Rock Center
Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert, host of The Colbert Report, announced on Thursday night he was forming an exploratory committee ahead of a possible run for president of what he jokingly described as "the United States of South Carolina." As a result of his decision, Colbert was required to hand over control of his Super PAC, a political action committee he created which has the ability to raise unlimited money from individuals and corporations, because potential candidates cannot control or coordinate efforts with the people who run Super PACs.
"I am proud to announce that I am forming an exploratory committee to lay the groundwork for my possible candidacy for the president of the United States of South Carolina," Colbert said, as red white and blue balloons started to fall from the ceiling. "I'm doing it!"
On Thursday's broadcast, Colbert at least appeared to hand over control of his Super PAC to fellow Comedy Central personality Jon Stewart. Colbert was also joined in studio by his lawyer, former Federal Election Commission Chairman Trevor Potter. After a dramatized transfer of power, Colbert and Stewart jointly announced the renamed committee, "The Definitely Not Coordinating With Stephen Colbert Super PAC."
"With your help, and possibly the help of some sort of outside group that I'm not coordinating with, we can explore taking this country back. Thank you. God bless you all and God bless Citizens United," Colbert said, referring to the Supreme Court's decision in 2010 in the case of Citizens United against the Federal Election Commission. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the government could not limit political spending by corporations.
Colbert has long been a satirical critic of Super PACs. In an interview with Rock Center special correspondent Ted Koppel to air Monday on NBC, Colbert described the benefits of Super PACs.
"A PAC can only take so much money, it can only spend so much money, and I wanted to spend unlimited amounts of money and receive, more importantly, unlimited amounts of money, and so my lawyer told me all I had to do was add a cover letter that said that I intend this to be a Super PAC and it was a Super PAC," Colbert said.
When asked how much money his Super PAC had raised, Colbert said, "The fun thing about that is I don't have to tell you."
Colbert said Super PAC rules eventually require disclosure of contributors but, until that time comes, "My major donor is none of your --- damn business."
Editor's note: Stephen Colbert's interview with Ted Koppel, part of an in-depth look at Super PACs, airs Monday at 10pm/9c on NBC's Rock Center with Brian Williams.
Leave a Comment:
Another wasted media advent. This is what makes a mockery of our voting system. If he truly wants to be president versus just a joke let him run for local election like town supervisor and work his way up the different an more important titles like mayor, congressman and so on. A TV show is not the experience one needs.
No. Not another wasted media advent. His entire act is mocking the already broken election system. How is it fair for candidates to recieve anonymous donations from corporations? It's not. Corporations produce and groom the candidates now. All that Colbert is doing is satirizing this, not actually trying to be president.
@Denis - that's sort of the point. He's showing, through action, exactly how broken our system actually is. Most of the things he's doing happen all the time, just in secret, and being done by people who actually mean it. His actions, though technically in jest, are designed to uncover the corruption of the process itself by following (very publically) those same normally-not-talked-about venues.
love it
that's the point! the voting system, as it currently stands, is a mockery! Stephen is doing an excellent job at pointing out how ridiculous it is for a politician to effectively receive unlimited amounts of laundered money.
Denis, you're missing the point. The idea is not actually to run for any office, the point is 1) to bring awareness to how simple it is for any political candidate to get unlimited financial backing from corporations and 2) retain near-complete control over that financial backing. The reason for this exercise is that both points are supposed to be against the rules, yet, both can be achieved by simple tactics that skirt the rules.
Colbert is, like Twain, casting the brighter light of truth on the dismally lit stage we now know of as Politics. He wants to show you, simply by doing what the candidates are doing now, what a mockery our voting system is. They form a Super-Pac with confidential donors, so he does likewise. He states blithely, that there is no link to his candidacy and the Super-Pac, just as they do. He says that the voters decide, not the corporate funders of his campaign, just as they do. Get it? You do not live in a democracy--representational or otherwise. You live in a corrupt state governed by puppets doing the will of their corporate bosses. You need to watch Stewart and Colbert more. You'll be glad you did.
Oh Yea! That way we can keep this system that we've always had. I think we need to shake it up some and get NEW BLOOD in there before they become compromised.
Call the cops! Denis Wittman has lost his sense of humor.
If corporations can't vote, they shouldn't be allowed to donate to political campaigns.
Stephen is rapidly becoming the Pat Paulsen of the 21st Century, hehe. I just wish I could get him and John to join and help promote the Popular Amendment Movement, along with all of you posters. Go to www.faircampaignreform.us to download the Election/Campaign Finance Reform and Term Limits constitutional amendments, sign and circulate them among your family, friends, and neighbors. Then go out and help form local, county, and state-wide grassroots organizations to circulate and collect the petitions within your state.
what makes a mockery of our political system are the politicians who use it as a tool for personal gain. the supreme court has taken the electoral process to a new low by allowing corporations and the wealthiest among us to control elections through misinformation!!! colbert is again bringing attention to the fact that the electoral process is indeed a joke!
the system is broken, to which I say no more donations, everyone pays $5/yr extra in taxes just for elections, if you want to support a candidate, volunteer.
the only problem I have with colbert, besides being a one trick pony and his constant yelling, is that he gives obama and his $billion a pass, but that's to be expected.
I'd vote for him...He would do a better job as President Steven than any of the last people to hold the office...And he might even get world peace through his sharp wit.
Pat Paulsen - hardly.
Pat did it for the joke and only for the joke.
Colbert is doing it for the joke WHILE he is satirizing and making us painfully aware of how pathetically rigged the current laws are regarding political campaigns. He's using the laws to show us how broken the system is.
Many comedians use thier humor satirically to make us aware of something that is totally wrong or blatantly absurd. Colbert and Stewart do this 90% of the time.
Look past the punch line and into the topic AND the issue they raise. When you do that, it's quite enlightening.
The sad thing is that Colbert couldn't do any worse the current crop of politicians. Chances are he'd do better.
Fortuneately for Colbert, being a natural born, witless buffoon sometimes pays very well.
Colbert has a better grasp of how the system actually works than most of the "average" voters, and tries to get it across to people via his comedy. He wants us to get it. Witless buffoon? Not at all. He just plays one on TV.
You know what's really funny? Few days ago, Gingrich was complaining about how much money Romney's SuperPAC has and how it is using all this money to buy influence using negative ads.
@spider-737231
Now you are confusing Colbert with Bill Oriley aka Papa Bear.
Actually, Paulsen was just as serious about his satire of the government and politics as Colbert and Stewart. You just have to understand how the satire of the 60's was different from the satire of today (politically at least.) It was more than just a joke to Pat and to the entire Smother Brothers staff, and that was right from Tommy Smothers in 1969.
Dennis, perhaps you'd be happier if he were in the movies instead.
Todd, you've been peaking at the next USSC decision authored by Alito himself....lol
Bill Moyers quoted someone, don't know/remember who, on Stephen's January 12, 2012 show ....
"I'll believe that Corporations are people as soon as Texas executes one."
And then I'll only believe it if I am present for it.
Or how about it the Government drafts one and sends it off to war. Or one gets put in jail. Or one gets elected to public office. Maybe shows me it's proof of eligibility to vote? Kind of like Republicans INSIST REAL people do.
Naw. Still wouldn't believe that they are.
He who laughs last did not get the joke.
Actually, the sad part here is that everything Colbert says about a SuperPAC and how it operates is the truth!
You had best pay attention, Dennis...Colbert's a lot smarter than you think.
but, but, dennis..what's this got to do with christmas?
Some of these uptight morons need to relax and remember that Colbert is a COMEDIAN!
Not anymore....just like Reagan....now he's a candidate,....have to get out the 20muleteam to come close to the last time Reagan did weekly tv.
=)
I would say that it would be a great idea to have comedians to run the country! Then, I remembered, we already have them running the country!
You do know he isn't being serious.
You have to be pretty damn autistic.
What does Autism have to do with this? I'd say your being pretty dern ignorant.
I'll second that question. I'm sure laughingvillain.jpg knows very little about autism, given his response. Get yourself educated.
Actually, he IS being serious. Everything he said about how a SuperPAC operates is the truth.
meant to be a generic derogatory epithet i'm sure.
ignorant however.
Both he and John Stewart utilize "dry" humor (aka "deadpan"), which essentially is satirical comments given with a straight face, appearing to be serious. If you are not familiar with this type of comedy, it is easy to believe what he says on face value. He is a comedian by trade.
He is mocking the system. Notice how no other candidate comes out and says these things -- he is exposing the truth through satire, which is part of his appeal.
@Da Noid:
Watch this YouTube video with Colbert out-of-character in an interview. It was posted to YouTube in 2009, but may be older. He touches on how his jokes are, and watching it will clear some things up for you.
YouTube.
laughinvillian - only hope that one day karma takes you down a path that forces you to grow up and take care of a relative (or friend, which you probably have few) who is not as perfect (albeit ignorant) as you!
Excellent, Stephen. Sugar is still available as a running mate. Give her a call.
He won't be the first comedian to run for national office. Unfortunately he may loose his sence of humor along the way when his media friends turn against him.
Pat Paulsen did it for decades.
Wow. Duck! Here it comes again!
Amazing how many people totally miss it. You think that what Colbert is doing is totally obvious, and then you read these comments and start thinking - no wonder the process is totally screwed up, buncha boxa rocks out there.
He's not running for national office he's running for president of South Carolina, a non existing office. His media friends get the joke, why didn't you??
xvet
lmao, he's no you don't get it. He's running for the republican nomination for US President. He's running for it in South Carolina, as in he's going to be on the ballot in South Carolina along with Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, etc...
Actually, he won't be on the ballot, as the deadline has passed to get on the ballot. And there is no write in space on the ballot either.
xvet,
Actually, he's running for President of the United States in South Carolina. Basically, he'll only be on SC's ballot.
Cvilleguy78:
No, Actually he is running for "president of the UNITED STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA".
"STATE" Without the "S"...
Although he is just an anchor on a tv show, there is absolutely no reason why this couldnt be true. He's no worse than the other candidates who are lying about all the things they can change, they never mention that they have to wait for congress to approve things. There is also nothing stating that it will be better then where we are now. Terminator is/was a Governor, he's not even American. I say rock on Stephen Colbert. You have my vote.
And luckily for America, Arnold screwed up just enough to make Congress reconsider the whole nonsense about changing the 'Born in the U.S.' clause in the Constitution. Tore that bill right up when he put the smackdown on Maria.
What is it about: "the United States of South Carolina" that people aren't getting?
Yes, he is.
Where's his long-form birth certificate then?
he is an american...by naturalization
3 Fold Law:
If you listen carefully to his "announcement":
he is running for "president of the UNITED STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA".
"STATE" Without the "S"...
Since the only way to get this country back on the road to personal responsibility is to vote anti-incumbent, he's as good a candidate as any.
yes. I like that fact that you voted for John Kerry. At least you tried to kick the moron out of office.
I wish he were serious about running. I believe that both he and Stewart know more about what this country needs than the "Bums of the Month Club", and they obviously have better staffs! Till then, we'll just have to laugh along as they completely ridicule the bought and paid for politicians in today's races.
Stephen Colbert is using a super-pac to show how dishonest super-pacs can be. He's made a comedic art form out of unbridled hypocrisy. His style reminds me somewhat of Andy Kaufman in that he's running a long joke with a straight face. While everyone cracks up, he's got this [I don't see what's so funny] expression on his face.
I totally agree with the Supreme Courts decision in Citizens United vs. the FEC. Just because Stephen Colbert is able to sarcastically and melodramatically use his own super-pac to promote his own agenda doesn't prove that any politician is using any super-pac similarly. Further even if a super-pac does support one politician in particular, why is that so wrong?
Colbert thinks it's okay that Budweiser promotes it's own beer vs. all the other beers with insanely ludicrously huge amounts of money. We're talking perhaps billions of dollars of advertizing to promote this one beer. But that's perfectly okay? Sure, billions of dollars to persuade people to consume a beverage that causes middleclass red-necks to beat the crap out of their wives and children, then drive a car at ninety miles per hour into a bus filled with orphans. Bedrooms filled with weeping bleeding victims and highways filled with mayhem and carnage at the behest of billion dollar persuasion campaigns are okay with Colbert, but an organization like Citizen's United that seeks to reassert the traditional American values of limited government, freedom of enterprise, strong families, and national sovereignty with security is just bad bad bad?
The irony of the over-the-top hypocrisy of Stephen Colbert is that his position against super-pacs [really is] the height of unbridled hypocrisy.
Dear Jayne,
It's difficult to tell if you are being serious or not, but I'll start by accepting your comment at face value.
"even if a super-pac does support one politician in particular, why is that so wrong?"
Well - what's so wrong is that undisclosed, corporate entities can fund and thus influence politicians to pass laws that favour their interests over those of the general public. Is that the kind of political system you favour?
"Colbert thinks it's okay that Budweiser promotes it's own beer vs. all the other beers with insanely ludicrously huge amounts of money." Does the decision to purchase one brand of intoxicant over the other really correspond with the right of citizens to select leaders in a free and fair vote, in your opinion? Such an assertion denigrates the purpose and function of democracy.
War and Peace is shorter that that drivel Jayne. I suppose you see life in pretty simple terms though. Keep up the great analysis of society!
DD
What's wrong with a Super Pac? How about a company like DOW Chemical for example, that buys an election with their unlimited amounts of money and in exchange they get to dump billions of gallons of toxic waste into our landfills and rivers? Why would they do that you may ask? Because they would rather spend 600 million dollars to elect their president than to spend 700 million dollars disposing of the waste. Net gain is 100 million dollars for DOW Chemical. A very simplified example but when you start thinking about Drug companies and the Insurance industry I think you get the picture. Wonder why your insurance rates go up even though the accident wasnt your fault? Thank your paid for representatives for that. Insurance companies lobbied for that nice little nugget
Yes but in your example, at least we know who owns and pays for the beer ads. Who gives citizen united the money to buy our politicians, we'd just like to know before we vote who owns the man we are voting for.
No, YOU don't get it. The problem isn't the money, it's the lack of transparency. The supreme court in its (activist partisan) ruling stated that while it was vital that the voters knew who were funding a candidate there was no risk of corruption because of transparency; the voters would know who the funder was. Here's the kicker: the super PACs are not required to divulge who their funders are until AFTER THE ELECTION.
Your comparison to beer is revealing - by your own analogy the candidates are products owned by corporations, which is exactly how most americans do NOT want the political system to work.
The Citizens United ruling was judicial activism at its worst (read Justice Stevens dissenting opinion), but sadly both the republicans and democrats get rich from it, so the laws are unlikely to be changed.
Dark ominous clouds hover over the black-cloaked figure while shadows obscure the diabolical face of the evil super-pac...[sinister drums boom in the distance as though we were walking through Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness jungle.] "Ha Ha Ha!" booms his laughing voice. "Now that you've foolishly elected my pawn as your President, I'll have him sign into law evil acts that Congress has already passed...Ha Ha Ha! Soon your water will be a sludge of radioactive waste, tar, and blue whale by-products."
Because---as we all know---super-pacs are the only way that evil corporations can buy politicians. I mean, it's not like they can promise them a job as a lobbyist, or put their name on a building.
Seriously, the whole "scary evil super-pac" meme is so absurd and asinine that the fact that you people are buying into it is really hysterical. Of course the truth is that you're fine with super-pacs as long as they're solidly left-wing. If the Super-Pac were called "Illegal Aliens United" I'm sure you'd be A-Okay with it.
Jayne - Super PACs bring us right back to the 1800s to early 20th Century in politics. You know, Tammany Hall, Teddy Roosevelt needing to do his trust busting, and all that nonsense. Doesn't matter whether they're left or right, they'll all eventually turn evil. That amount of unlimited, unchecked money in a campaign shouldn't be allowed. Federal funding for all elections. No private money.
Don't worry, people. Jayne works for the Koch brothers. It is her job to try to put a reasonable and serious face on what can only be described as Supreme Court authorized public corruption.
Jayne, move on to another discussion. We understand your views on this one.
Jayne - Colbert is pointing out the absurdities and the issues that can and most likely are being exploited by the candidates and the super pacs.
When a super pac is created by close friends and 'former campaign chairmen' of the candidate, or are friends AND business partners with the current campaign executives (Colbert and Stewart pointed some out like this last night) - it's hard to beleive that there is no 'coordination' between the campaign and the super pacs (go look it up - nearly all of the super pacs have that kind of incestious relationship with the candidates).
The system is rigged and broken. There is no limit to what super pacs can do and there is zero transparency into who is financing the 'win' of a specific candidate. (You'd have to be a moron to think that the super pac attack ads have no affect upon the outcome of the election).
Jayne had to post twice before I finally figured out that she (? - You never know.) just likes Super PAC's because they're usually corporations supporting Republicans. Now I can see where she's coming from with that insane drivel.
Corporations aren't people. Only people are people.
And somebody posted "it's not the money". Yes, it is the money. Anybody who thinks money can't buy elections just hasn't been paying attention. Polls track money very closely. Right now, for example, Romney is up and he has spent by far the most money. If Adolph Hitler spent enough money, he could win an election here.
Amazing, all of the comments on this vine prove that Colbert has accomplished one of the things his "campaign" intends, to increase the awareness of real live people (not "corporate people") of how broken our political system really is and that the only way to fix it is for people to become involved.
Ah, so the super PAC is OK as long as you agree with their agenda. Being from the deep south, born in the early fifties, and mostly paying attention to the people around me as well as the press for most of those years, I'm still trying to figure out just what American values are.
I'm going to leave this comment as is because I'm pretty sure there are at least 200,000,000 definitions.
There are so many things wrong with your post that I'm not even going to attempt to correct your reasoning. But your post is quite scary and also, shows biased anger. You need to loosen your grip.
You sir, have missed the point. Its supposed to be a public office and public service. Beer is for sale, my elected, impartial, representative is not!!!!!
Porter..he did,and his brother helped with the polls....boo-yaaah
Best thing in politics since Pat Paulson ran in the 1960's
Good Ol Pat Paulson, just think what he would have achived if he had a Super PAC.
Actually, it is Pat Paulsen. Google his name and watch some of his skits. He was one of the best parts of the SmoBro Comedy Hour back in the 60's. I actually wrote him in on the ballot in '68. Then I met Tommy Smothers at a dinner event in DC in '69. It was fun listening to his discussions about Pat's campaigns.
I'm afraid that Mr. Colbert has not been a corporate raider and habitual candidate. He has not on wife #3. He's never been booted out of congress, had to pay an ethics committee fine. He never lobbied for Fanny or Freddy. He's never sexually harassed. He's never given a stump speech while drunk or on drugs. He blinks. He's not a separationist old coot. It's safe to Google his name. He is obviously not qualified to be a Republican.
"It's safe to google his name" ... LMAO!
Mr. Liberal2You,
Many, MANY thanks for the laugh - I really needed that this morning! But, jokes aside, your take is spot on. Our system of elections has become a joke, just like Congress and SCOTUS have become jokes. Unfortunately we are not laughing ... Additionally, the GOPers don't get that corporations - who for as much as they delude themselves - are NOT people and don't vote yet they are allowed to buy elected officials ... yeah, isn't that just f**king genius ...
How pathetic is it that it takes a comedian to point out the many wrongs present in our elections yet, Washington, the supposed "adults", are positively clueless ...
Stewart / Colbert 2012!!
or a democrat. Both are useless dividers.
Great..... Another comedian to join in with ones already running. Nice! This elections going to be like stealing candy from a kid. The republican party dont stand half a chance. :))
The only difference is that Colbert hosts a comedy show; the others look more like one of the current reality shows - more stupid than funny.
At least this one actually uses his brilliance to intentionally be a comedian. The others are comedians only because of thier stupidity.
All the good jokes have been told before:
"When Congress makes a joke, it's a law. And when they pass a law, it's a joke."
-Will Rogers
Wow, so many gullible people in society. I thought the conservatives stayed at limbaughnews.com or fauxnews .com, now they are on here posting about some guy running for president like its real. There should be a test to determine if people can vote that cannot even figure out who is running and not running. I guess President of the U.S. of South Carolina makes sense to them. Amazing
remember these are the same people who thought Sara Palin was a serious candidate for president.
And these are the same people that think Bill O'Reilly hosts a news show, when Bill acknowledges that comedy shows are his competition...
Colbert is highlighting the fact that someday soon we will see presidential advertise ments like "President Romney, sponsored by Bain Capital" on the side of Air Force One or on the podium instead of the seal of the United States it will be Coca-Cola. Big money needs to be out of politics. Everyone in the US should be allowed to contribute to a max amount of $500. This way, we can track if the candidates raise more money than allowed by law. There will be a finite amount of cash in the system and they will have to battle it out to get it. These $10,000 a plate fund raisers by BOTH sides is BS. Give the power back to the people and NOT the people that sit around the board rooms of big corporate America....... and beyond our shores!!!!
Gary, see my post above and get involved. This is the ONLY way that we will ever accomplish your desires. (BTW, the ECFR amendment will limit individual contributions to $200 and families living in the same household to $500 and will restrict a candidate's expenditure of his/her own money to just 60% of the total of individual/family contributions.) It also bans ALL corporate, union, non-profit, PAC, SuperPAC, etc. contributions and third-party advertising.
Banning ads may not survive a constitutional challenge, but there is another way. We could require that corporations get permission from a majority of their shareholders for any political contributions they make and that they post that in the ad. ["We're the shareholders of XYZ and we approve of this commercial."] After all, union members have the right to vote out any leader that backs a candidate or takes a position on a policy that they do not support. Why shouldn't we have the same be true on the other side?
Read what I posted and the petitions....these are constitutional amendments and if passed then there is no constitutional challenge to them, any more than there would be to any other passed amendment. For those who haven't taken time to even read the petitions, here they are (note Sections 5, 6, 10, & 11....items in bold for emphasis):
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Election Reform
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Election Reform:
1. Abolish the Electoral College (Repeal Amendment 12)
2. ONE NATIONAL primary date to be held on the Tuesday eight (8) weeks prior to the General Election day for Congressional offices and for the President. Candidate petitions must be filed with the local/state elections boards 60 days prior to the Primary Election date. Federal election petitions shall be uniform in every state and shall include a “contract with the voters” that spells out clearly what that candidate stands for on all issues that they may have to address in elected office. They shall be held accountable in court for breach of that contract if elected and any/all terms are not met.
3. NO campaigning allowed for any elective federal office more than 60 days prior to the National Primary Date.
4. NO campaign contribution shall be donated to any candidate of more than $200 from an individual or $500 maximum from a family (spouses/children living in the same household.) No donations shall be made to a candidate more than sixty days prior to the primary date. No candidate shall contribute from their own funds more than 60% of the total donations from other private individuals.
5. NO campaign contribution from any PAC, corporation, union, non-profit organization, special interest group, etc. shall be allowed for any elected federal office.
6. NO third party campaigning (separate PAC ads, corporate ads, etc.) for/against any candidate shall be allowed at any time during or before the election season.
7. NO party conventions shall be held to select the presidential candidates. The selection must be done at the ballot box in the primary election.
8. The One Man/One Vote Supreme Court ruling shall be enforced by this Amendment, namely that NO federal candidate selection shall be by any means other than the ballot box on Primary/General Election Dates.
9. National Party Organizations shall NOT raise money for or donate to specific candidates of their party prior to the dates outlined above.
10. PAC’s shall NOT be granted tax-exempt status by the IRS, and any non-profit organization who uses their funding for political purposes shall lose their tax-exempt status.
11. All lobbyists shall be outlawed from influencing Congress at all times.
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Congressional Term Limits
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Term Limits for Congress:
1. Representatives to Congress shall serve no more than two two-year terms in the House.
2. Senators shall be elected to no more than two six year terms in the Senate.
3. No elected official shall serve more than six terms in office in any combined elected offices (House/Senate/Presidency.)
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
Hey people! Read this! Talk about it, discuss it, debate it. This may yet save our republic!
Colbert's announcement was great!
I am waiting for the Rock Central story to air. I will just love the rhetoric that will come from both sides, Liberal and Conservative. I leave you with a couple of old sayings; "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks." and more important; "if you can't take a joke get out of the race."
Truly have mixed emotions about Colbert"s campaign. He clearly is highlighting and mocking an improper means of influencing election outcomes but his method is trivializing our electoral process. What is even scarier is that whole chunks of US population don't recognize or appreciate his efforts as satire.
"trivializing our electoral process"
I think DC and SCOTUS have done an infinitely better job at trivializing our electoral process than Colbert - or any comedian for that matter - has and ever will.
he's not trivializing the process. He's not actually involved in the real process.
He's too late to become an official candidate (filing deadlines long since passed) and South Carolina does not allow write in candidates in the primary.
and if you don't get it, you really need to learn more about this type of satirical humor. The goal is to make you laugh while exposing the filthy, nasty, nearly illegal (if not blatantly so), probably often immoral, absurd and blatantly stupid con game that politics has become.
If that's trivializing the process, then you could say that any war movie or historical war documentary is trivializing the war that it's about.
On paper we have a great process. The reality is awful. Most people just don't have the time to keep up with issues, candidates, local or national happenings, or anything else an informed electorate needs to know. That makes us very vulnerable to suspect sources of information. I'll leave it to you to list those sources of information. I can't follow them all. I read left, right and foreign. I still can't figure out what the hell is going on. I do love Cobert though. His criticism through hilarious action is fantastic. Does he still have that toilet seat on the space station named after him?
"Does he still have that toilet seat on the space station named after him?"
Actually, it was a piece of exercise equipment:
"The Combined Operational Load Bearing External Resistance Treadmill, or COLBERT, will be the second treadmill on the space station, adding to a complement of six different exercise devices already in orbit that range from stationary bicycles to resistive exercise devices.
Named after comedian Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," the new treadmill, first and foremost, is a critical countermeasure device that will be used to keep the international crew healthy while in orbit and prepare them for return to Earth."
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/behindscenes/colbert_feature.html
Couldn't remember. Either way it was funny.
"Either way it was funny."
Agreed
Jimive, I think most people who watch Colbert Report regularly do get that this is satire. And I would guess also that he's too smart to run for political office. After all, he has a fun job, makes a ton of money, and he's smart enough to know that one person doesn't change the system. Great article in last week New York Times Sunday magazine on Colbert. We would be lucky to have politicians as smart, funny, and authentic as Colbert.
Oh, no...Citizens United already took care of that.
I hope he does run.... I love Colbert!! He is polling above Huntsman prior to this fiasco.....?? I say embarrass them all and get your name out there. Lets just see how sad the entire GOP is this go round. I'm willing to bet he would finish no less than 3rd in S.C. and how nice would it be to see him take the state that is supposed to secure the party selection. GO COLBERT!!
Sadly, S.C. would never vote for Colbert. They would vote GOP no matter how fascist the party has become because of the 3 G's. Allowing the plutocratic takeover of the U.S. to prevent the evil Dem's from "taking away their guns." As a liberal, I have no frackin' interest in taking away anyone's guns. But somehow the GOP has managed to convince SC voters that someone like me would do that at a moment's notice. Bosh.
Fieldguy,
Funny you mention "taking away guns". I was listening to a conversation between a coworker and a UPS driver yesterday about people buying up all the gun ammo after Obama got elected and the driver pointed out that Obama hasn't even mentioned gun control let alone taking guns away from people. My coworker said "He hasn't done anything YET!"
I still can't understand how these people get fooled into being afraid of their guns getting taken away when it will never happen.
"I still can't understand how these people get fooled into being afraid of their guns getting taken away when it will never happen."
Fear of the unknown and those "different" always scares the crap out of ignorant people. In this case, it's because President Obama isn't a white, dog-fearing Christian who clings to his bible and his guns ...
We should never lose sight of the fact that many of these folks are descendants of the ones who started the Civil War, when a majority elected a president that they just knew would take away their slaves. Remember, they still treasure the flag of treason (aka the Confederate flag), still celebrate the "achievements" of Confederate generals with a rival to Mt. Rushmore (Stone Mountain) and immortalize the leader of the attempt to dismantle the country they claim to love (e.g. Jefferson Davis Road in Virginia). On this last one, how about renaming that road in honor of the guy who gave his life to keep the country we have?
Bravo !! I hope he gets a crapload of votes. Lets hope one day we don't look back at these times as the beginning of the end. The further we travel down the corrupt path the larger the action required to get back. Comedy Central thanks for the entertainment and visoin to show just how stupid the American political system has become. We keep waiting for a breaking moment when things appear to get better but here we are heading for November and things are as bad as ever. Mitt grow some balls and come out as the true candidate that you are. Put forth your best effort and may the best man win. Screw the far-right conservatives they are going nowhere.
Think Justice Alito - who during Obama's State of the Union address mouthed "not true" re: the huge corporate funds that would flood PACs after the Supreme Court decision - will be keeping his mouth shut this time around?
Colbert shows the utter absurdity in our political system! We The People need to change it and until that happens we might as well laugh.
I am glad they have equal opportunity employment for retarded citizen's pertaining to the presidency of our failing country. Good grief.
colbert is a comedic genious and a very sharp man. he has brought his audience into the incredibly ridiculous world of super pacs to show how these things are setup, and how they are used and abused. he is showing how extremely dangerous it is to have unlimited funds, from annoymous donors which ultimately influence the elections.
through these super pacs, corporations are paying big dollars to promote their agenda, so they can get favorable treatment after their candidate(s) win the election. this sort of behavior is outragous and is making a mockery of our election process.
its always been said we have the best government money can buy, and it has never been more true now with the creation of these super pacs. its time for americans to wake up!
cokeorpepsi....(neither one actually....give me root beer, hehe). Do something active about it. Don't just sit there and complain. Join the Popular Amendment Movement's efforts through the link above.
With two Billionaires in Stephen Colbert's corner he can't lose.
Colbert--Mark Twain of our time, at least in this case. He's saying the things that I have longed for our policy makers to say since Citizens United. And he's getting it out there to lots of everyday Americans. If he does "run", he may actually get my vote instead of Obama or Romney or whatever GOP plutocrat gets the nomination. Obama needs to use the bully pulpit to say the things that Colbert is saying. Enough is enough with the corporate takeover of our political system.
As an non-partisan Canadian observer to this, I think it is absolutely brilliant that Colbert is doing what he is doing. I tend to pay attention as to what happens to my southern neighbours and truthfully, with the gambit of televison shows, news channels etc...the "truth" appears to come from both Colbert and Stewart.
What frustrates me is that what is portrayed on both Stewart's and Colbert's shows are largely viewed as faux-news" yet, they have played clips blatantly showing your elected officials flip-flopping on issues, contradicting themselves or just plain showing how pro Corporate America they really are.
Whether or not he is being serious, I would suggest that you all of you who support him lobby for him to actually do it. Can you think of a better way to expose the Republicans for who they really are (even more so, the Government as whole) then to elect satirical (yet brutually honest) figure into office? Geez, the Republicans still view Reagan as the second coming of JC and let's face it, Colbert is a much better actor than he was.
Good thoughts. But I have a different opinion on one point. Reagan was a great actor. He only sucked at being a governor and president.
Reagan is turning over in his grave over what the republican party has become....ultra right wing fascists only interested in themselves. Sadly to oppose them we have the ultra left wing liberalists only interested in themselves. In the end we will all lose since no one can work with anyone else in the interest of the public good.
"Reagan was a great actor."
Well, I guess sharing the big screen with a chimp makes anyone look like a great actor :)
My father, who is a veteran fighter pilot of Korea and Vietnam was a staunch Republian Reaganite for most of his life told me recently that if he knew back when what the Republican party would eventually become he would have changed every single vote he's made for the GOP to the Democratic party.
Actually the Repubs turning over in their graves would be Lincoln, Teddy, and Ike. Ike was the last of the real GOP and the ONLY one that I would have voted for in the last 60 years. It's too bad we didn't heed his warning about the military/industrial complex.
ray21: your father sounds like an intelligent, thinking person. It is no wonder the modern Republican party does not want him, he's not a sheep.
This is the ONLY Person worth MY Vote.. The other Candi-dated Crooks can sit back and see how America really feels. GO COLBERT!!!