“Every time congress makes a law, it’s a joke. Every time congress makes a joke, it’s a law”.
Will Rogers
A fitting ending to the 111th Congress was having Stephen Colbert testify regarding migrant workers. The Christian Science Monitor had a story on this bizarre episode entitled Stephen Colbert Congressional Testimony: Why Was He Invited?
He was invited by the subcommittee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, a liberal Democrat from California representing a very liberal congressional district. She thought that inviting Colbert to testify would get some publicity for her subcommittee. Well it certainly did that! Colbert’s testimony was so off-color that Steny Hoyer Democrat Majority Leader in the House on Sunday said: “His testimony was not appropriate. I think it was an embarrassment for Mr. Colbert more than the House.”
I could not disagree more. Colbert’s testimony was entirely appropriate. This Congress has been a complete joke. In the face of great economic hardship and government fiscal policies that threaten the economic well-being of the American people for generations, this Congress has indulged in an orgy of drunken spending that has had zero positive impact on the economy. The people would have been better off if Congress had done nothing rather than what it did. Someone who at least makes people laugh like Colbert is a harmless clown. This Congress is populated by harmful, unfunny clowns and their bad jokes in the form of legislation have been a plague on this country. Thank Heavens this Congress is coming to an end, and having a professional clown address it is the perfect ending for this bad farce.
The only language truly fitting for this Congress is that uttered by Oliver Cromwell, and may my Irish ancestors forgive me for quoting that “bold, bad man”, at the dissolution of the Long Parliament on April 20, 1653:
It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter’d your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil’d this sacred place, and turn’d the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress’d, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.
In the name of God, go!
Well, he got it half right – it was inappropriate, but the House Democrats were more embarassed (or shamed?), not Colbert.
Yet, Colbert did have some more serious moments.
I think all this “controversy” around his opening statement is rather silly. It seems as some would say there is no room for humor in Congress and it’s subcommittees. I was amused, and I also understood his point.
I thought Colbert’s “testimony” was at once brilliant and poignant. If one allows oneself to cut through the satire, one will see that he makes some important points, whether or not one ends up persuaded by the implicit argument he is making from them. Overall, I do not think it is the case that his testimony was a joke or off-color. Colbert is too clever to waste the opportunity.
Because I have not and will not listen to Colbert’s “testimony,” I have no view one way or another regarding its substance. The man is a comedian, and I am no more interested in his political opinions than those of my barber. The fact that Congress so routinely takes an interest in the views of Hollywood celebrities is ridiculous. If he is making fun of them then they plainly deserve it.
I watched his opening remarks and thought they were reasonably well done. He was a little off-color and rude in some of his responses in the Q&A session, but he also broke character to explain his reason for appearing and concern for immigrants as the least among us. For some reason Drudge decided to make this a top story for a day or two, so there was a lot of media coverage, but I don’t think there was anything particularly newsworthy.
The man is a comedian, and I am no more interested in his political opinions than those of my barber.
Out of curiosity, whose political opinions do you think are worth your interest and what is your criteria? Why not be interested in the political views of a comedian or barber (or bus driver or lawyer or professor or home-schooling parent or…)?