But that's hardly the point. And Colbert's hardly your run-of-the-mill comedian. He doesn't deal in comedy, he deals in irony. Had he designed his routine to be funny, in the conventional sense, it wouldn't have been effective. Bush prides himself on his capacity for self-effacement (see the ridiculous Bush impersonator he mugged with earlier in the night's program), and he often pokes fun at himself as a way of deflecting legitimate criticism. He only got as steamed as he did - and Laura only refused to shake Colbert's hand - because Colbert's masterful delivery gave the President no wiggle room. No, it wasn't funny, but it didn't need to be. Anyone who sees that as a problem is missing the point entirely.

Love Colbert, and your wrap-up. Perfection.

Amy

To the Humor Impaired: People, this was not a Comedy Club Standup Routine, ok? Colbert gave a speech in his "Colbert Report" persona. If you don't get it, you don't get it. His speech was less about knee slapping zingers and more about biting, relentless, shock and awe TRUTHINESS.

It was brave, concise, FUNNY, and something that inspired a lot of us who have known for years that the Emperor and his Cronies are all buck naked. And smell bad.

I thought the funniest part, actually, was watching the smile disappear from Bush's face. LOL! ROTFLMAO. Funny.

...because I've watched the video over and over with sheer delight!

What's all this flack about funny? Lenny Bruce wasn't always funny, but what he accomplished was brilliant. Colbert dared to pass through the same doors of truth that Bruce opened fifty years ago, and like Bruce, he was Jaw-dropping. In these days of reality TV, Colbert has raised the bar. FIdget all you want, Mr. President, the laugh's on you, and the truth has set us free. NOW THAT'S FUNNY!!

Steven, I think you missunderstood what was going on that night. The whole point of events like this is to coyly PRETEND that all present were not entangled in an incestuous thicket of self-interested career-mongering. That's the soul crushing reality these poor hypocritcal yobs have to live with everyday, but for one night -- just one night a year! -- they get to slip into a tux and gently, oh so gently!, poke each other in the ribs and wink a sly little wink that lets the other know that he or she is well aware of what they're up to... "but don't worry your secret is safe with me!"

But Steven, you had to show up with satirical steel when what was expected was whimsical Nurf... you endangered the spirit of the evening and have brought the good name of the Washington press corp to near ruin!

Be careful or they'll come take away your Peabody! Or maybe give you a McArthur Genius grant.

There's a reason that so many people—the media, the Christian right, the masses of gullible voters—have gone along with Bush despite the vast evidence of his incompetence. He makes them feel safe. As George Lakoff has pointed out, Bush is the strong father: authoritarian, well meaning, but always appearing to act in the family's best interests.

It seems like a new phenomenon but it isn't. There are a lot of parallels between this era and the 1950s, when a consensus of conformity ruled the day. Something happened in the 50s, though. James Dean came along, and rock 'n' roll. A social rebellion took hold and, in the subsequent decade, people rebeled en masse against the authority figure.

I firmly believe that it will take a similar dynamic to free us from the group-think that currently ails us, and Stephen Colbert has just helped create an environment for that to happen. He went on that stage before dad and all his dutiful brothers and sisters and made fun of them, to their faces. He showed them that they live in fear and that he can laugh at their fears because he can see past them; he showed them that he is free and they are not.

Bush's media mask as an authority, the good father, only works when people take him seriously. If people laugh at him—and if still more people see that laughing at him is fun and even liberating—his power over the masses begins to slip away.

And that's what he and his followers find so alarming and very, very unfunny.

While I periodically get annoyed with Salon's delight in whipping up the mommy wars, your coverage of the l'affaire de Colbert is exactly what makes this online magazine worth every penny of its membership costs! Not funny?! Of course it was not ha! ha! funny - the truth is never funny. No one gets satire anymore. He said what needs to be said and what the majority of the American people - not to mention the rest of the world - want to say, and having been handed an opportunity and a venue he rose to the occassion in a way that no Washington journalist has the guts to do! That we are spoon fed ridiculous garbage from our govenment is to be expected, but that the powerful are "offended" when we refuse to swallow it is outrageous. The case of John McCain is the best illustrative example. Does McCain need to court the religious right in order to get the Republication nomination which he so desperately wants? Probably. But are we really supposed be silent and nod our heads when he packages it as his evolving understanding of the positive impact this goup of ideologues has had on policy? Is he serious? How stupid do our govenment leaders think we are? Like the famous New Yorker cartoon, Colbert stood up and essentially said "I say it's spinach and I say the hell with it." It makes you proud to be an American.

Funny? Funny? There was nothing funny about the material. The players? Now that's funny. Nervous smatterings of laughter from news-clowns being taken to the wood shed, blank bovine stares from closet neocons "forced" to sit through a dose of self-imposed truth serum, and a huge pee ring in Bush's pants. Now, that's funny. Colbert was masterful. What nerve to stare down the "decider" with the plain truth unemcumbered by unholy spin. As the sage said: You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

To the white house media lemmings: Tough luck.