Richard Cohen (WP) calls Colbert "rude," "not funny," "lame," "insulting,"

[Julius Civitatus]

Richard Cohen (WP) calls Colbert "rude," "not funny," "lame," "insulting," "bully."



We have already established that Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen is a WANKER. He is not just a wanker, but one of a major order. Cohen is the self-described "liberal" columnist at the notoriously neocon-friendly WaPo. Funny thing, is that this self-described "liberal" always finds ways to agree with the Bush administration, always supports the decisions of the Bush administration, and has never wasted time attacking and chiding his "fellow liberals" for one reason or another.
In essence, Richard Cohen is what Eric Alterman calls a "New Republic Democrat," or a liberal in name only that can only be equated to the likes of Joe Lieberman in his predictable brown-nosing of the Bush administration.

In today's column, Cohen spews venom against Stephen Colbert. It surprised me how nasty and personal Cohen gets in his column. Still, what surprised me the most is how Cohen called Colbert a "bully":

But in this country, anyone can insult the president of the United States. Colbert just did it, and he will not suffer any consequence at all. He knew that going in. He also knew that Bush would have to sit there and pretend to laugh at Colbert's lame and insulting jokes. Bush himself plays off his reputation as a dunce and his penchant for mangling English. Self-mockery can be funny. Mockery that is insulting is not. The sort of stuff that would get you punched in a bar can be said on a dais with impunity. This is why Colbert was more than rude. He was a bully.

See how it works? According to Cohen, a comedian with a biting sense of sarcasm is a “bully,” but not Bush. Not siree! Bush is not a bully that deserves at least some comical criticism to his face, for once. Colbert is the bully in Cohen’s servile mind. Bush apparently is not, the same guy who started a preemptive war based on lies, that attacked and persecuted critics by using dirty tricks (Plame), that used the power of the presidency to leak the identity of a CIA agent for personal revenge reasons (Plame again), who has silenced critics, who has cowed media and opposition into subservient devotion “or else,” the same guy who has decided he’s above the law and violated 750 laws just because, who has authorized human rights abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Grahib, well, that guy is not a “bully.” That guy is just a poor victim of that horrible, not-funny, rude, lame, insulting comedian Stephen Colbert.

Somehow I am not surprised this tool has come out so quickly to attack Colbert. Richard Cohen was there when it was time to rush the country into invading Iraq. Cohen devotedly chided and criticized antiwar protestors. Cohen bashed Michael Moore when the right went on a crusade against Fahrenheit 9/11. Cohen is as predictable in his lapdog devotion to Bush and his cronies as Ol’ Faithful.

Cohen gets even better in this paragraph:

I am not a member of the White House Correspondents' Association, and I have not attended its dinner in years (I watched this year's on C-SPAN). The gala is an essentially harmless event that requires the presence of one man, the president. If presidents started not to show up, the organization would have to transform itself into a burial association. But presidents come and suffer through a ritual that most of them find mildly painful, not to mention boring. Whatever the case, they are guests. They don't have to be there -- and if I were Bush, next year I would not. Spring is a marvelous time to be at Camp David.

Oh the horror! Oh the horror and the ignominy that Dear Leader had to endure a bit of sarcastic jokes and criticism! What are we gonna tell the children? How did that “unfunny” Colbert guy dare pierce that bubble of isolation that surrounds Bush at all times? How dare he???

If Richard Cohen has demonstrated anything over the years is that he is a Washington courtier, a servile tool of the DC Republican establishment, always ready to join the latest Republican cause célèbre and side with his outrage in the conservative melee.

If anything is “not funny,” it is Richard Cohen still pretending to represent “the left” in the Washington Post. Now that’s an insulting joke.

PS: he posts his email in the article
[email protected]

[Avalux]

1. Did Richard get his ego bruised??

Poor baby. :nopity:

[awoke_in_2003]

128. of course it did

the truth hurts, and Steven Colbert was dishing out a lot of it. P.S. Like him even more, now. It took some guts to do what he did

[AtomicKitten]

2. In other words, Colbert was FABULOUS.

[blm]

12. In other words : TRUTH HURTS - DON'T IT?

They would laugh at themselvesif Colbert merely TOUCHED on the truth, but since he laid it out dead to rights, they are all PISSED and RESENTFUL.

Fuck 'em. I'll bet calls for renewed ambien prescriptions went STRAIGHT UP in DC.

[The Wielding Truth]

57. It's kinda Lenny Bruce or Jackie Mason only on a spoon of honey.

[Karenca]

3. Thanks for his email

My letter is on its way:mad:

[wryter2000]

4. Don't forget

Colbert skewered the "news" media pretty well, too. In other words, he got Cohen, too. Well deservedly.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. His friends don't call him Dick for nothin'! n/t

[Supersedeas]

120. WHO are his friends?

[ShortnFiery]

6. I think dear "poor richard" is PROJECTING

A psychological term for behaving in exactly the manner he chides others for.

Sad, isn't it?

NO! It's f**king hilarious. That is, both Cobert and all the pissy little Jealous toadies of the Corporate press.

Albeit it unintentional, your snotty article is as funny as hell Coen, but mostly due to it's dripping hypocritical pissypants tone. You're a real good boy to our Dear Leader. There there funny boy, don't cry or threaten to make us goons in the Blogosphere irrelavant.

Oh boy, the more they protest, the more publicity we score. :woohoo:

[reichstag911]

52. Hey,...

...don't type this POS's name as "Coen!" It's an insult to the Coen brothers who are, after all, talented.

[ShortnFiery]

81. I stand corrected COHEN it is :-) eom

[nashville_brook]

7. so, the press is scared the pResident won't show if he's lampooned

has the press turned into one big BATTERED WIFE? they've taken it on the chin repeatedly. now they can't imagine life without threat.

god help them.

[Julius Civitatus]

11. Yes, the "battered wife" complex of the US media has been discussed

before. That's exactly how they behave, as bad as it sounds.

[nashville_brook]

143. it's so common -- it's not just about 'wives' -- it's power

monkeys can't regulate themselves

[Rose Siding]

8. Certainly Mr Cohen will be lighting into Leno and Letterman next

Or maybe he'll just wait to see if Hoyer says anything to make that less scary for him.

"Did you know former President James Garfield could write Latin with one hand and Greek with the other at the same time?" Leno said. "That was Garfield. When President Bush heard about it, he said, 'We had a talking cat for president?' "

One of Letterman's jokes: "Lincoln had an IQ of 120. Bush's IQ is under four score and seven."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/04/entertainment/main1585160.shtml?source=RSS&attr=Politics_1585160

[Vadem]

82. ROTFLMAO! Letterman joke.....

One of Letterman's jokes: "Lincoln had an IQ of 120. Bush's IQ is under four score and seven."

[slay]

9. Try "honest"

Typical political smear against the REAL liberals, as usual. I don't know why I expect any different - Washington doesn't do "honest". That dinner was probably the first time anyone EVER told Bush the truth. If the truth hurts so much, then Bush should quit being such an evil, criminal, soulless bastard! I can tell you one thing for sure, Cohen is NOT a liberal if this is his reaction. At least not like any I know.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. my mail to his holey-ness

Considering that most of MSM, the WaPo and you in particular, included, has been asleep for the last 4 years, it is no surprise that you would find Mr. Colbert rude and not funny. Frankly, that makes his performance even more priceless, accurate, entertaining and humorous.

Poor Mr. Cohen, not liking what he sees in the mirror, especially when the mirror shows a sycophantic press, lapdogs of an illegal administration and supporters of the neocon thugs who are destroying our country.

Mr. Cohen, just so you know, Mr. Colbert was funny. His description of you and yours was dead-on accurate and your predictable reaction proves his point. If you don't like the message, eh?

We are about to invade Iran based on more lies and spin, and you worry about Colbert being a bully?

Please share what ever you are adding to your water. I want some. Given today's realities and insane warmongering from our White House, I could use a good dose of self-imposed delusions.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Very well presented ...

No suck up here.

But genuine KUDOS to you antifaschits.

Your email was IMO, excellent, i.e., concise and hard hitting. :applause:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. Thank you, short.

I just got a dashboard download of Shakespeare's best insults. I am awed by his wit. If only I had a fingernail's worth of his talent. . . .
But, you need a mac for that.

If (a big if) I receive a response, I will post it here.

[ShortnFiery]

27. Please do ...

Well you show greater "writing talent" promise than me but I have other gifts. ;)

The fact that you kept it concise will maximize the chance Cohen may at least read it. Yeah, if you do get a response, don't forget to scoop us.

[Vadem]

85. Wonderful assessment! I'm getting ready to send my own....n/t

[wryter2000]

14. Another liberal

Will Durst on SF's Air American affiliate said Colbert wasn't "professional." He said Colbert was funny and Bush deserved it, but delivering it at that dinner was unprofessional. :nopity:

[CBHagman]

34. Durst said that?

I'm so disappointed! I thought he would have been able to handle the scathing Colbert address...

[wryter2000]

39. That's what they said this morning

They're getting quite a few e-mails about it. I haven't been much of a Durst fan ever since he wrote a column about how they should put a mirror in the middle of the bay so folks in SF wouldn't have to look at Oakland when they look East. I love Oakland, and I hate that crap!

[CBHagman]

137. Epilogue: A friend who is a priest sent the Colbert clip around.

Father (name deleted for privacy purposes) described it as "an amazing performance" and termed Colbert one of the "three relevant voices in the media, along with Jon Stewart and Amy Goodman."

Of course Father explained to recipients what sort of comedy Colbert does. Perhaps Father could gently and delicately explain it all to Mr. Cohen, who apparently did not get the memo.

[reichstag911]

53. Duty to country...

...supersedes duty to profession.



:patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot::patriot:

[leveymg]

15. Knee-jerk "liberal". Reflex clonk.

Richard, you should know better than to try this. If you're going to use up ink in this town, you have to observe the rules.

If you insult a Washington policy wonk as ignorant or wrong-headed, your column had better be far more informative and better argued. Similarly, if you call a comedian "unfunny", you have to be REALLY funny as you do it.

But, you don't have the wit, so why even try? You are what you do best - you're boring. And, a phoney liberal. Best of both worlds.

[Dudley_DUright]

16. Another press wanker just proving Colbert's point

As Joan Walsh said in her Salon piece, Colbert's speech is the gift that keeps on giving.

[Ganja Ninja]

17. "Bush would have to sit there and pretend to laugh"

That's what made it so funny. Colbert didn't invite himself.
Colbert has no obligation to change his act and play nice. Don't get mad a Colbert. Get mad at the guy that hired a man who makes his living roasting politicians and the media.
Colbert made fools out of all of them and I'll bet he had fun doing it.

[Contrary1]

33. Junior didn't

have to sit there and pretend to laugh. The one thing that would have made Colbert's
routine even better is if the Idiot Son and Laura had stormed off the stage.

But then, it wasn't in the script, so he had no clue how to deal with it.

[Bumblebee]

19. Cohen broke with his family and voted for Bush in 2000 -- and, for all

we know, in 2004, just did not write about it then. Plus who the hell reads Cohen any more -- other than masochists in this forum (used affectionately :)?

[agingdem]

20. During the 2000 recount...

Cohen the Putz admitted to voting for Gore but said he should have voted for Bush because he was such a stand-up guy.

[Bumblebee]

22. you are right -- I forgot that bit. This is from NewsMax.com

Cohen's Endorsement of Bush: What It Really Means

Lawrence Auster
Monday, Nov. 27, 2000

Conservative Web sites were all on fire Friday with reactions to Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen's announcement that he now supports George W. Bush for president. Gov. Bush, says Cohen, is the man who can best unite the nation after this divisive post-election experience, "a conciliator, a likable guy who will make things better and not worse."

At Lucianne Goldberg's lively Web chat room, many of the participants couldn't get over their joy and amazement that a liberal stalwart like Cohen had abandoned the Gore camp. They said things like:

• "Did I just read this? Am I imagining things? Cohen? Naw."

• "Maybe this is the start of something big. If enough prominent Democrats begin calling for a Gore concession, it might just happen."

• "This is a truly astonishing article!! If Gore gets many more like this one, what will he do if his friendly media desert him?"

• "I can only assume that hell froze over today."

• "Wow ... I'm speechless ... "

But as some conservatives were getting ready to break out the champagne (a typical, and often dangerously deluded, response of contemporary conservatives to a single favorable event), cooler heads warned that Cohen's apostasy to the Bush camp might be a Democratic ploy designed to put Republicans to sleep while Gore snatched the lead in the Florida recount.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2000/11/27/91323.shtml

[CBHagman]

144. Well, THAT was a bright idea.

:sarcasm:

"Conservative Web sites were all on fire Friday with reactions to Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen's announcement that he now supports George W. Bush for president. Gov. Bush, says Cohen, is the man who can best unite the nation after this divisive post-election experience, 'a conciliator, a likable guy who will make things better and not worse.'"

A "conciliator, a likable guy who will make things better and not worse"? Here among the cubicle rats, I can see how much more acrimonious politics are and what a beating bipartisanship has taken. And that's without going into the long-term fiscal, domestic, and foreign policy damage the Bush administration has inflicted.

If Cohen could believe in 2000 that Bush was conciliatory and inclined to make things better, he's had ample evidence debunking that belief since then. That Cohen could vote for that vindictive and incompetent thing in 2004 and still defend him in this fashion two years later speaks volumes on Cohen's self-delusion and moral failings.

[Julius Civitatus]

25. Most of his columns between 199 and 2005 have been pro-Bush

Even when he had to criticize Bush, he did claim Bush's words came fro someone else. This is the most widely publicized "wankerism" of Richard Cohen. He went on a long tirade attacking Joe Lieberman for saying this:

"Our nation is chosen by God and commissioned by history to be a model to the world," Lieberman told the annual convention of B'nai B'rith late last month.

He went on a long tirade about politicians using God's name in vain, and using religion for political purposes. He was angry, and so was his article.

There was only one problem....

Joe Lieberman never said that... IT WAS BUSH WHO SAID IT!!!!!!

So even when he had to criticize something Bush had said, he claimed someone el;se had uttered those words. Wonder if the WaPo would be so lenient with this idiot if he was a true liberal.

[chaumont58]

47. Cohen is a stupid man

What remains of his audience? He has been such a whore for chimpie. He wanted Fitzgerald to leave town before he indicted anyone. To Cohen, IOKIYAR* is a way of life. He's beyond redemption now. A few days for now, not too much of the Colbert Affair will be remembered, except the Bush whores who trashed Colbert.

*Its OK if you are republican.

[Julius Civitatus]

58. Yes, I forgot about his contempt for Fitzgerald

He wants that big bad Fitzgy to leave the poor Corrupt Republicans alone.

See, to Cohen, Fitzgerald is another "bully."


Booo hoooo!!!

[CBHagman]

145. Thanks for mentioning that!

I'll have to go back and read those columns.

The most troubling thing is the way in which The Washington Post staff seems to identify with the Bushes (Well, not editorial cartoonist Tom Toles, God love him) as much as they expressed open contempt for both the Gores and the Clintons. I've watched with mounting disgust as Post reporters and columnists have cooed over the Bush twins, praised George W. Bush as sincere and compassionate and devout, and gushed about Laura Bush's supposed commitment to reading. :puke: Jim VandeHei even tried to link Bush's political stances to the late Pope John Paul II. No, I am NOT making that up.

Dana Milbank ruffles the Bush feathers sometimes, but mostly it's the Post staff covering Bush with phrases like "popular wartime president" (Which they used repeatedly for about 18 months). I wish the Post would rehire Colman McCarthy. And I wish Mary McGrory and Judy Mann were still with us.

[Jacobin]

21. I agree with 'rude, insulting and not funny'

Lame it clearly was not.

It was rude because it needed to be rude. It was insulting because it threw his failures in his face and the face of the media. It was not funny because this administration is not funny....it is pathological and dangerous.

[WarrenBowman]

24. My letter to Cohen

I agree that Colbert was not funny. He was devastating. The president and the press corps had their little circle-jerk interrupted by someone who reminded them of their collective gross incompetence, and you take offense on their behalf? Boo-effing-hoo. None of them will miss a meal, or lose a limb because of it. And so what if Bush skips the WHCA skips the event next year? Fine with me. As far as I can tell, there's no earthly reason for the WHCA to exist. Your column does a nice job of showing how far inside-the-beltway you are. It also reveals how far out of touch you are with reality.

[otohara]

36. Welcome to DU

excellent first post :yourock:

[Jacobin]

45. Welcome to DU

Very glad to have you here and thanks for the post.

:hi:

[Hoping4Change]

49. Hi there warrenbowman. Welcome to DU.

Glad your here. :bounce:

[reichstag911]

54. Good letter...

...Welcome!

[Vadem]

88. Great first post! Welcome to the evil DUers that are we.....hehe.n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

130. May be late,

but I, also, welcome you. You hit the nail on the head. While I was laughing all through Colbert's performance, I knew it really wasn't funny, because it was all so true. Someone yelled about the emperor having no clothes, and that someone was Steven Colbert.

[calimary]

23. "He was a bully." Cry me a river, cohen.

I'm surprised bush didn't enjoy it more. One bully to another, dontcha know...

Oh, BTW - WarrenBowman, Welcome to DU! Nice letter there! :hi:

[havocmom]

26. How does he feel about people who lie to promote a needless war

OK kidnapping & torture
Violate the US Constitution over and over again
Send US troops into danger without proper planning and equipment
Bomb innocent civilians
Gut departments charged with protecting Americans via environmental regs, worker safety
Allow military recruiters to go behind parents' backs to court underage children
Spy on US citizens without cause or warrant
Pursue policies which promote dictatorship in the US
Wage wars of aggression for the sake of enabling corporations to make huge profits


He found Colbert offensive? Gee, if Colbert didn't have all that to point out, wouldn't that be better than complaining about the messenger?

[Jack Rabbit]

28. Jack Rabbit calls the WaPo sycophantic, deceptive, yellow, corporate whore

[spooky3]

29. wish I could remember who said

that Cohen once was a good reporter, but lately he seems to think he need never leave the confines of his NY apartment.

[kaygore]

30. You need to send this as an opinion piece or LTTE to the WAPO

Very well said!

[deutsey]

31. He's part of the Washington elite

They always get bent out of shape when their underlings get uppity.

:eyes:

[calimary]

32. Here's my email to this panty-waist:

Dear Richard,

You moan and groan about Stephen Colbert being a bully.

Boo-hoo.

Bush deserved EVERY WORD of that, and so did the White House Press Corpse. Truth hurts, sometimes, doesn't it?

Frankly, as a retired Associated Press Radio reporter (I was a colleague of outgoing WHCA chief Mark Smith's for nine years), I've been utterly disgusted by the powder-puff coverage and years-long free passes and other no-accountability protections that the WHOLE LOT OF YOU have given this president, especially considering the proctoscopes and packs of baying hounds none of you hesitated to use, for years - and for NOTHING, against Bill Clinton (who among other things NEVER lied to the nation in a lust to take us to war).

Can't take a joke, any of you? Especially when you ARE the joke?

What pains me about this, as a retired member of the press, is how ashamed I am of my former profession because of the lapdogs you've become under this administration. I put 25 years of hard work and long hours and less-than-stellar pay and hard-to-please bosses into that profession. I always tried to tell the truth, however uncomfortable it might be - ESPECIALLY in situations in which the emperor had nothing to wear.

Oh, and by the way, Bush SHOULD have loved it. Colbert was speaking his language. Bush was, after all, the biggest bully in the room.

Sincerely,

me

[Julius Civitatus]

38. Wow! Excellent letter!

Kudos!!!

:headbang:

[calimary]

132. Thanks! By now, it looks like he's had a new one reamed by a

whole banquet-hall's worth.

And he deserves it.

He, along with the rest of the Kool-aid drinkers and other enablers in the news media, are part of the PROBLEM, NOT the solution.

[Jacobin]

46. WOW. Greeeaat letter

Made me smile.

:-)

[calimary]

133. Cheers, Jacobin!

You make me smile, too.

:)

[reichstag911]

55. Yee-haaaaaaaa!

Good on ya!

:bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce:

[calimary]

134. Thanks.

I guess chowderheads like this cohen guy just get me fired up...


Honestly, though, I can't figure out how a supposedly well-educated, sophisticated and experienced-in-the-ways-of-Washington (plus the knowledge of human nature required to be a smart, insightful columnist for a major American newspaper) would write something like this, let alone conclude something like this.

:grr:

[VOX]

89. Oh, well said, calimary! Thank you! n/t

[calimary]

135. Thank you!

I hope this guy gets deluged with retorts like ours.

[Vadem]

91. OMG! I love you Calimary! ......Damn, you told him! ......n/t

[calimary]

136. Love ya back!

Don't you wish we could tell him TO HIS FACE???

Maybe he's so blocked up inside that tight, parochial, pinched little Beltway area that he needs an enema, 'eh?

:evilgrin:

[otohara]

35. ... Here's My Letter

Speaking of Self-Selected Audiences.

Bush wasn't surrounded by those who normally agree to sign a contract promising not to say "boo" to Bush. How many times have we seen a lone protester taken out within minutes of trying to say a line or two to Mr. Bush? I imagine you would have like to seen Mr. Colbert taken out by the Secret Service.

And speaking of insulting bullies, do a Google search of Bush/bully Mr. Cohen. Six million results come up. I can't think of any US President who has been referred to as a bully so much as your Mr. Bush.

Truth to power has been nonexistent the last five years thanks to a pathetic press. I was more happy to see Mr. Colbert skewer the lapdog press vs King George.

[EVDebs]

40. Cohen, the NYTimes and the WashPost never get it right the first time

""Many of the most egregious WMD stories appeared in the most prestigious establishment newspapers, the New York Times and the Washington Post. The New York Times fronted bogus assertions about the nuclear-weapons capabilities of aluminum tubes that were really for conventional weapons. Washington Post editorials reported Bush's allegations about Iraqi WMD as fact, not a point in dispute.""

from Robert Perry's
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_Reform/Left's_MediaMiscalculation.html

""Panelist Ceci Connolly of the Washington Post offered praise for Bush's comedic gifts: "You know, trying to be funny at these things is so difficult, and he is quite good at it. I mean, he really is very good at self-deprecating humor. The pictures were funny. I laughed at the photos. I mean, he looks goofy, and he's got that great deadpan delivery." Connolly added that "perhaps it was an insight into how seriously he takes the fact that we have yet to find weapons of mass destruction."""

http://www.therearguard.pdx.edu/issues/Vol6_iss7_april04/wmd%20jokes.htm

and this from a related DU poster re the WashPost:

""One year later Zinni spoke before the U.S. Naval Institute and the Marine Corps Association, undressed the administration for its bungled handling of the war, and famously described its misguided preemptive war effort as "a brain fart of an idea." The Washington Post declined to cover those remarks.""

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1099099&mesg_id=1100271

Cohen obviously thought the Iraq adventure and the whole WMD b.s. was a spledid little war.

[Julius Civitatus]

41. Barf!

:puke:

Ceci Connoly is a piece of work, isn't she. Another "Fox News Democrat" there for you!

[EVDebs]

42. And a 'regular' on PBS's Washington Week in Review

Can Bush get any more friends like that in the media ? As I've said, in wartime Operation Mockingbird goes into overdrive along with military's PsyOps crowd. First casualty in war being the truth, the media just takes what it's given...sloppy seconds.

[0007]

44. Mine was just about the same except a little shorter.

[WhoWantsToBeOccupied]

37. Colbert's not going to be your monkey!!!

[Canuckistanian]

43. Aw, there, there, it's all right...

Now look what you've done, Mr Colbert! And little Richie was perfectly contented before you said these mean things about the pResident!

[lwcon]

48. Thanks -- Cohen showed me the error of my ways

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[davez]

50. wasted time writing a stupid email to a stupid stupid man

Dear Mr Cohen,

I thought Colbert was widely received with hatred and dead silence at many points and many ugly faces all around though many were caught laughing and as the camera fell on them they were quick to hide those smiles. Many were jolly throughout his words such as Mr. McClellan, he is a pro. But the others, what are they scared of? Is the line between losing ones job or position that thin in the media? I saw many of the audience having to dry their eyes. Either crying at the shame and outrage of this honest president being bullied or were they having some other emotion taking place... I almost mistook it as some form of exultation... I think you might be able to explain that better than I but what about this...

Many try to make it out like someone is pulling your strings so to speak, I find that disturbing. I find some of what Colbert said to be disturbing as you did, but it was disturbingly genius and was much more entertaining for me than his usual comedy. It must have been the setting... It was like watching an artist given a canvas made of GOLD, of pure GOLD. Noone can "roast" better I guess, roast seeming a better word than bully in my opinion, he roasted Bush didn't he... ? My thinking is a comic bully is better than a political bully, comedy doesn't usually hurt people... unless they die laughing as I almost did at one point... during that little skit he did in the parking lot with Helen... but this seems to really have affected you.

Can you explain yourself better now that you see what others have said to put things into context? It almost seems like you are expecting people to read what you wrote and not have seen Colbert speak or know anything about Bush. Anyone who knows anything about Bush knows that he deserves a little harsh comedy thrown in his face. Although I must admit I was expecting him to be YANKED off stage any minute, because it seems that is how they would operate. That may just be my opinion based on fact. Not everyone has access to factual information and I find that disturbing as well. I would call this instance of Colbert's comedy a harsh comedy because in a situation where the "roastee" in this case our dear friend Mr. Bush you just KNOW he is being told he will look worse if he is visually offended. At one point Bush is caught on camera with an ugly look on his face maybe kind of figuring out at that point that this man was not really on his side and then you can tell someone told him through an earphone to pucker up and smile because he doesn't want to make matters worse by being pissed off, no president looks good when angry about a little comedy right? But then Bush doesn't do such a great acting job and it makes for an uncomfortable situation. I must commend both Bush and Colbert. Bush has guys like you to do that comedy bashing for them I guess. I'm really disappointed in your response. I think you lack real insight but I know you have a sense of humor somewhere behind all that grey facial hair...

[reichstag911]

51. My LTTE to WP (cc to Cohen):

Subject: "So Not Funny," Richard Cohen
To: "Washington Post Letters to the Editor" <[email protected]>
CC: [email protected]

Dear Sirs:

Since Mr. Cohen has chosen to fulminate on Stephen Colbert's comedic performance (and the rudeness thereof), I choose to respond.

First, contrary to Mr. Cohen, I found Colbert's performance brilliant. It was hysterically funny to those of us, unlike Mr. Cohen, who recognize the harm being done to this country by Bush and his cronies. For those of us who've recognized Emperor Bush's nudity since before his selection by the Supremes, it was immensely gratifying and hugely entertaining to see and hear someone speak the truths that Bush is an incompetent fool, and the press corps have served as stenographers for administration talking points. As soon as someone pays Mr. Cohen for being so funny -- as he so humbly describes himself -- I will consider his criticism of a professional's comedic performance relevant.

Regarding rudeness, I cannot imagine anything more rude than Mr. Bush's foray into comedy at the Radio and Television Correspondents event at which he unveiled the high hilarity of his "Where are the WMDs?" skit. Never mind that thousands were dead -- and continue to die -- because of his administration's fabrications about the imminent danger posed by Saddam's fictional WMD stockpiles, the complicit press laughed along and lauded Bush for his genial simulacrum of bonhomie. That's rude.

And Colbert was hilarious.

Best,
Ron Barth, Jr.

[Blue_Tires]

56. and once again, yet another

meme artist that believes only the liberal side should be polite, play fair, not stir the shit, be considerate, be mature, nice, etc etc.

and of course, EVERY time someone on the liberal side becomes offended at anything, our friends in the media toss out words like "too soft" "too PC" "Too thin-skinned"


can people please make up their fucking minds?

[katinmn]

59. Before the occupation of Iraq, Cohen wrote that Saddam had WMDs

"without a doubt."

He was one of the accomplices in perpetuating the lie and getting people all lathered up for war.

He was personally exposed by Colbert.

No wonder he thinks Colbert was "rude" and not funny.

Shame on you, Cohen! You care more about maintaining your place on the Bush social ladder than you do about truth.

[Arugula Latte]

60. My letter to Dick Cohen

Dear Mr. Cohen,

It is with endless amusement that I watch mainstream journalists tsk, tsk, tsk
over Stephen Colbert's amazing performance at the White House Correspondents
Dinner.

Mr. Colbert had the guts (I could use another descriptive term, but will
refrain) to tell the truth about this administration -- in a funny way. Millions
of us who saw the event on C-Span or later watched it over the Net were howling
with laughter. What made if funnier were the pained sucking-lemons expressions
on Bush and his servile lapdogs -- the press.

The press has spent five years pandering to, cheerleading for, and covering up
for this filthy, corrupt administration. Finally, someone said to Bush's face
what millions have said in their homes or online. This sentiment -- that this
administration lies, that it is corrupt, that it led us into war on lies, and
that it is unpopular, in spite of the best efforts of the corporate media to
prop up their boy and his cronies -- has been surpressed for too long. Colbert
took the lid off the pot.

Now, what is even more amusing is the way the press tried to wash the incident
down the memory hole almost immediately. Colbert references were largely
scrubbed from journalistic accounts of the event on both television and in
newspapers. But not on the Net. Ah, not on the Net, where real Americans talk to
each other and cut through the no-longer-effective screen of pro-Republican
corporate propaganda. Now, to see the mainstream press backpeddle and sputter
and run disapproving stories about the AUDACITY of a man who told the truth to
the president's face -- all because the Net won't LET you wash it down the
memory hole -- is rich. It is amusing. I love it.

Too bad the mainstream media couldn't muster up a small sliver of outrage before
tens of thousands were needlessly slaughtered in Iraq on Bush's behalf, eh?

-- [Oregonian}

[spooky3]

66. Fabulous letter! This line of yours says it all:

"Finally, someone said to Bush's face
what millions have said in their homes or online. "

And he did so with cleverness--and brilliance.

[Arugula Latte]

67. Thanks, Spooky!

:hi:

[VOX]

90. Beautiful! Thanks, Oregonian! n/t

[katty]

61. oPuleeesseee!mr. manners?! yr comments embarrass YOU

[AverageJoe]

62. I emailed the bastard

Here's what I wrote:

Dear Mr. Cohen:

Stephen Colbert is funny the way Mark Twain is funny. He makes smart and honest people laugh, even if the laughter is sometimes touched with unease.

The White House press corps was the real target of Colbert's venom, not the President. Colbert only referenced Bush to demonstrate the presidential malfeasance the corporate media continues to enable.

If Colbert's jokes make him a bully, what do the President's lies--which took the United States into an unnecessary, immoral war--make him? And how would you describe the corporate media that willingly acts as an echo chamber for those lies?

[wizdum]

63. Richard Cohen (whoever the hell he is) has disdain for the truth,...

...no sense of humor and he's just plain ugly. Only those harboring a guilty conscious disliked Colbert's routine.

[bajamary]

64. Richard Cohen: a humor-nista

Boy, Richard Cohen is quite a humor-nista. Get the humor police on him.

Bravo Stephen for standing up and saying that neither The Emperor, nor his so called press corp, are wearing any clothes.

[brentspeak]

65. What is the inane need for some here to have people agree with them

on this Colbert thing? Who cares if Richard Cohen -- or anyone else, for that matter -- likes or doesn't like Colbert's act? How does that affect your life?

[fujiyama]

84. This really isn't about "liking" or "disliking"

Colbert or finding or not finding his act funny.

It's about how the Washington "journalists" are completely unable to call out the president for anything he's done the past six years. And when someone finally calls them on the fact that they haven't done their job, they get defensive and snarky.

Their lashing out at Colbert for being "mean" is typical of the way the media has covered for Bush. They are complete absolute syncophants. No wonder so few people trust the media. They don't do anything. It really is one big circle jerk. Honestly watching press conferences is like watching a coordinated circus. Has anyone gained one single useful thing out of them? They are the most meaningless exercises I've seen. And usually this idiotic "correspondent's dinner" is meant to break the "tension" between the White House and the media. What tension? They don't challenge him anyways. They look like they have a very comfortable relationship. Colbert said it best when he mentioned that the media be nothing more than stenographers.

It's truly sad these elites can't see the truth. At the best they are a disgrace to their profession and their country. At the worst they are enablers of this horrible regime.

For all conservatives bash Hollywood, I am convinced beyond any doubt that Washington DC is by far the slimiest, nastiest, most corrupt town in the entire nation. The WH press corps are a big reason for that (aside from the K street lobbyists and GOP scum).

[brentspeak]

96. Good point

Breaking the "tension", indeed. Don't the D.C. correspondents and White House staff already break the tension at each other's weekly cocktail parties?

[GOTV]

123. It affects my life...

... if a national journalist diminishes the effect of a critique of the president.

If he contributes to the perception that liberals are driven by anger at the president and not concern for the country.

If he takes the public's focus off the message and on to the messenger.

This affects my life.

[w4rma]

68. Cohen has been an ineffectual wimp for a while now. He doesn't fight.

He considers himself above all that. And whats worse is that many times he tries to shoot down anyone who does try to fight especially when it seems that he should agree with their views. People are in the trenches fighting and he's safe in his ivory tower sniping at them.

[Bossy Monkey]

69. So in other words, it's spelled Cohen but pronounced Colmes n/t

[JAbuchan08]

70. My letter to Richard Cohen

Gosh, it sure is sad that Stephen Colbert would mock and bully the single most powerful person in the world, by making ironic use of the same kiss-up attitude that has so thoroughly infected the media.
Oh, but he was rude and cruel - an absolute bully! Yes, Stephen Colbert is a bully. He called out an administration that outed a CIA agent for political purposes, that suggested those who doubted Saddam's WMD capacity were a danger to America (remind me how all of that turned out?), that famously told a senator to F-himself, that has flipped off reporters, called them a-holes and generally undermined and discredited... well... factuality - your bread and butter (or is it?).
Are you outraged by this administration's deceptions, their usurption of both judicial and legislative power, are you even upset that whether by accident or by design they have proven incorrect about nearly everything they've ever claimed? No. You are outraged by a comedian who used narry a curse word, whose bullying consisted of mocking right-wingers with their own combative, willfully ignorant style of debate. Think about that for a second... Colbert's monologue was offensive to the Bush administration and the media and he did it all by mocking their bullying tones, their inflated egos, their self-importance and their combative styles. I guess imitation is not always the sincerest form of flattery.

[melissinha]

77. Nice angle

mocking what is out there and in doing so, exposing it.

[tomg]

71. Well. Cohen did get something partially right

"in this country, anyone can insult the president of the United States. Colbert just did it." At least we can for now. Where that moron is wrong, of course, is when he said "he will not suffer any consequence at all," by which he meant, of course, we have freedom of speech. Granted Stephen Colbert might not suffer any consequences, but maybe somebody should remind that schmuck that 36 years ago today 4 Americans were gunned down for essentially exercising freedom of speech. And Bush with his Patriot Act makes Nixon look like a small-time piker.

Why do I have the feeling that more and more our entertainment is resembling German cabaret of, say, the mid-1930s.

[kitkat65]

72. Couldn't help myself - had to write a letter. Enjoy!

Oh, please stop! You're making my sides ache!

"Colbert took a swipe at Bush's Iraq policy, at domestic eavesdropping, and he took a shot at the news corps for purportedly being nothing more than stenographers recording what the Bush White House said."

Bingo!

How embarrassing for you that there's nothing "purported" about it.

Colbert definitely knew his audience that night, and it wasn't the media whores in the room. Colbert's real audience was the American public that is finally catching on to how lame the press's coverage has been regarding all that is Bush.

For that reason alone, that makes it pretty damn funny. And, it's a becoming a comedic gift that just keeps on giving because, you see, then it became mildly amusing watching the press pretend it didn't happen by not covering it. Now it's in the public eye despite you, and it's a hoot all over again watching you all try to backtrack and say Colbert's shtick was simply not funny and just plain rude.

You claim that "in this country, anyone can insult the president of the United States." Yes, we can, but it appears that our press won't even bother to call him on his bullshit or ask the basic questions that might expose that bullshit. The press also fails to realize that the bullshit meter for at least 60% of Americans went off a long time ago.

You claim you're a funny man, Mr. Cohen, and given the circumstances, I can't argue with that one bit.

[The Wizard]

73. reattach his foreskin

No self respecting member of a tribe of Israel would support a party that aligns itself with the Klan. Mr. Cohen should get his foreskin surgically reattached. The corporate media will get the message when we stop buying what they're selling, like newspapers. They can rig the NYT best sellers list by having shills like Scaife buy Coulter's screeds in bulk, but a daily newspaper is another animal. Anyone dumb enough to get behind the criminal Administration wouldn't get the humor. Was Colbert supposed to get laughs by saying nice things? No one ever got a laugh by saying something nice. They're just pissed off because Colbert told them to get real jobs. If he said Dear Leader was jerking off a horse the corporate media would have said OK? Yeah right.

[melissinha]

74. People who dislike Colbert are his targets

Its a simple as that... if you disliked his performance, chances are, he was poking fun at YOU.



Simple as that. People love it when comics pick on other people, but when it is too close to home, they don't like it. But honestly if Colbert or a like person poked fun at liberals like me (not in the absured Rush way) I think I would be able to laugh at it....

[rusty charly]

83. reminds me of

a line a stand up comedienne friend of mine says when she uses the word "goyim" in her act.

It goes: "And if you don't know what 'goyim' is, you are one"

[Jose Diablo]

75. Gosh, Cohen is right

About saying stuff that would get ya punched in bar.

I'd like to punch-out Cohen in a bar, for what he said, and I don't even know the ass-wipe. But here he is blabbing in the Post and getting away with it. Maybe he should wander into a bar someplace, say in the Bonx, and vet his columns before the Post will publish what he says. That way we will know, he's a gutsy sort of guy and we should listen to him, or like the OP says, 'He's a wanker'. We would know by just looking to see if he's sporting a shiner. I trust the guys in the Bronx in their judgement of charecter.

[Debs]

76. As MMFA pointed out

Mr Cohen didnt write any columns about Bush's incredibly insensative skit joking about not being able to find WMDs in the oval office. It is incredible that a man who is supposed to be a liberal selectively finds Colbert unfunny and rude, but seemingly has no problem with Bush making a joke out of lying us into a war that has had such an unconcionable cost in every sense of the word. He has become a charicature of a journalist and should resign in shame.

[Diane R]

78. Does the WP have a forum to discuss this column? n/t

[AX10]

79. Richard Cohen is quite lame.

[Vadem]

80. You've hit the nail on the head, Julius.........

"If anything is “not funny,” it is Richard Cohen still pretending to represent “the left” in the Washington Post. Now that’s an insulting joke."

I have fumed over Richard Cohen for so many years it is not EVEN funny! Liberal, my ASS!

Thank you for finally calling him out! The f****** neocon with his grandfather ghost advising him! Sheesh! He betrayed his Jewish LIBERAL roots many, many years ago!


:mad:

Edited to add that I'm sure his LIBERAL grandfather is turning in his grave by the betrayal of his so-called liberal grandson!

[Up2Late]

86. I think it was Saturday night or Sunday morning that someone remarked...

...that the mental midgets over at the site, where the refer to themselves as (rhymes with creepers), were NOT discussing the Colbert speech, and I remarked that it would take a few days for them to figure out what just happened, after the puppet masters and their hate spewing, talking head radio and TV Gods, told them what to think and formed their opinions for them.

Well, it took a little longer that I had predicted but, there ya go. :evilgrin:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

87. richard cohen evicted Pale Male & Lola Hawks from his 5th ave building

the SOB is married to the whore Paula Zahn



http://www.palemale.com/january292006.html


whores of a feather whore togeather

[Vadem]

94. OMFG!!!!! Are you sure about that????? I have never heard that....

Please check your facts and get back to us! If he is married to her, then he divorced his first wife and kids and, if so, it all makes sense now! OMG!

[Julius Civitatus]

99. Different Richard Cohen. Not the same guy.

There are many people with that name. Easy, guys!

[Vadem]

105. Thanks for the clarification.......n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

102. a different Cohen/Zahn...sorry my bad.....

http://www.manhattanusersguide.com/archives_content.php?contentID=121404&category=info

She is married to Richard Cohen, a New York City real estate developer


CNN's Paula Zahn (aka Paula Cohen, aka Mrs. Richard Cohen) apparently had a big say in the fate of Pale Male and Lola's nest.
"Pale Male" as he is known to thousands of admirer's, is a red-tailed hawk who with his current girl friend "Lola", were added to the New York City's homeless ranks by developer and co-op board chairman, Richard Cohen (husband of CNN's Paula Zahn)this past week.

[Vadem]

106. Thanks for the update, although it still doesn't make my opinion...

of Richard Cohen any better than before.

[CAcyclist]

92. My letter to Cohen

Dear Mr. Cohen,

Colbert may not have been funny to you, because a joke is rarely funny to the person at whose expense it is being made. But to those of us, the common people, who are Colbert's real audience, oh, yes, it was hilarious and I reveled in it.

[confludemocrat]

93. "he (Colbert) will not suffer any consequence at all"

like that is something people like he, Cohen, are supposed to be the sole arbiters of and that they have reserved for George W. Bush above all and here is someone who was not authorized to skate by our club. What a dick.
What audience does he think he has to write this shit for? Yeah that's right no one but himself.

[Julius Civitatus]

98. The Dixie Chicks were crucified by the wingnuts for much, much less

Criticizing the president in our times is a dangerous thing. That only makes Colbert's act even braver.

[ncteechur]

95. Cohen is a PRICK!

[splat@14]

97. Rude? Fuck "rude",....how many people have died?

[Sparkly]

100. My Letter -- Just sent!! (I worked awhile on this one.)

Dear Mr. Cohen,

With all due respect, I think you found Stephen Colbert's speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner not "funny" because you didn't get the jokes. You mention "the funny person's most solemn obligation: to use absurdity or contrast or hyperbole to elucidate -- to make people see things a little bit differently."

Your words perfectly describe Colbert's performance. The key to your misunderstanding is in your description of Colbert on his own show. You wrote that "on his own show he appeals to a self-selected audience that reminds him often of his greatness." That's not so. It's not about his "greatness" at all -- it's about a satirical view of rightwing media "personalities." The joke is about his character being a jerk, not having "greatness." The character itself is hyperbole, showing the absurdity of the rightwing, while simultaneously (and brilliantly) contrasting that with the truth. It's all about irony.

Here are just three quotes from Colbert's speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Read correctly, there is no way they could be interpreted as as anything but "absurdity, contrast, and hyperbole."

"Every night on my show, the Colbert Report, I speak straight from the gut, OK? I give people the truth, unfiltered by rational argument."
This is a joke about RNC campaign messages (and continual White House rhetoric) that relies on "gut" feelings, and downplays facts. (People "felt" Bush was strong and a war hero, while Kerry was weak and a coward, despite all facts to the contrary; people "felt" Bush is a regular, folksy Texan guy like themselves, even a "cowboy," despite all facts to the contrary; and people "felt" it was right to invade Iraq, despite all facts to the contrary. It's no accident -- in speech after speech, they were led to those feelings.)

"I believe the government that governs best is the government that governs least. And by these standards, we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq."
This joke shows the absurd contrast between what the rightwing says about government in America vs. what it does; and further, what it says about the government in Iraq vs. what the reality is.

"He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."
This captures the absurdity of the truth behind Bush's "steadfast" aura. We have surpluses; that means we need taxcuts! - later - We have deficits; that means we need tax cuts! Or, the invasion of Iraq is unavoidable because they have WMD! - later - The invasion of Iraq was unavoidable, even if they never had WMD!

You referred to Colbert's "shot at the news corps for purportedly being nothing more than stenographers recording what the Bush White House said." Purportedly? There's plenty of evidence that his jokes were based on truth -- Judith Miller on WMD, Bob Woodward's entire book (touted as great "access," based on 'everything the White House told him!'), Wall Street Journal and Washington Post editorials reciting, sometimes word for word, government memos; and the obvious "message" that goes around verbatim in quick response to any questionable news story. (And I'm not even mentioning Armstrong Williams, Jeff Gannon, Fox News or the Washington Times.)

"Speaking truth to power" is hardly a "tired phrase" to my ears -- we hear far too little of it. "Tired phrases" I hear include "turning the corner," "ongoing investigation," "enemies of freedom," "the world is safer," "9/11, 9/11, 9/11," etc...

You called Colbert a "bully" for taking "swipes" at the president, but you say certain swipes are acceptable -- it depends. What were Colbert's swipes about? Not Bush's arrests or past drug and alcohol use; not his alarming inability to speak coherently without a script, or breath-takingly simplistic answers to questions about complex issues; not his embarassing gaffes overseas, or his decidedly simian appearance and way of walking. Those, we might agree, would be "bullying." He may be unable to control or overcome these personal shortcomings. But as you point out, Colbert's so-called bullying and "mockery" were about "Bush's Iraq policy" and "domestic eavesdropping." THAT is what you consider over-the-top insulting, mockery and bullying?! Disastrous Iraq policy, and illegal, warrantless spying on American citizens? Those are weighty issues affecting all citizens, not matters for inappropriate personal insult and ridicule. Considering that, Colbert handled them lightly.

Finally, you characterized Colbert's joke about the Bush White House not sinking but rather soaring (when he said they were "rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg") as "mixed metaphor, and lame as can be." The metaphor is "rearranging deck chairs." This is NOT a mixed metaphor.

Given your inability to recognize and understand satire, irony, or even your own definition of a "funny person's obligation;" given your apparent difficultly recalling recent history and current reality; given your belief that hard satire on serious, deadly, costly, tragic blunders is inappropriate because it "insults" or "bullies" the one man who caused it (nevermind the millions who are suffering from it); and given your literary confusion over a simple metaphor -- well, I am baffled as to why you consider yourself qualified to be a columnist.

Ah -- how could I forget? You started your column opining, "I am a funny guy," and ended it declaring that Colbert "wasn't funny."

Now THAT is funny.

Sincerely,

(Sparkly)

(Edited to fix html discrepancies from my email.)

[Diane R]

103. Incredible letter

Very well done. Thank you.

[Vadem]

104. Excellente!!!!.......

:applause:

[Mad_Dem_X]

122. Excellent letter!

Bravo! :applause:

[ima_sinnic]

101. oh stick a sock in it, you fake "liberal"

sheesh, how awful! Colbert was "rude" to his Imperial Fraudulency. Try to get over it, okay? I'm sure within a day or two you will be back to sucking up to the arrogant little prick and this will be nothing more than an unpleasant vague memory of someone making you confront your own cowardly, dumbass bullshit. By the way, letting thousands of citizens die in Katrina is more than "rude," it is obscene. And invading a defenseless sovereign nation is what a "bully" does. Which is "ruder," brilliantly spinning the liars' own words into truth--or torture, rape, plunder, mass murder and mayhem in Iraq on the basis of outright lies to We The People?

I think I will write that in my e-mail to the s.o.b. :)

[John1956PA]

107. Great letter, Sparkly

You certainly put a lot of time and effort into it. In my letter to Cohen, I limited my comments to explaining why the "Hindenburg" joke was indeed humorous and why it is not a mixed metaphor. Reading the comments on various progressive blogs, I conclude that Cohen is receiving thousands of emails from those of us who found his column to be preposterous. Unfortunately, I doubt if he will take time to read them.

[Pierre Trudeau]

108. here's the email I sent

(sent 11:54 am EST on May 4, 2006):

"Mr. Cohen,

I just read your "So Not Funny" article, and found it quite funny indeed. Not really "ha-ha" funny, more like "Can you believe this idiot?" funny. After all, there's nothing funnier than a pompous Washington columnist solemnly assuring us that he is certifiably a "funny guy" (which I am sure you are, in that "good heavens, he doesn't realize how unfunny he is" way), and therefore somehow "qualified" to objectively proclaim as "unfunny" the performance of a funny guy who wasn't even intending to be funny in that "good-time guffaws" way in the first place. Mr. Colbert wasn't there to entertain the President, he came to deliver a sharp piece of satire that sliced through the fictions of the administration and the press. If the president had found it "funny", then the satire would have been toothless and ineffective. Hopefully I don't need to explain that one for you, although I suspect your "funny guy" credentials only extend to lightbulb jokes or the occasional limerick, and not something as sophisticated as satire.

Perhaps your point, then, was that it was inappropriate for Colbert to perform a piece of satire at the dinner. But that is, after all, what he is known for. He was invited precisely because he is the pre-eminent satirist of the moment. You can't complain now because he did his job. And that job does not include being sensitive to the president's feelings.

The more columnists begin to denounce Colbert as "not funny", the funnier it all becomes. Especially since we've all watched it and know perfectly well what we saw.

But hey, you know funny, Mr. Cohen. I suggest you speak to Comedy Central and demand your own late-night show so you can dazzle us with your comedic talents.

Best of luck,
(me)"

[Hans Delbrook]

109. You can look it up - I DID!

My Letter:

Mr. Cohen,

I was upset at your calling Stephen Colbert a "bully" but before I got too distressed I decided to look the word up in Merriam-Webster. So I did:

Main Entry: bul·ly
Pronunciation: 'bu-lE, 'b&-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural bullies
Etymology: probably modification of Dutch boel lover, from Middle High German buole
1 archaic a : SWEETHEART b : a fine chap
2 a : a blustering browbeating person; especially: one habitually cruel to others who are weaker b : PIMP
3 : a hired ruffian

Now I see - you were using the archaic form - he is indeed "a fine chap" and a sweetheart. Any man w/ the nerve (and it did take nerves of steel, no matter how dismissive you are of his performance) to point out all the outrageous failings of this administration to their face - can be considered nothing less.

What did he say that was undeserved? That Bush's approval ratings were low? Did Mr. Bush ever stop to ask himself why? That Bush is not an intellectual - something Mr. Bush is absurdly proud of - at least to hear him talk. That Iraq is a mess - gee ya' think? At least someone in Washington (even if only temporarily) NOTICED. That there was illegal wire tapping going on? And that a CIA operative was "outed" as part of a smear campaign? Ohhhhh, don't mention that stuff - you might hurt the President's feelings.

With that attitude no wonder the so-called Fourth Estate has been reduced to whining, mewling lap dogs. And yes, Mr. Colbert dared to "take a swipe" at the impotent, sycophantic press that we've been stuck with for the past five years. Who watches the watchers when they've fallen asleep at the gate? Well apparently, a comedian, at least.

You say that this was not an instance of "speaking Truth to Power" because there were no "repercussions, consequences -- maybe even death..." So that's been the problem! It's not that the press has been lazy, complacent, and ineffectual while this criminally arrogant and incompetent administration ran amok - it is that you weren't being threatened enough.

Well then, try this one on for size – I think that the press is completely disposable when we the people have to look to a comedian for a single shining example of someone standing up to a real bully like Bush. See definition #2 - a blustering browbeating person… habitually cruel to others who are weaker. I can't think of a more fitting description of the actions of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove et al. Of course Rove fits nicely under definition #3 - a hired ruffian.

And as for the remaining definition - PIMP - Mr. Cohen, you and your fellow members of the press can look in a mirror!

[kitkat65]

129. Ooooooh! SNAP!

"And as for the remaining definition - PIMP - Mr. Cohen, you and your fellow members of the press can look in a mirror!"

We have really amazing writers here.

[Imagevision]

110. Richard Cohen isa another Joe Lieberman, another Jeff Gannon/Guckert!

Colbert is genius in is method of approach,wit and humor!

[Martunez]

111. Well, here's my letter

Dear Mr. Cohen--
"Speaking Rude to Power"

Maybe all those years of Washington D.C. decorum and protocol have actually withered your own sense of humor. I thought Colbert's act was biting, funny, and highly inappropriate--in this case, that's just what the republic needs.

He called out a lying war-monger and he humiliated his courtier press, and praised one of the few, Helen Thomas, who has the guts to ask "inappropriate" questions. Why should we be surprised that the press is downplaying the event or offering negative reviews? I understand; I throw away pictures of myself which reveal unflattering details, too.

I'm sorry to tell you this (because I don't want you to think I'm trying to insult you), but the notion that a comedian could be a "bully" to the most powerful man on earth is one of the stupidest things I've ever read. I mean, that's just guffaw-making. We're supposed to cry a river for the poor, victimized president, who lied to get us into a vicious and futile bloodbath? Tell me, Mr. Cohen: exactly how many decent, innocent people have had to die thanks to Colbert's comedy?

I know full well who the real bully is, and I couldn't help but join in the laughter. With more than two years to go of this insanity, it's one of the few comforts available to me.

Sincerely,
(Martunez)
San Jose California
(a long way from Beltway decorum...)

[12 12 2000]

112. email to cohen

I sent the following email to Sir Richard, y'all -


Sir, a quote from your column of May 4th states, "The commentary... will make the point that Colbert was not just a failure as a comedian but rude."

Mr. Cohen, I have in my possession an old edition of "The Springfield Daily News" dated April 23, 1964. One of its front page stories was how a group of black civil rights activists held a 'sit-in' at the Ford Exhibit at the World's Fair in New York. The demonstration caused Ford to close the exhibit to the public when the sit-ins refused to leave. The headline read, "L.B.J. Hits 'Rudeness' At The Fair." The first paragraph went on to say that the president,"..expressed pity" for the 'racial demonstrators' but that he felt their tactics were characterized by "fanaticism and rudeness."

Injustice and crimes against humanity deserve much more opprobrium than 'rudeness' sir, but for now we who have a social conscience will take it! Stephen Colbert is as courageous and righteous as those civil rights protesters were, and you, sir, well, you're more than just rude in your elitist commentary, you're a horse's ass.

[chanip]

114. writing

I'm not a journalist or a writer and don't pretend to be one. This posting will probably be full of punctuation and grammatical errors.

However, if I were a journalist, I would make some attempt to adhere to standard grammar and punctuation standards. There is a good reason for doing so. The reason is to allow others to read what one writes without forcing the reader to sift through and translate the article into something understandable. Proper spelling is not that critical. The reader generally skips over that without trouble, but poor punctuation can make the reader stop reading, then reread, translate, interpret, and eventually stop 'listening'.

In addition, it's difficult to take seriously a writer that can not or refuses to care about his/her reader and forces that reader to repunctuate and/or rewrite in his/her mind while reading so as to follow the article

This author may have important and pertinent information to convey, but having such very poor writing skills makes it harder for a reader to take him seriously, especially for older folks that have higher standards (of which I am not one).

To democraticunderground: Please do not post any more such poorly-written articles or please edit them before posting. This kind of writing can give you a bad name. That would be a shame because you serve a very good purpose.

[Sparkly]

115. Okayyy....

Certainly looking forward to hearing more from you, chanip... :hi:

[whoneedstickets]

113. The Evolution of Cohen......a trip through Lexis -Nexis

Clearly Cohen's vicious response was as much driven by his own internal demons as anything Colbert said. His own writings from around the time of the war's onset and later failures bear witness to his complicity with the administration, his attempts at rationalization and finally, as reality set in, his disenchantment. Cohen's attack on Colbert is a much a confession of his sins as it is a rebuke of Colbert's. The later's transgression was only rudeness, that's far less egregious than warmongering of which Cohen is guilty.

I have compiled a quick list of Cohen quotes:


1. Cohen beating the drums for war :“In listing his reasons for (probably) going to war against Iraq soon -- the threat of weapons of mass destruction, the nature of Saddam Hussein's regime and its flouting of international law -- President Bush the other night failed to mention the most important one: Now's the time.” 10/12/ 2002.

2. Cohen on the WOT and democratic election setbacks: “What the Democrats should have done was embrace the war on terrorism and make it a non-issue.” 11/12/2002

3. Cohen on the anti-Semitism of European opposition to the war:” But if Bush has his shortcomings, so do his European critics. They know damn well the menace that Hussein poses: Why else did they vote to send in the U.N. inspectors? But rather than back Bush at this critical moment, they give vent to their resentment of American power and carp from the sidelines. They insist, for reasons that emit a whiff of anti-Semitism, that the Arab-Israeli muddle must be settled first -- although how that will happen quickly after all these years no one seems to know.” 01/28/2003

4. Cohen beats the drums for war again, after Powell’s UN speech: “...there is no "other hand" when it comes to Iraq. If anyone had any doubt, Powell proved that it has defied international law -- not to mention international norms concerning human rights -- and virtually dared the United Nations to put up or shut up. There is no other hand. There is no choice.” 2/6/2003

5. Cohen on the war’s ideological and truth ignoring (some irony there for you) critics: “Because something truly awful has happened. The looming war has already become deeply and biliously ideological. By that I mean that the extremes on both sides -- but particularly the war's opponents -- no longer feel compelled to prove a case or stick to the facts. As with Vietnam, this is becoming an emotional battle between ideologues who, as usual, don't give a damn about the truth.” 2/25/2003

6. Cohen in defense of torture to fight terror, long before Abu Ghraib: “Undeniably, though, there are times when torture does the trick. It has not been around all this time for no reason.” 3/6/2003

7. Cohen in his strongest war op-ed,dreams of past and future Holocausts, but denies that protecting Israel is a motivation: “I don't know -- and I somehow doubt -- that George W. Bush spends much time ruminating on the Holocaust and pairing it with what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I do think, though, that he thinks about evil. He does so, we are told, in religious terms, and in that he is different from me. But we both come out in the same place: Evil must be confronted. Since Hiroshima, there is little room to maneuver. Bad guys can do an awful lot of damage.” 3/20/2003

8. Cohen’s post war rationalizations in the form a conversation with his conscience: “’Okay, but Saddam Hussein was a beast. It was a good thing to get rid of him. He was like another Hitler.’” 4/29/2003

9. Cohen gets a whiff of reality after Fallujah but isn’t yet ready to address his own cognitive dissonance and so dodges the issue “You and I can argue the wisdom of going into Iraq some other time.” 5/6/2003


Then the shift begins..........

10. Cohen following Abu Ghraib repudiates torture despite his earlier rationalizations: “The Bush administration has shamed us all, reducing us to the level of those governments that also have wonderful laws forbidding torture, but condone it anyway. It is commonly said that we are a nation of laws, not men. And we are. But beyond the laws, we are also a nation of men and women with a common ethic. Some things are not American. Torture, for damned sure, is one of them.” 6/10/2004

11. Cohen excoriates the Bush administration for going after the impotent Saddam, and not the dangerous Bin Laden, conveniently ignoring his own role in crafting this diversion: “Instead, we went after Saddam Hussein, who posed only the remotest of threats -- he had no weapons of mass destruction, his army was a shambles and he himself was insanely writing romantic potboilers -- and effectively ignored the man who is a threat and who had already killed thousands of Americans on Sept. 11. We've got Saddam Hussein; we don't have Osama bin Laden.” 7/13/2004

12. Cohen finds more unpleasant reality and laments about the safety of Jews in the middle east, perhaps Saddam wasn’t quite as bad as Hitler after all since it appears things could be WORSE (worse than Hitler?) : “If, as it now seems likely, Iraq becomes yet another Islamist state, replacing a homicidal pragmatist (Hussein) with a religious fanatic (name to be supplied later), it's hard to see how Israel will be better off.” 10/26/2004.

13. Cohen, while calling for the impeachment of the president, seemingly forgets his earlier sloganeering that “now’s the time” for war and accuses the administration of hasty crusading! “Not since the Spanish-American War has the United States gone off to war so casually, so half-cocked and so ineptly. The sinking of the Maine, the casus belli for that dustup, has been replaced by missing weapons of mass destruction, and the Hearst and Pulitzer presses are now talk radio and Fox News Channel. Everything has changed. Nothing has changed. Still, though, we mourn the dead, look away from the wounded and maimed, and wonder what it was all about. We embarked, truly and regrettably, on a crusade.” 10/28/2004.


Cohen is no fool, he know what he wrote and how he rationalized the war but sadly he is left to project his own self-loathing on Colbert.

[Inland]

118. Cohen says you should stop bullying him, you rude thing.

Cohen just hopes that continued "politeness" to the president--that is, nobody every challenging him or having the bad taste to bring up past mistakes--will protect him as well.

If nobody is rude enough to ever say the emperor has no clothes, then nobody is ever rude enough to ask why Cohen didn't declare the royal jingleberries hanging out before a guy who has a program on basic cable.

[brentspeak]

131. I don't like Cohen, but he did once write the best small piece

on the Vietnam War I've come across. A simple article he published about four or five years ago. He was in Vietnam, at a war museum or something, and the Vietnamese curators were proudly discussing photographs of "hero families" who lost large numbers of their sons and daughters fighting for the Viet Cong.

Cohen was justifiably dismayed and disgusted with these families who were "proud" of sending so many of their offspring to their deaths, but he realized that that was the reason the United States lost the Vietnam War, and would never be able to win no matter how long it stayed and fought: the Vietnamese were willing to sacrifice everything and everybody to win, and (logically) the U.S. wasn't.

Of course, these days Cohen is just another journalist establishment schnook. (I picture Cokie Roberts laughing it up with Scott McClellan at some Friday night D.C. cocktail party.)

[mojowork_n]

139. thanks for that sparkling bit of research

I had considered e-mailing the man, to ask him to elaborate on 2 sentences in his dreary little attack piece:

"He had a chance to tell the president and much of important (and self-important) Washington things it would have been good for them to hear."

"...he spoke truth to power. This is a tired phrase, as we all know..."

I'd thought about asking, "OK, so if *you'd* had the chance to tell all those people.... what would have been worth saying..."

and

"Since when is speaking the truth so tiresome?"

But you saved me the trouble. It would have been an empty gesture. Like sending a telegram to Rush Limbaugh, asking him to drop the attitude, come clean, and maybe yank that stainless steel yard arm out of his ass, for just a minute...
There isn't a surgeon on the planet capable of that sort of extraction.

[lonestarnot]

116. I emailed him this

Your sense of humor is corrupted, just like the administration's whose butt you lick.

[The Backlash Cometh]

117. Colbert a bully. What a joke.

They have this huge right-wing machinery and it all comes to a grinding halt because Jiminy Cricket flips them off.

[jellybeancurse]

119. Colbert did not ONCE make a personal attack

All his remarks reflected policy or decisions the president made. So its completely fair game. Why is everyone so upset because someone had the minerals to say what we were all thinking...and on tv of all places.

[rainydaywomanbmore]

121. The first email I have ever sent to someone like this.....

Here's the email I felt compelled to send:

I have never written to a columnist before. Honestly. But I had to respond to
your column "So Not Funny."

Many people have used the "He wasn't funny" excuse to dismiss what Colbert had
to say. What is and what is not funny is entirely subjective. I, personally,
laughed hysterically. You obviously did not. I do not have a national outlet
to express my very subjective take on Mr. Colbert's humor skills. And if I did,
I would not presume that my comedic tastes should somehow dictate that of the
entire populous. Your opinion of his humor has no effect on mine. I did not
read your column and think "Thank goodness Richard Cohen helped me to understand
that Stephen Colbert was not funny. How much breath did I waste laughing?" No,
I read your column and thought "Is he writing a personal diary entry? Does he
really believe that his personal tastes matter to me?"

Whether or not he made you laugh, what he said, and the way he said it, matters.
I, like many citizens of this fine country, have felt like that "other person"
in the room, far outside this administration's "bubble," with no way to penetrate
it, and no way to escape. I have been repeatedly insulted by this president.
Straw-men, lies and arrogance from a man who has incredible power over my life,
and billions of others, is beyond insulting. It is beyond being a bully. It is
beyond rude.

Boo-hoo for President Bush. I'll save my sympathies for the Iraqis, for our
serviceman and women and their families, for Katrina victims, for 9/11 victims,
for the 16,000 species at risk of extinction, for the planet, for the poor.....

Please spare us your comedic opinions. If you think Colbert has somehow
insulted Bush more than Bush has insulted our intelligence, our civil liberties,
our allies, our enemies and our very democracy, then Colbert's true target was
you. Feeling bullied?

[Cooley Hurd]

124. Great letter and first post, rainydaywomanbmore!

:hi: Welcome to DU! :hi:

[rainydaywomanbmore]

126. Thanks for the welcome....

I'm guilty...I've been reading DU for 2 years or so. It was about time I finally signed up. I've hesitated in the past because I know myself....I can't shut up once I get started. I may have opened a nasty can of worms for myself. Too late now!!!!

[Arugula Latte]

127. Holy Crap!

That is a GREAT letter! Wow. I am very impressed!

Welcome to DU! :toast:

[Skinner]

125. This journal got picked up on Crooks & Liars

Check out "Mike's Blog Round Up."

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/05.html#a8171

Look for the words "This craven wanker doesn't know the difference."

Congrats, Julius Civitatus

[hobbywizard]

138. Speaking of not funny....

I just read this posting (and the Cohen article) today, but for what it's worth, my snarky e-mail to Cohen:

Dear Dick,

Here's a funny joke:

A NeoCon brownshirt employed by the Bush Regime walks into a bar with a slobbering "liberal" on a leash. The bartender says, "Hey, where didja get him?" and the brownshirt replies, "The Washington Post; they loan Dick Cohen out at the drop of a hat!"

Sorry it offends you that Colbert didn't employ the so-hilarious "looking for WMDs, are they under the desk?" joke, but Bush already crassly used that one. Colbert's speech was no different than his nightly Comedy Central show. There was certainly no reason why, accepting an invitation on the merits of his work on the show, he should change his "schtick" so as not to offend Fearless (and Feckless) Leader. Too bad you are too funny to see that. As your lame, bullying article noted (after all, Colbert has to "take it," right?), the mainstream press, including your own mediocre daily rag, also received a well-deserved lambasting from Colbert for its complicity in Bush's illegal war. So you can't really say Bush was singled out for thorny mockery, can you.

By all means, Bush shouldn't show up to the correspondents' dinner next year. After all, he hasn't shown up to defend the Constitution, to defend the rights and prosperity of average Americans or to defend the reputation of the US as law abiding in the eyes of world. So yes, you and Fearless Leader have solid precedent to find a hidey hole next year and suck each other's thumbs over the big bully Colbert. (laughtrack erupts in sniggers and guffaws)

You've got a lot of gall to speak of Colbert's "self-selected" audience. Perhaps if Bush didn't sequester himself away behind yes-men and "self-selected" radical rightwing audiences, Colbert wouldn't have felt it incumbant to use this event to express how the other 68% (and rising) of us feel, you hilarious dimwit.

You sicken me, Dick. May you enjoy the same peace and prosperity the Bush Regime has brought to the people of Iraq (ie, making them target practice for terrorists, you know: "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here").

I'm sure you must be off now to lick Fearless Leader's wounds for him, so I leave you

without a scintilla of regard,

hobbywizard
Marblehead, MA

[catbert836]

140. I can't wait to see

what Colbert has to say about Cohen during his next segment of "Who's Attacking Me Now"

[emcguffie]

141. here's my reply to him.

I hope it's not too lame, but just had to say SOMETHING.


Dear Mr. Cohen,

I imagine I am one of the majority of Americans who disagree with you about Stephen Colbert’s extraordinary performance.

I think the “Emperor” has been naked for so long, and most of you members of the fifth estate have become so accustomed to grovelling before him and taking great pains to describe his non-existent clothes that your brains have been forced to make internal adjustments to compensate for the unbearable dissonance. Perhaps I can begin to understand the confusing journalistic groupthink that has mystified me for so long. But, then again, maybe not.

I can see how it might seem unfunny – to some people. But to me, it was an absolute scream. Hilarious. The most potent, revivifying breath of fresh to enter my desperately gasping lungs in seven long years.

Why, since that dinner, I have even started to allow a teensy weensy bit of television news to pass before my eyes – carefully chosen, of course. I haven’t done that for a very long time. But to go so far as to read the WP, or even the NY Times? Yes, it is true I was once utterly addicted, but thankfully I have recovered completely and do not suffer at all by never, ever reading one word of either of them. In fact, the quality of my life has improved significantly: what had become a quite tortured existence is now almost bearable.

Funny? Yes. Oh, oh, so deliciously, wickedly funny. A "roast" I think is what it is called?

I guess it takes all kinds, and that's okay -- in a democracy, right? So, vive la difference?

What a truly great performance that was. History was made. What a shame you didn't notice.

emc

[ChairmanAgnostic]

142. Has ANYONE here gotten a response from this bozo?

Sorry, I am being rude to the greatest clown in the world.

I have heard nothing. I bet he just dumped all the e-mails without looking at them.

[Arugula Latte]

147. Nope. n/t

[Arugula Latte]

146. I just sent the Dick this link (it mentions his name)

My comment to him -- Read it and weep.

http://www.theittlist.com/site/ittlist/ind/the_blustery_screeching_death_of_pundit_apartheid/

Here is the DU thread I got that from:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1120621

[zulchzulu]

148. Maybe he can fill in for Alan Colmes when he's on vacation...

Hannity might want to keep Cohen in the process.