http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/ this isn't meant to last, this is for.right.now. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:10:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-50 Wiki Thu, 03 May 2007 00:32:44 +0000 http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-50 Yes, political comedians is the perfect word for both of them in my book anyway. I, too, see Jon as being a mix between an idealist and realist; I love that about him He's aware of the muck we live in but still has hopes that we will rise up and does what he can to help drag our asses up out of it. You may be right on about Stephen. He just has me scratching my head over the WHCD. Yes, political comedians is the perfect word for both of them in my book anyway. I, too, see Jon as being a mix between an idealist and realist; I love that about him He’s aware of the muck we live in but still has hopes that we will rise up and does what he can to help drag our asses up out of it.
You may be right on about Stephen. He just has me scratching my head over the WHCD.

]]> http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-45 Meow House Tue, 01 May 2007 21:27:13 +0000 http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-45 I think that although they are primarily NOT political figures, they are political comedians, for lack of a better term. Jon especially; he made The Daily Show what it is on the force of his political beliefs. Or rather, his idealism of politics and how the media relates to it. Although I don't think he is an idealist: I view him as a realist. Idealism can, if one chooses, remain in the fairy-land of the clouds but realism can be changed. And Jon does what he can to make things change, or hope for things to change, in the way he is able to do it. As for Stephen's saying he didn't except the WHCD to be anything but an act, I just don't buy it. He is too smart for that. Plus it's clear based on other people's comments that they all knew what kind of a they were writing. They had to have known it would not be the standard dull event banquet yawnfest. I suppose the ton of bricks that landed was beyond their wildest imaginings of the night, though. I think that although they are primarily NOT political figures, they are political comedians, for lack of a better term. Jon especially; he made The Daily Show what it is on the force of his political beliefs. Or rather, his idealism of politics and how the media relates to it. Although I don’t think he is an idealist: I view him as a realist. Idealism can, if one chooses, remain in the fairy-land of the clouds but realism can be changed. And Jon does what he can to make things change, or hope for things to change, in the way he is able to do it. As for Stephen’s saying he didn’t except the WHCD to be anything but an act, I just don’t buy it. He is too smart for that. Plus it’s clear based on other people’s comments that they all knew what kind of a they were writing. They had to have known it would not be the standard dull event banquet yawnfest. I suppose the ton of bricks that landed was beyond their wildest imaginings of the night, though.

]]> http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-44 Wiki Tue, 01 May 2007 01:36:31 +0000 http://meowhouse.net/2007/04/30/365-days-since-the-dinner/#comment-44 I have always found Stephen's comments (as well as Jon's) about not being a political figure interesting. I'm guessing the reluctance to be seen as a political figure has to do, in part, with not wanting to be identified with one particular party. But anyone who has watched TDS, the show that 'birthed' TCR, for any length of time knows that both political parties are fair game--neither is held to be sacrosanct as both are incredibly fallible. And then, I guess there's just plain old humility, which I sometimes get in comments the real Stephen Colbert has made about his dinner speech. Perhaps, that is another reason why he dismisses it as being neither brave or courageous. Either way, Stephen's response to the response about his speech is curious to me. I'm not sure I'll ever totally understand it. I have always found Stephen’s comments (as well as Jon’s) about not being a political figure interesting. I’m guessing the reluctance to be seen as a political figure has to do, in part, with not wanting to be identified with one particular party. But anyone who has watched TDS, the show that ‘birthed’ TCR, for any length of time knows that both political parties are fair game–neither is held to be sacrosanct as both are incredibly fallible.
And then, I guess there’s just plain old humility, which I sometimes get in comments the real Stephen Colbert has made about his dinner speech. Perhaps, that is another reason why he dismisses it as being neither brave or courageous.
Either way, Stephen’s response to the response about his speech is curious to me. I’m not sure I’ll ever totally understand it.

]]>