Stephen Colbert’s Bush-bashing comedy routine was a bit too much for some attendees — including, possibly, President Bush — at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner last night. “This was anti-Bush,â€? said one member of the press corps. “Usually they go back and forth between us and him.â€? Well, in fairness, Colbert did make fun of the press — but only from a liberal perspective (basically saying they don’t question Bush enough, bashing Fox News, etc.). Excerpt:
Colbert, who spoke in the guise of his talk show character, who ostensibly supports the president strongly, urged the Bush to ignore his low approval ratings, saying they were based on reality, “and reality has a well-known liberal bias.�
He attacked those in the press who claim that the shake-up at the White House was merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. “This administration is soaring, not sinking,â€? he said. “If anything, they are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.â€? …
Turning to the war, he declared, “I believe that the government that governs best is a government that governs least, and by these standards we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.” …
Observing that Bush sticks to his principles, he said, “When the president decides something on Monday, he still believes it on Wednesday - no matter what happened Tuesday.”
Also lampooning the press, Colbert complained that he was “surrounded by the liberal media who are destroying this country, except for Fox News. Fox believes in presenting both sides of the story — the president’s side and the vice president’s side.” He also reflected on the alleged good old days, when the media was still swallowing the WMD story.
Addressing the reporters, he said, “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. Put them 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.”
Heh. Very partisan, but funny. Not the sort of routine you’d expect to go over well with that crowd; clearly, Colbert was not expecting to be invited back.
Crooks and Liars has the video. Here’s the transcript. (Hat tip: A Nun Mouse.)
|
Categories: News, Misc. Funny Stuff
|
April 30th, 2006 at 6:09:44 pm
Beautiful use of sarcasm.
And no matter of how partisan it was, the truth is the truth.
Two Thumbs Up.
April 30th, 2006 at 6:21:18 pm
Saw parts of it, seemed like Colbert was bombing on every level.
April 30th, 2006 at 6:43:54 pm
Colbert was bombing in a room full of self-important assholes. I laughed my ass off.
April 30th, 2006 at 7:08:37 pm
I thought it was funny, but I just like that style. Colbert’s style is definitely not a very “presidential” class of humor, though, so I can see why Washington’s uppity-ups would not be amused.
April 30th, 2006 at 7:11:01 pm
I remember this happened to Don Imus a few years back. If anything, the PR helped his career.
April 30th, 2006 at 9:10:51 pm
It was bombing on so many different levels that I became uncomfortable myself and went to migrate web servers from Win2000 to Win2003. Much more entertaining.
And please quote one truth of Colbert, DUP. I don’t think stupid comments are defined as cutting sarcasm.
April 30th, 2006 at 9:17:24 pm
Cut a little deep, did it, Charles?
April 30th, 2006 at 9:41:27 pm
Charles isn’t interested in facts Briandot, just accusing people of saying things which they never did then running away like a coward.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:40:11 pm
Colbert’s schtick gets old quickly. The Bush imitator (and Bush himself) were much funnier IMHO.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:41:45 pm
Colbert’s job wasn’t to be sarcastic, or to tell truth to power. It was to entertain, and to that end, he failed miserably.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:01:35 am
I was entertained.
May 1st, 2006 at 3:51:30 am
I think– whether or not you like Colbert– Colbert has a great sense of satire. He does with comedy what any masterful politician does in the political arena: he adopts the position of the other side and uses it for rhetorical, comedic effect. His style reminds me of great satire like Swift. He also reminds me of Mark Twain. In dark times, truth hides in the nooks and crannies of our culture.
May 1st, 2006 at 6:57:53 am
Wow, Brian,
You and David are sooooo edgie, just like Colbert.
How ’bout you two guys go and serve your country rather than bash it. You sit in your comfy houses just bashing those people that serve to protect you and you feel just grand.
I served my country and was prepared to die for your ability to say the stupidest things.
I am not the coward in this comment thread.
The President and our soldiers are fighting in Iraq so that we don’t have to be attacked over here.
But that doesn’t make sense to you cowards.
Those that serve understand what is happening. You cowards are still trying to figure out why Islam is so mad at us and how can we open a dialog negotiate with them.
You are still children.
May 1st, 2006 at 7:34:40 am
That’s right, Charles. If you don’t want to die or kill in a war of aggression, you’re a coward. Which inherently means that Colbert is wrong and unfunny. (Sadly enough, you’re starting to sound like Colbert when he just calls those who disagree with him cowards.)
Why is it, when something gets under a conservative’s skin, they demand you go die in a cause you don’t believe?
How many logical fallacies can I count in that one post? Ad hominem, changing the subject, missing the point…
May 1st, 2006 at 8:50:23 am
Mouse,
Swift, Twain . . . and Colbert?!
LOL!
May 1st, 2006 at 8:54:38 am
I am serving my country, albeit as a Navy civilian instead of in uniform. When you were in the Army, did you consider the hundreds of thousands of nonuniformed Army employees traitors and cowards? I hope not; they were making sure you were fed, paid, and in possession of modern weaponry.
(If/when we go to war with China over Taiwan, you’ll be glad I’m here, making quiet and deadly things that lurk beneath the waves.)
Charles, you need to learn to separate the ability to go to war — i.e., a strong military — from the political decision to go to war. It’s not always a good idea to use the biggest, heaviest tool in your bag; sometimes problems can be resolved in a more intelligent fashion. But when all you have is a hammer, then every problem is a nail, right?
Or is it just a juvenile desire to shoot things and make stuff go ‘boom’? Maybe you’ll be more reasonable when you grow up.
May 1st, 2006 at 9:00:35 am
Good points, Sean. But let’s not forget that there is only one way to serve the country, and that’s through military service. No other job - including being a civilian employee of the DoD (which, if I remember correctly, is what Brian is) - constitutes serving. Because clearly, the only job needed to run this country is that of soldier.
And I totally see where, in their comments about Stephen Colbert being funny, Brian and David were “bashing” the country, the President and the military. Really, I totally get all of that out of “Cut a little deep, Charles?”
The funny thing is that even Andrew thought it was funny. Why? It has nothing to do with politics - it’s because he has a sense of humor! Something that Charles is clearly lacking. If you can’t laugh at yourself, then you’re taking yourself too seriously.
May 1st, 2006 at 9:29:58 am
Charles, to be clear, this statement of yours is utter nonsense: The President and our soldiers are fighting in Iraq so that we don’t have to be attacked over here.
First, the President is not fighting in Iraq, he is clearing brush in Texas. Fighting in Iraq will not prevent us from being attacked here. It takes resources away from the war in Afghanistan where we might actually be able to fight them over there instead of over here. Iraq was stable — run by a total asshole but stable. Iraq also had a low percent likelihood of attacking us. As opposed to Al Quieda in Afghanistan who, you know, had already attacked us. Instead we go out and put on a massive PR campaign for the enemy in Iraq of just why the west should not be trusted. Which, you know, creates more terrorists. So your whole idea is ludicrous. You might have been in the military but you certainly don’t think strategically. If you ever made it past private I feel sorry for the people under your command.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:22:23 am
How ’bout you two guys go and serve your country rather than bash it. You sit in your comfy houses just bashing those people that serve to protect you and you feel just grand.
Yes Charles, you ARE a coward. You are afraid to hear opinions that you disagree with but even beyond that you are willing to make false accusations against someone, specifically ME and then you run away without answering when I call you on them.
And your statment above which i have highlighted is patently absurd. One does not need to serve in the military to serve ones country. And one definitely does not need to agree hook line and sinker with the President to be right in this world. You accuse us of bashing this country because in your eyes aparently, “this country” must mean Bush and his administration.
Let me try and get this through your thick skull one more time.
I criticize Bush and his administration and the GOP in Congress and their leadership in general because I believe that they are doing more to harm this country than any administration in the history of our country. Whether or not you agree or disagree, the bottom line remains that what I am doing is trying to PROTECT America and the freedoms it is supposed to stand for. The freedom to be free from illegal warrantless wiretaping. The freedom to be free to check out a book from the library without worrying about ending up on some FBI watch list. I could go on but we’ve had those discussions over and over on this blog.
The idea, the very idea that disagreeing with this administration and believing that the choices it has made are wrong somehow being equal to bashing America and the people who are serving in the armed forces or other areas is so far beyond reasonable its disgusting.
I have family and friends who are serving in the military right now, and you know what? I’d rather they not die for some ego maniacs war, a war that continues to get worse because the Commander in Chief is to arrogant to listen to reason.
But lets see you put your money where your mouth is, if you won’t listen to me, how about the numerous retired Generals who have come out publicly criticizing Bush for his handling of the war. They served their country yet they were at the time and now ignored and dismissed for daring to question Bush and co. They served, but Bush, Cheney et al. never did. Are you questioning their patriotism too?
How about John Kerry, John McCain and Muartha, all men who bravely served their country and were brutally attacked and slandered by the Rove smear machine. Why aren’t you standing up for them? Instead you have thrown your weight behind people who did NOT serve in the military. Not only are you a coward but you are a hypocrit. Its bad enough that you dismiss any opinion of somone whose ideas you like on the ridiculous idea that we didn’t join the army therefore we are bashing our country when we disagree with Bush, but no you can’t even apply the standard fairly. Then again hypcorisy appears to be the number one trait of most GOPers these days so I’m not exactly surprised.
No Charles, it is YOU who are in the wrong here, you are incapable of having a debate of ideas so instead you must try and assassinate the character of thsoe who disagree iwth you by LYING about them and accusing them of things which have never happened.
For serving your country in the military and for what you did during the hurricane you have my deepest thanks.
For slandering me and questioning my patriotism without so much as a shred of reason, you are a coward and a cad.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:40:11 am
Ah, but David, you forget that in going to Vietnam John Kerry was protected from harm by the indestructible forcefield of “rich boy with political motive.” The bullets shot at him by the Viet Cong bounced right off. Obviously Kerry’s wartime service is entirely discountable because he probably only did it because he wanted to run for office one day. Or at least we can assume so because afterward he had the treasonistic gall to testify before Congress about the horrors the Vietnam War worked not only on the Vietnamese but on the soldiers who fought the war. And he ended up running for office.
I think Colbert is hilarious and I think he had a lot of balls to stand up there and say what he did.
Though I have to say the funniest Press Corps dinner moment was Bill Clinton’s lame duck video. Riding the old-timey bike around the Supreme Court? Hilarious.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:43:15 am
How dare Colbert make fun of the King…I mean, President.
Some of the people on this thread need to declare themselves loyalists and move to Canada before it’s too late.
May 1st, 2006 at 12:14:14 pm
A measure of Colbert will be whether or not he is invited back … if he served his intended audience well, we will … if he didn’t, he won’t …
From what I have seen so far, he should probably keep his regular job where he does seem to serve *that* audience well …
May 1st, 2006 at 2:58:21 pm
Andrew finding the routine funny is indeed linked to him having a sense of humor. But it’s not necessarily the case that people who didn’t find it funny lack a sense of humor. Humor is an inherently subjective thing, and there are a whole lot of styles of it. I frequently get annoyed by people stating that someone needs a sense of humor, when what they really mean is that they want the person to have a compatible sense of humor to their own. An actual lack of a sense of humor is exceedingly rare, and found mostly in lobotomy patients.
May 1st, 2006 at 4:18:10 pm
Ah Mike, sorry, I was just embellishing a bit. I don’t honestly think that Charles has NO sense of humor; I just think maybe he’s not very good at laughing at himself or those he admires/identifies with.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:54:36 am
Watch Colbert unedited here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgTKfOJrTuM
He made most of the audience laugh numerous times and he received a standing ovation.
But don’t tell All Ass Dare that.
May 2nd, 2006 at 3:38:31 pm
For a different (and broader) perspective, try the first sub-article here complete with links to video and a transcript …
Was the eprformance well-targeted for the audience ?
May 3rd, 2006 at 8:25:38 pm
ummm, how can it possible be broader than the live unedited performance? Yeah another gem of wisdom from the local village idiot,err Alasdair.