(Video) Stephen Colbert At The White House Correspondents Dinner - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

host · 05-02-2006, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaya

/lingers in Politics... this is kinda fun.

You'll be sorry....it's nothing but <a href="http://www.google.com/search?as_q=%22the+president%22%3A+%22hard+work%22&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=+&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=whitehouse.gov&as_rights=&safe=images">hard work.</>

ubertuber · 05-02-2006, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaya

Meanwhile, from host's transcript of the Helen Thomas inquisition:
If you read along up to that point, he justifies the war using 9/11 and going into Afghanistan. He keeps talking about Afghanistan, the Taliban, etc. Helen Thomas reminds him that's not what she's asking about. So then all of a sudden: "I also saw a threat in Iraq." There is no real connection between Afghanistan and Iraq... he makes this total jump. The threat he saw had nothing to do with 9/11 or Afghanistan. What logic.

/lingers in Politics... this is kinda fun.

Glad you're here abaya - it's always nice to have different faces.

Well, to be fair he didn't JUST say "I also saw a threat in Iraq." There was some other stuff about weapons and resistance to international inspections that characterized the threat he thought he saw. And that's actually how I remember the run-up to the Iraq war. Lots of talk about 9/11, Afghanistan, and terrorism. Next to that, lots of talk about Iraq and the somewhat valid issue of non-compliance with security council resolutions. I heard lots of people arguing that the administration claimed Iraq was linked to 9/11, but I never actually heard that claim from the administration outside of speculative contexts. [I'm now preparing myself for an onslaught of transcripts from host. Host, if that's going to happen, let me know and let's have it in a thread devoted to that topic.]

And that brings me to the reason that I don't think Helen Thomas' question was actually all that insightful. All those things she mentions turning out to not be true doesn't mean they weren't the reason we invaded Iraq. It just means that they weren't true. I think President Bush really believed that there were WMDs in Iraq, and I think he may have held this belief in contradiction to the hard evidence (or that the evidence was already skewed before it reached him because people were telling him what they thought he wanted to hear). I think he really believed that Saddam Hussein was looking for ways to foment terrorism in the Middle East and abroad. I think Bush was really wrong on the first count and possibly wrong on the second. However, I'm still not conviced that those reasons were PRETEXTS for the real reasons.

Hell, people believe stuff everyday in the face of contradictory evidence. Happens all the time.

Ustwo · 05-02-2006, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaya

I do agree, Ustwo. I think it's valuable to see one's follies and laugh at them. However, to go on making the same follies or supporting the ones in the past, after seeing them for what they are... that's being even more of a self-important ass, I'd say. Having the ability to laugh at oneself is fine, but it is worthless if it doesn't push you to change those faults.

There are grains of truth in all good satire, but rarely does it tell a whole story, and its often more akin to taking a quote out of context. Such is what is always at those white house roasts. Anyone looking for serious political debate in this can't see a red wagon for what it is.

Quote:

LITTLE RED WAGON
by Michelle F.

A little red wagon,
Small, red, and rusty,
A childhood long forgotten.
In my backyard it sits
For years that seem forever
It is now but a faded memory.

(For uber

)

host · 05-02-2006, 09:07 AM

ubertuber wrote:

Quote:

[I'm now preparing myself for an onslaught of transcripts from host. Host, if that's going to happen, let me know and let's have it in a thread devoted to that topic.]

ubertuber, I replied here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=1#post2055700

Here's a tease:

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...am_quotes.html
Vice President Cheney: Dec. 9, 2001 -- Meet the Press

RUSSERT: Let me turn to Iraq. When you were last on this program, September 16, five days after the attack on our country, I asked you whether there was any evidence that Iraq was involved in the attack and you said no. Since that time, a couple articles have appeared which I want to get you to react to. The first: "The Czech interior minister said today that <b>an Iraqi intelligence officer met with Mohammed Atta</b>, one of the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, just five months before the synchronized hijackings and mass killings were carried out."....

......Do you still believe there's no evidence that Iraq was involved in September 11?

Vice President Cheney on NBC's Meet the Press (AP)

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that--it's been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack......

abaya · 05-02-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

You'll be sorry....it's nothing but <a href="http://www.google.com/search?as_q=%22the+president%22%3A+%22hard+work%22&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=+&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=whitehouse.gov&as_rights=&safe=images">hard work.</>

hee hee.

Well, unfortunately I don't have much time for posting more right now, since it's Finals week for me and I've gotta grade undergrad papers, do a GIS project, and write a long paper by Friday (just turned in a long paper yesterday, too). But I will be dropping in from time to time, once summer semester begins.

Thanks for the welcome, Uber. Hope to see you in NYC this weekend!

Btw, are there any frequent female TFP'ers in here? Seems like a sausage party...

prb · 05-02-2006, 10:36 AM

Bush looked as uncomfortable listening to Colbert as he did listening to the speakers at Coretta King's funeral. What with Bush's "free-speech" zones or his carefully packed townhall meetings, it's almost impossible for anyone to tell him to his face what they think of his policies unless he is a captive listener. He only hears what he wants to hear and the truth hurts when it hits his ears.

Lasereth · 05-02-2006, 10:51 AM

I think Colbert's show is pretty funny and I like his style, but his satire at the ceremony simply didn't fit. The audience was laughing at his bravery, not at the actual speech. By the end, no one was laughing.

Bush's skit before Colbert's was definitely the highlight of the show with the impersonator. It shows that even through extreme criticism and mockery, the President is still able to make jokes at himself and take the idiotic criticism lightheartedly (most notably the public speaking). If Colbert had followed up on the tone of Bush's skit then I would have enjoyed the speech much more.

I won't make any hugely detailed political posts, but while I disagree with the actions taken of our President, I still believe in supporting the President. Also -- Helen's question was pretty obvious, as aforementioned in this thread. The reason for invading Iraq is simple -- Bush thought Iraq was a threat. Was it a mistake? Probably, but you don't wait on terrorists to act, you take preventive measures. If anyone here can prove that Hussein wasn't a terrorist, be my guest.

ObieX · 05-02-2006, 05:15 PM

Quote:

By the end, no one was laughing.

They shouldn't have been laughing as the "jokes" he was telling were serious issues. Hopefully the silence was from people actually thinking about these things and snapping out of sheep-mode. I really don't think Colbert was there to make many friends. He got his shot and he took it.

Elphaba · 05-02-2006, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaya

Thanks for the welcome, Uber. Hope to see you in NYC this weekend!

Btw, are there any frequent female TFP'ers in here? Seems like a sausage party...

Elph waves her hand

A most enthusiastic welcome, abaya. I have felt so ... marginalized and alone.

05-02-2006, 10:51 AM	#47 (permalink)
Lasereth Knight of the Old Republic Location: Winston-Salem, NC	I think Colbert's show is pretty funny and I like his style, but his satire at the ceremony simply didn't fit. The audience was laughing at his bravery, not at the actual speech. By the end, no one was laughing. Bush's skit before Colbert's was definitely the highlight of the show with the impersonator. It shows that even through extreme criticism and mockery, the President is still able to make jokes at himself and take the idiotic criticism lightheartedly (most notably the public speaking). If Colbert had followed up on the tone of Bush's skit then I would have enjoyed the speech much more. I won't make any hugely detailed political posts, but while I disagree with the actions taken of our President, I still believe in supporting the President. Also -- Helen's question was pretty obvious, as aforementioned in this thread. The reason for invading Iraq is simple -- Bush thought Iraq was a threat. Was it a mistake? Probably, but you don't wait on terrorists to act, you take preventive measures. If anyone here can prove that Hussein wasn't a terrorist, be my guest. __________________ "A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert

05-02-2006, 10:36 AM	#46 (permalink)
prb Psycho	Bush looked as uncomfortable listening to Colbert as he did listening to the speakers at Coretta King's funeral. What with Bush's "free-speech" zones or his carefully packed townhall meetings, it's almost impossible for anyone to tell him to his face what they think of his policies unless he is a captive listener. He only hears what he wants to hear and the truth hurts when it hits his ears.