• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Colbert Offers Comedy Shtick in Farm Workers Testimony, Fails to Amuse Lawmakers

Well now............I can certainly understand why most of the house members didn't even flinch and crack a smile... It seems Mr. Colbert doesn't know how to control what comes out of his mouth. But when you stop and think about it, neither do some politicians, preachers, professors etc. and on and on we go..... But that's what you get when you allow a commedian into a political house of ill puke. That's what they do. It comes natural to them to spiel out the gobbily goop because that's what they are used to doing....He showed his ass and allowed the world to see he was a racist. If it didn't know before, it sure as heck does now.....

I'm sorry, but it was known before he went that he would be testifying in character. Also I didn't hear anything racist. Do you have something to back that up or are you talking about where he said he didn't want his tomatoes picked by a mexican? If so, it might help to listen to what he said after that. Believe me, I am not a Colbert fan, but I don't want to see anyone treated the way Beck and Limbaugh are everytime something is taken out of context.
 
I think it's less likely that the media (which is made up of individuals who probably like Colbert) has some ridiculous vendetta against Colbert and more just that Congressional hearings about actual important issues are not the place for TV comedians to perform skits.

In terms of numbers, how much do you think illegal immigrants affect the price of food?

Colbert's testimony was "in character" his facts were not.
Colbert to Congress: What would Jesus do about migrant farm workers? [VIDEO] | Grist
~snip
Kudos to Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert for spotlighting how schizophrenic Americans are when it comes to an unpopular issue -- immigration -- despite how these much-maligned migrant workers are the linchpin of America's beloved cheap-food system.

Colbert appeared with United Farm Workers (UFW) President Arturo S. Rodriguez today to testify before Congress for a hearing called "Protecting America's Harvest" held by the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.

He testified in character about a day he spent working in the fields, having taken up the UFW on its dare to American citizens "take our jobs." It was apparently a rough day for the comedian: "Please don't make me do this again. It is really, really hard ... Apparently, even the invisible hand doesn't want to pick beans," he told Congress.

You tell me how much you think our food would cost if the labor were by US citizens?
 
You tell me how much you think our food would cost if the labor were by US citizens?
Our economy is set to enable and really entice immigrants to our country. It isn't that Americans aren't willing, it's more like - why should they?

About the Colbert thing, had the law makers paid attention (like we pay them to do), it would have been funny. They were afraid to laugh as it might send the wrong signal and offend someone. Besides, it was no where near the joke of the Iraq war hearing. Unsure what folks are complaining about...
 
Our economy is set to enable and really entice immigrants to our country. It isn't that Americans aren't willing, it's more like - why should they?

About the Colbert thing, had the law makers paid attention (like we pay them to do), it would have been funny. They were afraid to laugh as it might send the wrong signal and offend someone. Besides, it was no where near the joke of the Iraq war hearing. Unsure what folks are complaining about...

The problem people are having is two fold. He was testifying in character making light of a very serious issue. It was not like past celebrities who believe and are being serious in their cause.

The second issue is with the economy as bad as it is with as many issues in front of Congress we spent over 100k an hour listening to a comedian in character testifying in front of the Senate. I'm sure the money and time could have been spent better.
 
The problem people are having is two fold. He was testifying in character making light of a very serious issue. It was not like past celebrities who believe and are being serious in their cause.

The second issue is with the economy as bad as it is with as many issues in front of Congress we spent over 100k an hour listening to a comedian in character testifying in front of the Senate. I'm sure the money and time could have been spent better.

While it is a serious issue, it's not so serious that a little humor can't be added to it. One can still make fairly valid points in a humorous way. I think you should lighten up a tad.
 
While it is a serious issue, it's not so serious that a little humor can't be added to it. One can still make fairly valid points in a humorous way. I think you should lighten up a tad.

I wouldn't mind humor but couldn't they get Lewis Black? Colbert is just... weak.
 
Tell them that

Crime victims of illegal aliens


If you were in a border state you wouldn't find the prospect of trivializing this issue funny at all.
I believe you may have missed the entire point of Colbert's statements. There was nothing trivial about it and the satire was actually not bad. Because they didn't respond to him, his timing was off making it not seem funny.

His argument was two fold:
1. We are in a global economy.
2. Make it attractive so Americans will want the job

I disagree with #2, but always enjoy a good Colbert satire - it's good for the ears...of corn.
About #2 above, I say we need to make it LESS attractive for immigrants to want to be here to begin with.
 
I believe you may have missed the entire point of Colbert's statements. There was nothing trivial about it and the satire was actually not bad. Because they didn't respond to him, his timing was off making it not seem funny.

His argument was two fold:
1. We are in a global economy.
2. Make it attractive so Americans will want the job

I disagree with #2, but always enjoy a good Colbert satire - it's good for the ears...of corn.
About #2 above, I say we need to make it LESS attractive for immigrants to want to be here to begin with.

I don't believe I missed the point at all. Lets look at his words:

"This is America. I don't want a tomato picked by a Mexican. I want it picked by an American, then sliced by a Guatemalan and served by a Venezuelan in a spa where a Chilean gives me a Brazilian."

And:

"America's farms are presently far too dependent on immigrant labor to pick our fruits and vegetables. Now the obvious answer is for all of us to stop eating fruits and vegetables, and if you look at the recent obesity statistics, you'll see that many Americans have already started."

From The Detroit News: DETNEWS | Weblogs | The Watercooler


I'm not seeing the humor in either of those statements. And when he ignores the crime and human trafficking results of pushing more illegal immigrants into this country so farmers can exploit cheap labor I believe he is trivializing the issue by ignoring some of the key parts of it.


I agree we need to make it less attractive to work here illegally but the result of illegal immigration is not just cheap labor but all the factors from strained resources of hospitals and schools to the crime they bring with them. All of this must be put on the table for an honest discussion on the issue.
 
Last edited:
I agree we need to make it less attractive to work here illegally but the result of illegal immigration is not just cheap labor but all the factors from strained resources of hospitals and schools to the crime they bring with them. All of this must be put on the table for an honest discussion on the issue.
Absolutely. I could not agree with the above statement more.

However, you are adding context that was not at the discussion to begin with.

Illegal immigration is a strain on just about everything in our economy. Crime, education, labor blue and white collar and even politics. The question is if you de-humanize them (treating inhuman - throwing them out because they are "bad people") or do you fix the problems (like NAFTA, welfare, drivers license, free college education) that gives them incentive to come here to begin with? I vote for the later.
 
in times like these...

what's next, al franken as stuart smalley testifying on substance abuse?

snl's sendup of ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS is hilarious at 11:30 pm, it really is

but it would NOT be funny in front of bitchy barbara boxer

a day after max baucus, the gatekeeper, announced there's not enough time to address the bush tax cuts, leaving the economy in always greater uncertainty---will there be a vote, won't there be, middle class only or higher earners too, maybe in lame duck...

leadership can't even state its stance, as october nears, on the bush tax cuts...

only 3 days after rushing dadt onto the floor hidden inside some bigger bill only to bellyflop, ripping the hearts of rainbow chasers coast to coast...

one thing this forum at its finest can show you is just how much our gay neighbors and friends CARE about gender issues

just look at this week in news---bob woodward's tell-all exposes the president's pursuit of obama's war is purely political

the staff is jumping ship like that dude on the titanic who donned a dress

the georgetown town hall, described the next day by the grey lady as "a therapy session for disillusioned obama supporters," was taken up by question after question of this caste---do you find immoral working for a profit, when will you stop whacking wall street like a pinata, are you preparing americans to buck up for cuts in services in social security and medicare, do your elite education and personal style prevent you from really feeling what americans are going thru, how can i continue to defend you when i'm exhausted...

obama at the un dais declared the door open to iran, then our delegation walked out on the hateful holocaust denier with whom the president still purposes to parley

the clintons began making their move

the president couldn't more than 2/3 fill the ballroom of the roosevelt hotel in nyc, even at 50 bucks admission, and then was heckled mercillessly by rightfully umbraged gay protestors who feel strung along, played, betrayed

these are serious times

colbert wasn't funny, what he passes as clever is hackneyed, heard a thousand times

the only thing that might have been comic to some is the venue

politics is big and small, it's whatever hits the gut

and this, colbert's expert testimony before zoe lofgren's justice, to your more sober neighbors, comes as a suckerpunch

this image will not fade

and consider its proximity to november

it too closely characterizes the smug sanctimony and smarminess of the 30-something elitists and professional leftists who think they're so clever and know so more than not only THEIR moms but every mom on the block

leadership, due to events like these, comes across as orbiting some OTHER planet, perhaps uranus

party on, progressives, you know best

and laughter is golden
 
Absolutely. I could not agree with the above statement more.

However, you are adding context that was not at the discussion to begin with.

Illegal immigration is a strain on just about everything in our economy. Crime, education, labor blue and white collar and even politics. The question is if you de-humanize them (treating inhuman - throwing them out because they are "bad people") or do you fix the problems (like NAFTA, welfare, drivers license, free college education) that gives them incentive to come here to begin with? I vote for the later.

Treating them as inhuman is extremely important to stop from the way they are transported to the US to how they are treated by the employers. There is no debate there, I completely agree.

I also believe the facts not discussed by Colbert as the crime, money and jobs lost here in America is inextricably linked to what he touched on. Leaving it out trivializes the issue as a whole by only addressing the side from the perspective of the illegal immigrant and not the US civilian hurt by his arrival and what he/she brings with them.

Enforce the laws. Export the illegals when found. Shut down sanctuary cities, punish the employers who hire and abuse them but do not let sympathy circumvent the law while ignoring the pain many illegals cause to our society.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily. Social conservatism is an ideology that may or may not include government. I personally believe that traditional values should be taught but not mandated by the government.

True, I'll give you that. Social Conservatism practiced individually does not tend to subvert freedom. However, Social Conservatism when practiced in politics and government does tend to subvert personal liberty. A simple glance at Iran and Saudi Arabia is sufficient evidence for that. And our history has Puritans banning **** left and right because it was immoral in their eyes.
 
There was a time i thought Cobert was kind of funny but he's become a total and complete fool. If you just read the following transcript from his sorry embarrassing appearance on Capital Hill, will agree that he is in need of serious attitude adjustment of a good B***h slapping to get it through his dense or empty head that some things in certain palces are just not funny worth a damn.



Why didn't they just have Bill Maher come and call John Conyers the N word when he ask Colbert to leave.

This is a sick puppy to think being a racist is funny ever.

A clown testifying before clowns. How amusing.
 
I didn't really think it was funny.. but I don't think Colbert is funny all the time. It's either hit or miss, and it was miss for me. But if one of the representatives actually offered to give Colbert the Brazilian, it would have been worth it comedy wise.
 
True, I'll give you that. Social Conservatism practiced individually does not tend to subvert freedom. However, Social Conservatism when practiced in politics and government does tend to subvert personal liberty. A simple glance at Iran and Saudi Arabia is sufficient evidence for that. And our history has Puritans banning **** left and right because it was immoral in their eyes.

You never cease to create your goofy facts, with no proof to back up your silly claims.

You of course are welcome to you own opinion but you can never have your own facts.
 
Colbert's testimony was "in character" his facts were not.

If he wanted to appear and discuss it seriously, it wouldn't be such a huge deal. When's the last time that a comedian/actor testified before Congress in character?

You tell me how much you think our food would cost if the labor were by US citizens?

You were the one who claimed that it would raise prices a bunch, so I'm asking you to tell me how much they will increase. You don't appear to have any idea.
 
You tell me how much you think our food would cost if the labor were by US citizens?

Not much more. I can tell you from experience.

How about you? Can you accurately tell me how much more I pay for my produce that is farmed, harvested, and delivered by citizens?
 
If he wanted to appear and discuss it seriously, it wouldn't be such a huge deal. When's the last time that a comedian/actor testified before Congress in character?

Absoltuely correct. It was the fact he decided to play in character that made it unacceptable.

And it begs the question, did he lie under oath? I deoubt he believes everything he said in character.

You were the one who claimed that it would raise prices a bunch, so I'm asking you to tell me how much they will increase. You don't appear to have any idea.

There was a documentary on this I saw somewhere that really blew that argument out of the water claiming that the amount of spending by the farmers on labor is a small percentage of their overall cost.
 
If he wanted to appear and discuss it seriously, it wouldn't be such a huge deal. When's the last time that a comedian/actor testified before Congress in character?
April 2002
Elmo.PNG


Besides, shouldn't the folks concerned about this whole Colbert thing be calling and bitching on the congress person that invited him in the first place?

I mean, the dude spent *ONE* day out in the field to make a comedy show and some genius invites him to congress expecting what exactly?
 
April 2002
Elmo.PNG


Besides, shouldn't the folks concerned about this whole Colbert thing be calling and bitching on the congress person that invited him in the first place?

I mean, the dude spent *ONE* day out in the field to make a comedy show and some genius invites him to congress expecting what exactly?

I was waiting for someone to bring this up.

Elmo #1 isn'ta real person and his cause was to increase funding for music education, hardly a controversal topic.

#2 This was in 2002 well before the serious economic woes we face now

#3 The topic was no where near as controversial as this one is.

Am I excusing it? No. It was a waste of money and a stupid idea but the context and timing cannot be directily compared to what we witnessed this week.
 
shouldn't the folks concerned about this whole Colbert thing be calling and bitching on the congress person that invited him in the first place?

I mean, the dude spent *ONE* day out in the field to make a comedy show and some genius invites him to congress expecting what exactly?

that IS what we're saying, sir

america is crashing and congress is orbiting uranus

and they don't even know it

THIS leadership can't even say whether it will or will not extend the bush cuts

it can't commit to cuts for only the middle class or, on the other hand, for all americans

it can't declare WHEN it will decide to decide

the sober and serious in times like these search for that shred of certainty upon which they can proceed

instead baucus boxes up the bush cuts while zoe lofgren invites the equivalent of stuart smalley to testify as an expert on the topic that might as well be substance abuse

and the palsied speakeress, in her temporary position, approves

it is what is

party on, progressives

put that self stroking sanctimony on display

you know best, for 36 more days
 
April 2002
Elmo.PNG

Thank you, I didn't know about that. I think that's equally inappropriate.

Besides, shouldn't the folks concerned about this whole Colbert thing be calling and bitching on the congress person that invited him in the first place?

I mean, the dude spent *ONE* day out in the field to make a comedy show and some genius invites him to congress expecting what exactly?

Just looked it up and saw that he was invited by Zoe Lofgren, Chairwoman of the Committee. Ugh.
 
Back
Top Bottom