Comments on: Hodgman Roasts Obama

Hodgman Roasts Obama

HumuloneRanger — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:11:34 -0800

John Hodgman tests President Obama's nerd credentials at the Radio and TV Correspondents Dinner. [SLYT]

By: Dumsnill

Dumsnill — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:14:39 -0800

Fun, but already posted in MeTa.

By: Henrik

Henrik — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:15:07 -0800

By: smackfu

smackfu — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:16:11 -0800

This is better than MetaTalk.

By: HumuloneRanger

HumuloneRanger — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:25:36 -0800

I don't read MeTa regularly and never would have thought to check there first.

By: nevercalm

nevercalm — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:26:06 -0800

Let me just be the fourth to say that this has been posted in MeTa.

By: Dumsnill

Dumsnill — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:29:39 -0800

I don't read MeTa regularly and never would have thought to check there first. No, sorry if my comment seemed snarky. The fact that something was mentioned on MeTa doesn't mean that a blue post is unacceptable. Henrik's comment was better.

By: Artw

Artw — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:34:49 -0800

This belongs here.

By: Balisong

Balisong — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:39:10 -0800

I hear this site has a different section that also has a similar post on a related subject.

By: rageagainsttherobots

rageagainsttherobots — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:46:23 -0800

Nerdtastic.

By: gameshints

gameshints — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:49:15 -0800

I enjoyed the serious message behind the speech too.

By: gerryblog

gerryblog — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:51:08 -0800

As I said on MetaTalk earlier today, this is the Colbert moment: You are clearly not exactly the person we hoped you would be. And perhaps it was wrong and impractical and unrealistic of us to lay such hopes upon you. I've decided that it's directed in equal parts at Obama and at his increasingly disenchanted supporters.

By: BitterOldPunk

BitterOldPunk — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:57:10 -0800

I'm tired of John Hodgman. I read his cute little book, I watch his cute little Daily Show segments, I read his cute little Twitter feed. I'm over-Hodgmanned. (This was pretty funny, though)

By: samsm

samsm — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:00:02 -0800

Enjoyed it, but ... buzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:01:20 -0800

I hope that's not the sound of a weirding module activating.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:01:25 -0800

Most important question: Did Obama get a hobo name?

By: Christ, what an asshole

Christ, what an asshole — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:03:11 -0800

I think C-SPAN takes pride in always zooming in on the audience members who look most insulted by a speech. Take 3:48, as Hodgman goes on to explain how all the members of the audience were once high school newspaper geeks, and it cuts to a table of people who couldn't be bothered with such a sentiment. More pronounced, you have a guy staring at the ta-tas of some young hunny at his table while his post-prime wife looks on. He must have been a jock.

By: game warden to the events rhino

game warden to the events rhino — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:13:54 -0800

More pronounced, you have a guy staring at the ta-tas of some young hunny at his table while his post-prime wife looks on. He must have been a jock. He's David Axelrod, Obama's senior advisor. Surely a geek.

By: MrZaius

MrZaius — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:16:07 -0800

CSPAN hosts it directly, but neither it not Youtube really cut the mustard when the thing is an hour long. What happened to their switch to more open licensing? One would think this would be out there in a more readily stored, higher resolution codec already. This sounds like an example of "Presidential events at the White House" to me.

By: nevercalm

nevercalm — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:18:14 -0800

This is great. I hope they bring the PC guy back every year to roast our Mac of a president.

By: Marisa Stole the Precious Thing

Marisa Stole the Precious Thing — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:21:10 -0800

I'd never thought of the Constitution as a penultimate nerd document or the Founding Fathers as nerds, But Hodgman makes a strong case there. "God as Dungeon Master" is a concept that probably shaped everything that went into the framing of the American system. Not to mention, when you look at their portraits, the evidence is there - these are the expressions of men who have endured many a wedgie.

By: w0mbat

w0mbat — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:25:49 -0800

MetaTalk was the wrong place to post this, that was the error. MetaFilter is the right place. Good post, HumuloneRanger.

By: Solon and Thanks

Solon and Thanks — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:26:32 -0800

I think C-SPAN takes pride in always zooming in on the audience members who look most insulted by a speech. Really, they always find that one person who is clearly thinking "god why am I here I have so many more important things to do hurf durf." At least Obama was cracking up the entire time.

By: EarBucket

EarBucket — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:31:17 -0800

Most important question: Did Obama get a hobo name? #424 on the original list of 700.

By: fire&wings

fire&wings — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:31:33 -0800

Worthy of a post I'd say.

By: rokusan

rokusan — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:38:11 -0800

Obama and Hodgman? How can anyone think this wouldn't end up on MetaFilter? The only think that would make it more appropriate is if it was a dinner made of bacon.

By: rokusan

rokusan — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:38:41 -0800

("The only think?" Oy vey.)

By: Christ, what an asshole

Christ, what an asshole — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:50:28 -0800

Thing about it.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:53:59 -0800

#424 on the original list of 700. I had no idea. Fantastic. Thank you.

By: KokuRyu

KokuRyu — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:58:52 -0800

The "simple, three-part question" about Frank Herbert's Dune cracked me up. Pure comedy gold.

By: Nelson

Nelson — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:06:05 -0800

That was great, thank you. As with the defining Colbert performance, I think what's most funny is the bit where he skewers the press themselves.

By: elfgirl

elfgirl — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:06:12 -0800

I don't read MeTa regularly So you're, um, single, then?

By: hippybear

hippybear — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:31:12 -0800

As with the defining Colbert performance For the record, the Colbert speech was made at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Similar event, yet different.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:34:10 -0800

His speech wasn't that great.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:35:25 -0800

The "simple, three-part question" about Frank Herbert's Dune cracked me up. I don't get it. That was about as simple a question as he could offer. A medium-difficulty question might have asked: (1) Who was the current Padishah-Emperor of the Known Universe? (2) From what planet do the Sardaukar originate? (3) What happens if a lasgun beam strikes a shield? Hard questions might have been: (1) Describe the mental organization of Leto II. (2) How can original memories be restored to a ghola? (3) What is an axolotl tank?

By: revgeorge

revgeorge — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:40:28 -0800

rokusan has another think coming.

By: rokusan

rokusan — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:52:46 -0800

You guys badger me worse than ex-MeFi spouses.

By: Pope Guilty

Pope Guilty — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:02:08 -0800

Funny, but I thought the quiz bogged things down.

By: reverend cuttle

reverend cuttle — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:09:42 -0800

Who was the current Padishah-Emperor of the Known Universe? tensefail? ...unless ROU_Xenophobe is also a kwisatz haderach.

By: o0o0o

o0o0o — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:25:17 -0800

Funny, but how many comedy-based events do they have a year? It seems like this is at least the fourth since the inauguration. I'm not saying they shouldn't be having fun, but at this rate they'll be holding press conferences at the Laugh Factory. Not sure we're there yet, but at some point it becomes too much, too often.

By: SirOmega

SirOmega — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:32:07 -0800

I <3 Dune references. Never thought Obama as the Kwisatz Haderach though. But I did have a sensation on election night, as if we had just blown up the Death Star.

By: rokusan

rokusan — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:35:55 -0800

I did have a sensation on election night, as if we had just blown up the Death Star. Nub nub?

By: minervous

minervous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:39:21 -0800

Hello, nerds.

By: jedicus

jedicus — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:40:57 -0800

Nub nub? I think you'll find that 'Yub Nub' is the canonical transcription.

By: TheophileEscargot

TheophileEscargot — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:45:57 -0800

Only since this is a nerd post... A lot of the founding fathers were deists: they thought that God created the world, but did not intervene in it afterwards. Therefore God is clearly not a Dungeon Master, who controls and influences the game as it progresses. God is more like Steve Jackson: he just creates the game, how you get on with it is up to you.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:49:37 -0800

oOoOo, the main ones are the White House Correspondents' Dinner, the Radio and Television Correspondents' Dinner (this one), and the Gridiron Club. The National Press Club also has weekly events which sometimes get notice. This year the Alfalfa Club dinner was in the papers but mainly because it was founded to honor Robert E. Lee and Obama is, well, black. But these are the well-known annual dinners. I'm sure there are others because it's part of the Washington social culture. What's new and unusual is that they are always on C-SPAN and/or the web, and for that reason the comedy acts are aimed at the national audience more than they used to be. In years past they tended to be, oh, Rich Little doing pretty much the same act as always.

By: Dr-Baa

Dr-Baa — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:52:02 -0800

It seems like this is at least the fourth since the inauguration. If Obama were Bush, these would have been vacations.

By: roomthreeseventeen

roomthreeseventeen — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:57:15 -0800

That was boring. I turned it off around the 2 minute mark.

By: rodgerd

rodgerd — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:08:36 -0800

Hard questions might have been: (1) Describe the mental organization of Leto II. (2) How can original memories be restored to a ghola? (3) What is an axolotl tank? I can answer all those off the top of my head. /me cries

By: OmieWise

OmieWise — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:10:06 -0800

I only thought it was ok. I guess I ended up feeling that cramming nerdy references into the speech wasn't enough to really make it funny.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:30:12 -0800

I liked it. I think it helps if you consider yourself in that group. Wasn't brilliant, but I like Hodgman's delivery, especially because there are times you can tell he might work better on a screen or with a smaller audience, and he loses the crowd a bit and he just sort of plods through, like he's demonstrating the vacuum cleaner he's trying to sell you and is determined to get through his pitch. There's something really endearing about it. It wasn't as good as Colbert's infamous speech, but there is no way to deliver something like that without all the history behind it. Obama's still in his first six months.

By: deliquescent

deliquescent — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:30:25 -0800

Now I want more Hodgman. GIVE ME MORE HODGMAN!

By: roomthreeseventeen

roomthreeseventeen — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:36:19 -0800

Oh, this was aimed at people who think Colbert is funny? Gotcha.

By: stinkycheese

stinkycheese — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:42:51 -0800

I always thought it was Yub Yub.

By: stinkycheese

stinkycheese — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:44:19 -0800

*shudder*

By: Pendragon

Pendragon — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:07:00 -0800

No, It's Yib Yib.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:11:23 -0800

I find Hodgman pretty dull most of the time, frankly. I don't think he compares to Colbert at all, the "colbert moment" refers to Colbert's white house correspondents dinner, where he basically ripped on Bush and everyone in the media to their faces.

By: drjimmy11

drjimmy11 — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:15:05 -0800

As I said on MetaTalk earlier today, this is the Colbert moment: You are clearly not exactly the person we hoped you would be. And perhaps it was wrong and impractical and unrealistic of us to lay such hopes upon you. yes, it's our fault. Us stupid asshole voters and volunteers who got him elected. Clearly it was "wrong and impractical and unrealistic" of me to expect him to respect the Constitution or keep more than a couple of his promises. It was definitely "wrong and impractical and unrealistic" to be surprised when he had the breathtaking hypocrisy to go to Philadelphia, stand in the same building with the Constitution, and say that he believed in indefinite detention for people who might possibly be thinking about committing a crime at some point. I'm such an asshole, and that ever so gentle, pre-vetted, Court Jester bit of toadying really set me straight. Bravo! Now can we watch a video of Toby Keith poking fun at Bush?

By: shadytrees

shadytrees — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:37:46 -0800

Other things that aren't as good as the Colbert speech The American Civil War Long-distance relationships Arm cancer Calculating tips Lumbar punctures Bad haircuts Poliovirus Mondays Itchy sweaters Zombie bed bugs Super Mario Sunshine Gentrification

By: Artw

Artw — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:43:51 -0800

Awesome T-Shirt for meet ups

By: smackfu

smackfu — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:46:44 -0800

I'm such an asshole, and that ever so gentle, pre-vetted Ha! Do you take all comedy so personally?

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:03:45 -0800

I don't think he compares to Colbert at all, the "colbert moment" refers to Colbert's white house correspondents dinner The problem with Colbert, or rather his act, is that he is as confined to a two-dimensional image as Dorian fucking Gray. He can never step out of his little caricature, all edges, but only relax or intensify it; he can give you O'Reilly on a good hair day or bad. Unlike Jon Stuart, who can on occasion take off the jester's cap and comport himself for an interview, Yorick here can only parrot and condescend. He cannot dialogue. He intends to live and die with the thing on. And so whereas Stuart's comedy can distinguish between our defunct medium - television - and those credulous of it, Colbert's cannot. Its joke is as vast as it is useless and foregone - 'Lord, how can all these rubes believe all this tripe,' to the tittering of some internet chorus, one as much the mirror-image of O'Reilly's passive dittoheads as irony will allow.

By: tzikeh

tzikeh — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:05:49 -0800

drjimmy11: I'm such an asshole, and that ever so gentle, pre-vetted.... smackfu: Ha! Do you take all comedy so personally? I think, smackfu, that drjimmy11 is saying that, to call Hodgman's facile and toothless bit a "Colbert moment" (which it couldn't be further from), and then to interpret it as laying blame on those Obama voters who are now very disappointed with him, takes more than a little contortion and is just a bit insulting. And re: the post--I like Hodgman fine, and this me smile, but it was way too small for the room. It would have played much better in my basement. Twenty-six years ago. Obama would have laughed then, too.

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:07:28 -0800

Er, Jon Stewart. He's okay but I'm not going to give him retroactive credit for On Liberty.

By: zerokey

zerokey — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:19:51 -0800

Important distinctions must be made.

By: TypographicalError

TypographicalError — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:25:15 -0800

kid ichorous: "The problem with Colbert, or rather his act, is that he is as confined to a two-dimensional image as Dorian fucking Gray. He can never step out of his little caricature, all edges, but only relax or intensify it; he can give you O'Reilly on a good hair day or bad. Unlike Jon Stuart, who can on occasion take off the jester's cap and comport himself for an interview, Yorick here can only parrot and condescend. He cannot dialogue. He intends to live and die with the thing on. And so whereas Stuart's comedy can distinguish between our defunct medium - television - and those credulous of it, Colbert's cannot. Its joke is as vast as it is useless and foregone - 'Lord, how can all these rubes believe all this tripe,' to the tittering of some internet chorus, one as much the mirror-image of O'Reilly's passive dittoheads as irony will allow." I'm not sure when the last time you experienced Colbert was, but I think you should reevaluate him. In the beginning of the character, what you say was true - he had a lot of problems with staying in character when it would've been easier and better (in the moment) for him to drop it. But as time has gone on, he's grown into the character, and now he has learned how to make it do what he wants. It's a little strange to explain, but I think the best example is his interviews. If you go back to the beginning, you'll see an obsessive need to "nail" the interviewee, at the expense of a good interview. He even remarked, out of character, that this was the worst thing about the character. But if you watch him now, he uses slightly different language. He still asks the ridiculous questions, and plays the conservative fool, but he has an incredible way with still somehow making his interviews full-bodied and real. And if you imagine him irrelevant, you should go back and watch his USO week. It was moving, sincere, and quite well done.

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:06:06 -0800

Okay, you're on. I'll watch the (five?) interviews from uso week.

By: exlotuseater

exlotuseater — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:11:17 -0800

1. Shai Hulud 2. Thumper 3. Water of Life

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:17:30 -0800

Colbert's "Formidable Opponent" on gays in the military--in front of a packed military house, in Saddam Hussein's former palace--was "uncomfortable-room comedy" at its best. He's still at the top of his game, as far as I'm concerned.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:16:33 -0800

"And so whereas Stuart's comedy can distinguish between our defunct medium - television - and those credulous of it, Colbert's cannot. Its joke is as vast as it is useless and foregone - 'Lord, how can all these rubes believe all this tripe,' to the tittering of some internet chorus, one as much the mirror-image of O'Reilly's passive dittoheads as irony will allow." Well, it is just a character. He has done other work, and eventually he'll go on to something else. But it still works right now, and he actually does walk to the edge of his character during interviews these days and sort of lets his guard down. He had Green Day on there and ran the interview like Carson Daily on MTV, but it's OK, because ample opportunities exist. He was very careful in Iraq not to be too stridently sarcastic, but he was able to make the room go silent a few times, especially during the segment ColdChef mentions.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:17:53 -0800

Daily? Daly? See, I'm not really in the loop ... do the kids still like the music teevee?

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:30:21 -0800

The problem with Colbert, or rather his act, is that he is as confined to a two-dimensional image as Dorian fucking Gray. He can never step out of his little caricature, all edges, but only relax or intensify it ... Yorick here can only parrot and condescend. He cannot dialogue. He intends to live and die with the thing on. And so whereas Stuart's comedy can distinguish between our defunct medium - television - and those credulous of it, Colbert's cannot. Its joke is as vast as it is useless and foregone - 'Lord, how can all these rubes believe all this tripe,' to the tittering of some internet chorus, one as much the mirror-image of O'Reilly's passive dittoheads as irony will allow.

A bunch of people have pushed back here, but I'm going to take an ever stronger approach. I think that statement is moronic. It presupposes that humor is a strictly logical system that given a set of constraints (or axioms) it cannot transcend them any more then 2+2 = n*1/3. Furthermore, it presumes that your own views on the rules of humor are correct. Both of these are incorrect, and thus your statement is indefensible.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:37:22 -0800

"But if you watch him now, he uses slightly different language. He still asks the ridiculous questions, and plays the conservative fool, but he has an incredible way with still somehow making his interviews full-bodied and real." Yeah, but one thing that bugs me is it's a little transparent, like the veil is dropped a bit. He sucks up a lot more these days. But the show continues to surprise me with the quality and the completely free-form nature of the writing, despite the reliance on parody of a particular format. The simplest ideas are pretty ripe, like the Formidable Opponent segment, reminds me a bit of Even Stepvhen (Islam vs. Christianity is good). A Colbert Christmas was outstanding, exactly right, and sort of came out of nowhere. Bill O'Reilly never did a Christmas special, and definitely not with Willie Nelson singing about his gift of marijuana for the Baby Jesus. I never buy DVDs of television, but got that one. "And re: the post--I like Hodgman fine, and this me smile, but it was way too small for the room. It would have played much better in my basement. Twenty-six years ago. Obama would have laughed then, too." That's kinda why I liked it. His delivery was nerdy.

By: TypographicalError

TypographicalError — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 18:15:50 -0800

delmoi: "A bunch of people have pushed back here, but I'm going to take an ever stronger approach. I think that statement is moronic. It presupposes that humor is a strictly logical system that given a set of constraints (or axioms) it cannot transcend them any more then 2+2 = n*1/3. Furthermore, it presumes that your own views on the rules of humor are correct. Both of these are incorrect, and thus your statement is indefensible." To be fair to kid ichorous, Stewart and Colbert are not entirely about humor anymore. They have established themselves as critics of media and politics, despite following shows with crank-calling puppets. So, in that light, being stuck in a character whose criticism capabilities are reduced to caricaturing O'Reilly and other pundits is a mistake. But I don't think that's a problem Colbert suffers from anymore.

By: zippy

zippy — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 19:01:51 -0800

it cannot transcend them any more then 2+2 = n*1/3 n = 12

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:25:14 -0800

I think that statement is moronic. It presupposes that humor is a strictly logical system that given a set of constraints (or axioms) it cannot transcend them any more then 2+2 = n*1/3. [...] your statement is indefensible. Delmoi: holy shit. I've checked all the numbers, and you're right. I pray my mistake has not cost us too much. The defenses must hold. I was mad to think that the Dorian Gray analogy would cohere. In my folly I though it would address the disconnect somewhere between personhood and TV persona. And I thought the disintegrating head of O'Reilly as a passable conjugate to the tortured painting: this headshot, this face swallowed down its open throat, this pinkish scream turned inside-out. And the cro-magnon brow, the bulbous punching-bag of a brain. Don't you know that they do not let him sleep? That his nights are paroxysms of every form of torture he defends on air - electro shocks, mock executions, and non-stop Eminem? It is to this hangdog wreck we anchor an ever-young Stephen Colbert. The part ages; but the actor does not. Still, the correct two-dimensional cage analogy is, as your math confirms, General Zod's planar prison from Superman 2. That thing was badass down to the eigenvector, an evil Solitude Fortress that lives in wavering between here and nothingness, and releases its villain at the moment of highest drama. On viewing the new Colbert I have come to two realizations. First, it is true - Colbert has learned to tone it down. It actually works. Even in the worst case, is now much less like two Bill O'Reilli - one real, one false - are flaying me in stereo, but rather that one is pinning me down and the other is shouting in my face. Second, it was not my understanding that the entire show had been transplanted to Comedy Central's server farm, nor that, in keeping with today's vernacular, I should have known to parse "comedy central online" as "minefield of asshat." I had suspicions in the past. They are all come true. Consider this fair warning. There is, by all appearances, an asshat monarchy that has sprung up around us, Disney castles and gypsy tents. Asshat has Title now. Mr. Asshat, of the Canterbridgian Asshats. It has estate to bequeath. There are now asshat duchies, baronets, asshat vassal systems, legal arabesques to asshat inheritance and franchise. There is asshat pageantry and perhaps an asshat flag. First: the Burger King. I've known for some time that he'd taken on a Kingly avatar, but only now understood it as a sort of fratboy trickster demigod. If the commercials are to believed, he kicks down doors and holds hockey airhorns to your sleeping ear. You wake in a terrified hunger, sleep still plastered to your face. He is like a Midas of asshattery, ready to transmute your world to an unhappy meal of 3 AM microwave sliders. Burger King: Gotcha. Next in the pantheon: Gene Simmons, shitfaced seraph astride a polished throne of glam, satellited by platinum bimbos. He is a baritone asshat. He is also some kind of asshat franchise & pater familias, to be succeeded by his asshat son. I am informed, eight times or so, that he has graduated from asshat medical school, and should properly be addressed as Doctor Asshat. There was a time - yesterday, in fact - when I would not have to think of Gene Simmons at all. McDonalds entreats me to join in the nuveau asshattery, to become a Dollar Menunaire. I assume from the advertisements it tastes like something between a cigar burn and a consumer jury stacked deep with asshats - the sorts of people who reflexively call 'shotgun' upon entering any structure with more than one door. If presented with their monopoly menu, I will take the car or the shoe; I know who's got dibs on the hat, and in what number. What's more, the asshats have apparently made good on some sort of perverse, malfunctional gesture of civic responsibility. They have torn up the roads, mocked our infrastructure in its disrepair. In fact, they are such calculating asshats - perhaps a braintrust of asshats, asshat scientists - that they've mutilated stretches of highway in such a pattern as to make your tires skid out a song. As expected, the construction of the song itself is pure asshat baroque: it is all the unpleasantness of road damage and ring tone at once. I don't even know what it is selling. "We broke the world. Best, the Asshats." I have just seen a total of sixty or seventy minutes of Colbert strewn across various episodes, and maybe a half hour of it in the last two months. I have seen some high power of that in asshat commercials. It is a form of psychic vandalism, and I contend that no program, no matter how good, is worth that.

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:44:04 -0800

The William Tell Overture is crying.

By: Wild_Eep

Wild_Eep — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:21:52 -0800

Is there any chance that some geek out there can strip out the 60Hz hum in the audio track?

By: CaseyB

CaseyB — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:23:19 -0800

Honestly, he lost points with me for not knowing Crom. You can't read an issue and not know that. He's been referred to as a comic collector repeatedly, and this proves that he clearly was not -- unless it was in the anti-nerd manner of buying boxes of comics as an investment and boxing them unread.

By: Mental Wimp

Mental Wimp — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:52:08 -0800

Honestly, he lost points with me for not knowing Crom. You can't read an issue and not know that. Or he forgot. He may have other things on his mind.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:54:48 -0800

Wait, how could not remember Crom? Does he know about the riddle of steel? How can he lead us if he doesn't know these things?!

By: o0o0o

o0o0o — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:56:33 -0800

Honestly, he lost points with me for not knowing Crom It seemed to me like he knew the answer and decided it would be better not to play into what was obviously a leading question.

By: Ms. Saint

Ms. Saint — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:06:01 -0800

Probably, when one is president of the United States, it's best not to correctly name the god in Conan the Barbarian in front of cameras.

By: hippybear

hippybear — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:09:29 -0800

He's afraid to. If he says it, he will offend Allah, and he's a secret Muslim as we all know.

By: mightygodking

mightygodking — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:12:54 -0800

Not posted to Youtube: the following 14-minute speech by Justin Long about how the President is a cool dude who likes making home movies.

By: Marisa Stole the Precious Thing

Marisa Stole the Precious Thing — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:13:36 -0800

CROM WILL PUNISH OBAMA

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:20:18 -0800

I have just seen a total of sixty or seventy minutes of Colbert strewn across various episodes, and maybe a half hour of it in the last two months. I have seen some high power of that in asshat commercials. It is a form of psychic vandalism, and I contend that no program, no matter how good, is worth that. And that, my friend, is why you go to bittorrent. No commercials.

By: rokusan

rokusan — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 23:35:59 -0800

Crom be damned, I want some of whatever kid ichorous is smoking.

By: flaterik

flaterik — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 00:45:42 -0800

"They have established themselves as critics of media" The daily show and colbert report have always been parodies of news media, and I'm pretty sure parody is usually critical.

By: rodgerd

rodgerd — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 01:09:08 -0800

Honestly, he lost points with me for not knowing Crom It seemed to me like he knew the answer and decided it would be better not to play into what was obviously a leading question. Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with an out of context clip of, "President Obama, what is best in life?"

By: mdn

mdn — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:11:02 -0800

The problem with Colbert, or rather his act, is that he is as confined to a two-dimensional image as Dorian fucking Gray. He can never step out of his little caricature, all edges, but only relax or intensify it; he can give you O'Reilly on a good hair day or bad. Unlike Jon Stuart, who can on occasion take off the jester's cap and comport himself for an interview, Yorick here can only parrot and condescend. He cannot dialogue. He intends to live and die with the thing on. I'm amazed you see it this way, as Colbert is about the most deft and even subtle comedian I can think of. He manages to point toward, perform, and directly nail all at the same time, and somehow all with a light heart, so that it never seems mean-spirited but just revealing. Perhaps it's that Stewart switches between funny man and serious man, whereas Colbert walks a line of funny-serious man, which I find very appealing, but you may not. Still, it's missing the point to call him two-dimensional, since he is parodying the two-dimensional, so you've gotta give him at least another dimension for that (remember those Seinfeld live-action trailers for Bee Movie? He's like that, dressing up as a cartoon but so obviously not a cartoon himself...)

By: rifflesby

rifflesby — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:42:13 -0800

It seemed to me like he knew the answer and decided it would be better not to play into what was obviously a leading question. It was almost certainly this, or some variation thereof. Obama collects Conan the Barbarian comics specifically, it's impossible that he wouldn't have known.

By: CCBC

CCBC — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:38:40 -0800

So PCs are for nerds and Macs are for jocks?

By: Artw

Artw — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:33:13 -0800

I want to know where Obama stands on the Mutant Registration Act.

By: designbot

designbot — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:52:20 -0800

Oh, hodgman. A simple favorite would have sufficed.

By: graventy

graventy — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:01:14 -0800

Speaking as a nerd who read the most recent Conan incarnation for 50 issues or so, in an on-the-spot moment like that I wouldn't have remembered.

By: Artw

Artw — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:08:39 -0800

Crom laughs at you, he laughs from his mountain.