Comic Performance on Capital Hill Not All That Funny
How shocked were you to see funnyman Stephen Colbert doing a routine at a Congressional committee meeting held recently in the nation's capital? What kind of thinking went into this wasteful use of time and money? Was Colbert performing for the committee or was his act supposed to bring media attention to the plight of migrant farm workers? Or, is there something deeper behind the Colbert testimony? In case you missed it, Colbert was invited by California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren to shine a light on the hypocrisy of the current immigration situation.
While other people in the entertainment industry have been in front of congressional panels in the past, this may be the first time that a performer appeared playing a role rather than as a real citizen.
The first question this situation suggests is can a person deliver sworn testimony when playing a character as opposed to being themselves? If not illegal it is certainly a strange way to deliver information to a special panel of Congress.
Which brings up the question as to whether this event was for comic relief or a simply another error in congressional judgment? This little gathering cost tax payers an estimated $120,000 or more.
It was not as if Colbert was supporting changes in the immigration laws, particularly the need for an effective guest worker program.
He is known for his satire in which he makes fun of government rather than being an advocate for any causes.
Did his act accomplish anything other than upset Republicans who pulled out all the stops to wag their fingers and claim this was one more example the Democrats wasting money? Did his act provide a unique platform to draw attention to a subject of importance? Or, did his act simply promote his act? Colbert's half-hour comedy show, which is a companion piece to Jon Stewart's comic version of a real news program, is based on a one-joke premise.
He impersonates what most people believe is Bill O'Reilly, a leading cable news commentator.
See if Colbert does a good job; check out Fox News and then watch his show on the Comedy Network.
Since no one will face up to the true reasons behind Colbert's bizarre Capital Hill appearance, one could surmise it was a simple case of unabashed self-promotion.
On October 30th Stewart is planning an event on the National Mall, "Rally to Restore Sanity.
" Colbert will latch on to this event with his "March to Keep Fear Alive.
" Both efforts will focus on what's wrong with Washington politics, and Colbert's congressional testimony is likely to bolster attendance at this rally.
It's hard to imagine who will be the brunt of the jokes at this laugh-fest, but the past antics of these comics suggest that the GOP, the Pledge to America" as well as the party's controversial candidates will be prime targets.
This is fair enough; after all we embrace free speech in this country.
However, let's keep the comics performing on public venues rather than have them acting out in the halls of Congress.
While other people in the entertainment industry have been in front of congressional panels in the past, this may be the first time that a performer appeared playing a role rather than as a real citizen.
The first question this situation suggests is can a person deliver sworn testimony when playing a character as opposed to being themselves? If not illegal it is certainly a strange way to deliver information to a special panel of Congress.
Which brings up the question as to whether this event was for comic relief or a simply another error in congressional judgment? This little gathering cost tax payers an estimated $120,000 or more.
It was not as if Colbert was supporting changes in the immigration laws, particularly the need for an effective guest worker program.
He is known for his satire in which he makes fun of government rather than being an advocate for any causes.
Did his act accomplish anything other than upset Republicans who pulled out all the stops to wag their fingers and claim this was one more example the Democrats wasting money? Did his act provide a unique platform to draw attention to a subject of importance? Or, did his act simply promote his act? Colbert's half-hour comedy show, which is a companion piece to Jon Stewart's comic version of a real news program, is based on a one-joke premise.
He impersonates what most people believe is Bill O'Reilly, a leading cable news commentator.
See if Colbert does a good job; check out Fox News and then watch his show on the Comedy Network.
Since no one will face up to the true reasons behind Colbert's bizarre Capital Hill appearance, one could surmise it was a simple case of unabashed self-promotion.
On October 30th Stewart is planning an event on the National Mall, "Rally to Restore Sanity.
" Colbert will latch on to this event with his "March to Keep Fear Alive.
" Both efforts will focus on what's wrong with Washington politics, and Colbert's congressional testimony is likely to bolster attendance at this rally.
It's hard to imagine who will be the brunt of the jokes at this laugh-fest, but the past antics of these comics suggest that the GOP, the Pledge to America" as well as the party's controversial candidates will be prime targets.
This is fair enough; after all we embrace free speech in this country.
However, let's keep the comics performing on public venues rather than have them acting out in the halls of Congress.
