Poll: Colbert or Stewart?
- Thread starter reincarN8ed
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think you're taking too many of his jokes as actual criticism. Most of it is just him exaggerating with his character's routine, not being preachy about ideologies. It's also kind've weird that you make a point about him being rich when Stewart undoubtedly makes more money than Colbert does.Crash486 said:
His act is based on conservatives, but that doesn't mean every joke is intended to be a laugh at them specifically.
Are you joking, or do you actually agree with Colbert's routines?reincarN8ed said:
I vote both. If I still watched shows on TV, they'd be the main reason I turned it on.
[sarcasm]No, really?![/sarcasm]Glerken said:
Yea, I know that Colbert is a comedian and doesn't really deliver the news, in fact they both are. If I want news I'll flip over to Hannity or O'Reily or whatever.
I hope you realize that Mr. Colbert makes heavy use of irony and parody. When he's on his show, he's putting on a character. This doesn't change my opinion of him, but you may be interested in knowing that he's actually a democrat in real life.
I can't stand either one, but Stewart is by far the worst one.
Make fun of people all you want, but as soon as you start openly mocking beliefs, you need a wake-up call...
Make fun of people all you want, but as soon as you start openly mocking beliefs, you need a wake-up call...
You know after the study out of a Ohio University(don't remember which one) about how conservatives have started to think that Colbert gives them a good representation to the citizenry at large in regards to their views.
When I got to be in the studio audience last year and he started the audience prep by saying "You know the thing here, I play a complete idiot." We have a problem that there is a disconnect in the Republican Party that they think the joke is representing their party.
When I got to be in the studio audience last year and he started the audience prep by saying "You know the thing here, I play a complete idiot." We have a problem that there is a disconnect in the Republican Party that they think the joke is representing their party.
...I'm still confused. You understand that Colbert isn't really an over-patriot conservative, yet then you say if you want real news you'll watch Hannity or O'Reily...reincarN8ed said:
Is that still sarcasm? Because honestly, over the internet it's impossible to tell...
I'm aware of what he's satirising in his act. I don't really care so much that he makes alot of money, I do care that he makes alot of money and comes off as preachy. For example, the other day when he was criticising people for bitching about the tax on soda. Of course 5 cents doesn't matter to him, he makes multi-millions of dollars a year. Not that it's a large tax or that I care about it, but I just don't like him telling me that I shouldn't care about it. It's the principal of the thing.G-Mang said:
Stewart on the other hand isn't as preachy and condescending, and while I understand Colbert's arrogance is part of his act, I find it annoying. Colbert strikes me as a brilliant guy, just listening to how quick he is on his feet during interviews is impressive, but I don't think I'd want to hang out with him, he rubs me as kind of a dick.
If all these celebrities were as phillanthropic and charitable as they pretend to be (and lecture the rest of the world to be) they wouldn't be as rich as they are.
I like em both, but I had to vote for Stewart. And the fact is that even though they're both comedy shows, they also do serve some serious purposes. Both have proven excelent at pointing political hipocrisy, generally through the juxtaposition of contridicting clips. And for those who really want to see what a serious program Stewart can put on, track down a video of the Cramer interview, that was a serious piece of legitimate journalism, as well as being something that none of the "legit" news networks had the guts to cover. Colbert's interviews, particularly the Better Know a District Interviews have also been shown to have some political sway, so much so that Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, had at one time (this happened before he became a part of Obama's administration) advised all Democrats to avoid Colbert at all costs. I think the difference for me is in the fact that Colbert always plays the "Colbert" character, while it seems like Stewart is generally a lot truer to who he probably is in real life.
Also,
Overall though, my all time favorite comedic news show is Real Time With Bill Maher because Maher frequently asks really tough questions and voices opinions that most other pundits don't have the guts to voice, even if you're fairly certain it's what they think. It's nice because you never get bullshit from him, and the panels he holds generally result in really good debates.
Also,
John Stewart is his actual name, I watched a biographical documentary about him once.Flunk said:
Overall though, my all time favorite comedic news show is Real Time With Bill Maher because Maher frequently asks really tough questions and voices opinions that most other pundits don't have the guts to voice, even if you're fairly certain it's what they think. It's nice because you never get bullshit from him, and the panels he holds generally result in really good debates.
I know that Colbert is putting on a show but at least his show is entertaining instead of infuriating like Stewart is. The Daily Show used to be funny until people starting writing articles about how people were tuning in to it to get real news and find stuff that they could take seriously. About the time that started happening the mockery of the news started to take a different tone and I pretty much quit watching. Now whenever I happen to flip past and stop for a few seconds to see what they're talking about it's become pretty predictable 99% of the time he's making some lame overused Dick Cheney is a robot joke that was stale and old two years ago, he's out of office let it die and move on.
What I think would be fun to see, even though it won't happen now that Jon Stewart is too bitter and unfunny, would be to see Colbert and Stewart switch sides. Lets see Colbert rabidly defend Obama's every single minuscule action while Stewart has to mock them.
What I think would be fun to see, even though it won't happen now that Jon Stewart is too bitter and unfunny, would be to see Colbert and Stewart switch sides. Lets see Colbert rabidly defend Obama's every single minuscule action while Stewart has to mock them.
It's his real name, but not his birth name.
If you want to use that example, you really need to consider what was actually presented. I don't know if you saw it, but prior to that, he played a clip of pundits complaining about it, including Hannity (almost certainly richer than Colbert) saying "They're also talking about a soda tax. We can't live anymore!" I think that deserves a joke, and Colbert shouldn't be off-limits to it. Also, the tax itself was made to help unhealthy people who can't afford health costs, which Colbert points out (angrily shaking his fist at "basic human decency" while doing so). I don't really see how you can accuse it of hyper-liberalism while also accusing its jokes as being offensive to the unwealthy (American liberalism is about charging the rich to help the poor, not the other way around).
It's kind've presumptuous to act like you know how much of Colbert's money goes to extravagance, and even if you did, most of his satire isn't about people failing to be philanthropic. While we're on the topic, Colbert has promotes charities on his show much, much more than Stewart ever did.
If people believe in something, that doesn't make it more respectable or give it merit. That just gives it supporters. Would you disagree with that?reincarN8ed said:
I don't really think it's fair to say that because of his wealth, he can't make fun of those topics while maintaining his character's mannerisms.Crash486 said:
If you want to use that example, you really need to consider what was actually presented. I don't know if you saw it, but prior to that, he played a clip of pundits complaining about it, including Hannity (almost certainly richer than Colbert) saying "They're also talking about a soda tax. We can't live anymore!" I think that deserves a joke, and Colbert shouldn't be off-limits to it. Also, the tax itself was made to help unhealthy people who can't afford health costs, which Colbert points out (angrily shaking his fist at "basic human decency" while doing so). I don't really see how you can accuse it of hyper-liberalism while also accusing its jokes as being offensive to the unwealthy (American liberalism is about charging the rich to help the poor, not the other way around).
It's kind've presumptuous to act like you know how much of Colbert's money goes to extravagance, and even if you did, most of his satire isn't about people failing to be philanthropic. While we're on the topic, Colbert has promotes charities on his show much, much more than Stewart ever did.
He has his moments; some of which are quite overt. Watch the part where attacks Cramer. He clearly says what's wrong with finical reporting in general and shows specific instances to back it up. All while being very funny.Rajin Cajun said:
I understand that Colbert is nothing more than a satire of Republicans, but the way he does it is just more obnoxious than funny. Same reason I hated King of the Hill. I know it was meant to be a comedic parody of Texans, but it was just so...boring.
They can be funny on occasion during the few times that they are not being totally rude and insulting.
There is no doubt he can be I especially liked Colbert when he ripped Ayn Rand supporters apart it is just far too inconsistent for it to be taken as a source of criticism. Not to say that I don't catch Colbert and Stewart every second I get a chance.Pseudonym2 said: