Comments on: So they said

By: Monkeyhawk

Monkeyhawk — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:06:18 +0000

“Pedant” –

Colbert’s speech wasn’t just funny, it was truth-to-power.

And, yes. The news media hated it; tried to portray it as Colbert “bombing.” (The NY Times ignored it altogether until the video went viral.)

You sorta have respect for Scalia who obviously got the jokes. But the more it went on, the more you could see Shrub was really p-o’d.

Not all of the laughs were roars; it’s a tough room. But the cut-away shots reveal most of the people… even the objects of Colbert’s jokes… were amused by the Court Jester truth that came from the podium.

It’s kinda sad some of the most relevant political commentary still comes from jesters such as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.

Look at the Sunday morning talking-heads shows today. Haven’t the networks caught on that Democrats have won the last two elections?

By: Pedant

Pedant — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:40:54 +0000

I’m not so sure Colbert was kidding. In fact, I think he was completely sincere in his satire. Thing, the direct target of his satire is the media (i.e., blowhard talking heads), not Bush’s idiocy. In Colbert’s eyes, there is no shortage of idiots both in and aspiring to be in DC. That anybody with two eyes and a television could plainly see that Bush is moronic yet could never read or see the media ever plainly state so: that’s the point of Colbert’s satire. I don’t believe he was angry with Bush because he realizes that idiots like Bush are in positions of power throughout the US.

This is not new in the US, by the way. We’ve always had our share of idiots in positions of high power, as any casual student of US history will attest.

Bush’s reaction is inappropriate because he doesn’t undertand that Colbert was merely using his adminstration’s actions as ammunition with which to shoot the media. The fact that there was no laughter just increased Bush’s sense of discomfit (because again, he didn’t get the joke at all).

By: Monkeyhawk

Monkeyhawk — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:16:46 +0000

As a comparison, look at Stephen Colbert’s performance at the event three years ago.

You could tell that little punk Shrub was seething.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879

And CONs don’t get it that Colbert is kidding!

What a hoot!

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:03:33 +0000

#
Political_mama
Posted May 10, 2009 at 9:44 am | Permalink

Obama is a lot like CLinton in the way he just relates to people. I like someone who can laugh at himself.
================================================

Let’s just hope that he’s less adept at chatting up the female White House interns. ;-)

By: Political_mama

Political_mama — Sun, 10 May 2009 14:44:03 +0000

Obama is a lot like CLinton in the way he just relates to people. I like someone who can laugh at himself.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 10 May 2009 13:19:30 +0000

Monkeyhawk,

I saw that last night. Obama was actually pretty funny. He seemed to strike just about the right balance between jabs at political opponents and self-deprecation.

The bit about Michael Steele and the GOP not being eligible for a bailout and Rush Limbaugh not being considered a ‘troubled asset’ was especially on target.

By: outlander

outlander — Sun, 10 May 2009 12:53:51 +0000

“Americans are pragmatists. A pragmatist thinks that if something works, it’s right. An ideologue believes that if something is wrong, it can’t possibly work, even when it’s working.”

Your reaction feather-brains CONs?

———-

He is right. For example, Mark Parkinson was a pragmatic in the coal plant deal.

Happy Mother’s Day, Monkey.

By: Monkeyhawk

Monkeyhawk — Sun, 10 May 2009 12:47:34 +0000

Shouldn’t this be the star of the “So They Said” thread?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/09/full-video-obamas-white-h_n_201264.html

By: Monkeyhawk

Monkeyhawk — Sun, 10 May 2009 12:26:20 +0000

A dispatch from the Reality-Based Community –

“”The Republicans aren’t a party, they’re a cult.”

“The moderates aren’t a wing of the Republicans, they’re a feather.”

In each case, Schneider said he was quoting what people in Washington are saying to him. But he didn’t seem to disagree.

Schneider is certainly no drinker of Democratic Kool-Aid; his home base is the American Enterprise Institute. So the belief that the GOP is up the proverbial polluted estuary with no visible means of propulsion must be pretty widespread within the Beltway, and not just among those for whom it reflects wish fulfillment.

Schneider also had a good line about what “pragmatism” means in American politics:

“Americans are pragmatists. A pragmatist thinks that if something works, it’s right. An ideologue believes that if something is wrong, it can’t possibly work, even when it’s working.”

The possibility that something might “work” in the short term and be morally wrong or disastrous in the long term or both wasn’t mentioned. Yes, there are ideologues who insist on fitting the world to their views rather than vice versa. But the belief that whatever works is right, no matter how well that belief “works” politically, is wrong. “

Your reaction ~~feather-brains~~ CONs?