New York Times finally recognizes Colbert

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/arts/03colb.html

Mark Smith, a reporter for The Associated Press who is president of the White House Correspondents' Association, acknowledges that he had not seen much of Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central before he booked him as the main entertainment for the association's annual black-tie dinner on Saturday night. But he says he knew enough about Mr. Colbert — "He not only skewers politicians, he skewers those of us in the media" — to expect that he would cause some good-natured discomfort among the 2,600 guests, many of them politicians and reporters.

What Mr. Smith did not anticipate, he said, was that Mr. Colbert's nearly 20-minute address would become one of the most hotly debated topics in the politically charged blogosphere. Mr. Colbert delivered his remarks in character as the Bill O'Reillyesque commentator he plays on "The Colbert Report," although this time his principal foil, President Bush, was just a few feet away.


After talking to a of couple people yesterday, I realized that Colbert's performance was very similiar to Michael Moore's Oscar acceptance speech for Bowling for Columbine. Michael Moore said the following that night:

"On behalf of our producers Kathleen Glynn and Michael Donovan (from Canada), I would like to thank the Academy for this award. I have invited the other Documentary nominees on stage with me. They are here in solidarity because we like non-fiction. We like non-fiction because we live in fictitious times. We live in a time where fictitious election results give us a fictitious president. We are now fighting a war for fictitious reasons. Whether it's the fiction of duct tape or the fictitious 'Orange Alerts,' we are against this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush, shame on you. And, whenever you've got the Pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, your time is up."

The next day at work, some people were happy with what he did, and some people were unhappy. "Just support the troops." Said one co-worker, who happened to be ex-Navy. Someone else said that it wasn't Michael Moore'e right to take his Oscar opportunity to spout of his political beliefs.

The point that these people were missing was that Michael Moore won best documentary because of his beliefs. For him NOT to go up there and point out that the Iraq war was complete bullshit would be completely against his character. It's the same thing with Stephen Colbert.

And for anyone who thinks that it is rude to expouse their personal beliefs at the National level when others are not expecting it, I have just 3 words for you. Edward R. Murrow.

Here is a selected quote of his for you to enjoy:

"If we confuse dissent with disloyalty — if we deny the right of the individual to be wrong, unpopular, eccentric or unorthodox — if we deny the essence of racial equality then hundreds of millions in Asia and Africa who are shopping about for a new allegiance will conclude that we are concerned to defend a myth and our present privileged status. Every act that denies or limits the freedom of the individual in this country costs us the . . . confidence of men and women who aspire to that freedom and independence of which we speak and for which our ancestors fought."

What Colbert did was patriotic.