Hollywood Left Behind: Stephen Colbert's Truthiness Will Set You Free

By Vlahos, Keley Beaucar | The American Conservative, October 2011 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Hollywood Left Behind: Stephen Colbert's Truthiness Will Set You Free


Vlahos, Keley Beaucar, The American Conservative


Poor Daryl Hannah. For all of her trouble getting arrested in front of the White House on Aug. 30, she received with nothing but a few tepid "Splash" references and was the butt of a joke in Washington's newspaper of record. Doesn't the former 1980s eye-candy star know that corn porn will beat angry mermaids every time?

It remains unclear whether Hannah managed to bring any more public awareness to her cause--stopping construction of an Alberta-to-Houston tar sand oil pipeline--than the non-celebrity protesters sitting on the sidewalk in front of the White House did. After snarking, "Hannah and her resisters ... arrested for a good cause. Yawn," the Washington Post couldn't be troubled to tell us what tar sand is, much less why we should be wary of it.

In contrast, political satirist Stephen Colbert shows Hannah how it's done. Colbert wants everyone to know how ludicrous he thinks so-called Super Political Action Committees (PACs) are, so he went to the Federal Election Commission June 30 and got the green light to start his own. After taping the tedious proceedings inside the FEC chambers, for use later on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," he emerged victorious in his Bill O'Reilly-inspired alter ego to a press conference outside. As fans held signs that said, "cash and checks only," Colbert declared, "I don't know about you, but I do not accept limits on my free speech. I do not accept the status quo. But I do accept Visa, Mastercard and American Express. Fifty dollars or less, please, then I do not need to keep a record."

Colbert's satire inspired by recent Supreme Court rulings, including the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC, which paved the way for unlimited cash contributions to PACs from corporations, unions, and other organizations-- thus was born the "Super PAC," the hottest buzzword for wily campaign fundraising since the phrase "527 group" hit the scene in 2004.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

"I believe that the Citizens United decision was the right one," he told Politico when filing the FEC papers for his PAC--Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

"There should be unlimited corporate money, and I want some of it. I don't want to be the one chump who doesn't have any."

He may be spoofing, but he's not kidding. Using his wildly popular nightly cable program--which averages 1.5 million viewers a night and beats titans like Jay Leno among the 18 to 34 age demographic--he raised enough money to air two ads during the Ames Straw Poll in August. Taking direct aim at the pandering and the disproportionate resources poured into this quadrennial Midwestern event, the ad, funded and approved by Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, insists in a classic Colbert voiceover that it does better "cornography" than its competitors, including the pro-Rick Perry "Jobs for Iowa" Super PAC.

Colbert's ad goes a step further and asks Iowa voters to write in Perry on the ballot (the Texas governor had not yet declared at the time) by spelling "Parry with an A,' that's 'A' for America, with 'A' for Iowa." The state GOP has so far refused to announce just how many voters did that--but the number of headlines generated by the ad, the bashing Colbert gave to a local television station that wouldn't air it, and news that his PAC's treasurer left to work for Perry have done more for Colbert's crusade than any effort to generate outrage by say, Ben Affleck or Tim Robbins.

"Colbert is not just another comedian with barbed punch lines and a racy vocabulary. He is a guerrilla fighter, a master of the old-world art of irony," offered writer Michael Scherer in 2006, shortly after Colbert's nuclear takedown of President George W. Bush, to his face, at that year's Washington Correspondents Dinner, the annual narcissistic convergence of Washington-Hollywood-Press elite.

"The depth of his attack caused bewilderment on the face of the president and some of the press, who, like myopic fish, are used to ignoring the water that sustains them.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Hollywood Left Behind: Stephen Colbert's Truthiness Will Set You Free
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?