Friday, March 26, 2004

My Media Sources: Yes, I do get most of my broadcast news from radio. But I have seen Stewart's show. Some of his stuff is well written, but he can't seem to decide if he wants to be sophisticated or silly. Sometimes I gape at him, with an expression usually reserved for Saturday Night Live skits, wondering, "Who on earth thought this would be funny?" And nobody -- nobody! -- is worse than Stewart at recovering from a dud or misfire. He sits there waiting, stunned look firmly in place, as though he has no idea what just happened, and any minute now we'll come around to the joke.

I've also heard Shearer's show, and he can indeed be wickedly funny. He can also be strident, a failing that Limbaugh shares. (The strident parts of Limbaugh's show are unlistenable, no matter whether I think he's right or wrong.)

George Carlin is undeniably funny, partly because he's not a liberal. He's certainly not a Republican, but he's got zero patience for the politically correct tropes and feelings-based policies of American liberalism. When he goes sacred-cow tipping, both sides have reason to tremble.

A corallary to your theory might be this: since political humor is typically aimed at the other side of the aisle, conservatives are funny because liberals make good targets -- racing to be called metrosexuals and be "black" white presidents, for example. Conservatives, being so heartlessly evil, make better targets for the outrage and tantrums of liberals -- like when they try to put arsenic in school lunches. Or was it mercury? I forget.

I'm the wrong one to analyze it, of course, since it is precisely the most heartless parts of conservatism that I support.

No comments: