Colbert whores for the U.S. empire

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:06 pm

Mac, one whore to another, you make my exact point for me, so I really need not say more, but I will. Please tell me that you aren't suggesting that the troops aren't deserving of some humor because they are worse whores than Rocketman-whore.

MacCruiskeen · Post by **MacCruiskeen** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:09 pm

RocketMan · Post by **RocketMan** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:15 pm

Well I'd like to think my whoring is at least a few removes from actually killing people.

IanEye · Post by **IanEye** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:22 pm

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:22 pm

Does somebody have to write a manifesto about humor as a tool before some of you see that what Colbert is doing is probably more useful than what most of us here are doing, flapping our fingers night and day over the keyboard, sighing and moaning with each other in sympathy and not changing one person's mind? Why do you think the right has almost no comics, for Pete's sake? Because they take themselves too seriously...and they're genetically deformed, of course, in that they're missing a funny bone. Which is why the Pentagon had to settle for a liberal comic.

Perelandra · Post by **Perelandra** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:23 pm

It's just that we all wish Colbert could've humorously informed the troops of just a slice of our collective predicament, rather than playing soldier (haw haw, that's so funny!).

Edit: I posted before I saw your last post, and I don't know what I'm talking about, cuz I didn't see the show. Nevermind!

MacCruiskeen · Post by **MacCruiskeen** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:32 pm

So if an American comedian - say Chris Rock - refused to go Iraq to be a tonic for the troops (which are occupying that foreign country), his refusal would be reprehensible? Positively immoral, apparently. (Because the occupying forces, who are not even conscripts, are "deserving of humor".)

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:35 pm

Jeff, PLEASE, write a book on the role of humor as a mirror, it's history, it's elements.

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:39 pm

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199 ... or-in.html

Shortly before the 2000 Presidential election, the Pew Research Center for People and the Press reported that 47% of people between the ages of 18 and 29 obtain most of their political information from late-night entertainment outlets (Kloer & Jubera, 2000). Findings like this suggest that the relationship between politics and entertainment has substantially changed. In an effort to reach undecided voters, politicians have shifted substantial effort to a media genre typically reserved for political criticism. Rather than the traditional one-sided relationship of late-night comedians using political officials as a comedic tool, the relationship between comedians and entertainers is increasingly more reciprocal where politics now strategically uses humor for maneuvering as much as humor uses politics for comic antics. Willing or not, late-night television comedians are an important disseminator and arbiter of information for political officials, marking an era where humor could potentially act as a valid form o f political argument....

RocketMan · Post by **RocketMan** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:42 pm

I don't get this mindset that sometimes rears its head here (just like Putin sometimes does over Alaska) that to qualify for usefully registering one's dissent/grievances one should be a major media star/consequential political figure.

If the scene bugs you, take a holiday or something.

Willing or not, late-night television comedians are an important disseminator and arbiter of information for political officials

Meaning of course, among other things, that when Stephen Colbert guest edits Newsweek, we should be paying very, very close and extremely suspicious attention.

IanEye · Post by **IanEye** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:45 pm

chiggerbit wrote:Why do you think the right has almost no comics, for Pete's sake?

[url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,907337,00.html]Back in March, when Richard Nixon invited each of the released Viet Nam P.O.W.s to come to dinner, he had little idea how much he would welcome their applause. He nonetheless ordered preparations for the biggest, most elaborate party ever held at the White House.
(snip)
Military orchestras and Les Brown's band provided music, and Bob Hope played host at the after-dinner show. A sample Hope line (greeted with traditional groans): "This is the first time I've played to a captive audience."[/url]

MacCruiskeen · Post by **MacCruiskeen** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:11 pm

Nobody can deny that Muhammed Ali had a sense of humour, but he also had guts and integrity, and he knew what was funny and what wasn't. He wasn't trying to raise a laugh when he said this, and acted on it, at great personal expense and not without effect:

"I Ain't Got No Quarrel With The VietCong... No VietCong Ever Called Me Nigger" — Muhammad Ali, 1966

He really meant it. Such things are possible.

Or rather: they were. It is amazing how much ground has been lost in the last half-century.

Colbert wasn't even conscripted; he did it of his own free will, doubtless after briefly pondering his career-prospects. No towelhead ever called him nigger, but then again neither did any US general, US president, TV executive or personal agent. Nor will they, ever.

The camouflage business-suit is a real rib-tickler, though. Of course it wouldn't really work in the battle-zone, and of course Colbert didn't really mean it. In 2009, that goes without saying. He was just trying to raise a laugh, for the troops, who "deserve some humor". After all, what else could he possibly be doing?

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:12 pm

So if an American comedian - say Chris Rock - refused to go Iraq to be a tonic for the troops (which are occupying that foreign country), his refusal would be reprehensible?

No, Mac, you and Rocketman and a couple of others are the ones who are engaging in either/or thinking, the either-you're-with-us-or-you're-against-us mentality.

But I find the religio-political schism that's developed in this country to be frightening. These troops get enough of that in their training. When they finally come home, who are they going to reach out to, to be open to in carrying on a dialog? Tiller-types? Colbert has started a different kind of dialog with them.

chiggerbit · Post by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:34 pm

What you have to understand is that humor is an unloyal beast. It can't be owned, but it can be shared, shared with whoever is touched by it. Don't try to fence it in.

RocketMan · Post by **RocketMan** » Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:48 pm

I wonder what the value of some premium Colbert stock would be right now if he had engaged in the same kind of fearless, savage satire in Iraq, in front of Tha Troops as he did in front of Bush?