fivera Posted November 1, 2007 Report Share Posted November 1, 2007 Did anyone catch this? I was laughing my butt off. He pulled out a copy of Atlas Shrugged from the Halloween basket. Ill try to post a link when the show clips come online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted November 1, 2007 Report Share Posted November 1, 2007 He once read from The Fountainhead at the end of Stewart's show where they kind of segway between. He was kind of mocking Objectivism, but it was funny nonetheless. " Jimmy, are you sharing a cookie? What did I tell you about sharing? It rewards the weak!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwertz Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 (edited) http://www.ifilm.com/episode/18037?startsWith=2908319 At least it sounds like he (or one of his writers) is at least somewhat familiar with the plot and characters. ~Q EDIT: corrected URL. Edited November 2, 2007 by Qwertz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkWaters Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 The joke itself is amusing. However, I again do not like Stephen Colbert is associating Ayn Rand with Republican buffoonery. Stephen Colbert is a parody of conservative talking heads like Bill O'Reilly. He obvious is very influential amongst the 18 - 30 liberal crowd. I imagine that this small segment will cause college students to not know the difference between Objectivism and Neoconservativism for another five years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 The joke itself is amusing. However, I again do not like Stephen Colbert is associating Ayn Rand with Republican buffoonery. Stephen Colbert is a parody of conservative talking heads like Bill O'Reilly. He obvious is very influential amongst the 18 - 30 liberal crowd. I imagine that this small segment will cause college students to not know the difference between Objectivism and Neoconservativism for another five years. BINGO! You nailed what I've been trying to get across to everyone here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenure Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 *Looks around for Mammon's other posts in this topic* Huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 *Looks around for Mammon's other posts in this topic* Huh? About voting Republican, supporting Neoconserative talkheads, worrying about Objectivism become a fad... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenure Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 (edited) I don't see what this has to do with Objectivism becoming a fad - he isn't honestly supporting Objectivism; if anything, he's criticising by associating it with his Neocon character. Also, I don't think the majority of Americans can't tell the difference between a Republican and a Neoconservative. Heck, over 50% of the population are old enough to remember the Reagan years (I'm basing this off people who would have been about 16 or over half way through his time in office - 16 being a time of great political activity in a person's life). He's no model of a perfect Conservative, but he's not a Neocon either. Edited November 2, 2007 by Tenure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mammon Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 I don't see what this has to do with Objectivism becoming a fad - he isn't honestly supporting Objectivism; if anything, he's criticising by associating it with his Neocon character. Also, I don't think the majority of Americans can't tell the difference between a Republican and a Neoconservative. Heck, over 50% of the population are old enough to remember the Reagan years (I'm basing this off people who would have been about 16 or over half way through his time in office - 16 being a time of great political activity in a person's life). He's no model of a perfect Conservative, but he's not a Neocon either. *sigh* It can be a fad in two ways, 1) A fad to make fun of it 2) A fad where Neocons and other such people use Rands works to back up things she didn't advocate. It's just going to damage the your credibility in the populations eyes because you've been exposed to a stupid stigma. That's why it's a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenure Posted November 2, 2007 Report Share Posted November 2, 2007 (edited) Well, ok, now you're talking about something else. You're talking about people misrepresenting Ayn Rand, and it being popular to do that -- well that's hardly a new thing. People have been doing that since she publicised her philosophy. If someone calls you uncredible (perhaps the word is 'incredible'?) for being an advocate of Objectivism, then ask them what they find wrong with it. Then is the perfect opportunity to correct them, and to show them how the truth has been distorted to them. Some may not listen, but I have a feeling most will, if you simply explain the facts of the situation to them. They won't turn to Objectivism, but they'll at least be willing to hear what it really is all about. My question is - what do you care what the public thinks of you? Do you care that they'll act on their association of you with the distortion of Objectivism they have heard of? Well, why should that be anymore of a problem than their distortions of reality that you already have to deal with? Also, can I ask that you not write out derogatory prefixes to your posts. Edited November 2, 2007 by Tenure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fivera Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 Well, ok, now you're talking about something else. You're talking about people misrepresenting Ayn Rand, and it being popular to do that -- well that's hardly a new thing. People have been doing that since she publicised her philosophy. If someone calls you uncredible (perhaps the word is 'incredible'?) for being an advocate of Objectivism, then ask them what they find wrong with it. Then is the perfect opportunity to correct them, and to show them how the truth has been distorted to them. Some may not listen, but I have a feeling most will, if you simply explain the facts of the situation to them. They won't turn to Objectivism, but they'll at least be willing to hear what it really is all about. My question is - what do you care what the public thinks of you? Do you care that they'll act on their association of you with the distortion of Objectivism they have heard of? Well, why should that be anymore of a problem than their distortions of reality that you already have to deal with? Also, can I ask that you not write out derogatory prefixes to your posts. wow this is exciting, l love this board. ok, this is my interpretation, that stephen colbert used his tv show to promote good literature. as for the viewers or whatever party associations, who cares that is for their interpretation. the show is meant for humor and entertainment, and i think it's great that a good book like atlas shrugged gets publicity amongst all the crap they promote in some bookstores nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 I remember seeing it a long time ago, it was very funny. I wonder though how many of his viewers got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.