We all know that Stephen Colbert's Colbert Report is a satirical parody of shows like the O'Reilly Factor and Glenn Beck, but who do you take more seriously, the class clown or the guys that think they are educating America?

Caitlin Park

Following Beck's rally, an online campaign on Reddit was undertaken to make the most popular post be one pleading for Colbert to do such an event and rally that was similar to Beck's. Yesterday, he and Stewart hinted they might possibly be having a rally, and now it seems they are. Do you think Stephen Colbert should hold his own Beck-like Rally in DC?

George Davis

On 10-30-2010, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are having a rally in DC. Listen to the video as Jon explains what it is about. Will you go or would you go if you could?

George Washington

Some members of Congress took offense at Stephen Colbert's Capitol Hill testimony on Friday - do you think he was funny...or inappropriate?

Larry King

Earlier this year Glenn Beck held a controversial rally in our Nation's Capitol, this weekend Daily Show and Colbert Report host's Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are holding a joint Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear. Which of these will rallies was/is more important?

Caitlin Park

Who is the best comedic presenter on Comedy Central?

Karen Bogart

Stephen Hawking stated in 2010: "There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works." Do you agree with Hawking? Will science win?

See related polls:

1. Stephen Hawking on Larry King: Should Religion and science be treated separately?

George Washington

Sarah Palin began a bus tour on May 29 to visit historical sites throughout the Northeast United States. Her website sarahpac.com contains updates on her visits to monument like the Liberty Bell and Ellis Island. The blurb on her site explains the "One Nation Tour" as "our new campaign to educate and energize Americans about our nation's founding principles," but some commentators wonder if it isn't about a different campaign -- a presidential campaign. 

The Huffington Post has an intelligent analysis of Palin's role in the Republican landscape. Toward the end of the article the journalist looks at her odds against the other viable candidates, including Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty, complete with support percentage breakdowns.  The article also observes, "If the former VP candidate does not decide to run, the bus tour and the film could be seen as an attempt to hang on to relevance." Real Clear Politics opens their coverage with the statement, "In a move designed to propel her closer to a presidential run, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will set out on a bus tour." Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert also had fun speculating on Palin's intentions.

So do you think Palin's tour is preparation for a presidential run? Or just an attempt to keep her from fading out of the public eye?

Eleanor Brown

Every morning I give myself half an hour to drink coffee, lay around in bed and watch The Daily Show episode from the night before. I don’t get Comedy Central but lucky for me, they post the previous night’s episode on their website every day. Watching the same Rogaine commercial over and over is worth it to get my Jon Stewart fix. I think I’ve seen every episode that’s aired this year.

As for The Colbert Report, the spin-off that began in 2005 and airs after The Daily Show in nearly every market and which is just as easily available online, I haven’t seen a single episode this year. Maybe I should give it another chance, but I so prefer Jon Stewart’s straight man to Stephen Colbert’s doofus act. I liked him a lot better in Strangers with Candy. (Hey, is that yet another Brilliant but Cancelled show? We’re approaching enough titles for a Round 4, people!)

The Daily Show began airing in 1996 and originally Craig Kilborn hosted the show. Jon Stewart took over in 1999 and shifted the focus from pop culture to politics and current events. The show describes itself as a fake news program, and the writers and creators have often disputed claims that The Daily Show is a main source of news for many young people. It’s not my main source of news, but it definitely supplements my understanding of current events, and the commentary is really sharp and thoughtful.

The Colbert Report… I don’t watch it, so I don’t have much to say about it. Anyone have any arguments for or against Stephen’s spin-off? I know it’s a popular show and it has eclipsed The Daily Show in ratings and Emmy nominations in the past. I can’t find any current numbers. Here’s a funny article from 2007 comparing the shows. So who’s your favorite?

Eleanor Brown

Hawking recently argued in 2010: "There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works." Do you agree with Stephen Hawking? Are religion and science fundamentally different?

See related polls:

1. Stephen Hawking on Larry King: Should Religion and science be treated separately?

2. Stephen Hawking: Will Science Win?

 

George Washington

How was the Earth created? Do you agree with creationism, evolution, or do you think the two are not exclusively correct? By this I mean you believe there is truth in both the biblical account and scientific accout. They don't necessarily contradict each other.

See related polls:

1. Stephen Hawking on Larry King: Should Religion and science be treated separately?

2. Stephen Hawking: Will Science Win?

 

George Washington

Stephen Hawking says God was not needed for creation. Do you think God created the universe?

Larry King

Occupy Wall Street began as a movement targeting the crooks on Wall Street. For over a month now, people have taken to the streets and created camp sites in protest to illustrate the extent of their frustration.

What began in New York City as a movement deeply angered specifically at the financial district has now spread to 462 locations in the United States and the World and has broadened its scope to include every political and economic actor belonging to or serving the Corrupt Establishment and their unfair policies. The following is a list of issues/movements that have spawned from the Occupy Wall Street Protests (note - some of the names given below were invented here for convenience):

• Occupy Congress
  
• Occupy Corporate Media
  
• Occupy the FED
  
• Occupy Marines
  
• Occupy Homelessness
• We Are the 99 Percent
• Occupy Together
• Occupy Student Debt

So far there has been no serious outcry levied towards those that frame the corrupt political and economic policies in a a dishonest manner that misleads the general public into supporting the messages and strategies advocated by our government and media. Simply stated, think tanks study how to best present policies and issues to the public to gain the most support. They do so through the use of Focus Groups and Polling in which they present an issue/policy in many different ways by packaging different words and phrases that essentially mean the same thing, and then evaluating how people react to the different word and phrase packages. Finally, after having collected the data, the think tanks use the information to craft the message and strategy using the terms and phrases that are most likely to lead to the most support.

A simple example of how think tanks operate can be seen in the October 24, 2011 episode of the Colbert Report. Stephen Colbert invites the conservative messaging guru Frank Luntz to help him communicate his message that "Corporations are People" for an advertisement for his Colbert Super Pac. Luntz uses a focus group for the study, and defines them as having "25 people" that "react on a second to second basis, to visuals, to words, and it is the most precise methodology for understanding what communication works and what doesn't."

Luntz presents the focus group with the blunt form of Colbert's message and asks them to raise their hand if they agree with the statement "Corporations are People." After nobody raises their hands, he asks them what they think and receives responses such as "corporations pay-off our politicians" and the entities "are getting away with murder." The Study Group unequivocally rejects the message.

After conducting the study testing the reactions of people to different ways of phrasing the message, Luntz crafts the following phrases/slogans:

• Corporations are human
• Corporations are people, but the question is will they be American people or Chinese people
• People are corporations

As can be seen, the underlying policy remains the same, however, the message is crafted differently and in a way that is more agreeable by the general public. In the first new phrase, he simply changed the word people to human. In the second suggestion, he creates a distraction from the actual message by playing with people's patriotic sense and creating an imagined threat that if the corporations don't become American people, then America will lose them to the Chinese. All Luntz does in the third suggestion is reorder the phrase which makes the actual message's intent more vague. So even though people reject the message "Corporations are people," they can still be steered into supporting something they disagree with by merely repackaging the message in less blunt terms.


Two other practices that think tanks help our government get support for their corrupt and morally bankrupt policies is by priming the public into believing or supporting an issue before the politicians begin advocating it, and then once our politicians begin advocating it the members of the think tank serve as experts in the media on the issue. In the video provided, Bill Maher explains how it was think tanks that incubated the necessity of having to go to war with Iraq and how easy the war would be. Specifically, neoconservative think tanks, The Heritage Foundation and The Project for a New American Century strongly advocated for invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein for many years prior to the actual Buch administration taking office. For example, in 1998, The Project for a New American Century wrote President Bill Clinton a letter pushing him to start the war.

For at least four or five years, neoconservative think tanks were trying to nudge the US President into invading Iraq. At the same time, they were selling the myth of an imminent threat of attack on US soil by Saddam Hussein to the American public. The reason this is so vital is because of the influential role their constant drumming of an impeding war played on the American psyche. After repeatedly hearing what a threat Hussein was, Americans came to accept this as fact. So after 9/11 happened, it was easy for the think tanks, many of the members of The Heritage Foundation and The Project for a New American Century had now become a part of President Bush's cabinet, to fabricate a link between Al Qaeda, 9/11, and Saddam Hussein. Americans had been primed to accept this as fact by the think tanks due to their role as "expert" on the issue in the media, and after listening to all the "experts" on our news repeatedly warn us of Saddam's imminent threat it made that link seem perfectly logical. "Of course Saddam had something to do with 9/11. He has been threatening to attack us for all these years according to the 'experts' and media."

So basically what made it so easy for Americans to get behind an unnecessary and very costly war in Iraq was because they had been primed with false information, and because of the roll the same think tanks play as issue experts in our media.

The purpose and roll of think tanks is to study and develop policies to be later advocated by Politicians. They study the effect of using different words and phrases to say the same thing and then use the arrangement that was supported most by the public. They also serve to prime the public into believing or thinking a certain way on issues. And finally, the members of these think tanks play the roll of "expert" on certain issues in the media.

Essentially a think tank's purpose is to deceive the public into supporting their cause through the use of word choices or groupings arranged in a manner that is already known to be receptive by the public, and then flooding the public with constant arguments in favor of and that support their position on the issue. They play the role of intermediary between the public and the politicians, but play on the side of the Politicians while pretending to advocate policies that are good for all.

In layman's terms, they figure out how to craft a message to get the public to support terrible and often unethical policies. They are directly involved in and are actually the primary institutions responsible for getting the public to support horrible polices that go against the public good. It is because of this that the Occupy Wall Street movement needs to include a position against think tanks.

It is time to Occupy Think Tanks!!!

Occupy Think Tanks

Bible Fellowship believe the world will end on Saturday, May 21, 2011 after monster earthquake starting at the international dateline spreading around the world hitting each time zone at 6:00 PM.

A. K.

Today we have some Brilliant but Cancelled odds and ends. Three of the shows I’m familiar with and fond of. The other one I choose rather randomly from TV without Pity’s excellent Brilliant but Cancelled archive. Feel free to take a look at that archive, refresh your memory of your favorites and suggest contenders for Round 5! Or maybe I should start categorizing the shows by genre and put ones I’ve already featured head to head. What do you think? Anyway, for today:

Strangers with Candy ran for 30 episodes and featured the excellent Amy Sedaris, Stephen Colbert and Paul Dinello. The series was inspired by after-school-special, scared-straight type videos, and it turned that genre on its head. Probably not for everyone (my mom would hate it), but if you can get past (or embrace!) Jerry’s grotesque facial expressions, it’s hilarious and occasionally heartwarming.

Undeclared was Judd Apatow’s project right after Freaks and Geeks. Sadly, it too got cancelled after 17 episodes. Many of the Freaks and Geeks cast made appearances on Undeclared – Seth Rogan, Jason Segal, and Busy Phillips all had roles. Linda Cardellini, Lindsay from Freak and Geeks, would have had a role had the show continued. Although Undeclared didn’t capture me like Freaks and Geeks did, I’m a sucker for this crew.

Popular was a WB high-school comedy-drama that aired 43 episodes. Ryan Murphy, who went to create Glee, was responsible for this gem. I watched this show when it aired and I haven’t seen it since but I remember loving it. It was much more clever and ridiculous than most shows in its genre.

Southland. This is a fresh wound, or so I hear. All I know is that Ryan from the OC is on it, and NBC decided this cop drama set in LA was “too gritty” to continue. Lame. The show ran for 23 episodes, aired from April 2009 to May 2009, at which point NBC promised a second season, only to cancel the show in October right before the premier. 

Brilliant but Cancelled Round 1, Round 2, Round 3

Eleanor Brown