The Sad Reality Of Colbert's Performance

The Left and even some moderates amaze me with their reaction to Colbert. If you see the comments I'm getting on this post, I'm some Bush-obsessed politico who can't take a joke. Never mind that it's been over a month that I posted Bush was losing me with how he has been managing and followed it up with other posts, one entitled Bush Has Fallen And He Can't Get Up.

I took Colbert on on his lack of timing, delivery and ultimately talent and stayed completely away from the political. If you read around to the reactions to Colbert, especially from those on the Left supporting him, they especially prove how flawed and sad was the performance.

Going into an entertainment venue and doing a show which only appeals to a subset of the audience is not courage, or great talent, it's a lack of feel for ones audience and a display of the type of self-obsessed alleged comedy so many young comedians appear to have fallen into.

I could care less who Colbert is, he's basically an insignificant individual in any historical sense. His job wasn't to call Bush on the carpet, or to give the more unhinged of the Left something to crow about. His job was to entertain as many people as effectively as possible and he failed. It really is just that simple. Why over-estimate the man's importance, it doesn't exist?

Traditionally the dinner is a night off. Reactions around on different blogs prove that's precisely what Colbert failed to deliver, it was simply more of the same. To live and ultimately to govern together in this great nation requires a sort of comity, an ability to step back from the edge, frankly, dare I say it, to at least get along. Our politicians know that, despite how it might grate on some when they display it. Do you think our Senators and Representatives are constantly insulting one another? Can't get together occasionally on some night and put politics aside?

They can and they do because they approach weighty subjects with a certain maturity and perspective. The issues before this nation are significant ones, the challenges great. But a country which can't take a breath, or a break away from the crudest of political rhetoric can't hope to represent anything at all resembling a great society committed to some greater good.

Colbert didn't soar in his performance, or do anything ultimately good and entertaining for the nation at large. He highlighted that subset of it which runs constantly on hate and division, seemingly having no motivating factor other than its own self-perpetuation.

Great comedians have great feel for time and place. Colbert all but proved he has none at all. Take a break people. Don't you ever tire of the constant name calling, incessant bickering which is the worst of our politics and not its best? The press the politico's, pundits and the nation at large had a chance to do just that last night - take a break, breath, laugh, get along. Colbert robbed the country of that opportunity because he apparently fails to understand that there is something greater at risk here than ourselves and our particular opinions - even if it is only for one solitary night.

In the end, he wasn't entertaining or brilliant or doing something unique and incredibly bold, all Colbert gave us was more of the same. If I wanted to live only on that nonsense, I could read only far Left or Right blogs everyday. I don't need a probably well-paid, moderately talented hack with a sledge hammer to provide it on a Saturday night.

Here's some great insight from of all people, a liberal, I presume:

The other point that begs to be made is that the shrieking about police states, etc. demonstrates just how humorless much of Colbert's audience is. There is less comedy being made than the fiction that Colbert and Jon Stewart "speak" for some voiceless mass. In the age of the ubiquitous opinion, screaming at the top of one's lungs that one's speech is being stolen is absurd and in itself, the best form of satire practiced today.

and

from OTB: The annual White House Correspondents dinner apparently had some tense moments last night, as Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert made some remarks that were perhaps a bit more biting than typical for the occasion. President Bush, as is customa... [Read More]

from The Moderate Voice
The scene: The White House Correspondent Dinner. The time: right after President George W. Bush put in a boffo performance next to a top-notch Bush im... [Read More]

from Preemptive Karma - We'll probably never see Bush's sketch again. But Colbert's will be played over and over for years to come. Last evening he conducted a master class on satire--while shoving the truth down the throat of the President and the DC press who are absent from it the other 364 days of the year... [Read More]

Comments

[DISCRIPTION OF THE EVENT]

The White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner, begun in 1920, has become a Washington DC tradition and is usually attended by the President and Vice President. The format of the event is similar to a roast where the Washington makes fun of himself and the press and vice versa.

[Dan]

the Washington makes fun of himself and the press and vice versa.

Absolutely, keyword funny - and for all, or at least most, not some few, as I said. Duh!

[Raskool]

What a steaming pile Dan. Colbert played the court jester role perfectly, wrapping stinging truth-telling in a thinly veiled comedic wrapper. Why on earth would you or anyone prefer a staged, stale, eye-rollingly trite mild little entertainment?

The fact that the Bushies would find this all shocking and somehow inappropriate is the best argument why this is necessary - it was a bubble-bursting exercise for those whose bubble very much needs bursting - for the good of all of us (and that includes the correspondants).

The right, and that includes you, come off as being humorless cads in a defensive crouch. Enough already with the desparate spin attempts.

[DISCRIPTION OF THE EVENT]

my error. the original stated "the pres. makes fun" and I attempted in an edit with a copy/paste changing it to "the President makes fun" (with the intent to make it more clear) but screwed it up.

[joeyangtree]

"Great comedians have great feel for time and place."
I don't think Lenny Bruce or Bill Hicks got invited to do too many Christmas parties or children's birthdays. Some of Hicks' funniest bits were where he basically fought with the audience. If they wanted lame and tame, they should have invited Billy Crystal. In any event, someone actually bursting Bush's bubble and telling him directly that his ratings are in the toilet and that governing on faith is about as sane as getting advice from your pet rat was priceless. You can't pass up that type of opportunity if you're Stephen Colbert. Also note that Jon Stewart did the same type of thing on Crossfire to Tucker Carlson and people ate it up. Sometimes, actually speaking the truth directly to someone's face is the only way that it gets through. You rail against Colbert for using a "sledge hammer," but, in the words of John Doe, "you can't just tap them on the shoulder anymore. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you've got their strict attention." Could any leader benefit more from being hit with a rhetorical sledgehammer than George Bush? Harriet Myers, Dubai Ports Deal? How long did it take this guy to get the point that absolutely NO ONE agreed with those decisions? Maybe now he can start to understand what over 60% of the populace is thinking about the rest of his ideas.

"His job was to entertain as many people as effectively as possible and he failed."
Reading about his performance today and the vast numbers of people that have read the transcript and watched the video and loved it, I'd say he probably entertained many times more people than there were at the dinner. You're not thinking outside the box.

"To live and ultimately to govern together in this great nation requires a sort of comity, an ability to step back from the edge, frankly, dare I say it, to at least get along."
If this is a shot at Colbert, it is an absolute indictment of the Bush administration. There's a damn good reason that Bush has been the divider, not the uniter. When your "Strongly Disapprove" rating gets up to 40%, you *really* have to fight for every point after that, but Bush keeps going. I wouldn't call that "stepping back from the edge." It's more like staying the course over the cliff.

"I could care less who Colbert is, he's basically an insignificant individual in any historical sense."
Fair enough. If he had given the lame, feel good tripe you love and guffaw helplessly to, that would have made him more or less significant?

[dnichols]

Colbert did entertain some Dan, those who hate Bush, and love Helen Thomas.
He gave them what they wanted, to insult Bush and his wife in front of all the people who are praying Bush drowns. It wasn't funny because it cut too deep, and it wasn't a comic routine, it was like skinning a live animal and watching it suffer.

I am sure the brood of vipers got what they wanted, and they want blood. That is why this was so uncomfortable...it was tasteless and vile, like watching a beheading.

[jkatl]

I have always heard about Don Imus's turn back in 96. All the accounts you hear are how awful he was. Well with all the fervor over Colbert I sought out a transcript of Imus's 96 performance. At least that had some genuinely funny lines, he spent more time lampooning the press which is what should be done. By stark contrast Colbert was just plain not funny, the cringe factor was off the chart. I have seen The Colbert Report a couple of times and sometimes he is funny, so when I stumbled accidently on Sat nights performance I was like cool this should be funny, what a disappointment, my girlfriend said, I thought you said this guy was funny.
Colbert was very much an amateur, the humor was not even witty say like a Dennis Miller, bottom line Colbert is definitely NOT ready for prime time.

[lwm]

"Going into an entertainment venue and doing a show which only appeals to a subset of the audience is not courage, or great talent, it's a lack of feel for ones audience [. . .]I could care less who [name removed] is, he's basically an insignificant individual in any historical sense," said the blogger to his regular audience of international scandal spectators.

Lol, I love it! You crack me up . . .come on, Dan, where's the big news that was going to break last week in the Holloway case?

[Cousin X]

Wow ... it's hysterical seeing all the Bushzi responses to this. "Oh, he was so immature, he wasn't funny at all, he bombed. I'm serious, guys, it's not sour grapes, he really was bad. Come on, guys, seriously, it was disrespectful and ... and bad!" Of course, pissing and moaning is what Real Mature people do; NeoCons are all Mature, so they can tell you when someone is being immature. Or a traitor. Is he also being a traitor, guys? I bet he is.

[tester]

Isn't setting the self depreciation theme a recipe for disaster...

kinda like inviting the relatives from across the ocean to spend a week at your home, only to have them actually show up.

[CanuckRob]

Amazing that this is even controversial. It was funny, irony usually is except those that don't get it. If your president can't take it then he is the thinnest skinned politician (dictators excluded) I have ever heard of. The organizers were fully aware of Colbert and what he does so well so I can't imagine they were surprised. This kind of lampooning is common in Canada and at least in the UK (don't know about the rest of Europe)and politicians have learned to go along or be ridiculed even worse by the general public. The fact the president couldn't take it shows just how shallow he is. Clinton would have loved it and would have probably got in a few good shots, Bush has to leave that to his VP.

[victor]

You said, "Take a break people."

Actually you've put your finger right on the problem: the press has been on a break during the entire Bush administration. Colbert took a break from the break.