Colbert's Correspondents Course

There's quite a bit of political frothing over Stephen Colbert's appearance at the White House Correspondent Dinner over the weekend. The usual suspects are leaping and hooting in the trees with roughly a thousand threads saluting the courage Colbert in taking on the President. I'll simply note that when a political party's hero of the year is a comedian, that's probably a sign of nothing good.

As for the actual performance, it's good in parts, awkward and stilted in others. The Helen Thomas Terminator 2 bit goes on far too long and has been trimmed. I'm a big fan of Colbert's right-wing pundit character, often featuring him in Malcovision, but he wears thin under the strain of twenty unbroken minutes. Though he seems very much out of his element, there are a few worthwhile moments and jokes interspersed throughout.

[Watch video – 20:35, WMV format, high bandwidth]

[Watch video – 20:35, WMV format, low bandwidth]

Comments

[Dan]

He knew exactly what he was doing. I'm wagering he meant it to be less funny and more pointed.

Granted, I don't have any problem with that. Some of the folks around here might tho.

[Queer Conservative]

I actually agree with you Dan.

Colbert was being much more direct than he is on his show, and as I commented to Robbie - I think everyone he skewered could use the spanking, from the President to the press corp.

[James]

QC,

Be careful. Some in the press corps might like to be spanked.

Yeah all of this noise about the dinner seems to be silly. Has political discourse been so dumbed down that a dinner is now news?

peace

[Alan]

Frankly, I thought Colbert stank, with a capital suck. Could he have laid a bigger egg? It was worse than simply being mean-spirited... it was unfunny. If I'd paid to be there I'd damn sure expect to be entertained.

[raj]

Colbert did get in some good zingers, but he wasn't as funny as he is on his TV show. Probably because on the TV show, he has some visual props that add to the comedy, which he could not have had at the correspondents' dinner.

[Jamie]

I think the audience was "shocked & awed" that he had the temerity to roast Bush the way he did. It's like some were simply aghast, and others were afraid to laugh.

Personally, I thought it was a fucking riot.

[Queer Conservative]

A "riot" - no. Awkward - yes. On target - definitely.

[Justin]

"I'll simply note that when a political party's hero of the year is a comedian, that's probably a sign of nothing good."

There you go with your patented American binary thinking - it's all Coke vs. Pepsi with you. I don't think he's the Democrat's 'hero' at all since cutting, scathing irony can be used just as effectively against them. The difference is, of course, they didn't march Americans into a war under false pretenses.

When irony is used against Bush it takes on a tragic note. Sure we on the 'left' are loving Colbert's speech but it reveals your false leader and an impotent press - both of which are more sad and pathetic then hilarious.

I thought 9/11 would make Americans more cautious about their government's actions in other countries but it seems to have made them more gullible.

Stephen Colbert has shown the world that not all Americans are sycophantic followers who believe everything their President says.

[Robbie]

Five points to Justin for illustrating my comment perfectly.

[Queer Conservative]

I agree Justin, I hardly believed a word President Clinton said :-) Especially when he promised we'd be out of Bosnia in a year!

[Dan]

With all due respect, Robbie, humorists are often the sole voice of opposition when you have an oppressive, totalitarian regime.

Yeah, that's a joke. Kinda.

[Craig Ranapia]

Um, I'd like to think I'm a conservative who can laugh at the excesses and stupidities of my own kind. God know there's plenty of laughter in the dark to be had.. But, gee Steve, I guess it just sticks in my craw to be making funny in your pants about Iraq when you're in a well-guarded (and probably very well-lubricated) ballroom in Washington.

And could someone tell me what 'courage' was involved in Colbert's monologue? "Taking on the president" in front of this crowd is about as edgy as Jew-bating in Tehran or telling nigger jokes in blackface at a KKK convention. I just find it rather ironic that Bush taking the piss out of himself was funnier - and more pointed that something that read like it was written by a horde of Kos-sacks on speed.

[Dan]

Craig, if you don't see the bravery of a cable-tier comedian taking (very pointed) potshots at the leader of the free world... WHILE ON THE SAME STAGE WITH HIM, I don't know what to say.

[Craig Ranapia]

Dan:

Oh please - what the fuck was Bush going to do: Order his Secret Service detail to get Bonnie and Clyde on Colbert's uppity ass, live on C-Span? Seriously, Dan, a wee bit of perspective is in order here. A fashionable political satirist taking predictable shots at a safe target in front of a basically friendly audience doesn't meet my definition of 'courage'. (And as I've said above, I certainly don't think Bush is somehow above being mocked - no politician is. It's just I'm old school enough to think jokes need to be funny.)

[Kiwi]

Colbert did exactly what needed to be done: showed the press corps what a bunch of pandering lackeys they are. Sometimes the truth hurts. If the press corps and the pResident want to sit around swilling cocktails and sucking on each other cocks, let 'em do in the White House briefing room, where it seems to go on unchecked each and every day. Colbert got it right. The only things these bastards report is the delusional fiction that the Bush regime spins through its spurious leaks.

[Queer Conservative]

if you don't see the bravery of a cable-tier comedian taking (very pointed) potshots at the leader of the free world... WHILE ON THE SAME STAGE WITH HIM, I don't know what to say.

First - kudos for admitting we live in the free world.

Second - is it really that big a deal? Comedians have been lambasting US Presidents since Washington and I don't think any of them ever spent any time in the gulag for it.

With all due respect, Robbie, humorists are often the sole voice of opposition when you have an oppressive, totalitarian regime.

Yeah, that's a joke. Kinda.

Third - you know you weren't kidding...

[Justin]

Anyone else notice that the MSM (check out the New York Times article especially) totally IGNORED Stephen Colbert's speech?

Apparently the press aren't liberal at all. Something the left has been saying for many, many years (see: Chomsky, et al.).

[Queer Conservative]

I think they ignored because it isn't really news worthy and it wasn't Colbert's best schtick.

Chomsky?

[Michigan-Matt]

Colbert is dumber than a sponge.

I stumbled upon Colbert's act and the video while surfing between basketball games, but the funniest line I heard was when he was admonishing reporters --WH reporters-- to spend more time with the family... to relax, write the book that is floating around in the head of nearly every self-centered egomanical WH reporter... where they are the strong, fearless or feckless reporter who stand up to the President, the govt... a work of fiction.

LOL. Yet, of the 10+ minutes I watched, I thought it was generally in poor taste, a little funny in places, but that he misread a crowd smattered with Administration workers and allies sitting next to reporters... the reporters were restrained in their impulse to laugh because it was awkward to laugh at the President, Veep, and others.

First rule of comedy: know they audience. Hell, even SpongeBob knows that after making fun of Sandy the Squirrel with all those dumb-squirrel jokes for weeks.

Therefore, I conclude Colbert is dumber than a sponge. And less talented as a comedian, too.

[Justin]

Hey Michigan-Matt,
I watched the speech through a magical device called the 'internets' and myself and many people laughed quite a bit. So it would seem he DID know his audience. Unless of course by 'audience' you meant the people that were there in person - in that case you'll have to tell all those people watching videos at youtube, Google video or even Malcontent that they aren't really an audience cause they aren't live...oh and stop in at every cinema in the country and tell them too...oh and anyone watching reruns on TV...the list goes on.
Unfortunately as with most conservatives your basic concepts and arguments are flawed and frankly pathetic.

Oh and my simple rebuttal would make you the one dumber than a sponge.

You want to talk "poor taste"? How about sending American troops to fight for a lie.

[Queer Conservative]

Yep. Justin reads Chomsky.

"America sucks! Pol Pot rocks!"

[Craig Ranapia]

BTW, folks.

May 3 is World Press Freedom Day. You might want to have a look at http://www.worldpressfreedomday.org/ and see what real courage in the service of free speech is. It's a bit more than having to have the fish because the kitchen ran out of rubber chicken, and pay for your own drinks...

[Patrick]

Colbert was just doing what he was asked to do, come on and do his character from his show. His comedy was the same as it has been on the show. People are saying it wasn't as funny is because the audience wasn't laughing. But that is not the best indicator. It seemed to me the audience was supressing laughter as opposed to not laughing or finding anything funny.

I really think that the reason people are having the negative reaction that they are is that Colbert wasn't just taking the piss out of the President- he was doing it to the journos too, and some people seem to lose their sense of humor when the comedy is pointed their way. I think Americans would be a better lot if they would laugh a bit more. He's a freakin' comedian- why be sensitive over what a comedian says?

"It's funny cuz it's true!"

[Justin]

"Yep. Justin reads Chomsky. "America sucks! Pol Pot rocks!""

As I've already said above:

"There you go with your patented American binary thinking - it's all Coke vs. Pepsi with you."

Why is it that conservatives can only understand things when they're reduced to a conceit as simple as a using a light switch or a turn signal (ie. it's either 'on' or 'off'/'left' or 'right').

This is probably why they didn't get Colbert's speech.

[Michigan-Matt]

Jason writes, with a lot of penis envy, "Unfortunately as with most conservatives your basic concepts and arguments are flawed and frankly pathetic."

Right, Justin... that's why conservatives still control the US House, took back the US Senate, kicked the liberals-poster-boi Tom Daschle to the curb, control the SCOTUS, control the WH for about another 1000 days, most of the gubernatorial mansions, 2/3rds of the state legislatures... et cetera... and FoxNews is #1 in ratings for news shows time and time again and WeScream4HowieDean can't get the impotent liberals off the ground again... LOL. Right Justin --drink the Kool Aid on your way to marginal inconsequence.

It's also why "gay marriage" advocates from the far radical Left continue to misserve our interests... and, Justin, you'll be in the marginalized minority for years and years to come.

No, Colbert flopped. He violtaed rule #1: know thy audience b4 shooting yourself in the foot, crotch, mouth and hand that feeds you.

And for the record, Justin, comedy central network isn't the news even tho' something like 65% of college freshmen think it is a news show. It isn't a "speech by Colbert" as you contend --it was an act. He's a frickin actor, you moron.