Steven Colbert to Replace David Letterman

Late night TV viewers are about to get a new choice -- Steven Colbert has been tapped to replace the retiring David Letterman.

Good choice.

< Freedom of Speech: Freedom of Protest | Oscar Pistorius's Cross-Examination >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    A gain for The Late Show (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 12:55:10 PM EST
    Possibly a bigger loss to entertainment overall as fictional Stephen will be no more.

    I am in mourning. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by vml68 on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:33:14 PM EST
    I love the fictional Stephen.

    Many great comedians, who became famous (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Peter G on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:08:25 PM EST
    playing a certain part over and over -- Charlie Chaplin's tramp, Buster Keaton's sad man, W.C. Fields' drunk, to pick three from an earlier era -- got tired of that schtick because their audiences did, but had to break out to remain creative and productive.

    I agree. IMHO, Colbert had a few (none / 0) (#29)
    by vml68 on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 04:57:19 PM EST
    more years before his schtick got old.

    He is extremely talented, so he will do just fine on the Late Show.

    This had me in stitches. Love that wicked sense of humour!


    Proofreading, proofreading, proofreading (none / 0) (#34)
    by Peter G on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 06:23:39 PM EST
    I meant, "before their audiences did," not "because ...."

    Fields (none / 0) (#39)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:05:14 PM EST
    did not play a drunk.

    It was not his character.

    He liked a nip, but he did not play a drunk.


    Me too (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:59:00 PM EST
    But as fictional Stephen would say " I Called it!" many years ago, after his show had been on the air a year or so and it as clear what a great interviewer he is - light years better than anyone on the air now.

    I will actually watch a late night talk show again, and I have not since Carson retired.


    Ya mean... (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:04:00 PM EST
    he's not gonna be in character at all times anymore?  That does suck, and is a great loss to broadcast sarcasm.

    I don't get (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:08:27 PM EST
    this "Colbert in character" thing.

    His intelligence and feeling about things is always apparent - at least it is to me.

    It is apparent in his interviews.
    It certainly was apparent in the way he took Bush apart.

    And he has, imo, a great sense of humor.

    So, what I expect we will see is a very intelligent person, doing terrific interviews and some very funny sketches.

    I'm looking forward to it.


    The network announced (none / 0) (#5)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:05:21 PM EST
    he will not be in character.

    A loss for us... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:07:11 PM EST
    but a blow to Bill O'Reilly's ego as well...ying/yang;)

    So, actually, pretty much nobody knows (none / 0) (#12)
    by Peter G on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:52:24 PM EST
    who this "Stephen Colbert" guy is -- that is, supposedly, the "real" Colbert -- who will be hosting the former Letterman show, and thus no real idea how he will handle it. He gets to start totally fresh.

    I think we get a glimpse from (none / 0) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:04:31 PM EST
    I don't (none / 0) (#38)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:03:13 PM EST
    see a problem.

    Colbert is obviously brilliant.

    And he is a good interviewer.

    This should be good television.


    Great Eric Boehlert tweet (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 06:04:05 PM EST
    < love how the dopes on Fox have been treating Letterman's replacement like it's a cabinet post; this close to calling for confirmation vote

    Link doesn't work on mini. (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 11:41:28 AM EST

    i don't know why (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 12:25:24 PM EST
    it works on my laptop. Sorry.

    It did not work for me at first (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:35:00 PM EST
    Now it does.  Life is strange in pad land.

    Late night (none / 0) (#7)
    by vicndabx on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:10:04 PM EST
    between Fallon and Colbert, going to be hard to choose.

    The bit Colbert did on Fallon's premier re: $100 bet was, IMO, hilarious.

    I just don't see how this works (none / 0) (#8)
    by unitron on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:23:59 PM EST
    There's no way CBS lets him bring the Stephen Colbert character with him, so if he won't be playing Stephen Colbert, who will he be playing?

    If Carson had spent several years playing Floyd R. Turbo for 30 minutes every weeknight, but going by the name Johnny Carson, and was only seen by the public "in character", could he ever have gone on to be anything like the Johnny Carson we knew on a Tonight Show anything like the one we knew?

    The changeover will be happening as the 2016 election stories are starting to heat up, will he be sidelined talking to starlets about their latest movies instead?

    The real Colbert is amazing (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by RonK Seattle on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 09:54:41 AM EST
    Incredible breadth and depth of knowledge, multi-genre culture maven (both pop and highbrow), and a nose for regular folks' emotional pulse.

    Fine interviewer, excellent pre-show prep ethic and work rate, and a great ad-libber.

    It'll be like having Dick Cavett, only incisive and FUNNY.

    Ever seen the Colbert Christmas special? There's a slice of the real Colbert.


    I'm sure (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:32:08 PM EST
    He won't leave irony behind.

    He loves music, politics, film (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 08:00:47 PM EST
    Don't worry about it, he will be fine.

    Not to mention science (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 08:24:16 PM EST
    and is a total charmer to boot. Look up his interview with Jane Goodall from the other night. A classic.

    CBS has to be loving the free publicity (none / 0) (#9)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:31:17 PM EST
    on the hiring of Colbert...

    "CBS has just declared war on the heartland of America." ... Rush Limbaugh

    Murphy's Law... (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by kdog on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:42:54 PM EST
    when Rush is foaming at the mouth about it, you're doing something right.

    you aren't kidding. (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 01:45:50 PM EST

    Rush is doing a great job accelerating the decline of the GOP.


    Longer quote (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:55:59 PM EST
    "CBS has just declared war on the heartland of America," Limbaugh fumed. "No longer is comedy going to be a covert assault on traditional American values, conservatism. Now it's just wide out in the open."

    I think I know he means but it almost sounds like he is admitting that many of  the ditto heads were stupid enough to believe Colberts shtick.


    And dittoheads... (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by kdog on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:10:46 PM EST
    have the gaul to claim minorities and women have a victim complex;)

    I mean I smoke enough dope to kill a pet according to the DEA, and I'm not this paranoid.  What gives?  


    Oh they have perfected the (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:23:15 PM EST
    Victim thong.

    But I'm sure that if you had pets they would be as blissfull as mine.


    Hohhot (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:24:33 PM EST
    Victim THONG sounds a bit sketchy.  

    Victim. THING is what I meant there.


    Haha (none / 0) (#23)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:28:12 PM EST
    I really think victim thong might be much more appropriate in the case of Limbaugh.

    But yeah, conservatives have this massive victim complex.


    I may need to bleach my brain (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:43:29 PM EST
    To rid myself of the image of Rush in a victim thong

    I really wish (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:32:52 PM EST
    He wouldn't speak "for the heartland", since that position does not represent what many, many people "in the heartland" think or feel.

    Maybe he should stick to speaking for the people in New York City and Florida, since that's where he lives.


    Heartland (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:48:03 PM EST
    A popular definition of "Heartland" refers to the red states. That is what Limbaugh is referring to as it is his base.

    The heartland has no special claim to represent the ''real America.''



    So? (none / 0) (#27)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 03:51:10 PM EST
    There still are many people in red states who also don't listen to, nor care for the positions taken by, Rush Limbaugh.

    Limbaugh's Niche: Conservative Men (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 04:15:29 PM EST
    Fully 80% of those who said they regularly listened to Limbaugh's show were self-identified conservatives, compared with 7% who were moderates and 10% who were liberals.

    Fully 72% of those who said they regularly listen to Limbaugh were men while just 28% were women.

    Pew 2008

    If the Red States are red because they are mostly conservative, and Limbaugh's audience is mostly Conservatives, it is fair for him to acknowledge his listeners from the heartland. IOW, he speaks for a majority of people from the heartland. IOW he speaks for the heartland. It is metonymic and reductionist but that is the way representation works. Rough science.

    BUT, you may be arguing that Limbaugh does not speak for conservatives because he does not speak for you. That is another issue.


    See, you were almost sane (none / 0) (#32)
    by sj on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 05:40:38 PM EST
    And then you had to go and finish off with the crazy squeaky.

    Sanity: missed it by "thismuch"


    You Have Nothing But Insults (none / 0) (#55)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 11:29:04 AM EST
    You may want to provide content, not chatter and personal insults.

    I model my comments (none / 0) (#56)
    by sj on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 11:30:28 AM EST
    after the commenter to whom I am responding.

    Just so you know.


    That Explains a Lot (none / 0) (#59)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 11:56:52 AM EST
    Now I know why your comments are so empty. Nothing but 3rd rate imitation.

    Wev (none / 0) (#60)
    by sj on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 12:39:23 PM EST
    You don't like mirrors. Got it. Your attempts at glib cleverness notwithstanding. The written word is, apparently, not your art form.

    I've followed, for example, your Mount Rushmore comments with incredulity. And you have so many of them that apparently you consider that "content". But you know, there's a great gift shop there so...

    Overall... you're funny. And you're really, really funny when you're accusing someone else of chattering. Or not providing "content".


    YadaYadaYada (none / 0) (#61)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 12:58:57 PM EST

    Your idea of a mirror is swishing around some used tinfoil and adding pathetic bluster... reflects much more about you than anyone else.


    If the "heartland" encompasses (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 11:37:29 AM EST
    the Midwest, Limbaugh does not speak for the majority there. Word of the "metonymic.."

    The heartland or Amurka (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 02:33:32 PM EST
    Could use a good war.  Metaphorically speaking.

    The only Colbert that matters... (none / 0) (#30)
    by Dadler on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 05:04:42 PM EST
    ...is the fake right-wing Colbert. The real one, believe it or not, didn't seem to really understand exactly what it meant for him to do that routine at the correspondent's dinner a few years back. He actually said he tried calling Dubya afterward to tell him no hard feelings, but his call wasn't taken. Duh. Dude, did you really just think you were doing some cute bits about Millard Fillmore? This was Dubya, Katrina, Iraq, all those phuckups, and he really thought he'd shake hands with Bush afterwards. I still don't get it.

    But, hey, it's late night TV, it's designed to sell shampoo and beer, which I'm sure it will still manage to do.

    Good luck, Steven.

    Colbert (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by lentinel on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 06:59:40 PM EST
    showed more guts than any member of the press corps.

    He showed more guts than Kerry or Edwards or Hillary.

    He confronted Bush.

    If he called Bush or he didn't call Bush or Bush answered or didn't doesn't mean anything to me.

    He put it to Bush.
    It was a great moment.
    A breath of air.

    And then we sunk back into the day to day reality of a president gone amok, a congress in a coma and a press corps with no heart, no soul and no brains.


    Agreed. And, Colbert (none / 0) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:24:52 PM EST
    was pretty new to it all.  His Col-bear Re-pore started in 2005 and the White House Correspondent's Dinner was in 2006.   His growth and sure-footedness is unlikely to have gone unnoticed by his new network bosses.

    I bet Comedy Central (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 07:27:56 PM EST
    Is not happy about his departure

    I believe that Viacom owns Comedy Channel... (none / 0) (#54)
    by magster on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 10:44:41 AM EST
    ... and CBS.

    Right (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 11:38:19 AM EST
    The "Carl's Junior" effect.

    That was an Idiocracy Joke


    I read about that (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 05:20:04 PM EST
    Hard to know which was sillier.  Making the call or not taking it.

    Bush (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 06:52:38 PM EST
    was so thin skinned with a boulder on his shoulder it was not even funny.  

    Seems Colbert (none / 0) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 05:44:27 PM EST
    recovered by Oct 18, 2013.  He was at it at the Al Smith Dinner.

    At least (none / 0) (#36)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 06:57:13 PM EST
    Colbert has some flavor, and generally the good comics are unable to resist pushing the envelope. I wonder how long the network will let him settle in before its ratings ratings ratings?

    Since he is the most googled late night host (none / 0) (#45)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 08:22:58 PM EST
    over the last six years, it's safe to say they hired him for the ratings ratings ratings.

    Yep. I think this is probably the safest bet (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 08:26:34 PM EST
    CBS had made for a long long time.

    Are we really hitting the T now? (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 08:57:58 PM EST
    I agree with all of this except that.


    If Colbert can bring his ire and pointed wit to bear on the format--turn the monologue into more of an argument or op-ed than a string of lame jokes; invite authors, scientists, politicians, and intellectuals to join him after the celebrities--that will be a boon to himself, CBS, audiences, and the genre. The other possibility--that he becomes another talent stuck behind a stifling desk--is almost too awful to bear. May we not see one of the greatest performers of our generation destroyed by interviewing Bradley Cooper about The Hangover 5.

    I suspect (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 10, 2014 at 09:21:26 PM EST
    He would not have taken the latter deal.  On the other hand I'm sure there is lots of money involved so I hope that is not naive .

    My thoughts exactly (none / 0) (#50)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 06:06:59 AM EST
    It really would be heartbreaking. I have faith he is doing this to  bring something new to the table (and couch), not waste his talent for the big payday.

    I agree (none / 0) (#51)
    by jbindc on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 07:06:18 AM EST
    Because once he makes this leap, he can't go back to being a fake right-wing host. And that would be a shame, because he's hilarious.

    I hope so (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 08:25:24 AM EST
    We shall see (none / 0) (#62)
    by Slado on Fri Apr 11, 2014 at 04:07:34 PM EST
    Just because you're good at one format doesn't mean you will succeed at another.

    The late night game is traditionally middle of the road so he's gonna have to actually take some shots at Obama that are real every novel and a while plus put up with all the silly celebrity interviews.

    He is talented but there are already two good young people doing what he'll be doing.   He had a market all to himself because of his character he'd created.

    Better be careful not to become just another mildly funny guy on late night.