Stephen Colbert targets President, media, and more @ White House Corre

[CBright7831 0]

Scroll down a little bit and it's there.

 

I laughed, but something tells me he won't be invited back next year.

[daileyxplanet 0]

It's the whole "I can make fun of my brother, but you can't" ordeal. Just a few minutes earlier W. Bush and W. Bush II did a somewhat humorous speech, ripping himself a new one.

 

But in my eyes, they had to know it was coming. Does no one do research? Colbert's on at 11:30, that's not too late.

[snuffbox 0]

I dont think anyone was too upset. Even the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (with the Bob Haldeman haircut) laughed at a joke about himself.

[CBright7831 0]

Apparently there was more to the speech than what there was in the link (a little over ten minutes actually):

 

http://www.etherkillers.com/files/colbert....ents.dinner.avi

 

The only problem is, it's like a thirty minute d/l, but you get alot more including better quality.

[snuffbox 0]

It will also be repeated on C-Span several times over the next week...

[2GOLD 0]

Bush gave him a smile and handshake after and the first lady gave him a laugh and handshake. If anyone had a problem it was the uptight media types in the crowd. I swear, when it was a joke mocking Bush they were in tears. When it was turned on them? Silence, absolute silence.

 

This is what the dinner is. The President has some fun and has some special guests up to do some jokes.

[Ginger Snaps 0]

I thought I saw Terrence Howard there.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Good times.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

If anyone had a problem it was the uptight media types in the crowd. I swear, when it was a joke mocking Bush they were in tears.

 

Not really. Whenever Colbert went for the jugular the whole crowd was pretty quiet. Like the part where he said, "This president doesn't just stand FOR things, he stands ON things! Like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares..." Silence.

[Vampiro69 0]

The media has no sense of humor.

[chirs3 0]

If anyone had a problem it was the uptight media types in the crowd. I swear, when it was a joke mocking Bush they were in tears.

 

Not really. Whenever Colbert went for the jugular the whole crowd was pretty quiet. Like the part where he said, "This president doesn't just stand FOR things, he stands ON things! Like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares..." Silence.

 

I thought I had seen the whole thing, but I don't remember that.

 

Anyone got a link to the full speech? CBright's is dead.

[chaosrage 0]

If anyone had a problem it was the uptight media types in the crowd. I swear, when it was a joke mocking Bush they were in tears.

 

Not really. Whenever Colbert went for the jugular the whole crowd was pretty quiet. Like the part where he said, "This president doesn't just stand FOR things, he stands ON things! Like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares..." Silence.

 

I thought I had seen the whole thing, but I don't remember that.

 

Anyone got a link to the full speech? CBright's is dead.

 

http://kilonum.info/sa/colbert.speech.wh.c...ents.dinner.avi

[chaosrage 0]

First ever double post.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

You can also just do a search on Youtube. There's three parts. Just type in "Colbert roast" or something like that for your search.

[Art Sandusky 0]

The crowd's kinda dead for most of his time at the podium, sadly.

[chaosrage 0]

You can also just do a search on Youtube. There's three parts. Just type in "Colbert roast" or something like that for your search.

 

The youtube video is off sync though

[LaParkaMarka 0]

The "Bush Double" bit got laughs because it was funnier than Colbert's piece. A line like "The President doesn't stand for things, he stands on things. Like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares..." is probably true, but isn't funny.

[NYU 0]

Well, that's a matter of opinion.

 

It seemed to me the Bush Double bit got more laughs primarily because people thought it was funny AND it wasn't as controversial as Colbert's piece. When you're in a room filled with pretentious media types that don't exactly like to poke fun at themselves -- besides Helen Thomas, of course -- controversial jokes aren't exactly going to light up the room with laughter. It just made the people there, who were sitting right before President Bush, feel uncomfortable. We can't discount the factor of Bush's participation either when determining why it got the laughs it did. If Colbert had done this same bit on The Colbert Report or The Daily Show, I think it would have killed.

[jesse_ewiak 0]

AFAIK, no one at the White House did the hiring. Colbert mentioned the guys name, he works for the AP and is in charge of the whole dinner.

 

The thing is, the reason why the Press Corps went all pissy on him?

 

Simple. They're power groupies. They love power and politics are second.

 

I mean, look, Jon Stewart went after Crossfire like a boxer. Which is why he's unlikely to host such an event any time soon. He's nice enough to Republicans, defusing them with earnest humor, genuinely interested in their loopy argument. I doubt he's actually angry at pols.

 

However, Stewaer's humor is more sly than ironic. He can listen well, but he can't hide his contempt. Which is why Tucker Carlson was left gasping for air. He got knocked around for twelve rounds and lost badly.

 

Colbert is a different sort of person. He's from South Carolina and TDS was his big break. As a result, he's far more familiar with the world of true believer Republicans than most comics, especially Stewart, who after all is from Jersey. So he can fake that creepy enthusiam of blind loyalty because he knows it.

 

However, below that is real anger. Stewart managed to host the Oscars and not piss off the room, despite the ability to do so. Colbert hosted the White House Correspondent's Dinner and pissed off the entire crowd and loved it.

 

After all, Washington likes political humor lame. They want court jesters, not people playing for keeps. Which Colbert was.

 

The fact was that his great offense was not in attacking the President. Bush can get pissy at the drop of a hat. It was turning on the media.

 

Thye self-image of Washington reporters is that of heroes who are protecting the nation from the evil politicians. They are deeply offended when people suggest otherwise.

 

Colbert called them cowards and suckups and that hurt. They aren't used to being attacked so directly, so indirectly. He didn't rant, but he sure showed his utter and complete contempt for these people.

 

Colbert could have just tossed some nasty comments at them, but that would have been artless. Instead, he took Bush's favorite form of communication, over-the-top praise, and turned it on them. They never knew what hit 'em.

 

Sure, Stewart can be brutally confrontational when he chooses, Colbert does it in a different way, a much more humiliating way. Instead of coming out swinging, he uses obsequiousness to shame you, to point out your flaws and errors in a way which people cannot miss.

 

When you get beat by Stewart, you know you've had your ass kicked. There's blood on the floor, and he still looks pissed. When you get beat by Colbert, and he beat that room, you know something bad happened, but he's got a smile on his face and you hurt bad, but aren't sure

why.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I watched it on youtube on Sunday, it seemed fine. The second part (the press secretary try out) aired on the show last night.

[EricMM 0]

People were upset by Colbert because it wasn't someone making fun of themself, it was him making fun of someone else.

 

It was "too mean," and I think tehy were worried he was going to ruin the whole party. Plus, he was mocking the press even harder than bush.

 

I loved it, personally.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

AFAIK, no one at the White House did the hiring. Colbert mentioned the guys name, he works for the AP and is in charge of the whole dinner.

 

The thing is, the reason why the Press Corps went all pissy on him?

 

Simple. They're power groupies. They love power and politics are second.

 

I mean, look, Jon Stewart went after Crossfire like a boxer. Which is why he's unlikely to host such an event any time soon. He's nice enough to Republicans, defusing them with earnest humor, genuinely interested in their loopy argument. I doubt he's actually angry at pols.

 

However, Stewaer's humor is more sly than ironic. He can listen well, but he can't hide his contempt. Which is why Tucker Carlson was left gasping for air. He got knocked around for twelve rounds and lost badly.

 

Colbert is a different sort of person. He's from South Carolina and TDS was his big break. As a result, he's far more familiar with the world of true believer Republicans than most comics, especially Stewart, who after all is from Jersey. So he can fake that creepy enthusiam of blind loyalty because he knows it.

 

However, below that is real anger. Stewart managed to host the Oscars and not piss off the room, despite the ability to do so. Colbert hosted the White House Correspondent's Dinner and pissed off the entire crowd and loved it.

 

After all, Washington likes political humor lame. They want court jesters, not people playing for keeps. Which Colbert was.

 

The fact was that his great offense was not in attacking the President. Bush can get pissy at the drop of a hat. It was turning on the media.

 

Thye self-image of Washington reporters is that of heroes who are protecting the nation from the evil politicians. They are deeply offended when people suggest otherwise.

 

Colbert called them cowards and suckups and that hurt. They aren't used to being attacked so directly, so indirectly. He didn't rant, but he sure showed his utter and complete contempt for these people.

 

Colbert could have just tossed some nasty comments at them, but that would have been artless. Instead, he took Bush's favorite form of communication, over-the-top praise, and turned it on them. They never knew what hit 'em.

 

Sure, Stewart can be brutally confrontational when he chooses, Colbert does it in a different way, a much more humiliating way. Instead of coming out swinging, he uses obsequiousness to shame you, to point out your flaws and errors in a way which people cannot miss.

 

When you get beat by Stewart, you know you've had your ass kicked. There's blood on the floor, and he still looks pissed. When you get beat by Colbert, and he beat that room, you know something bad happened, but he's got a smile on his face and you hurt bad, but aren't sure

why.

 

 

 

Well said. I could not agree more.

 

My jaw was on the ground over some of things he said while the people he was talking about were IN the room. With the Wilsons in the room it could not have been too good a night for some people. Who gives a fuck if their feelings got hurt. On this night comedy hurt as almost as much as a suicide bomber.

[SuperJerk 0]

The "Bush Double" bit got laughs because it was funnier than Colbert's piece. A line like "The President doesn't stand for things, he stands on things. Like aircraft carriers and rubble and recently flooded city squares..." is probably true, but isn't funny.

 

Please consult my avatar.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Your avatar speaks true.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

awesome. we were reading and quoting some of Colbert's lines and just cracking up in the office yesterday.

and I laugh at the media for not being able to take a little hit, especially considering how spot on he was.

SOme lines I liked, because not only were they funny, there's this creepy undercurrent of truth behind them as well:

 

I'm sorry, but this reading initiative. I'm sorry, I've never been a fan of books. I don't trust them. They're all fact, no heart. I mean, they're elitist, telling us what is or isn't true, or what did or didn't happen. Who's Britannica to tell me the Panama Canal was built in 1914? If I want to say it was built in 1941, that's my right as an American! I'm with the president, let history decide what did or did not happen.

 

Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!

 

Because really, what incentive do these people have to answer your questions, after all? I mean, nothing satisfies you. Everybody asks for personnel changes. So the White House has personnel changes. Then you write, "Oh, they're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!

 

See who we've got here tonight. General Moseley, Air Force Chief of Staff. General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They still support Rumsfeld. Right, you guys aren't retired yet, right? Right, they still support Rumsfeld.

[Failed Bridge 0]

They should have gotten Dave Chappelle to follow up Colbert.