Oops, wrong post. Hmmm, which way to the evolution vs. creationism debate?

Because, trust me, Ive got that one solved!

Thanks

Even though I did not laugh at Colbert's performance, I sure enjoyed it. I thought he succeeded artistically as well as ethicly and morally. From where I sit, Colbert is a master of his art. I can't think of a better satirist on the American comedy scene. And the fact that his character never slipped, never flinched, never retreated made his performance flawless. That's why it was so effective.

Mr. Cohen,

You are a card! I just loved your piece in the blogsphere!

That a man who traded on his Daddy's power, influence, and name recognition to usurp the highest office in "The Most Powerful Nation on Earth" , fail to protect his people through incompetance, and then pick a private war (killing tens of thousands of real people) should somehow expect to be protected from the only constituent that has gotten through the Media Guard that protect his petulant little ego is hillarious!

You are sooooo funny! You are also a "Master of Constitutional Wit".

Thanks! All the maimed and dead soldiers, the Disappeared and tortured prisoners, and the dead children of Iraq must be rolling in their cells, their hospital beds and their graves! Those yet to die sallute you!

Bravo!

MAX

Excellent piece by Joan Walsh.

Truth be told, Colbert *wasn't* that funny to me in his Saturday night performance, but his performance was outstanding. The fact is that the "truthiness" he was revealing is more painful than funny -- a searing reminder of the pathetic administration leading this country and the meek, callow press that has enabled them to keep pushing their vacuous message out to the country.

As some other writers have commented, despite the very awkward near-silence in the room, and the obvious distress of the president sitting a few feet away, Colbert did NOT resort to "funny" gags to lighten the moment. Instead he kept right on skewering and skewering, which was brilliant, and even more impressive than if he had resorted to easy gags.

Eric

I am truly apalled by the way Colbert's performance has been received by the media in general and by some politicians.

First of all, he was funny. The only way you could view his performance as unfunny is if you were made uncomfortable by it because it's truthiness hurt. That's the beauty of deep Swiftian satire - it illuminates points of view in ways that are immediately understandable and devoid of nuance (because, of course, they come from the gut).

Secondly, Colbert displayed that most cherised of all American of qualities - courage. Yes the phrase has been overused, but he did in fact speak truth to power. I won't back down from that position. And the fact that some in the press and/or the Democratic party feel threatened by that only tells us more of what we already know: they are beholden not to truth, but to power.

Cohen's article and the other critiques beg the question: Did they find the President's performance funny in the video at the dinner two years ago, searching for WMD in the oval office?

Hmm...offend the parents of soldiers who fought and lost lives or offend the "marshmallow filling" of insider Washington? Colbert was spot on.

Colbert's only failure was in convincing the audience they were at a roast. If all in attendance, including the President, were aware of that, everybody would've laughed and there wouldn't have been all this hooey from either side about Colbert's courage or his gall/unfunniness respectively. He was just doing, in character, what all great roasters do: skewering the guest of honor and throwing odd jabbs at the hosts for levity.

Let's all be realistic. Colbert is an expert comedian, who delivered a good, but not spectacular performance on Saturday. He's not, however, earned the credit just yet to be mentioned among great satirists like Swift and Twain. Nor is he some humorless brute as others, like Cohen, have suggested.

Apparently, according to the MSM, the comic, audience relationship trumps the citizen, country relationship, no matter what.

Richard Cohen and most of the MSM are nothing more than advocates for the Leni Reifenstahl School of Artistic Ethics.

Until I saw 60 Minutes last Sunday where Stephen openly proclaimed his liberal politics, I would have missed the satire of The Colbert Report.

Whether satire is a genre that is just beyond me or whether I am all too aware of the kind politics The Colbert Report supposedly mocks, I find it hard to see through.

I find it hard to sit through an entire half hour.

To me the satire is just a rouse to mollify the venom and incompetence of the right. Maybe it's because I never tune into the likes of The O'Reilly Factor or Scarborough Country or Hardball with Chris Matthews.

Recently in an interview with Rob Cordry, Cordry said that if Kerry had won The Daily Show would still have plenty of material because, face it, Kerry never said an interesting thing in his life. That's the cold reality of comedy. They just don't care what's really happening unless they can find a good joke in it.

It's hard for me to see Teh Colbert Report as criticism of the social evils by which we are beset. It's easier to see it as a half-hearted affirmation that the rich and mighty are "just folks" and should be left alone in their rich apartment houses and mountain resorts to party on like the rich and powerful are wont to do.

Maybe there is a better program for Colbert to do. Maybe if his "character" were to "see the light" as Blinded by the Right author David Brock did, his show would take an interesting turn. Until then I'll just avoid it.

Colbert's performance, as he surely anticipated, has become a defining firefight in the media culture wars. The late-blooming newspaper comedy critics shifting the story away from what he actually did -- confront the Dry-drunk in Chief with his failures, lies, and murderous hubris, something most of us gave up expecting the press corps to do a long time ago -- to whether it was funny or not is obfuscation worthy of Rummy or Dead-Eye Dick. Moreover, dismissively focusing on the response to Colbert's speech within "the blogosphere" (there's a phrase worth retiring) reveals how much contempt these self-appointed media insiders have for the rest of us -- that is, the people who've stopped expecting anything from their crummy reporting besides celebrity gossip and unrepentant administration toadyism. Colbert's speech wasn't tailored to tickle the funnybones of the attendees at the White House Correspondents' Association circle jerk Saturday night -- it was aimed at those of us who aren't in the club, and who are fed up with the Bushies' moral transgressions and the craven, cliqueish careerists in the so-called legitimate media who continue to give them a pass. That's what really pisses these guys off about Colbert's message -- it wasn't about them. Now that's funny!