Reply
Fri 16 Mar, 2007 07:11 am
WASHINGTON, March 15 (UPI) -- Watching Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central, OK; being interviewed on "The Colbert Report," not OK, new members of the U.S. House of Representatives were told.
U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., the Democratic Caucus chairman, told new Democratic members of Congress to steer clear of Colbert, or at least his satirical Comedy Central program, "The Colbert Report," The Hill, a Washington newspaper, said.
"He said don't do it ... it's a risk and it's probably safer not to do it," U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn, said of taping a segment for the show.
What a bunch of pansy-ass wimps.
I've always been amazed that people talk to him in the first place.
I forget who he had on during his "Better Know Your District" bit the other night but he challenged him to a debate then said "Throwing kittens in a woodchipper. I'm against it." leaving his guest to discuss why it's okay to throw kittens in a woodchipper.
And the guy did it!
Hilarious.
Gotta go along with you on this one, dys.
Unless it's a fake-out by Emmanuel.
The Colbert Report skewers the arrogant conservative viewpoint, you would think the Democrats would be sympathetic to it.
By pretending not to like the show, Emmanuel might be looking to blunt criticism from the right that the show is biased.
Let's face it. Before Jon Stewart got big a couple of years ago and now Colbert, the big things in political broadcasting were The O'Reilly Factor and Rush Limbaugh. Since Stewart and Colbert, those guys have become has-beens and now the hottest thing in political broadcasting are from a liberal viewpoint.
So Emmauel might be playing oh-so-coy and pretending to be shocked at the show-while loving every minute of it.
I saw a show the other night with Stewart and another fellow kind of interviewing each other. Stewart made a very astute comment. "Never fall in love with your audience." He went on to talk about how many will believe he is championing their cause and when he stops, they will complain loudly.
The thing I like about Stewart is that he has no love of either party of political belief. He satirizes current events. Right now Bush is current events and he satirizes him. Very well in fact.
Do not believe for a moment he will not use the same devices he is using now should a democrat come into office in 08.
I wonder if you will hold the same opinion then kelticwizard?
Well, I imagine if that happens, my opinion of Stewart will be similar to my opinion when Dennis Miller switched sides then saw his show cancelled.
Here was my response.
kelticwizard wrote:Still, I draw no joy from Miller's firing. Even though he has switched political sides, I like the guy's style, if not his viewpoint these days. And you have to still like him a little for the great job he did on Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live lo those many years ago.
I'm going to remember him for one of the funniest lines I ever heard. In a bit about how serial killers so often manage to live in quiet residential neighborhoods and manage to commit amazing crimes without rousing the slightest suspicion from their neighbors, Miller said:
"When you hit forty, you've given up on trying to reform anyone. You just want to make sure you're not living next door to them when they finally blow".
Just because a fellow sees things differently from myself nowadays doesn't mean I abandon him. If he was funny then, chances are he's funny now. Although I didn't find Miller's pro-Perot "rants" masquerading as a standup routine as being funny, he was confusing a campaign speech with political comedy there. I did like his CNBC show, however, even though it got cancelled.
So I'm on record as defending a comedian who turned conservative.
Answer your question, McGentrix?
Dys
I think the fear of Colbert is that the interviews he conducts with members of Congress could be used against them in election campaigns. The Republicans are known to take the silly sound bites out of contex and insert them into their smear campaign ads. (Democrats also do it.)
I think it was stupid to urge them to avoid Colbert. Instead, he might have advised them to be careful how they respond to Colbert's quote demands by being more clever than he is, a difficult task.
BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie:
You raise an interesting point. But here is a question: does the show give permission to use sound bites from the show in political campaigns?
I would think they wouldn't. If the answer is indeed that an interviewee's future opponent cannot use a clip from the show in his commericials, what's the harm?
Well, there's YouTube I suppose,and similar computer sites. But I wonder how much that can hurt, compared with being considered "a regular guy" and taking a little kidding?
BBB:
Well if clips find themselves into Letterman and Leno, then I suppose there is a small risk against the interviewd Congressman.
But this clip thing seems to be only really effective when hammered home by an ad campaign. And if the congressman in question is made to look a little foolish, once, on national TV I don't think it hurts that much.
Especially when the Democrats consider how much good The Daily Show and Colbert do lampooning conservatives.
If a Democratic Congressman looks silly for three seconds on Leno, but the right wing looks silly for an hour on The Daily Show and Colbert, that is a tradeoff I would take in a minute.
Just found out on the news a couple of hours ago: the Republicans told their people to keep away from Colbert since his unpopular, (with them), speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner.
So both are saying keep away. But Colbert is booked with political figures from both sides through the summer.
I say, "Lambast 'em all, until we get some honesty in there."
Both Stewart and Colbert attempt to satirize and lampoon politicos from both parties. The difference is that Stewart is funny and Colbert isn't.
JPB wrote:Both Stewart and Colbert attempt to satirize and lampoon politicos from both parties. The difference is that Stewart is funny and Colbert isn't.
No...they're both very funny.
And others are right, they have been increasing their attacks on democrats in congress since January. I'm pretty liberal and I enjoy the attacks directed at either side of the political party. There criticism is funny, honest, and fair regardless of who they are attacking.
I don't think Stewart will "switch sides" in a way comparable to Miller-- he'll always be liberal, but he'll joke about whoever's in power no matter which party that happens to be. Just like the other night when he skewered both Hillary and Obama for their silly accent stunts. *ouch*
In my opinion, Colbert is the funniest thing on Television right now.
ebrown_p wrote:In my opinion, Colbert is the funniest thing on Television right now.
Then you dont watch much TV,do you?
Letterman is still getting mileage out of Bill Clinton jokes. I always try to catch Stewart but sometimes I'm not in the mood for Colbert. I think his put on pretentious bit can get tiresome, but then again, everytime I watch I laugh till my sides ache. When he does his "know a district" bits, I always wonder why the elected official doesn't know what he/she is getting into beforehand. He interviewed a local county rep from my district and I was crying by the time he finished. By the way my local rep was considered to be pretty liberal and had been in office for over 30 years. The issues were silly and no one got hurt, not politically at least. Anybody remember the time he interviewed Barney Frank and followed him around the Capital. That was funny, but not to Barney.
I totally understand Emmanuel's advice.
I mean, it's Stewart's and Colbert's job to satirise, and they do it in a way that pleases their viewers. They should never stop.
But of course, there's no obligation for politicians to willingly offer themselves up for ridicule. Why should they? There's little to win, and enough risk.
If I were a politician, I would have no problem with them mocking me. But I wouldnt voluntarily throw myself in there to be mocked some extra.
When it comes to critical interviews, I really believe that political culture has gone all wrong, esp in the UK/US, in that the more prominent politicians, Bush way out front, just make sure they wont have to face more critical questions than the absolute miminum they can get.
I think it's a democratic obligation for elected representatives to be available for critical questioning.
But to make themseles available to be made a joke of, in a comedy show? Whyever would they?
Meantime, Colbert and Stewart can do just fine with tapes and quotes and imitations and the whole arsenal they can otherwise use to make fun of current affairs.
Btw, from what I caught through web video, I used to think Stewart was pretty funny, and Colbert just kinda wasnt. But the other night I watched a bunch of clips from both on the Comedy Central website, and I thought the opposite.
Colbert had become sharper, and had remained fairly sardonic, while Stewart appeared to be slipping into that more lazy, low-tempo self-congratulatory style that makes Letterman and Leno so unfunny to a European like me.
(If you cant imagine what would make Letterman and Leno so unfunny to a European like me,
read this post :wink: )
Colbert Wins "Person of the Year" Award
US comedian Stephen Colbert has been named "Person of the Year" by the US Comedy Arts Festival late last week. On accepting the award, Colbert said: "What an honor. An honor to receive and an honor for you to give to me."
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace