South Carolina moms versus Stephen Colbert – moms ticked off at candidate Colbert

Oh my gosh. This group of South Carolina women don’t seem to know who Stephen Colbert is. They don’t seem to get what he does for a living and some pretended to know who he is.

It’s rather crazy that a roomful of moms don’t get political satire, or the underlying message about the insanity of political spending.
CafeMom sponsors these political get togethers for women to discuss US election issues.
These woman did not show the satirist warm southern hospitality. About 100 women gathered in Myrtle Beach called him a liberal, a dandy, crazy, irrelevant, and silly. Colbert has announced on his show that he is running for president of the United States of South Carolina.”
One person in the video identified him as a comedian. One. Does the audience understand his faux presidental candidate run, or where they playing a stereotype to the camera? I dunno, I think some of the respondents were plants.

Last time I went to the US, Mrtyle Beach was my destination. I love it there, once I cross the border I have a hard and fast personal rule not to discuss politics or religion, especially when I get into the south. Maybe that’s a good rule.

About Bene Diction

Have courage for the great sorrows, And patience for the small ones. And when you have laboriously accomplished your tasks, go to sleep in peace. God is awake.
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to South Carolina moms versus Stephen Colbert – moms ticked off at candidate Colbert

  1. Bene Diction says:

    Pat Paulsen was a comedian who ‘ran for President’ on The Smothers Brothers show. He played it deadpan also, and played it laughs and protest
    He got protest votes.
    Wiki:

    Paulsen’s name appeared on the ballot in New Hampshire for the Democratic Primary several times. In 1996, he received 921 votes (1%) to finish second to President Bill Clinton (76,754 votes); this was actually ahead of real politicians such as Buffalo mayor James D. Griffin. In 1992, he came in second to George Bush in the North Dakota Republican Primary. In the 1992 Republican Party primaries he received 10,984 votes total.

  2. Torontonian says:

    I watch Colbert and Jon Stewart every night and both
    programs are top notch political comedy. Stewart gives
    the more penetrating interview and Colbert’s “self-
    importance” clouds his interviews.

    Each of them gets great media coverage in mainstream
    and internet media. It’s almost impossible to not know
    what they are all about. And that fact speaks unfavourably
    about those women in the Palmetto State.

    Perhaps a test for voter eligibility should be awareness
    of issues and candidates.

    I truly feel sorry for those women though; their lives must
    be devoid of fact and filled with God knows what.

  3. sassy says:

    When asked to name good corporations, many said “Amway”!!!!!

  4. Rick Hiebert says:

    I think that whenever Colbert is the papers, they say he’s not on the ballot. Could be wrong though…

    I’d read abour Paulsen in the recent book on the Smothers Brothers Show, but I hadn’t seen any of him as of yet. Fortunately, YouTube can help us out…

  5. Rick Hiebert says:

    Robert Kennedy was scare…or had a great dry wit:

  6. highrpm says:

    some of the moms sounded well informed as to who s cowbell is–and pls allow them their choice of humor. (i find him disgusting (and i even like, read and respect andrew sullivan and christopher hitchens.)) but more disgusting is to go along with the mainstream media-hatched meme of the stay-at-home-homeschooling-moms as somehow lamebrain victims of their sex-crazed and paranoid religulous husbands or whatever else. (fortunately, my ex-wife had the self-confidence and intelligence to dump her sex-and-religous-crazed husband after completing her 20-year sentence to being a full time mom, homeschool teacher, and sexertainer.)

  7. Susan says:

    I see corporations in general as entities. Not so much about people in general. More about their associations. Corporations tend to have their associations and their special interest. So, when the associations and lobbyist set the standard, where does that leave the people?

    I think the associations that are tied to the corporations tend to influence the effects, that can make a business more political and less distinct in reguard to unity, like a family. I don’t think they started out that way.

  8. Bene D says:

    Wendell Berry: Corporate Personhood
    http://www.blakkatz.com/spellcast/blog/?p=3002

    “The folly at the root of this foolish economy began with the idea that a corporation should be regarded, legally, as “a person.” But the limitless destructiveness of this economy comes about precisely because a corporation is not a person. A corporation, essentially, is a pile of money to which a number of persons have sold their moral allegiance. Unlike a person, a corporation does not age. It does not arrive, as most persons finally do, at a realization of the shortness and smallness of human lives; it does not come to see the future as the lifetime of the children and grandchildren of anybody in particular. It can experience no personal hope or remorse, no change of heart. It cannot humble itself. It goes about its business as if it were immortal, with the single purpose of becoming a bigger pile of money. The stockholders essentially are usurers, people who “let their money work for them,” expecting high pay in return for causing others to work for low pay.”

  9. Mark Byron says:

    If you don’t mind an agrarian low-tech lifestyle (which is Berry’s MO, if I recall), you can do most things with just small partnerships and sole proprietorships. Anything bigger either requires government or a corporation to get the money needed, and if you want big and creative, we’re talking corporations, since creativity isn’t a government strong-suit.

    Without proper management and oversight, they do lean towards the soulless.

    This current crop of super-PAC that Colbert is railing against is more than a bit sick, big money that doesn’t have to face the voters directly; candidates can hide behind the hit-and-run activities of “their” super-PACs and say “I didn’t authorize it nor can I, since it’s independent.”

    However, we’ve yet to see the Democratic super-PACs come out to play yet, since they can hold their fire until they see which of the Republicans makes it out of the primary. The slop from that war this fall will spill over up your way into Canada, it will get so messy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>