It is with some measure of guilt that I confess I count myself among the many who get a large portion of their news from the satirists on Comedy Central.
For some, one solid hour a night of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert supplies sufficient cognizance of what’s happening in the world. But Colbert has taken it a step further. Not content to just report the news, he’s now going to be making the news.
These United States of America ““ in one year’s time ““ might be considered the Colbert Nation if Stephen Colbert has anything to say about it. And, as fans of the comedian know, he always has something to say.
Tuesday on “The Colbert Report,” the popular pseudo-pundit announced his candidacy in the 2008 presidential race.
Who among the disaffected college youth isn’t intrigued at the prospect of seeing Colbert alongside the other presidential hopefuls at a debate? The possibility of a worthy follow-up to the infamous 2006 White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner would certainly draw a much wider audience.
And, who knows? Maybe someone might actually listen to the issues being discussed and what the other candidates have to say in the process of seeking out some entertainment. Wouldn’t that be something?
A pessimist might say that Colbert’s candidacy cheapens our political process ““ an assessment I strongly disagree with.
Certainly, his candidacy is no more improbable than others from years past. There is a precedent for candidates with slim chances who enter the race to ““ at the very least ““ call attention to issues being sidestepped by the more prominent candidates.
Colbert speaks to snarky, apathetic college students about issues such as what the federal government is prepared to do about bears ““ those godless killing machines.
Colbert need not fear a cold shoulder from the mainstream press. Thanks to his program being broadcast on cable, he has a half-hour nightly to espouse his political platform without being beholden to the same equal-time rules as the other candidates.
Considering how many negligent voters lie smack dab in the middle of Colbert’s viewership, his candidacy can only serve to increase awareness and improve turnout in ’08. The 2000 presidential election might have been the best showing since 1968, but it was still only 60 percent of the eligible population.
Of course, this candidacy is certainly not completely altruistic. No doubt this move will prove excellent fodder for the writing staff at “The Colbert Report.”
In fact, during the first show following his announcement, Colbert managed to spend roughly six minutes (almost one-third of the episode) humorously filling out candidacy paperwork. Honestly, sometimes episodes write themselves.
And yet, he also managed to use this bit to demonstrate the jarring disparity between the Republican and Democratic parties’ barriers to entry for a presidential candidate ““ at least in the state of South Carolina ($25,000 v. $2,500 or 3,000 Democratic signatures).
Deceptively, the most fascinating part of the segment wasn’t the jokes but the facts. So much for his disdain for the “factinista” and characterizations of his show as a “No Fact Zone.”
In the end, I have no doubt that Stephen Colbert will be a challenge to both sides of the aisle. What could evasive politicians fear more than a man whose entire persona is a well-established lie? At the very least, it will make for great television, which should always be the goal, putting to shame the recent slate of mediocre sitcoms dictated by laugh tracks. I for one didn’t expect to be this enthused at the prospect of what is essentially reality TV.
Stephen Colbert is good for America ““ which makes sense, since he is America, if his new book’s title is to be believed. And why shouldn’t we believe him? He invented truthiness.
If you hope Colbert campaigns for the Democratic nomination as his alternate reality hippie persona (pipe and all), e-mail Leng at dleng@media.ucla.edu.