Slashdot Mirror
Colbert New Comic-in-Chief
scottzak writes "Hail to the Chief! Stephen Colbert addressed the White House Correspondents Dinner Saturday (attended by the President, the elite of Washington politics, and the White House Press Corps) and told the truth. Jaws dropped. Eyes popped. The live audience gasped. Scalia laughed his ass off. You want to see a brilliant comic display some real courage? Look no further. Enjoy the reaction shots, and Colbert's audition for Press Secretary job." The BBC covers the act just prior to Mr. Colbert's, where the President and a look-alike took turns making fun of his speaking skills.
Here is the torrent link:
http://www.mininova.org/tor/296239
Registered Linux user #421033
Crooks and Liars doesn't have the full footage. Instead, check out the 3 segments on youtube:
1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcIRXur61II
The transcript is also available here:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/30/1441/5981
WTF? That BBC article was not only pointless, but about three paragraphs long. At least post an article that discusses the topic, like maybe... E&P story
It is really worth the watch. Colbert starts about 40 minutes into the video. Get the torrent or watch it on youtube (part 1, part 2, and part 3). If you haven't seen the Colbert report - it is quite good. Comedy central has a bunch of videos up - my favorite is the "know a district" ones.
The Colbert Report is really high quality political humor, like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart - it is funny because so often it is true.
Oh he didn't entirely lose the room. Far from it, considering the exceptionally dry speakers preceding the Bushes and Colbert. (All praise the invention of fast forward). Colbert's greeting of Scalia, comments regarding Fox, boxing a glacier, DC the mallowmar city, Plame, and Helen-Thomas-the-stalker were all priceless. The interviews of the press corps in their little caves and 'presidential humor - cspan style' segments were great too. By all means watch it if you haven't.
Stephen was on 60 Minutes this Sunday. Link to video. And the CBS text.
The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
"What's next, the NY Times not agreeing with the president on Iraq?"
Unless that was an attempt at irony, you really should pay closer attention to current events. The New York Times was pro-war from the beginning. Remember Judith Miller, the NY Times reporter who ended up in jail for contempt during Scooter Libby's grand jury hearing? She wrote one article after another for the Times backing up the Bush Administration's false claims of WMD. She was their star reporter, their headlining act, the woman with the (erroneous) inside information. When Joseph Wilson wrote his op-ed piece calling out Bush on his State of the Union lie, Scooter Libby leaked information to Judith Miller that he hoped would discredit Wilson. That's how she ended up in jail, because she refused to reveal Libby as her source. There's lots more to the story, but the crux of the matter is that the only difference between the New York Times and the New York Post as regards the war in Iraq is that the Times uses a classier typeface.
i thought, therefore i was...
Neither. Reality
1 .
By the way, as I am in old foggy Blighty I did not see it, but here is the full transcript: http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/30/1441/5981
And all I can say, applause, applause...
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Have you watched the Colbert Report? Ok this is what he does, this is his shtick. He pretends to be a super patriotic to the point of stupidity pundent that supports the administration (Bill O'Reilly would be the closest analogue) but it's actually biting satire that's criticising it. Whatever he's pretending to make look good, he's actually ripping on, and masterfully so I might add. Since he's playing the government loving windbag, they are the most frequent target. The media is another frequent target.
Well, you ought to know this when you book him. This is what he does, so this is what you are going to get. Getting pissed that he ripped on the administration and the media is like getting pissed becuase you book Carlos Mencia and get racial humour. Of COURSE that's what you get, that's what he does! If that's not what you want, book someone else.
This was Colbert doing what he does best. That it fell flat on the audience because they don't like being made fun of is of no concern. If you can't laugh at yourself, don't hire a satirist because they are likely to pick on you. This goes double if you are already a favourite subject for them. I have no idea what the Whitehouse was thinking booking him. It's not like it's hard to find out what he's about. He's on national TV 5 nights a week for you to see.
I saw it live, and when Colbert came on I said to myself "are they fucking stupid?!" Stephen Colbert is of course no fan of the president and I was suprised to see him hold his own up there as the audience refused to really laugh. Stephen bombed, not because he wasnt funny, or truthfull but because the audience seemed affraid to laugh.
:)
:)
:)
The whitehouse bit with Helen Thomas stalking him wasnt that funny. Stephen was funny overall though. It was interesting to see him be polite towards the president after having just said "the country doesnt like you and this whole thing is a mess"
Stephen did well considering the audience...
And thats what i'm really insulted by... (I'm not insulted by Stephen, i loved it) but the audience, the members of the press, the celebrities, the politicians, lawyers, judges, lobbiests...
Something just feels off when the press has a dinner with the whitehouse administration, plus celebrities. It just seems like a big get together of the wealthy and powerful for no reason.
For example, anyone that watched it on C-span, you would have seen George Clooney surrounded by 10 or more girls at a time after the dinner. There were no guys around Clonney, and i just found it histerical because they let 30minutes pass before showing clooney on tv again, and there he was with another 10 girls surrounding him wanting pictures
OK Clooney has political motives, but what about Phil Simms? Tiki Barber? Ludicris?... What could they possibly have to do with the whitehouse reporters?
It just seems like a slap in the face to the public. I dont think the Press should be "hanging" with the press. And i certainly dont think it should be a big celebrity dog and pony show.
What i found histerical is the number of old white men with young hot dates
The whole thing is rather phoney, and by that i mean the government, and the press
Part of the "illusion" of minimal crowd reaction was likely due to CSpan's audio configuration, which leaned heavily on the speaker and very little on the crowd. Since most comedy shows mic the crowd for cheering and laughter, it's somewhat strange to watch a comic when you can't hear that live reaction. I think that this is the case here, and I'm guessing the laughter was quite a bit stronger than it seems in the video.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
T. Jefferson
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.