a roast and done in a character. The reason why it was funny was because the character was being so disrespectful and dismissive of the generals. You laugh at the character for being so ridiculous and not at the general. And it is common fare at a roast to first go after the person you're honoring, and then the members of the crowd.
> 
> ...


[8D]

Colbert: [interviewing Tim Robbins] _I don't think I need to tell you, I have, I'm really split on you, Mr Robbins. On one hand, I think you are a true artist, who through your work is enriching our culture. On the other side, I think your politics are killing us by inches. Okay? So I'm not exactly sure what kinda question to lead off with here. Why don't I try to split the difference? What's it like working with Clint Eastwood, and why do you hate our troops? _


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by jbmcb_
> 
> On a related note, Clinton's 'lame duk' video at the W.H.C.D. a few years ago was genius.
> 
> ...


jbmcb - The video by President Clinton was one of the funniest I've seen. On the other hand, his speech in 1993, where he be-smirched Rush Limbaugh with the Janet Reno comment was really a low point. That remark went over like the Titanic.

Dennis
If you wish to control the future, then create it.
Est unusquisque faber ipsae suae fortunae


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by VS_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 That was a very funny interview. I've been watching them at

The 'Know your District' ones are some of the consistently funniest bits of television ever!

What Colbert did at the press dinner was entirely like what he regularly does on his show. The only difference was that he didn't have a friendly live audience who understood the joke. Again, bad audience. Good act.


----------



## SGladwell (Dec 22, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> I think a person can disagree, but should still show respect for the President. Unfortunately, the WH press corp seems unable to understand they appear to behave like hyennas to many of us out in the real America.


And I'm sure you were _sooo_ respectful of the president in 1998-9! And that was a president who made mistakes -I'm talking real _policy_ mistakes, like doing nothing on Rwanda, waiting far too long to break the siege on Sarajevo, letting Rabin/Bibi/Barak establish Apartheid in the illegally-occupied territories, and letting his silly wife ruin our best shot for a modern healthcare system in 20 years, not any irrelevant personal dalliances - but in the end left America far stronger in every sense than we were when he took office.

I think someone, no matter what position s/he holds, garners respect by earning it. This particular fellow has done nothing with the awesome power bestowed upon him to make him worthy of my respect. While Bill Clinton left us stronger in every way, this one is leaving us prostrate in every way compared to our position when he assumed the reigns of power.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by SGladwell_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow, that was some post! Good luck with the hangover from whatever it is you're taking. May I suggest you either halve or double the dosage next time?

And do you realize in another thread you are bashing someone for making claims without evidence while you do the same to me here?

Have another drink, buddy! 

And, for the record - I did not, meet, that man, former President Clinton. I did not have dinner with former President Clinton. I was busy doing the job the American people expect me to do.


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by SGladwell_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for your post and contributing your thoughts. However I must point out that technically it doesn't count. See you live in the "fake America," the America that has to deal with all those issues of race, inequality, suffering, world politics, etc. See the real America doesn't have to bother with all that. They just have to worry about gay people taking over. 

Oh, and ksinc: Colbert mentioned Zinni by name, not Pace. Not that it changes anything but I just thought you would like to know.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

I thought he was great. Some favorite lines:

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

"I believe like Jefferson that the government that governs best governs least. And by that standard, the government we've put in Iraq is doing a great job."

One of the things that makes Colbert so satisfying is that he not only mocks misguided policies, he mocks the feverish, vulgar, reality-indifferent ideologues who promote them. 

It doesn't take much to reveal the absurdity of FOX's slogan "Fair and Balanced," admittedly. Really all you need to do is repeat it out loud. Which is why Colbert's manner of parody works so well.

By the way, I think he did mention Pace as part of a list of generals in attendance. So what? I really don't understand people who think anybody is so sacred that he can't be made fun of. I think Rush Limbaugh is a demagogue and a vulgarian, but it never bothered me that he spent years mocking Clinton, just because he was "the president." (I admit I didn't much like Clinton, though I voted for him once.)

It's funny. The split on Colbert is just another instance of people in the US living in totally different worlds. I'm much rather live in mine--and I'm sure all those who shout "disrespectful!" would rather live in theirs. Do we have much to say to one another at all any more?

Stap my vitals!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by MER_
> 
> Oh, and ksinc: Colbert mentioned Zinni by name, not Pace. Not that it changes anything but I just thought you would like to know.


Very nice try! I commend your revisionism and I really thought you like to know. It changes a lot IMHO 

He did mention Zinni, but in that segment as he did when he picked people out of the audience (like Scalia and McCain and said they were here and talked to them) he looked out at the crowd and found who was there from the Pentagon and then spoke to them.

"Let's see who we have here tonight. General Mosley, Air Force Chief of Staff is here. *General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is here*. They still support Rumsfeld. *You guys aren't retired yet, right? * Right, they still support Rumsfeld. Look, by the way, I've got a theory about how to handle these retired generals causing all this trouble, don't let them retire. C'mon, we've got a stop loss program; let's use it on these guys. I've seen Zinni and that crowd on Wolf Blitzer. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you can stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. Come on."

It occurs half-way through Video 2 https://thankyoustephencolbert.org/wordpress/archives/3#comments


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Lord Foppington_
> 
> I thought he was great. Some favorite lines:
> 
> By the way, I think he did mention Pace as part of a list of generals in attendance. So what? I really don't understand people who think anybody is so sacred that he can't be made fun of.


I didn't say he was so sacred he couldn't be made fun of. I said, it needs to be based on truth to be funny. The implication is our generals like Mosley and Pace haven't been ordered into battle themselves and served honorably even in other questionable causes (Vietnam).

While not too sacred, I will admit I wonder why anyone would make fun of someone with such a distinguished record as General Pace. What is the point of tearing him down a notch just because you can without getting killed? It's like a monkey throwing poop.

General Pace is already a humble and honorable man. He should be lifted up and respected not disrespected.

MER and LordFop,

It's just my opinion. I find it hilarious how liberals care more about what people are than what they think. It shows in how you apply diversity. You support diversity in what people are, but if someone has a diverse view you get bent or hysterical. It's very, very telling. In your world, If I respect someone like General Pace and President Bush, then it follows I must be vulgar and filled with hate for minorities and gays. If I dare think differently and express it, I must live in the fantasy world, while you live in the real world.


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> I've got a theory about how to handle *these* retired generals causing all this trouble, don't let *them* retire. C'mon, we've got a stop loss program; let's use it on *these* guys. I've seen *Zinni and that crowd on Wolf Blitzer*. If you're strong enough to go on one of those pundit shows, you can stand on a bank of computers and order men into battle. Come on."
> 
> It occurs halfway throught Video 2 https://thankyoustephencolbert.org/wordpress/archives/3#comments


Of course it won't change your opinion. Why would someone get angry when someone lampoons a person who supports the SOD but not when someone makes fun of a person who has spoken out against him.

Check the antecedents, he's refering to the retired generals, and is talking about their ability to go on those pundit shows. Now it could also refer to Pace, but only if he tries to retire and go on a pundit show to speak out against the SOD. And he would never do that, right? 

That was the joke, that the Colbert character was so defensive of the administration the he would lash out at these generals and demean their service because they had gone on a pundit show and spoken out against the SOD. What makes it even funnier is that the SOD never served, nor has the Colbert character. Speaking of which did anyone else catch the bit a few months ago about being in the "marina core?" Fantastic.

I haven't seen anyone get bent or hysterical yet in this thread, but I thought you might enjoy this quote, the origin of which I can't remember (though it sounds like something Stanley Fish would say)

"A liberal is someone who loves everyone...except those who don't love everyone."


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by MER_
> "A liberal is someone who loves everyone...except those who don't love everyone."


Thanks for proving my point. 

BTW I commend you for staunchly defending your liberalism. I'm a conservative, but all my good friends are liberals.

I find they make these rather outlandish, sweeping statements, but when we discuss actually implementing their ideas they let go of them and become somewhat practical. In the end, they actually agree on most topics with me, they just can't bring themselves to say it. [}]

An example would be taxes. All my friends have been decrying the low tax rates (tax cuts) for several years and what should be done with that money instead. This last week after taxes were filed, they were all bragging on the golf course about their huge tax refunds and what lavish treats they were going to buy (new drivers, new irons, etc.). When asked I dead-panned and told them they had convinced me to send my refund to support increased border security instead of hijacking that money for the war in Iraq or giving it to the rich and undeserving to live even more lavishly. You should have seen the looks I got


----------



## J. Homely (Feb 7, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> 
> MER and LordFop,
> 
> It's just my opinion. I find it hilarious how liberals care more about what people are than what they think. It shows in how you apply diversity. You support diversity in what people are, but if someone has a diverse view you get bent or hysterical. It's very, very telling. In your world, If I respect someone like General Pace and President Bush, then it follows I must be vulgar and filled with hate for minorities and gays. If I dare think differently and express it, I must live in the fantasy world, while you live in the real world.


Blanket statements like this about "liberals" and "conservatives" are tiresome and meaningless and do nothing to elevate the level of discourse. What does it even mean to "care more about what people are than what people think?" What IS a person besides what they think?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by J. Homely_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nothing blanket about it. And it seems we agree.

I particularly agree with your question. I think that should give you pause about who is elevating the discourse and who isn't. I was responding to two people that apparently think race is one thing a person is that they don't think. And also apparently being gay. Ask them, not me.

You point out exactly what I meant by stating they are accepting diversity in what people are (meaning labels of race, gay, etc.), but not accepting diversity of differing viewpoints. They respectively brought up "race", "gay", and "the feverish, vulgar, reality-indifferent ideologues."


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Unless you're volunteering for the label or are regularly called upon to give your opinion on FOX News, there's no reason to suppose I was applying "feverish, vulgar, reality-indifferent ideologues" to you.

Colbert's whole schtick is to mock current-events commentators (most often conservative ones) on tv and radio. I was applying the label to them. I think those who specialize in media harangues, left and right (though the leftwing ones certainly fail to appeal to their constituency the way rightwing ones do), are the target of Colbert's satire.

Stap my vitals!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Lord Foppington_
> Unless you're volunteering for the label or are regularly called upon to give your opinion on FOX News, there's no reason to suppose I was applying "feverish, vulgar, reality-indifferent ideologues" to you.


I understand that you did not specifically apply that label to me. Thank you for that consideration!

Perhaps I didn't follow the thread correctly.

MER responded
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by MER

Thank you for your post and contributing your thoughts. However I must point out that technically it doesn't count. See you live in the "fake America," the America that has to deal with all those issues of race, inequality, suffering, world politics, etc. See the real America doesn't have to bother with all that. They just have to worry about gay people taking over.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then you responded 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lord Foppington

It's funny. The split on Colbert is just another instance of people in the US living in totally different worlds. I'm much rather live in mine--and I'm sure all those who shout "disrespectful!" would rather live in theirs. Do we have much to say to one another at all any more?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What did I miss? I try not to be too naive, but didn't you agree and imply that if I thought Colbert was "disrespectful" I lived in the fake, gay-hating America?

I have realized in this thread that if you had either heard of Colbert or watched his regular act, perhaps you have a different view of his act at the roast. I admit, I had done neither.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by ksinc_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I think you did miss something. Apparently you're conflating my talk about "disrespectful" with the other poster's comment about gays. I have no idea why.

Stap my vitals!


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

Don't take my comments the wrong way, I was merely making a joke about how people say things like "those of us in the Real America." Or "Real Americans think." Which I personally find highly amusing. The idea that a person lives in the "real" America implies that those who disagree with them don't...and perhaps aren't "real" Americans. The reason I brought in homosexuality is because that was what I saw referenced in the last GOP mailing I was sent (friends and loved ones keep signing me up for these hoping I'll see the light.) It talked about Hollywood Liberals undermining the family and values of Real Americans. Which is why I included it. I did not intend to claim anyone on this board was homophobic, merely to lampoon the usage of "real america". I probably should have set up the joke better, or at least included a  at the end. My apologies.


----------



## mano (Mar 17, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by Karl89_
> 
> Gmac,
> 
> ...


Exactly what I was thinking when I saw it on television. Regardless of my opinions about either man, I felt fortunate to be an American. And I'm about as patriotic as a watch fob.


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

Where are you comparing America to?

Any entertainer in the western world could make exactly the same comments about their leaders in complete freedom.

I'd say Americans are a lot more touchy about criticism of their president than most actually - witness the furor when the Dixie Chick said she was ashamed Bush was from Texas. A British pop star says something rude about Blair while overseas I can tell you what sort of reaction they can expect. Yawns.

Indeed, the right wing backlash against Colbert in the usual rags shows that Americans actually take this stuff seriously.

------------------


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Where are you comparing America to?
> 
> ...


No, all that tells you is that right wing media people take this stuff sersiously. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly don't speak for America, as much as they like to think that they do (by the way, neither does NPR).

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## gmac (Aug 13, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by odoreater_
> 
> No, all that tells you is that right wing media people take this stuff sersiously. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly don't speak for America, as much as they like to think that they do (by the way, neither does NPR).


Sure, but somebody is listening these goofs and nodding their head in agreement.

------------------


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No doubt. 

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## mano (Mar 17, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by gmac_
> 
> Where are you comparing America to?
> 
> ...


My point isn't how any sector of the public reacts, but how the government reacts. You're right about the benefit of freedom.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by odoreater_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry for any perceived untimeliness of this response but, I took a few days away from the forum to play in the real world for a bit...looks like I missed alot of the conversation.

I am familiar with the nature of a "roast." I understand that some may have a greater appreciation for this type of humor than I but, I simply do not care for it...regardless of whether it is directed at the President of the United States, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or even just a next door neighbor. Getting a laugh at anothers expense, to me, seems a cheap shot. There are more constructive ways to make a point or to register your disagreement in a participative democracy.

In a separate thread on this forum a member asks what others perceive as the root cause of the increase in the incidents of school violence. Responses included failures on the part of parents to discipline, availability of weapons, failures on the part of school administrations, social status distinctions, etc. Those responses overlooked the impact of acts of predatory, parasitic humor...that always seem to leave someone holding the bag. In almost all incidents of school violence and in many instances of violence in society in general, it is too often the subject of the ridicule and good natured(?) teasing (the person left holding the bag, that perhaps did't get the joke), that becomes the perpetrator of such violence.

When our children see us laugh at someone making fun of someone else, what message are we sending them regarding showing respect for others or of the importance of not showing disrespect for of teasing others. The fallout can often outweigh the laugh. As I said at the outset, I simply do not care for this approach to humor...there are better, more appropriate ways to get a laugh.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

eagle

I think that kids getting constantly hounded may be one reason for those shootings (but heck, it's so much easier if we just blame it on video games than on bad/absent parenting), but I think the solution to that doesn't lie in us getting rid of the roast. First off, I don't think that too many kids are watching the White House Correspondants Dinner. But mainly I think the problem needs to be resolved from the side of how kids take being made fun of, not from the side of trying to get people to not make fun of each other anymore. I think the problem is that parents make their kids too sensitive and entitled these days. Kids can't even play dodgeball in school anymore. Maybe if you were allowed to peg the kid who's been making fun of you in the head with a spongy blue ball then you wouldn't feel like shooting him later that day (not saying that dodgeball is the key to all these problems, but that it's a whole mentality that's pervasive in schools and parenting).

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

Odor, I think the hole in your dodgeball argument is that the kid who is getting made fun of, chances are, is also the kid getting beaned in the head with the rubber ball.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Great post Eagle! :applause: If only Colbert had used his 15 minutes of fame, and access to the world's most powerful man, to say something as important and profound.


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

> quote:_Originally posted by mano_
> ... And I'm about as patriotic as a watch fob.


 mano:

Is this the watch fob?

Andy


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by MER_
> 
> Odor, I think the hole in your dodgeball argument is that the kid who is getting made fun of, chances are, is also the kid getting beaned in the head with the rubber ball.


Yeah, you're probably right. But I was just using it as an example of current trends in society that try to remove all avenues for pent-up aggression, which results in the explosion of that aggression through much more violent means.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## Sweetness (Aug 25, 2005)

I think a lot of people are missing the point of the evening. The correspondent's dinner isn't a "roast" of the President, but a time for the President and the media to "make amends" for being at odds for the previous year. Its a fun event where both sides make jokes about themselves and then everyone goes home with a smile on their face. I don't know who said this earlier, but its alright to make fun of yourself but not the other. That was the reason why the President made all the jokes about himself, and why Clinton's video made fun of himself. However, what many people are up in arms about is that fact that Colbert went up and instead of making jokes about his fellow media, he went on a tirade attacking the President (although he made them in thinly veiled jokes). People have noted about how uncomfortable the audience and President seemed. This was because they were fully unprepared for Colbert's speech and it was completly uncalled for. Sure, it was funny, but it wasn't the time or place.


----------



## Trenditional (Feb 15, 2006)

I will grant that Colbert's take on politics is funny, at times. Overall, I don't find his routines overly hilarious.

The only comment I will make as to the appropriatness in regards to this being a roast is that roasts are typically done by ones peers. I would not say Colbert is a peer of Bush or any of the high ranking military officals he poked fun at. So in this case, I do believe there is a line of acceptableness and I would say he crossed it.

_Deny Guilt, Demand Proof and Never Speak Without an Attorney!_​


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Trenditional_
> 
> So in this case, I do believe there is a line of acceptableness and I would say he crossed it.


And that's why I love him.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------



## MER (Feb 5, 2006)

It is the way the WHCD has been for a long time. He gets up there and makes fun of himself and them. They get up there and make fun of themselves and him. And pretty much every year there has been controversy. There were some people upset because the first lady's routine was a little blue last time. Two years ago people got upset that the president made jokes about looking for WMDs, etc.


----------



## mano (Mar 17, 2003)

> quote:_Originally posted by Andy_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


LOL. For some reason I become more patriotic as I get older.

This is more my type of fob:



















It's just *me* in so many ways.

Andy, shoot me your addy. I have something for which you may have a burning desire.


----------



## Daywalker (Aug 21, 2005)

> quote:
> Are you guys kidding? I'm glad that we live in a country where if a president has a 30% approval rating you can tell him right to his face that he's doing a horrible job without having to worry about being respectful. My family comes from a country where even if the President was doing a s**tty job you still had to be respectful and tell him that he's doing a good job. That country ended in civil war and misery. Maybe if people were constantly telling the president of that country that he is really doing a bad job then things wouldn't have turned out that way.
> 
> Of course the President is going to keep his cool and smile and shake Colbert's hand and tell him "good job," but that doesn't mean he didn't get the message, and I for one, am glad that our comedians and our press corps are so disrespectful to the President. The press corps isn't there to poo-poo the president, they're there to keep him honest and to get answers and information for the American people and I want them to be as aggressive and unrelenting as they can possible be and let the president know what people are saying about him.


Disagreement with the administration is no excuse for the rampant disrespect we see from the news media every day. If they really can't respect the man, they should at least respect the office. I am appalled at the behavior of the White House press corps.

Comedians are another matter altogether and political satire gives them lots of mileage. Some of them, like Bill Maher and George Carlin, have taken their so-called humor to absurd mean-spirited and personal attacks on the President. They have become left-wing political commentators rather than comedians and I can live without them.


----------



## odoreater (Feb 27, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Daywalker_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then I guess we just disagree.

_I fought the law and the law won._​


----------

