glecco

I would guess that most have seen some portions of Colbert’s talk at the White House Correspondents’ Associates Dinner. The video is available at C-Span and the transcripts can be read at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/30/1441/59811.

In the course of his remarks, the comedian touched upon some facts and notions which the President may have found unsettling. In the best case Bush would appreciate the not so subtle messages and have them enlighten his perception of the current state of affairs. I am referring to the notions and facts that those who filter his vision may be hesitant to disburse. One particularly insightfull line was that “The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will.”

I am asking myself if it is possible that this speech could become rudely influential with Bush and over time have some effect upon real future policy, real policy and not simply upon the politically sensitive spin put on policy pronouncements. Does GWB have the insight to glean anything from these remarks or will they forever be viewed by him as another unmeaningle annoyance.

The guests from the press were not left unscathed. One quote summarizes nicely the usual pro-government line parroted by the current press corps. “But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down.”

I have no doubt how the press will react. The press will act as directed. Today, it is too timid and there are too many shared interests with the policy makers to adjust its MO.


A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

__________________
-------------------------------------------------------
Parity. What Parity? We dont need no stink'n parity!

Go Pats
- glecco

Harry Boy

Bush stole the show that night

Patters

I think there are bigger issues. With people buying newspapers less and paying less attention to television news, the media has cut back spending. We have far less investigative reporting than we used to and instead, the media simply goes to press conferences and reads news releases. Many of the reporters, perhaps because they're overworked, are not even well-versed enough in their subject to ask incisive questions.

The future of good journalism is on the internet, unless newspapers can figure out how to reverse their decline in circulation. We should support like-minded websites (whether it's newsmax or rawstory), which seem to be doing more investigative work than the major media.

As far as Bush learning something, you've got to be kidding. The guy thinks God talks to him; why would he listen to a mere mortal?

Harry Boy

Bush Talking To God,
Not to bring up the dastardly dreadful Clintons again but do you remember when Dear Hillary held a Seance up on the roof of the White House then claimed she spoke to Eleanor Roosevelt.

Who would you rather talk to, GOD or Eleanor Roosevelt?

Turd Furguson

I thought his little vignette with Helen Thomas was pretty amusing.

scout

The difference would be, that George Bush thinks God answers him and Bush goes to war. While Hillary may have used her seance to....I don't know, invest in cattle futures? Unlike, Nancy Reagan who used a fortune teller to manage her husband's schedule.

JJDChE

Did he speak too?

PatsWickedPissah

Colbert update from a 'right wing (sic) WaPo columnist...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...pinion/columns

Then I wrote about Stephen Colbert and his unfunny performance at the White House correspondents' dinner.

Kapow! Within a day, I got more than 2,000 e-mails. A day later, I got 1,000 more. By the fourth day, the number had reached 3,499 -- a figure that does not include the usual offers of nubile Russian women or loot from African dictators. The Colbert messages began with Patrick Manley ("You wouldn't know funny if it slapped you in the face") and ended with Ron ("Colbert ROCKS, you MURDER") who was so proud of his thought that he copied countless others. Ron, you're a genius.

It seemed that most of my correspondents had been egged on to write me by various blogs. In response, they smartly assembled into a digital lynch mob and went roaring after me. If I did not like Colbert, I must like Bush. If I write for The Post, I must be a mainstream media warmonger. If I was over a certain age -- which I am -- I am simply out of it, wherever "it" may be. All in all, I was -- I am, and I guess I remain -- the worthy object of ignorant, false and downright idiotic vituperation.


But the message in this case truly is the medium. The e-mails pulse in my queue, emanating raw hatred. This spells trouble -- not for Bush or, in 2008, the next GOP presidential candidate, but for Democrats. The anger festering on the Democratic left will be taken out on the Democratic middle. (Watch out, Hillary!) I have seen this anger before -- back in the Vietnam War era. That's when the antiwar wing of the Democratic Party helped elect Richard Nixon. In this way, they managed to prolong the very war they so hated.

The hatred is back. I know it's only words now appearing on my computer screen, but the words are so angry, so roiled with rage, that they are the functional equivalent of rocks once so furiously hurled during antiwar demonstrations. I can appreciate some of it. Institution after institution failed America -- the presidency, Congress and the press. They all endorsed a war to rid Iraq of what it did not have. Now, though, that gullibility is being matched by war critics who are so hyped on their own sanctimony that they will obliterate distinctions, punishing their friends for apostasy and, by so doing, aiding their enemies. If that's going to be the case, then Iraq is a war its critics will lose twice -- once because they couldn't stop it and once more at the polls.

Patters

Any hatred by Democratic left pales in comparison to the hatred by the Republican right that orchestrated the $60,000,000 taxpayer funded witchhunt against Clinton and then the lies and smear campaign against Kerry. But, if there are lessons to be learned from the Republican right, hatred pays. By the way, if you want to still hear Republican hatred, listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, O'Reilly, or visit freerepublic.com. They're still spewing their lies.

PatsWickedPissah

i.e. "the other guys did it and they were worse"

Patters why don't you simply number your knee jerk counters and save bandwidth and time by just replying "1" for this and "2" for "That's a right wing source you cited, so I discredit it out of hand even though you'll subsequently cite the same info from the WaPo" and so on?