Via the Chicago Tribune I am reminded that the President's fine performance at the Correspondent's Dinner has been lost in all the chatter about Stephen Colbert:
• Liberals are attacking the New York Times and other outlets for ignoring or underplaying Colbert's monologue, and instead focusing on the president's gentler, self-deprecating interplay with a Bush impersonator. "It's insane journalism not to write about Colbert's appearance," playwright Christopher Durang wrote on Huffington Post. Seems to me a complete story would have given ample play to both. Colbert is clearly what everyone was talking about. Bush and his friend deserved coverage because, well, just about every public act the president commits is newsworthy, whether it's funny or not.
http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/mmx-060503-colbert,0,2112129.story?coll=mmx-home_bottom_hedsh2o
By all means let's not forget that the President of the United States in the midst of his ruinous war in Iraq, record budget deficits and a complete breakdown of the rebuilding efforts in New Orleans, took time out of his schedule to practice a comedy routine for a bunch of self-important hacks.
I was worried his priorities where out of whack or something.
Posts
2 comments:
Let's not hurt the fwagile Pwesident's feewings.
Jon Stewart described the performance as "ballsolicious."
These guys are just babies. They still like to think they aren't stenographers and get all pouty when it is pointed out to them.
Seriously,
I am so upset about the LACK of coverage that so many news stories get, for me the straw was the Downing Street Memo. It's such a subtle and pernicious form of propaganda. No wonder the "powers that be" want to controll the internet. It's the only source of real news left. My girlfriend told her mom (a Republican) that she got her news of the internet and her mom became upset and said something like "The internet is scary!" I guess the internet is the new communist manifesto.
Post a Comment