Email
Tumblr
Digg
Youtube
Strangers With Colbert: Secret Past of News Host Raises Questions
Twitter
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Stumble
RedditStrangers With Colbert: Secret Past of News Host Raises Questions
How well do you know Stephen Colbert, that charismatic tv host that you unwittingly let into your family rooms five nights a week? When his hot breath of political fervor and Doritos wafts over your face, do you say, “It’s just comedy, it can’t hurt”? Well, not so fast my friends. Like a fresh mint, I am here to offer you parents and children a closer look at this man’s murky past that should make you even more afraid of The Colbert Report. I also think it’s about time that Stephen Colbert come clean about his involvement with the offensive tv show, Strangers With Candy, and admit how it launched him on the road to a new brand of deceptively radical liberalism. “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” (Proverbs 28:13).
Where No Man Has Gone Before
Recently, I broke the story about the extreme form of cynicism hidden behind Colbert’s chuckling facade. I also dissected the fanaticism of his followers, who idolize the tv talker beyond reason (a story that was quickly followed up on by the New York Times). Many people commented that I didn’t understand Colbert’s comedy, the he’s simply doing a parody of conservatives like myself or Bill O’Reilly. But my argument is much deeper than that, people! Colbert is at heart an anti-spiritualist materialist and democrat. Behind the laughs, he teaches an extreme form of skepticism. And he profits handsomely from it. The end result is that he forces upon the young a distrust and outright hatred towards time-honored American values of freedom, the Constitution, Christianity, states’ rights and manifest destiny. The “doublespeak, laziness and opportunism” that is his hallmark poses a direct challenge to the goodness of our country as a beacon for the world to witness. Worse still, he encourages drug use, apathy and has a highly questionable desire to be surrounded by youths. Do we really want this stranger alone in our family rooms with the next generation of Americans?
Fanatics “Stalking” Stephen, Reports New York Times
Colbert would not be as much of a threat to America if it were not for the intense dedication of his followers. Apologists have tried to characterize them as genial tv watchers who happen to enjoy the show, but in a recent New York Times exposé (on the heels of my own work), an executive at The Report’s parent company stated, “They not only talk, but they stalk.” Another wearily noted, “It’s a cultlike phenomenon,” while scientific studies have found Colbert, “more powerful than Oprah.” This is intensely frightening when you understand that Colbert has a tight grip on the coveted youth demographic and can manipulate them to his radical whims.
Equally frightening, tens of thousands of Colbert’s followers have joined forces and have come out of the closet with their obsession, releasing a statement that notes:
“When it comes to the passion of the Colbert Nation, we’re pretty much the hardest of the hard core – the WristSTRONG bracelet wearing, vacation to New York taking, IAAASCY reading, Ben & Jerry’s eating, Donors Choose supporting, chocolaty nougat center of the Colbert Nation. We watch most every show, and a large part of our online life consists of cavorting with other fans of the ‘Colbert Report’.” –Nofactzone.net, 8/25/09
Colbert on Candy
Strangers With Candy was not only one of the most unspeakable shows ever to air on television, but it gave birth to the modern-day Stephen Colbert. The content was so disturbing that a thousand sex offenders locked in a room with a thousand crayons could do no worse. Its star, Amy Sedaris, is the epitome of a sex radical, a real life Marquis de Sade in horrible make-up, a woman rumored to be now living out of a van in Manhattan’s gay district, hustling sugary confections to the morally bankrupt.
Strangers With Candy is worse than flying from JFK to Singapore in the middle seat between two chatty Scientists. It’s worse than do-it-yourself rhinoplasty. It’s even worse than college improv. — Kyle Smith, New York Post
Pervasive crude and sexual humor and sight gags, including inappropriate sexual situations involving an adult and teens, brief partial female nudity, an obscene drawing, drug content involving minors, a running homosexual gag, recurring crude language and profanity. RATED O — MORALLY OFFENSIVE! — The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Stephen Colbert’s started off small in this tv holocaust, but rose up through the ranks to be one of its major stars. Though Colbert has tried to suppress his role in Strangers and it is never mentioned on his current show or in any official biographies, his association with Sedaris planted the seeds for his later Colbert Report character.
Stephen played Chuck Noblet, the painfully homosexual high school teacher who has a fascination with guns and covert same-sex hookups. He professes a right-wing, pro-Christian ideology and is cruel to his wife (who is so unimportant to him that she never appears on screen). Clean-cut but homely, he seems a bit simple on the surface. In fact, watching early episodes reveals Colbert’s mediocre acting skills. Like a deer in the headlights, he constantly squints at his cue cards and inadvertently stares dumbfounded into the camera. But like many fragile young men, Colbert found the warm glow of tv notoriety addictive, and resolved to do everything and anything to stay in the spotlight, nearly bankrupting his young family in the process.
At the bony hands of Sedaris, Colbert was a quick learner. In one early episode he has animalistic sex with a costar in a filthy bathroom like some truckstop hustler. In another, he screams at a young girl, “Shut your dirty little mouth!” which quickly became his catchphrase, memorialized on hipster t-shirts across America. He found laughs with a prop gun that he named “Sweetness,” an anti-gun rights gag he continues on The Report. He exchanged herpes with one male character and then celebrated the transmission with a dance. Colbert also openly fantasizes about rough biker sex while a priest is present (a foreshadow of his gay bear fetish?), showers in the nude with his fellow teachers, and ultimately mocks a beautiful antique doll collection, like some demon who has no pride in America’s rich heritage. This vicious acting was a fearsome prelude to the dangerous and disingenuous character he would fully realize on The Colbert Report.
I want to digress here a moment to mention another of the notorious characters who burst out of this infectious disease of a show, if only to exemplify the sadly predictable trajectory of the Sedaris curse. His name is Jimmy Tickles and even though he is a child on Strangers, his adorable name should not fool you. He first appears as a cute mirror to our own wonderful children– cherubic and kind with a touch of innocence. Quickly, Tickles evolves into something sinister- an ambisexual nymph of high perversion, with bulging eyes that crawl all over you like some horny monkey. He delights in beatings and sexual disease. He screams and flutters. He is a great offense to heterosexuality. It is no surprise, then, that Tickles has become a sort of superhero among the most flamboyant of big-city homosexuals and a real life pusher of candy (Starburst) to children (see the sin here or here). As with Colbert, the perversion comes full circle!
On Strangers With Candy, Stephen Colbert first realized that nice guy antics weren’t enough to make him rich and powerful. He had to push the envelope for tv attention and Sedaris was the perfect teacher. He was taught to be a hypocrite, professing one set of moral values while acting on the most degenerate of his physical impulses. Politics weren’t yet part of his shtick- that came at the hands of Jon Stewart, a cliché of a New York Jew with a dollop of culture on his lapel. On Stewart’s The Daily Show he learned that talking politics gave him access to new realms of media attention, but his ego and lust for power grew so big that Stewart eventually forced him out (but with the business acumen of so many of his forbears, Stewart retained partial rights to the Colbert character, thus assuring him a steady income no matter how much of his market share his old protégé steals).
Recently, The Georgia Banner-Herald made an impassioned plea to have Stephen Colbert’s media awards rescinded. The New York Times piece mentioned above exposed the darker side of Colbert’s audience. It seems the liberal press just might be catching on to the threat this man poses to true American values. Isn’t it about time that Colbert comes clean about his secret nasty past? Don’t we as a country deserve that much? How much longer can he keep this hidden from the mainstream media? My own article elicited incredible emails and message board postings from people who are becoming disenchanted with Colbert. Other have stated openly that the show has lost touch with the times and that advertisers have grown weary of the star’s political bias (not to mention the possibility of a scandal erupting over his young male interns). It is too early to tell what the future holds for Stephen Colbert but as one commenter noted, “The anti-Colbert movement only has upwards to go! And then go some more up!”
[CaRP] XML error: Invalid document end at line 33 -
2:08 am
I thought his show was already cancelled? Oh, this is just offensive.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
6:31 am
Cancelled? Far from it.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
9:16 am
of course its cancel, this show is no longer on tv and stephen even says sedaris is living in a truck or soemthing.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
12:13 am
Strangers With Candy was cancelled due to advertiser disinterest and the high cost of insurance for the star’s lifestyles. The Colbert Report has not yet been cancelled, it’s on hiatus for a month, though Comedy Central’s contract with the show has not yet been renewed and may not be, depending on the ratings.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
1:57 pm
Well thank goodness!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:16 pm
Yes. I’m sure The Colbert Report isn’t making Comedy Channel ANY money… Given the tiny proportion of America that watches it. Should be cancelled any day now…
Waiting… any day… this time for sure…
At Janice: “This show is only popular because people watch it.”
Wow. Thanks for clearing that up. So they should be watching taped episodes of the O’Reilly Factor for their news? Is all TV immoral, or just that which you disagree with?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:22 am
Oh wow, I hate clowns! Its disturbing seeing Colbert in that costume galavanting around like that! He’s kinds of a weird fellow, isn’t he? Is he married or what?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
9:14 am
I personally like clowns in the right situation, like the circus. They make the breaks between the lion acts and acrobates fun hearted and the kids love them when they get close! But sometimes they are too much weird and I wouldnt be happy if i saw one walking down the street.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:18 am
Clowns can really turn a simple birthday party is something extraordinary! But you have to be selective, there are many different types of clowns, and many different people who are clown performers.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
2
10:06 pm
COLBERT WAS A MUCH BETTER CLOWN THAN YOU’LL EVER BE, ASSLICK.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
1
4:54 am
Wheres Abe’s tight ass
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
6:30 am
“He professes a right-wing, pro-Christian ideology and is cruel to his wife (who is so unimportant to him that she never appears on screen).”
FAIL. His wife appeared in the episode entitled “To Love, Honor, and Pretend”.
“Quickly, Tickles evolves into something sinister- an ambisexual nymph of high perversion, with bulging eyes that crawl all over you like some horny monkey. He delights in beatings and sexual disease. He screams and flutters. He is a great offense to heterosexuality. It is no surprise, then, that Tickles has become a sort of superhero among the most flamboyant of big-city homosexuals and a real life pusher of candy (Starburst) to children (see the sin here or here).”
Uh…what? While Jimmy Tickles is very clearly a homosexual, or at least bisexual, he does not delight in beatings. He very much dislikes the beatings that he gets for being gay, however, the other students (and even teachers) find it hilarious when he gets beaten. And do you know why? Because all the characters on the show are fucked up. And he does not delight in sexual disease. I don’t think that his character has ever had sex, let alone even kissed anyone. And so what if he’s in starburst commercials? At least he doesn’t invite young boys out to the woods to “minister” to them.
“It is too early to tell what the future holds for Stephen Colbert but as one commenter noted, “The anti-Colbert movement only has upwards to go! And then go some more up!””
You just used a quote from the shockingly illiterate JaniceFun.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
9:10 am
Claire, so this is the sort of garbage you love on tv? Well thats prettys sad. It is just showing what the liberal media corporations will do anything for a buck. This is practicaly pornography and the sort a thing a child should not watch for a minute or get all sorts of mixed up in his head. Can you imagine a young girl in front of this show thinking its just a teenage school show? it would really mix them up. i hope its not on during the daytime. And its no surprise to me Claire that this is what your parents raised you on. How old were you when you first started watching this garbage, 12? Thats practically child endangerment right there. It was very intresting to see this is how Colbert came from. His funny man personality on tv today is just a shade off from this filthman. I dont find this funny at all.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
10:07 am
“Claire, so this is the sort of garbage you love on tv?”
No, it’s the sort of garbage I love on DVD.
“This is practicaly pornography”
Far from it. Get a grip.
“Can you imagine a young girl in front of this show thinking its just a teenage school show?”
That’s why it comes with a warning that it’s intended for mature audiences only.
“i hope its not on during the daytime.”
They rarely show it on television anymore, but when they do, Comedy Central runs it during the day time. It’s pretty much the equivalent of when Comedy Central used to air reruns of SNL during the day.
“And its no surprise to me Claire that this is what your parents raised you on.”
If by “raised” me on, you mean that I grew up watching it, you couldn’t be farther from the truth. I was raised on shows like “Rugrats”, “Spongebob”, “Star Trek The Next Generation”, “Leave it to Beaver”, “Andy Griffith”, “Gilligans Island”, “Are You Afraid of the Dark”, etc. I was not permitted to watch “South Park” until I was almost 14 years old, and I did not start watching “Strangers with Candy” until I was 17 years old, which was a year ago.
“Thats practically child endangerment right there.”
Don’t you dare accuse my parents of child endangerment. My parents were very good at setting rules for television watching. I was seven when “South Park” first came out in 1997, and I was practically oblivious to what it was. Sadly, some of my friends had parents who didn’t care that they watched it, so my friends were watching “South Park” while I wasn’t even allowed to watch the Nickelodeon cartoon “The Angry Beavers” because my mother thought that they were actually angry.
“I dont find this funny at all”
Then don’t watch it, genious.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
10:15 am
Well its still to young Claire. I think 14 is a delicate age. And whats with that woman Sedaris she is so horrible looking and her makeup is just awful. How did she make it on tv? They really made a mistake their. She is not pretty at all!!!! ANd its like she has some kind of mental problem that eye of heres is always squishing and blinking? Maybe I dont get it. But this is pretty terrible and not funny. She looks like a real old fashoned hooker from way back in the day. What a weird shape body she has and that hair needs some work and color.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:09 pm
“Well its still to young Claire. I think 14 is a delicate age.”
It’s better to start watching things like South Park at age 14 than at age 8. Face it, kids these days are having sex at age 14. Be glad that all I was doing at age 14 was watching South Park, not having sex, experimenting with drugs, etc.
“And whats with that woman Sedaris she is so horrible looking and her makeup is just awful. How did she make it on tv? They really made a mistake their. She is not pretty at all!!!! ANd its like she has some kind of mental problem that eye of heres is always squishing and blinking? Maybe I dont get it. But this is pretty terrible and not funny. She looks like a real old fashoned hooker from way back in the day. What a weird shape body she has and that hair needs some work and color.”
The character of Jerri Blank is SUPPOSED to look terrible. She’s an ex-junkie, ex-prostitute who’s trying to turn her life around by restarting highschool at age 46. Here’s a picture of Jerri Blank:
And here’s a picture of the actress, Amy Sedaris:
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
8:15 am
Goddamn but you must have a hard on for this guy since this is the 2nd article in a week you’ve posted about him.
How many times a week do you jack off to his show? I bet you’ve got hours and hours TiVo’d, dontcha?
Praise or Condemn:
4 
0
9:05 am
This is obviously not the real me posting above people!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
9:18 am
I’d like my own pussy if I were that flexible.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
9:20 am
WHO ARE YOU?????
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
9:22 am
I think its pretty obvious that I’m you. Rocket scientist.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:14 am
I am sick to death of these sick rants from Stephenson Billings. It appears to me that HE’S the one who is obsessed with Stephen Colbert, as all his posts seem to be about him and he has even become a member of the ‘Colbert Nation’ forum so that he can spout his evil diatribe on there too. Well news for you sir, you aint welcome!!!
Stephen Colbert is a decent married man with 3 children who teaches at his local sunday school at weekends and knows the bible inside out! Get your facts straight!
Do you actually know what the word ‘acting’ means? Or do you confuse what you see on the tv/cinema screen for reality? When you see an actor killing someone on screen does it makes them a murderer in real life?????
Honestly, you need to get a life, sir!
Or is this obsession with Mr. Colbert a desperate ploy to get him to notice you, because secretly you are in love with him??????
Praise or Condemn:
3 
1
9:18 am
dont call him sir, i think it makes him anrgy. and no, i don’t think its right that colbert is around all these children like you say.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:04 pm
Who wouldn’t be obsessed? Colbert’s a total stud!
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
12:17 am
I am not obsessed with Colbert, I’m just a journalist who makes a living writing about important aspects of contemporary culture. I am sorry that you are sick Mrs. Colbert, maybe you’re suffering from melancholy or the vapours? It happens to women in August. And do not accuse me of anything untoward for posting a response to my honor on Colbert’s own forums. May I remind you that you are the one sending me secret emails in the dead of the night?
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:29 am
Jon Stewart is funny, and it has always struck me that Colbert is just following in his footsteps. His show isn’t as deep, nor are his guests as interesting. Stewart’s correspondents are first rate, and Colbert was great (and actually more interesting than he is now) as one on the Daily Show. I just think the single joke that Colbert is Bill O’Reilly is just worn thin. It’s really not that interesting anymore. And I’m a Christian and a conservative, but I still like watching Comedy Central (is that so wrong?). Clearly, I find a lot of bias and a lot I don’t agree with, but Stewart is good at catching politician and celebrities when they contradict themselves. Actually, he spends more time making fun of Fox news hosts than anyone else, and they’re not the best representatives of true conservatism in this country. There’s a lot more to Republicans and not all of us believe in Glen Beck.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:45 am
In tv and movies today actors and actresses seem to justify doing anything wild or immoral saying it’s just a character and not the real me. But what about how that character affects your soul and what if it encourages people to try risky behavior? Like the car ads that show people driving like race car drivers or heavy metal music that’s about drugs and suicide. And then people follow the example and get in accidents or teens hang themselves or bring guns to school. But on the other hand it can be good, like Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, showing the dangers of that type of lifestyle and generally educating the public. That isn’t the case here because it seems clear that Sedaris and Colbert are just in it for the money and shock value, and a deeper political agenda.
When you do have actors who make a moral commitment to do a moral good with their work, the Hollywood establishment really takes it out on them. Just look at Mel Gibson and the Passion of the Christ. After he professed his faith publicly and risked his own money on making the film, the ranks of liberals blacklisted him out from future projects. Even James Cazivel, the man who played Jesus in the film, has seen his acting roles limited. The liberals are angry about his work with Gibson and have blacklisted him, too. So on the one hand you have people who do good deeds and get punished and on the other you have actors who push the boundaries with sex and nudity and they get more and more TV and a cult-like following.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
3:18 pm
No, I think it when Mel Gibson got drunk and went on an anti-semitic rant that did more to hurt his standing in Hollywood than any of the movies he made (or a public profession of faith).
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:05 pm
Why are you trying to make this about bashing the Christian faith? I’ll have you know many good Catholics died defending our Jewish friends from the atheist hands of Hitler and Stalin.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:24 pm
The Hollywood leftist boycott of Colbert happened long before his unfortunate dwi incident. And he has followed this up with alcohol treatment and several public apologies. I think it’s unfair to single him out for one tiny mistake. Look at all the crazy things the liberal celebrities do and no one cares? How about Paris Hilton or Britney Spears? Gibson’s tiny mistake was nothing compared to them.
And Adam is right, under George Bush’s guidance Christians and Jews united under many, many common causes- anti-abortion, anti gay special rights, peace and authority in the Middle East, etc. so I think it really doesn’t stand up in the water when you claims Christians are anti-Semanitic.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:25 pm
Whoops! I meant the Hollywood boycott of MEL GIBSON, not Colbert
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:58 pm
Yes Hollywood loved Mel Gibson until he talked about God and then they all kicked him out of their inner circle. And Colbert gets a free pass with the liberal media? Big surprise there!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:22 pm
“But on the other hand it can be good, like Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, showing the dangers of that type of lifestyle and generally educating the public.”
Sorry, but the point of “Philadelphia” was to encourage tolerance of homosexuality and AIDS victims, as well as show viewers that it’s wrong to fire someone from a job or discriminate against them in other ways simply because that person is gay and/or has AIDS. I have seen that movie many times, and I can tell you that Tom Hanks would not agree to be in a movie that degrades the homosexual lifestyle. In fact, the movie deals with homophobia and COUNTERS it by showing the transformation of Denzel Washington’s character from a homophobic lawyer to a sympathetic friend of Tom Hanks’ character.
Any lover of the movie “Philadelphia” would be insulted at how you twisted around the message of the movie to agree with your agenda.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
4:58 pm
How dare you accuse Tom Hanks of supporting the gay agenda and child endangerment.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
8:23 pm
“How dare you accuse Tom Hanks of supporting the gay agenda and child endangerment.”
First of all, Tom Hanks is a liberal. Second, who said anything about child endangerment? Have you even seen the movie? It’s about the struggle of a gay man (Tom Hanks) who is fired from his job after his bosses learn that he has AIDS. He takes the company to court with the help of an attorney (Denzel Washington), a new father who, at the beginning of the movie, does not agree with his wife’s acceptance of homosexuals and is reluctant to take on Hanks’ case due to his fear of AIDS and dislike of gay people. He soon opens his mind and his heart and, upon seeing Hanks’ affection towards his partner (Antonio Banderas) understands that two men can truly love one another. Although the movie does address the known fact that AIDS is a serious, terminal illness and that unprotected anal sex is a risk factor for contracting it, it also addresses that the love that two men can have for one another is just as beautiful as the love that a man and a woman can have for one another. It taught audiences that homosexuality is not a sickness, and that discriminating against someone for being gay and/or having AIDS is not acceptable. The protagonists (Hanks and Washington) were victorious in their case against the company, and the movie ended with Hanks’ character succumbing to the disease.
As for child endangerment, obviously Hanks does not support that, because his character was NOT a pedophile. He was a homosexual who was in a loving relationship with his adult partner as well as an awesome uncle. Your implication that homosexuality and pedophilia are interchangeable is incredibly offensive and hurtful to the millions of homosexuals who have never touched a child.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:32 pm
Claire, it sounds like you cut and pasted that from a movie review. Try to form your own opinions once in a while instead of downloading them from Roger Ebert. I saw that movie totally differently, though I didn’t watch the whole thing when it was on TV, I remember very well the controversy surrounding it and it was the first time Aids was publicly discussed and directly connected with the excesses of the gay lifestyle. I believe a generation of children were very informed by this film about those dangers, even though you and Roger Ebert have you contrary opinions.
I didn’t realize Hanks was a liberal. I have enjoyed his work greatly. The Seattle movie, Apollo, Forest Gump, the children’s cartoons. He has been very pro-American in his work and I respect that. It goes back to my point before about chosing roles that are affirming and respect solid moral choices. I believe he has done that for the most part.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
1:21 am
You’re a real piece of work, Claire. The point of the movie was to show that gays spread sickness and shall fall to weird afflictions, just as warned in the Bible. Also, again, Tom Hanks is not gay. He has no wish to lay with a man or to have improper relations with children. Tom Hanks is a good American, not gay.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
1:27 am
Also, just to add, two men cannot love each other. They are just in love with Satan and the sin he’s implanted in their heart. Also, did the movie go over the fact that they did not live happily ever after because their gay immune systems were compromised?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
4
10:08 pm
You people are such hypocrites. Do you even have a clue how many closested homosexuals there are in the church, both as parishoners and clergy? Your intolerance will be your downfall.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
1:02 pm
Colbert is hot and smart hot! Too bad he plays for the wrong team.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:37 pm
Gay? And he’s too wimpish looking for me, like a librarian or a florist. I think a man should look like someone has done a hard day’s worth of worth, lifting heavy objects or commanding troops or being that leader at the office. Strong with a build that fills out a flannel shirt and says, I’m ready for a beer and my wife. That’s just me, but in an ideal world.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
12:03 am
I do not believe Stephen Colbert is openly gay. From what I’ve seen reported he has a wife and child, but who knows? It wouldn’t be the first time a man has dipped into sin behind his wife’s back. And his show has a strange amount of homosexual content, much more than your average show.
As for his physique, he does have that nebbish quality about him, something unhealthy and French in its skinniness. America is the land of bounty!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:46 am
“As for his physique, he does have that nebbish quality about him, something unhealthy and French in its skinniness. America is the land of bounty!”
Just because America is the land of bounty doesn’t mean that everyone has to be a fat boar like yourself, Stephenson.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:20 am
Claire, don’t be impolite. I am not a boar. I am an older man for whom a physique such as mine is entirely appropriate. And Colbert does come across as a wee bit wimpy.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:47 pm
Hey, StephensonB, dude! Do you know that the piece from the Georgia Banner-Herald was a joke, right? But, then again, I think you know that. The author of the piece said this:
“I appreciate the comments, everyone. I really do. And I guess what all of this proves is that perception is reality.
First of all, please understand that I get it. I understand the “Colbert Report” is satire. And this editorial was intended to be satirical as well. I guess we can argue about how well I did — or didn’t do — in penning a satirical piece. But honestly, I thought the references to “The Golden Girls” and “The Facts of Life” in the SECOND PARAGRAPH of the editorial were a clear and early tip-off to the fact that the editorial was stepping outside of the bounds of seriousness.
Similarly, I thought the use of phrases like “pseudo-intellectual affectation” and “erratic” to describe Colbert would be similarly heavy-handed tip-offs to the intended humor of the editorial.
Which brings me to the point I made above about perception being reality. For a lot of people in this community, the Banner-Herald’s editorial page represents the very definition of conservative commentary. And at some point in this newspaper’s not-too-distant past, that was certainly true. However, in more recent times, the newspaper has moved toward a more centrist outlook. For example, the editorial page has been consistently critical of Republican Congressman Paul Broun. It has accused a GOP-dominated state government of actively working to dismantle public education.
Yet it seems to me that the assumption behind many of the comments posted here is that a supposedly hidebound conservative editorial page must, in fact, be serious in its “backhanding” of Colbert. To the extent that perception colored the views expressed here, the problem is ours. To the extent it did not, well, the joke’s on you.”
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
11:59 pm
Interesting that you post this. From what my very reliable sources have informed me, the liberal establishment clamped down on this journalist and he was forced to retract his statement. He took the coward’s way out and claimed it was all a joke. But I believe his original points still hold true, Colbert is condescending and disrespectful and no media organization in their right mind should be honoring him in any way. It only feeds the attention he so desperately seeks.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:23 pm
wow, Mr. Billings, I’m not sure where to begin. First off, it seems that while you’ve found some great clips that will shock your readers to support your moral assertions, where are your specific claims like Mr. Colbert nearly bankrupted his young family, Mr. Colbert spends an inordinate amount of time with young children, and Mr. Colbert has a possible pending sex scandal involving his young male interns. These are three serious claims you have made but offer no support for.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:49 pm
Oops – I should have proofread. I meant you make a few assertions that I have not come across before and appear to give no support. I’ve never seen Colbert with children in a questionable way, and though he developed a gay character for a sketch comedy show, I think asserting he has a pending sex scandal with male interns on his show is a serious accusation to make without providing proof.
Andy Nelson – wow. Your comment – “God does not ordain the marriages of gays, even though some American states defy the laws of our Christian nation and worship at the throne of Satan by allowing these sickos to get marriage licenses. I don’t know what the punishment for that will be, but it’s going to be severe.” This comment is so offensive, as a Christian it is so offensive. Can you really see Jesus walking around calling men and women “sickos”? When you and I, I assume heterosexual people, commit any sin in our hearts, even lusting after another person who is not our spouse – are we sickos, are we worshiping at the throne of Satan? No, we are not. We are all sinners in comparison to a holy and perfect God, equal in our need for Christ, and his forgiveness is offered to us regardless of how entangled out lives have gotten.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
6:00 pm
“How well do you know Stephen Colbert, that charismatic tv host that you unwittingly let into your family rooms five nights a week?”
Obviously you don’t know him at all. The show is only regularly broadcasting 4 days a week Monday – Thursday and is actually replayed 7 days a week. LOL
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
12:05 am
Your condescending and annoying comment is a mere technical point. Sure, that tv station re-airs his show about 50 times a week because they have so little money to create or license any interesting content so instead they fall back on what they have lying around. But formally, the show airs at nighttimes 5 days a week. The rest are re-runs. Thanks for taking time out of your day to be rude.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
1:19 am
Actually your quite wrong again. They are played at night (11pm E) only Monday – Thursday and are replayed in the day time (6 pm E) Tuesday – Friday and play through the day time throughout the week randomly.Wow you complain about a technical point, but if you were actually doing a study and you would FAIL. Next time you try to do some reporting make sure your get technical facts correct then I wouldn’t need to waste your time or mine. Plus Comedy Central has numerous successful shows that have some of the highest ratings in cable which include Drawn Together, Colbert, Daily Show, South Park, Original Standup, Chapelle Show (No longer on the air but record DVD sales and replayed and royalties continue to come in). This article I say FAIL!
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
2:08 am
So I made a mistake about the show airing ONE SINGLE NIGHT a week. Big deal. You really need to calm down and take a breath.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
2:00 pm
whatever he’s on its too much!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:07 pm
STEVEN COLBERT is a GREAT AMERICAN! He is a MIGHTY CONSERVATIVE ICON. He may have been LIBERAL *hiss* once, but he, like PAUL, had a ROAD TO DAMASCUS MOMENT!
ACTS 9:3-19
He should have CHANGED his NAME to PTEVEN!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:58 pm
what the heck does any of that mean? you should formlate your ideas clearly before you type,
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:56 pm
JaniceFUN, I cannot walk with the LORD and walk with YOU.
I will be praying for YOU!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
8:53 pm
“Strangers With Colbert: Secret Past of News Host Raises Questions”
Anyone else find that title ridiculous? There’s nothing “secret” about his role as Chuck Noblet on Strangers with Candy. Stephenson seems rather high and mighty and is trying to make it seem as though he dug up some horrible secret from Colbert’s past that nobody knew about before.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
12:10 am
Claire, I suggest you try and actually finish my articles before you post your talking points memos. I clearly (very clearly!) state that the show Strangers With Candy is never mentioned on The Colbert Report and Colbert himself never gives credit to gutter Sedaris for creating his current character, even though so many of his gags were birthed there. And by pointing this out I believe I am revealing something secretly frightening about Colbert’s emotional evolution as a desperate attention seeker who will do anything for the bucks.
Also, the show is not mentioned in his official information and his executives never talk about it. Clearly, the obsessed wing of his fanatical fanbase has discovered this secret of his but even after my first article came out many, many people posted on different message boards comments like, “I wish Colbert would talk about Strangers!”. So here I am talking for him.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:33 pm
The reason Stephen never mentions Strangers with Candy on the show is because Stephen plays a character. And this character would never under no any circumstances take part in anything like “Strangers with Candy” (I guess in that respect the two of you agree).
When the “Strangers with Candy” movie came out Sedaris was a guest on the show (and on the Daily Show, by the way) and Colbert featured it in his June 27, 2006 segment of “Movies That Are Destroying America”.
And while it is kind of a running gag that Stephen’s character claims his role was not played by him but by Kevin Spacey, each time he was clearly recognizable in the clips they showed.
And by the way, what is that nonsense about Amy living in a van? When Stephen said something like that, it was a JOKE. Geez… that guy is a comedian, what else does he have to do to not get taken serious when he says something obviously silly…
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
9:46 pm
I dont know what passes for pretty in Cambridge square, but how can you find this creature atractive? Even more so when you understands the dire things she stands for?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
12:24 am
If Colbert were a crossdresser, I imagine him looking something like this. How wonderful this dreadful woman exposes herself to so many camera lenses! I don’t understand her narcissism in the face of an all too obvious grotesqueness. Does she live in a world with no mirrors? There is just something unwholesome about those eyes and that mouth. She reminds me of something only a pill-popping trucker could love, if only for ten minutes.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:02 am
“I don’t understand her narcissism in the face of an all too obvious grotesqueness. Does she live in a world with no mirrors? There is just something unwholesome about those eyes and that mouth. She reminds me of something only a pill-popping trucker could love, if only for ten minutes.”
Need I remind you that she is dressed as the CHARACTER of Jerri Blank in those photos?
p.s. “all too obvious grotesqueness”? The pot’s calling the kettle black.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:11 pm
Amy is a very, very beautiful woman and incredibly smart and probably one of the funniest people around. She has dated several famous celebrities who do not find her at all “grotesque.”
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:36 am
Look at those EYES! I believe we are entering a NEW AGE of REPTILES!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:35 am
“Claire, it sounds like you cut and pasted that from a movie review. Try to form your own opinions once in a while instead of downloading them from Roger Ebert.”
Excuse me? I cut and pasted nothing. Those are all my OWN words and my OWN opinions.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
8:58 am
Haha, yeah right. I was thinking some of the words you used there seemed a bit removed from a woman’s ability and command of language, but just wanted to be polite.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
3
12:31 pm
Excuse me, Adam, but I’m an A student in English/Language Arts. I read a lot and have a good command of the English language.
Your statement is simply more proof that you will never get married and you will remain childless until you die.
If you were standing in front of me I would not hesitate to pull out the hedge-clippers and castrate you.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
3:59 pm
That’s not very nice. I would give you a big hug and then pray with you, so that Christ’s love may fill your heart.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
5:45 pm
“That’s not very nice. I would give you a big hug and then pray with you, so that Christ’s love may fill your heart.”
And I would murder you. End of story.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
6:14 pm
See, that’s what I’m talking about. I train so that I may save the lives of my fellow man. I pray for them too. I try to greet you as my friend, and you threaten my life as if you’re an urban girl without morals.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:01 pm
BUSTED!!! Laughing out loud!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
5:51 pm
I certainly hope you people realize that plagiarism is easy to prove in today’s technology age. All you have to do is type in (with quotation marks) a sentence (or even a whole paragraph) of my “Philadelphia” synopsis into google. If I had indeed plagiarized some other reviewer, that exact quotation would show up in a google search. It does not.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:02 pm
You could have always taken it out of your local paper or magazine. Pretty sad that you can’t even use your own words there, my friend. You also forgot to capitalize Google (it’s a proper noun
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
6:49 pm
“You could have always taken it out of your local paper or magazine.”
Ah yes, because I have tons of newspapers and magazines from 1993 lying around my house.
“Pretty sad that you can’t even use your own words there, my friend.”
You want to know what’s sad? That when a female puts together a well-written synopsis of a movie, you immediately assume that it is plagiarism, even when you can find absolutely no evidence to support your claim. Oh, and for the last time, don’t call me your friend. I’m not friends with people who insult women. And I don’t give a flying fuck that I forgot to capitalize google. Sorry, but the name of am internet search engine isn’t a proper noun in my book.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:44 am
“The point of the movie was to show that gays spread sickness and shall fall to weird afflictions, just as warned in the Bible.”
If they wanted to make a movie that just showed that “gays spread sickness” they would not have had the protagonist (Hanks) receiving justice in a court of law for being fired from his job.
“Also, again, Tom Hanks is not gay.”
Please show me where I said that Tom Hanks is gay.
“He has no wish to lay with a man or to have improper relations with children.”
No shit Sherlock, he’s an ACTOR. And homosexuals do not molest children. PEDOPHILES molest children, and PLENTY of pedophiles are STRAIGHT.
“Also, just to add, two men cannot love each other.”
That is an incredibly hurtful thing to say. Two men and two women can love one another just as much as my parents love one another.
“Also, did the movie go over the fact that they did not live happily ever after because their gay immune systems were compromised?”
It showed Tom Hanks’ character telling his partner that he was ready to die, and then it showed his memorial service. So yes, it addressed the tragic fact that AIDS kills people, but it DID NOT condemn homosexuals. It ALSO addressed the fact that people can contract AIDS many other ways, such as blood transfusions and HETEROSEXUAL INTERCOURSE.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:55 am
Sure, but we all know where AIDS is mainly spread and that’s through homosexuals who claim they are ‘bisexual’, infecting all moving life around them with this condition. That’s why it’s good to find a good, Christian relationship and remain chaste until marriage. That way, you won’t end up dying from complications due to AIDS, just because you were a whore or even worse a person who chose a different sexual role than what our Lord intended.
And please, how can a man love a man? A woman a woman? True love is not based in carnality or the spirit of fornication. It is something that goes far beyond that and is verified by a God ordained marriage. God does not ordain the marriages of gays, even though some American states defy the laws of our Christian nation and worship at the throne of Satan by allowing these sickos to get marriage licenses. I don’t know what the punishment for that will be, but it’s going to be severe.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
12:59 pm
“And please, how can a man love a man? A woman a woman?”
Why must you be such an intolerant bigot? How dare you accuse my homosexual friends of not really loving their partners???
“It is something that goes far beyond that and is verified by a God ordained marriage. God does not ordain the marriages of gays”
How many times must I say it? NOT EVERYBODY BELIEVES IN GOD! GOD IS A LOAD OF SHIT AND THE BIBLE IS BEST USED AS TOILET PAPER! SO KEEP YOUR NOSE OUT OF THE LIVES OF YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS OR ELSE I WILL BREAK IT ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE IN YOUR BODY!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:50 pm
I pray you don’t get struck down with affliction or wind up in hell for what you just said, Claire. And no, it’s in the Bible. People will deny our Lord but they will all day one confess he is Lord. There is no if, ands or buts about it. I just want more people to do it so they won’t burn in hell when they die, much like the gays are bound to do.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:55 pm
“I pray you don’t get struck down with affliction or wind up in hell for what you just said, Claire.”
Don’t pray for me, you sick fuck.
“And no, it’s in the Bible.”
Do I give a shit? No.
“People will deny our Lord but they will all day one confess he is Lord.”
Bullshit.
“There is no if, ands or buts about it.”
Your opinion, dipstick.
“I just want more people to do it so they won’t burn in hell when they die”
I believe I have said multiple times that if there does turn out to be a heaven and hell, I would much rather go to hell than go to heaven with assholes like you. Need I say it again, dick-breath?
“much like the gays are bound to do.”
Fuck off, dicklick.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
12:50 pm
“Claire, don’t be impolite. I am not a boar. I am an older man for whom a physique such as mine is entirely appropriate. And Colbert does come across as a wee bit wimpy.”
I wasn’t aware that looking like a combination of a tub of lard and John Wayne Gacy was appropriate for any age.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
3:51 pm
Why are feminist lesbians always so mean?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
5:46 pm
I’m a feminist but I am not a lesbian. I support gays and lesbians, but I am not one.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
6:13 pm
Beware when staring long into the abyss, for the abyss also stares long into you .
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
6:40 pm
Que?
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
5:52 pm
feminists aren’t mean in general, they’re mean to you, because you treat them shamefully… THEY’RE GOD’S CREATION TOO!
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
5:58 pm
Like one of the authors here said, feminism is destroying society.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
6:07 pm
“Like one of the authors here said, feminism is destroying society.”
No, we’re not destroying society. I’m not one of the radical feminists who think that women are superior to men; I’m a traditional feminist who believes that women should be able to choose what they want to do with their life, be it a mother or a career-woman. I believe that women aren’t baby-machines like you seem to think we are, Adam, I believe that we should receive equal pay for equal work, and I believe that we should have 100% control over our own bodies and reproductive systems.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
6:17 pm
I’m a feminist, and I am a guy… a STRAIGHT guy… many people think I’m helping society…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:18 pm
Well hopefully this well help you out, Oliver.
http://christwire.org/2009/01/feminism-is-destroying-society/
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:52 pm
i believe that women deserve the same rights men do… not that they should rule the world and we be “objects” to them… That would bring them down to our level, we need to be up to their level of respect and love for all…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:04 pm
i miss this show so much. 3 seasons was way too little. they could have gone 5 or 8 years in my book. and colbert wasn’t the only great character there, mr. blackman was just hilarious, i wish he was in more comedy these days and then you have coach wolf and orlando and timmy littlenut! anyone else remember iris puffybush! oh my god, there names were great! but i think my favorite no main character had to be stew the meat man! store clerk: “what are you thinking about today, sir?” stew: “i’m here to buy some steaks. i’m thinkin’ about poontang.”
this show was the awesomest, but the movie was ho hum… they really should have had more of the original characters and it just lost steam halfway through.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:17 pm
Here’s Iris!!!!
And Stew the Meat Man!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:38 pm
oh, ps. that review by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is fucking hilarious! I can just imagine a bunch of bishops trying to sit through this movie!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:06 pm
Hey don’t mess with Jimmy Tickles, he’ll mess you up! Cut you!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:49 pm
You guys are crazy! Where would we be without women? Not even born I bet. You have to stop hating on them, that’s so 1890s. Today women have equal rights, the right to vote, wealth and success, property ownership, and high states of political power. Many countries, with the exception of the weak USA, have had women presidents or premiers. Marge Thatcher! Mrs. Gandhi! Bhutto! The first head of Israel! There’s plenty of them and they did very well for their countries. And they’re our mothers, sisters, daughters and aunts… How could men live with out such helpers and role models?
But this doesn’t have anything to do with Colbert. I don’t even know why this subject came up. He doesn’t hate women, far from it! He interviews and shows great respect towards many of them.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:17 am
Because I’m sure there’s nothing better to worry about and put your time into. Look up Invisible Children on freedocumentaries.org and tell me where your world is at this point in time. Worry about places like that and people who allow such atrocities to happen, not people like Colbert, who, like the rest of us, would be appalled by such hatred.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
12:23 am
Personally I find this whole thing ridicules. Actors act, actors need a way to make money. There is ALWAYS the option of turning the television off if you don’t like what’s playing. By turning the TV off you tell companies that you don’t LIKE watching shows like “Strangers with Candy” or “The Colbert Report” but by sitting there and nit picking at everything you not only attack the viewership, who’ll come back and attack you (as they have) but you tell the company that you’re watching the show. All they see are the numbers.
I assume if you’re watching “Colbert Report” you have the option to change to at least a hundred different channels. So change it! If I find something offensive on television I don’t watch it. It’s a simple concept. Maybe you’re in the minority, but that’s how life works sometime.
As parents, you have the power to tell your children what not to watch. Use that power however you please. You don’t like what Stephen Colbert has to say? Than don’t let them watch it. And honestly, his show is at late at night, put your kids to bed if you’re so worried about them!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
12:31 am
Yes! I agree with Bananas. We have to get the word out to more parents of children to turn off the tv from the Colbert Report and Strange Candy. It’s the parents who are the first step to getting this annoying show cancel. If parents start payng attention and realize how awful these things are to there minds, then they will not watch. This show is only popular because people watch it. So stop watching it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:22 am
Claire you rule!
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
8:08 pm
The Colbert Report = best show on tv.
Praise or Condemn:
3 
0
8:10 pm
“I clearly (very clearly!) state that the show Strangers With Candy is never mentioned on The Colbert Report”
I feel the need to point out that on last night’s episode of The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert made a reference to Strangers with Candy. He was talking to a man about drugs and the man was talking about what his first experience with marijuana was like, to which Colbert replied “Did you think you were a bee and try to squeeze yourself through a keyhole?” That is a reference to the first episode of Strangers, when Jeri Blank gave a popular girl a drug called “Glint”. The girl, totally baked, believed that she was a bumblebee and tried to force herself through a keyhole and ended up in a coma.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1