I wonder, is this the type of raw hatred emanating from Richie's inbox, or was that just his breakfast burritos clouding his perceptions?

Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 11:00:46 -0700 (PDT)

From: "Ron Barth, Jr."

Subject: "So Not Funny," Richard Cohen

To: "Washington Post Letters to the Editor"

CC: cohenr@washpost.com

Dear Sirs:

Since Mr. Cohen has chosen to fulminate on Stephen Colbert's comedic performance (and the rudeness thereof), I choose to respond.

First, contrary to Mr. Cohen, I found Colbert's performance brilliant. It was hysterically funny to those of us, unlike Mr. Cohen, who recognize the harm being done to this country by Bush and his cronies. For those of us who've recognized Emperor Bush's nudity since before his selection by the Supremes, it was immensely gratifying and hugely entertaining to see and hear someone speak the truths that Bush is an incompetent fool, and the press corps have served as stenographers for administration talking points. As soon as someone pays Mr. Cohen for being so funny -- as he so humbly describes himself -- I will consider his criticism of a professional's comedic performance relevant.

Regarding rudeness, I cannot imagine anything more rude than Mr. Bush's foray into comedy at the Radio and Television Correspondents event at which he unveiled the high hilarity of his "Where are the WMDs" skit. Never mind that thousands were dead -- and continue to die -- because of his administration's fabrications about the imminent danger posed by Saddam's fictional WMD stockpiles, the complicit press laughed along and lauded Bush for his genial simulacrum of bonhomie. That's rude.

And Colbert was hilarious.

Best,

Ron Barth, Jr.

I feel bad for Richard Cohen and all the trash e-mails he has received. I guess he deserves them since he made statements which are as outrageous as Colbert. If he thinks that Colbert was rude, he has gone to the same level when he insulted Colbert.Colbert was invited to speak to the event, so,is that what they wanted? or are they sorry they invited him? For myself, if I was invited to speak for Bush, I would have told the truth with a comical approch as Colbert did.

This President shuns away from people who want to tell him what they think by prearranging his audience every time he gives a speech and therefore never knows how real people think and what they really like to say.That is pitiful and absurd. Colbert spoke for many of us and we support him all the way.We could care less on what Richard Cohen thinks and the evidence that he would like to suppress free speech. Mr.Cohen,should go take a cold shower and shut up.

Sorry, wrong again, Richard. You are making some colossal and unwarranted assumptions. Of course Americans feel anger when they watch the death toll going up daily in Iraq. If that doesn't make you angry then you are dead inside. But to assume that we are having a knee jerk anger reaction to Iraq and that is all we are angry about is a colossal misreading of this matter.

The war is just one of the things among many we are angry about, among many that Mr. Colbert spoke of in his performance piece. Many of us know that we should have a presence in the Middle East, bases, an Embassy, and input and influence. And that might have happened with someone else in charge. But Bush has bungled that whole mission abominably. Through mistake after mistake, he has mangled any chance the US has of having an appreciated influence there.

You also accuse us of being influenced by bloggers. I don't read blogs just as I don't depend on the Wikipedia. Unlike our president, I prefer to listen to experts who devote their lives to penetrating the nuances of their science, political science, military science, chess, art, statesmanship, whatever their passions are that spur them on to bringing the highest discipline to their chosen field of study. We are not all crack pots.

Now here's something I never thought I would be doing--lecturing a Congressman on the art of being a Gentleman. The essence of being a Gentleman is doing and saying the appropriate things at the appropriate time. You are no Gentleman, Richard. There is such a thing as righteous anger. I am not referring to the bible thumping, illiterate, deprived and depraved right-wing extremist mental dwarfs, but to the true indignation we feel at Bush and his other morons who are tearing this Country to shreds. This anger is patriotism. It is not cowardly as you are acting. It is what needs to be said at the time it needs to be said. It is the Gentlemanly thing to do. It is how a Democracy is supposed to work. You are trapped in the political correctness these micro-brains have tried to force on us while they say one crazy thing after another.

It may be rude for me to call you by your first name, to lecture you, and it would be rude if I were to say you have no balls and are not a Gentleman. But that does seem appropriate in light of your behavior. But it is never rude to stand up for our Constitution and our way of life against an Administration that intends to turn us into their pet vision of what they want us to be by breaking laws and lying, withholding information, pandering to anyone they can manipulate, throwing away our funds, hurting our ill and elderly, committing one criminal act after another, and letting their rich friends run roughshod over our lives and our environment.

It would be rude not to speak up. And it would be rude and cowardly to be indignant with those who do speak up. And the best thing for you to do is to be a Gentleman, let yourself feel the Nation's anger, understand it, and do something about it.

Pat Mencke

so i'll say no more on that. One can simply leave it alone because it is what it implies it isn't and is beneath what it implies it's above.

I know nothing of the man but what he said here, so I can't speak and shouldn't speak of the man himself. But his words and the corresponding debate remind me that it's probably a good idea to keep remembering what's politically and socially important in the present time. These are the things that I think are important.

What is important is that our family members, neighbors and friends are being killed and maimed in Iraq every day; not just the troops, but the civilians present from all nations, including the nation in violent flux we call "Iraq." Portentous violence and injustice is happening in Korea, China, and of course Africa and elsewhere. No one can take it all on, but it must weigh significantly in actions or policies which have a wider impact.

What is important is that the group of individuals and institutions which uphold president Bush and the organization which he represents (presumably willingly although personally I see him as the emperor unaware he's wearing no clothes) have fostered and promoted attitudes and law (much of which is illegal and unconstitutional) that force the non-rich toward poverty and out of a social support structure (jural and institutional) that has been around for a long time, a support structure which naturally created a vast network of dependencies the sudden destruction of which is cruel and heartless, far from the compassion and mercy which this country should always uphold.

What is important is to recognize the broad spectrum of public trust that has been abused, most specifically with regard to the following (that I can recall right now): debt reform, Medicare reform, environmental policy, education, finance, posse comitatus, civil protest policy, FOIA, FEMA (and what it represents), the profile of the supreme court, rules of conduct in congress, the parameters of executive branch power... all of these are areas in which the public has come to expect certain balances which have been degraded by this administration.

What is important is that the policies of this administration effectively (not nominally) divide the country into two camps: those whose interests are enhanced by the administration (a very large group of powerful and wealthy individuals and institutions) and everyone else (a much larger but less focused group). This administration seems only to be interested in the welfare of the powerful and only in tricking the normal citizen into believing it supports them, rather than actually supporting the ordinary citizen.

What is important is the destruction of the environment now carried out by this administration in a wholesale manner, exemplifying further the ongoing brokering of that political power that is a public trust, in complete disregard for the common-weal.

What is important is this shady power-brokering is happening at a rapid-fire rate across the full spectrum of public and private issues, and it is managed by a very large and well-financed above-national association of corporations and individuals that appears to be surprisingly well organized. This is not “conspiracy theory.” It is obvious.

Like Paul Simon said, “Why deny the obvious, child?”

What is important is that the true events of 9/11 are shrouded in mystery and doubt and ought to be explored and rooted out.

What is important is that Peak Oil is real and ought to be at the top of national discussion (not debate -- it's beyond the realm of debate and ought to be dealt with in the sense of an actual emergency happening right now).

What is important is that as oil supply is becoming more precious and national debt is rising, the dollar is devaluing and our nation’s global stance is faltering in both the fiscal and political spheres.

What is important is that many of the politicians now in office on both sides of the aisle are lying and willfully deceiving the public every day. We have to unflinchingly see this reality. It's not said here to be "dangerous" or to exaggerate for political impact. The real problem is that it's just not pleasant and no one wants to "take the fall" or risk derision. But the best way to cope with it is to call attention to it at every opportunity. Just ask Maxine Waters! Or Russ Feingold.

What is important is that civil liberties are being violated at the basic level and few realize the implications of that fact, or even know that it is happening. But it is happening regularly, primarily to individuals representing points of view in opposition to those cherished by the incumbent ruling group and their witting and unwitting supporters. This is always the first sphere of action for those capturing power and always a precursor to wider civil curtailment: such usurpation always begins at the fringes of society and seeps in toward the center like Curare.

What is important is that, above all, the publicly expressed perceptions of the social & political reality under which we now live seem to be relegated to some form of either impotent or divisive info-tainment, when they’re discussed at all. As some are already doing, every journalist, writer, pundit, I believe, should every day call these things to our attention and attempt to describe their reality and their solution as best as possible, in an ego-transcending manner if at all possible, rather than merely to debate who is harming who with words, who's funnier than who, who's being rude or verbally unkind… the facts we're living in are hard-core and need our utmost serious attention.

Oh, and by the way: Stephen Colbert, who will be seen more as a hero in the future, brought up each of these points brilliantly in his talk during the press dinner. It's hard to imagine there could have been a less confrontational and more lucid way to articulate these uncomfortable truths, that was simultaneously so impactful.

Thanks.