While there were some amusing moments here (the cool cult-leader photo being a high point), moreover it came off like a dry-run for rejected SNL skit. I wonder also if Colbert misspoke when comparing Sen. Sam Irvin's eyebrows to Herman Munster's, when they're actually more akin to Grandpa Munster's. It's truly a pivotal distinction.

funny

Wow. First time I've seen Timmy have a hint of a chin in at least five years.. Until Steven answered the charge, and the rest of the program was the same as usual: Questions asked for the sake of asking questions, not for finding things out - which is done so skilfully by Timmy he can conduct a full and engaged interview with a fake candidate who has no platform or substance to offer.

Of course, anyone who has watched Meet the Press for a while knew that already..

Wow, this makes Steven Colbert a little less sympathetic to me... Sorry.

Is it just me or does Timmy look more and more like a Kewpie Doll every day?

What do you call saturating the airwaves with your character? Sacha Baron Cohen-syndrome? Ugh! Enough with the same schtick already.

I recommend listening to the an interview involving Colburt.

agreed. i am weary of this satirical persona. it gets tiring on those who actually resonate with his views.

What the fuck is this?

Also, thanks for the link, Marco. That interview was less... irritatingly surreal.

Colbert's persona IMO has been fading lately into self-promotion, which leaves you with little more than your established fan base that love you simply for the sake of routine. Top that off with Russert's increasingly annoying A-HA approach, his inability to adapt to a satirist's caricature and this was a sore dissapoint in my books.

Colbert is pure genius in action.

I find it ironic that people are "tiring" of his schtick. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF HIS SCHTICK! He's a satrical take on the idea that we are all tired of the same "schtick" from the real politicians... get it?

You find him "fading lately into self promotion". Again, as is the case with politicians, they are all about self-promotion instead of promoting the well being of all Americans, which by the way, is their JOB!

Now do you understand?

Now do you understand?

Now, now. You're being shrill, you leftie loon (haha). Try to avoid subverting the homeland and it's patriotic servants for a short while, hmm, and stay clear of the hyperbole - you know, just say everything's fine - and you'll be taken seriously right away.

Or don't you... want to be taken seriously? Oh, I think you do. Because you're not a little Maoist aspirant who loves terrorists and hate everything American, are you?

No, of course not. So therefore you agree with everything our politicians say they have always said. That's a good boy.

Hey Norm - can you put the interview Colbert did on Larry King live a while ago? I saw a clip and it looked awesome but I haven't seen the whole thing.

I didn't record the King Colbert I'll see what I can find.

Colbear (for the accent lazy) asks some terrific questions.

But a terrific scene setting was Tim's question to the pleading at the white house press corps. Ending up at 'when they didn''t ask any questions at all.' right after 'Write that novel!". wow? Why did they invite this guy to speak? Didn't you ask that question?

This looks like Colbert's real person. 'Follow the satire' has become today's 'follow the money' logic. What came after was filler in my mind but then ...

I still can't make heads or tails of satire. I don't know why we need to dig so deep. Then I hear, "What I would give for a Nixon". (Colbert is satire ice cream.)

Soberly, it, suggests that it's time for a definition of truth again. He's asking, do we need satire to stand in for truth?

This was a remarkable reflection. What can media do better than reflect? Sorry reflecting...

The take two at mtp brings comfort. Russert gave a nice welcome.