1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Stephen Colbert is amazing

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by TheSportsPredictor, Sep 24, 2010.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I don't have a huge problem when Clooney testifies about Darfur or when Jolie testifes about some of her UN missions because at least they're knowledgeable on the subject.

    Colbert did a two-day stunt for his show and now they bring him in to testify. Just ridiculous.
     
  2. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    What is more ridiculous? When Colbert comes in saying something with a ring of truth, delivered in character? Or when someone comes into a house hearing all serious, and lies and obfuscates his or her ass off?

    One of the problems we have with Congress now is everything is about fucking process.

    By the way, Colbert's two days of experience on the farm is two more days than most every member of Congress or their staff has.
     
  3. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    But he wasn't informative or funny.

    "Soil is at ground level." Ha ha! Too funny.

    Hey, I'll bet that line will move politicians to implement new policy.

    His testimony didn't help the cause. It hurt Democrats, and in hurting Democrats -- who favor his position on the issue -- he hurt his own cause.
     
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Clooney or Bono, or any number of celebrities, can bring the attention of the public to an issue and put pressure upon lawmakers without embarrassing their hosts and hurting their cause in the process.

    Colbert let his ego get the best of him. That room was not the place for his "act". it went over like a lead balloon.

    Hell, the chairman of the committee tried to throw him out before he could even give his testimony because he knew how it would go.
     
  5. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    What you meant to write was, "I found him neither informative nor funny."
     
  6. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    How so? In case you understand satire, I'll explain the joke:

    -- We are a nation of immigrants.

    -- By keeping of system of immigration as it is, we are creating conditions for workers to be exploited.

    -- The idea that immigrants are taking jobs American would otherwise do, at least when it comes to farm work, is a myth.

    -- That, in fact (and this was in other testimony), farms are being shut down and we are importing some food because farmers can't find enough people who want to work the fields.

    -- If you want Americans to clamor for these jobs, you have to improve conditions so that they might want them.

    By the way, that John Conyers or others didn't like his "act" is more of a reflection on them, just like the reaction after Colbert did the White House Correspondents' Dinner. People in Washington don't like it when someone -- effectively, to their face -- points out what a fucking mockery Washington often is.

    What would have really been ridiculous is if Colbert had showed up and did the hearing straight.
     
  7. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    Geraldo just went on Fox and broke orbit, calling Colbert's testimony brilliant.
     
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Colbert is usually brilliant. My issue is not with him.
     
  9. Iron_chet

    Iron_chet Well-Known Member

    As a piece of performance I found it pretty funny. I would not expect the place to be rolling in the aisles as most would not want to sell the comedy of the performance lest they look like they are not serious about their jobs.

    I think he made substantive points in a fantastic way that was really non partisan.
     
  10. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Here's text for those who didn't hear it. Chu asked him why he cares about this issue. Here's what he said:

    I like talking about people who don't have any power. It seems like some of the least powerful people in the U.S. are those who come to the U.S. and do our work and don't have any rights when they're here. And then we ask them to leave. ... I don't want to take anyone's hardship away from them or diminish [the widespread effects of the recession] ... but migrant workers suffer and have no rights.

    If Congress had to sit as his stooges and that statement came out of it, that's just fine with me.

    Terrell Owens testified about Alzheimer's. A whole lot of other people have testified about a whole lot of other issues important to them. For whatever reason, Colbert believes in this issue and has gotten himself damn educated about it. Nobody has given him the right to make policy. He just got five minutes to have his say.
     
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    I'd rather have Colbert picking fruit than Gallagher.
     
  12. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    I think one of the biggest differences between Colbert and most people who testify in front of Congress is that you had no fucking idea what Colbert was going to say. For that, people pay attention, because usually you can call the testimony once you see the person's name and title.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page