I thought I had clicked the wrong spot and deleted my letter.

Editor, if you can delete one of those twins, please delete this apology also.

Thanks.

Satire is about pointing the spotlight at absurdity. It's about challenging people to see what's really going on and to do better. And especially, satire is never funny when you're the one being satirized; which was nearly the entire audience of dinner. And there was laughter...the kind of laughter you hear from subordinates when the boss gets called out...except from the brown-nosers (you can read that as the White House Press Corp).

I think Colbert reads Aretino: "I love you, and because I love you, I would sooner have you hate me for telling you the truth than adore me for telling you lies."

I agree with Sen and any other folks who commented similarly. Colbert was invited because he is a political funny man but funny wasn't the point on Saturday night. Colbert made the most of an opportunity to speak to a much larger audience. He couched his critique of Bush et al in a framework of humor but funny wasn't really the point at all. People applaud Colbert's skilled use of irony in his show, but by commenting on his funniness at the WHCD they really overlook the biggest irony of them all: He wasn't using irony on Saturday night. He was being earnest.

Colbert has the biggest, hardest stones in the country. Hurray for SC.

But when we talk about the WH press corps, what exactly are these people up against? They feed their families by being reporters. But the administration gets to decide, does it not, who is allowed in and who is chosen to ask a question? Therefore the WH Press Corps feeds their children at the pleasure of those they're supposed to poke and prod, question, cross-examine and lay bare? That's never going to work. Of course they're toadies, it's that or back to covering celebrities' children's birthday parties.

From the close to 40,000 thank you notes to Colbert over at thankyoustephencolbert.org/ one would have to acknowledge that the docile press corps caved in even more to the White House when they all decided, no doubt without having to be told by Karl Rove, upon a press corps unified talking point: he just wasn't funny. When 40,000 people found him hilarious, heroic, and truly patriotic enough to write and thank him, many more must also be feeling that way.

Thanks to you for this. I will keep my subscription to Salon. I have already quit the Post and the Times.

It's the grandest problem with irony. No one was talking about Chris Rock's still-brilliant opening monologue at the Academy Awards however long ago, and it was similarly scathing--a routine that not only poked fun at the industry in question from outside, but also seemed to crawl inside its skin in some of the most uncomfortable ways.

Of course Colbert was not perceived as funny--he was talking, and talking seriously, about the same people who have passed such judgement. To those of us on the outside, he was everything we want a comic to be. Very rarely, when you're the audience member who's awkward evening-wear is in question, do you leave the show raving.

Luis

John Cleese once said that when people laugh, you knew they got the point. The people in that room didn't laugh. Everybody I know who has watched it (primarily on the internet)thinks it's one of the funniest things they've ever seen. The only arguing I've been hearing revolves around which was the best line in the performance.

It appears the status quo remains in full force and effect.

Dear Salon writers,

Don´t take their bait! By arguing over the "funny" issue and giving it so much space in Salon´s columns, you are getting sucked into the Colbert critics´ distraction game.

"Funny" is not the point. Saturday night´s White House Correspondents' Association dinner was not a Star Search for best comedian. Ok, so Bush wins. Are you happy now, Joe Scarborough and Ana Marie Cox and friends? And how should Americans feel about THAT? Their president was the funniest stand-up comedian in the room, never mind he put the country in the toilet? How should the families of dead soldiers manage the news that their leader is a stand-up comedian?

Where´s all the powerful stuff Scherer wrote about situationists in France... a revolutionary act... and what about "E Unibus Pluram"??

Folks, you have bigger fish to fry, and you were on the right track. Stick to IRONY, and don´t lose the momentum.

Get back in the ballgame, and stop agonizing about whether humour is "subjective". Sheesh, the country is in trouble-- who gives a shit about who was funnier??!!

When you have a tooth ache you go to the dentist. But if it's a truth ache you have, then you've been listening to Stephen Colbert sink his fangs deep into the lies and failings of the Bush Administration and the blind media lapdogs.

Stephen Colbert bombed? When Stephen Colbert bombs it's a wisdom truth coming in.

I didn't laugh all that much either the first time I watched the video. But then I watched it again, and again, and read the transcripts, and finally the truthiness of Colbert's words settled deep into my funny bones. It was a painful and crafty truth extraction -- without anesthetic.

Watching Stephen Colbert wasn't supposed to be funny like "funny, ha ha" it was more like "funny that guy got hit by that train."

It was like watching the bully get his ass kicked, while his family watched in silence. It was surreal. I kept waiting for Karl to pull the mic.

Damn.

I've never seen a ripping like that before and I'm from Philadelphia...

Colbert is a performer, like Kaufman was a performer. Andy Kaufman performed to elicit a response. Sometimes it was laughter; sometimes it was anger. One thing for sure: Colbert ain’t George W. Bush’s monkey.

JPR, Birmingham, Alabama