CBS Boosts Colbert's 'Mitt the Ripper' Anti-Super PAC Campaign
By Matthew Balan | January 17, 2012 | 18:34
Dean Reynolds filed a glowing report on Tuesday's CBS This Morning promoting comedian Stephen Colbert's mock campaign against super PACs. Reynolds led the segment by stating, "Before we say that a comedian could have no serious impact on a presidential campaign, let us remember that six days after a poll came out here showing Stephen Colbert slightly ahead of Jon Huntsman, Jon Huntsman quit the race."
After inflating Colbert's supposed impact, the correspondent continued by claiming that "so far, Colbert's effort is not displaying what you would call a light touch." Reynolds then played a clip from an ad released by the comedian's "Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow" super PAC, which blasts GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney as a "serial killer. He's 'Mitt the Ripper.'"
The CBS journalist noted that "what's striking about the ad is how it resembles the ones that have been flooding the airwaves, which attack Romney on the one hand....and especially Newt Gingrich on the other." He added that "Gingrich and Romney have insisted they have no control over these nominally-unaffiliated groups, and they say the ads should be removed if they're inaccurate. And so, too, in his way, does Colbert." Reynolds followed this with a clip from Colbert half-seriously remarking on his Comedy Central program, with the laughter of his audience, "So is Mitt Romney a serial killer? I don't know. But that question's out there now."
Near the end of his report, the correspondent stated that "Colbert has found is another way to inject himself into the race," played a sound bite from the latest ad put out the comedian's super PAC, which jokingly endorsed former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain. Anchor Charlie Rose asked Reynolds, "Is Stephen Colbert having fun, or does he have a message that he wants to have some impact?" The CBS personality returned to boosting Colbert:
REYNOLDS: Well, he clearly is mocking the whole super PAC thing. Whether or not the people of South Carolina understand the distinction that is drawn between PACs and super PACs, I think, remains to be seen. But, clearly, it came up in the debate last night, and whether these guys are playing fair, and whether this whole Citizens United case, which allowed super PACs and unlimited, unregulated money to get into campaigns, is a good idea. That's a debate that is worth having, and Stephen Colbert is having it.
The transcript of Dean Reynolds's report from Tuesday's CBS This Morning, which aired at the bottom of the 7 am Eastern hour:
ERICA HILL: This morning, the Republican presidential field isn't laughing about Stephen Colbert, as we hear from national correspondent Dean Reynolds, who's in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. Colbert's super PAC is now running ads for that state's upcoming primary, although, perhaps, not for the person you'd think. Dean, good morning.
[CBS News Graphic: "Colbert Vs. Romney: Comedian Takes Jab At Candidates, Super-PACs"]
DEAN REYNOLDS: Good morning, Erica. Well, before we say that a comedian could have no serious impact on a presidential campaign, let us remember that six days after a poll came out here showing Stephen Colbert slightly ahead of Jon Huntsman, Jon Huntsman quit the race.
REYNOLDS (voice-over): So far, Colbert's effort is not displaying what you would call a light touch. This is from the Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow super PAC, which Colbert is using to mock super PACs in general.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE ANNOUNCER 1 (from Stephen Colbert super PAC ad): If Mitt Romney really believes-
MITT ROMNEY, (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Corporations are people, my friend. (echoes)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE ANNOUNCER 1: Then Mitt Romney is a serial killer. He's 'Mitt the Ripper.' (clip of unidentified woman screaming)
REYNOLDS: What's striking about the ad is how it resembles the ones that have been flooding the airwaves, which attack Romney on the one hand-
UNIDENTIFIED MALE ANNOUNCER 2 (from anti-Mitt Romney super PAC ad): For tens of thousands of Americans, the suffering began when Mitt Romney came to town.
REYNOLDS: And especially Newt Gingrich on the other.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE ANNOUNCER 1: Newt has a ton of baggage.
REYNOLDS: Gingrich and Romney have insisted they have no control over these nominally-unaffiliated groups, and they say the ads should be removed if they're inaccurate. And so, too, in his way, does Colbert.
STEPHEN COLBERT (from Comedy Central's "Colbert Robert"): So is Mitt Romney a serial killer? I don't know. (audience laughs) But that question's out there now. (audience laughs)
REYNOLDS: Colbert may have an obstacle to his write-in campaign here, like the fact that South Carolina doesn't recognize write-in campaigns, but so what?
COLBERT (from ABC's "This Week"): They said you can't go to the moon. They said you can't put cheese inside a pizza crust. But NASA did it. (George Stephanopoulos laughs) They had to because the cheese kept on floating off in space.
REYNOLDS: A satellite message to diners in Myrtle Beach on Monday dealt with an almost Talmudic question about corporations.
COLBERT: Are corporations people, or are only people people? And while you discuss that, I'm going be the good boy and eat my vegetables.
REYNOLDS: Colbert insists his effort is less than a campaign, and more like an expedition without a destination.
COLBERT (from "This Week:): You know, I'm exploring right now. I'm a one-man Lewis & Clark, and I'm just looking for my Sacagawea. When you're exploring, you don't know what you're going to find.
REYNOLDS (live): And what Colbert has found is another way to inject himself into the race. This is a new ad that went out last night.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE ANNOUNCER 3 (voice-over): Thankfully, there is one name on the ballot that stands for true Americanity (sic)- Herman Cain. America for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow believes a vote for Herman Cain is a vote for America. He's not a career politician. He's such a Washington outsider, he's not even running for president. Send them a message. On January 21, vote Herman Cain.
REYNOLDS (live): Now, that may, just may, cause a little confusion here because Herman Cain, while he quit the race in December, is still on the ballot in South Carolina.
CHARLIE ROSE: So Dean, is Stephen Colbert having fun, or does he have a message that he wants to have some impact?
REYNOLDS: Well, he clearly is mocking the whole super PAC thing. Whether or not the people of South Carolina understand the distinction that is drawn between PACs and super PACs, I think, remains to be seen. But, clearly, it came up in the debate last night, and whether these guys are playing fair, and whether this whole Citizens United case, which allowed super PACs and unlimited, unregulated money to get into campaigns, is a good idea. That's a debate that is worth having, and Stephen Colbert is having it.
ROSE: Dean, thank you very much- good to see you. And the point is, also, that if, in fact, you're part of the conversation, then you're having impact.
- Matthew Balan's blog
- Login to post comments




















Comments
If you don't report on
Submitted by kg on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 6:48pm.
Outside of bashing Republicans, if you don't report on Democrats and especially don't report on Obama then all you have left is reporting on comedians .
"DumbAssity of Dope"
"Before we say that a
Submitted by Van Halen on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 7:28pm.
"Before we say that a comedian could have no serious impact on a presidential campaign, let us remember that six days after a poll came out here showing Stephen Colbert slightly ahead of Jon Huntsman, Jon Huntsman quit the race."
This statement puts way too much emphasis on Colbert. It's highly likely that Huntsman was gong to drop out anyway. He hadn't been showing worth a damn in any race yet.
This is genius by Colbert,
Submitted by balboa on Tue, 01/17/2012 - 11:54pm.
This is genius by Colbert, along with Stewart, exposing the silliness of Super PAC rules.
Yea, it's "genius" alright.
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 12:40pm.
Yea, it's "genius" alright, to use a non-political, comedy based TV network to launch a politically based attack against political organizations knowing full well that, as it is Comedy Central we're talking about, the two men will be shielded from accusations of hypocrisy.
Let's see, Conservatives are lambasted for using Super-PAC's, unregulated sources of money and, most importantly, access, to get out their political message, but Colbert and Stewart can use their own TV show for the same purpose, which they actually get paid for, and this is not only acceptable, it's actually a stroke of genius! Yea, that's not hypocritical, is it?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
The bit(s) were about
Submitted by mandrake on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 12:58pm.
The silliness of the Super PAC rules, not of a specific candidate. Comedy exists to poke fun at power. In the olden days I think they called it the court jester..get over it already.
Poke Fun at Power
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 1:11pm.
"Comedy Central" seems rather selective at which "power" they're willing to "poke fun" at. When was the last time you heard Stewart or Colbert make a "joke" about gay rights? How about a joke about the "racist" Obama's?
Like all hypocrites, Colbert and Stewart are very careful in how they select their "joke" subject material. They don't to offend the "wrong people," you know.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
What conservatives can't generate comedians?
Submitted by mandrake on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 1:31pm.
Examples..Dennis Miller, Evan Savet? I recall Dennis Miller had his own TV show at one point.
funny as Colbert's skit -
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 1:21pm.
on how Obama immediately broke his promise on campaign funding so he could collect, among other things, internet money from undisclosed donors.
Like I said, genius.
Submitted by balboa on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:09pm.
Like I said, genius.
genius
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:23pm.
Wile E Coyote!
Always preferred the coyote with Bugs over the Roadrunner.
The comedic value of the skit is not in question - the question is whether it would have occurred during a Democratic primary. I don't remember skits about the Obama flip on his campaign fundraising promise. The quickness of it and the results were ripe for a spoof.
I found it to be hilarious!
Submitted by wiwf on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 11:50am.
I found it to be hilarious!
Hay, Colbert...
Submitted by CobraMan on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 12:32pm.
Hay, Colbert, you used Comedy Central to launch a political based agenda. By you own arguments, that shouldn't be allowed. What a fricken hypocrite you are!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Cobra
Submitted by mandrake on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:02pm.
Colbert's job description is to ridicule stupid ideas. And the notion that corporations are people is just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. So, Colbert is just doing his job.
mandrake,
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:19pm.
One, I have a hard time believing that is the stupidest thing you have ever heard even if you have a liberal pov about corporations.
Two, regardless of the need to depersonalize those that are seen as our antagonist - corporations are made up of people. People populate all levels of corporations from the Plant Caretaker to the CEO.
Three, even if you don't like the idea that corporations are made up of people as a reasoning for his statement - corporations share many of the characteristics of an individual (some granted by the courts). Corporations have moods, political leanings, self preserving motivations, obligations, a tax debt, goals, emotional/logical reactions, etc....
The only thing wrong with saying that "corporations are people too" is that it is political fodder for those who place political points above truth, integrity and respect. Unfortunately this occurs way too much in American politics and there is no political view free of blame.
Angnostic
Submitted by mandrake on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:37pm.
The thing is, I.am actually a Christian. And I do not believe that some abstract legal construct such as a 'corporation' has the same human rights as an actual person. I really don't care about their 'moods, motivations, tax debt.etc'..what they don't have is a soul..so there is the difference.
So, they should not be defiined in the polictical sense as a person.
definition of a person
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 3:59pm.
I'm willing to bet that the comedian in question here would disagree about the soul things and make this conversation rather moot.
I would also like to know what having a soul has to do with the political sense of a definition.
Despite my 'name', I have no problem with the concept of a person having a soul but there is two ways of looking at a soul and they both affect the idea of what is a person.
One, the soul is an abstract existence within a person that is not influenced by physical or mental characteristics of the individual. Two, the soul represents the person in a non-physical, possibly ethereal, form. Depending upon your beliefs whether personal characteristics are important as a definition of a person, outside of the requirement of having a 'soul', the individual is either represented by their soul or their soul is an entity correlating with a humanized version of God (easily arguable but not the purpose of this website).
Corporations as a business entity have no soul in any real sense. They are still made up of people who do have a soul. The corporate atmosphere represents an amalgamation of the souls represented in the company albeit not all are represented equally.
For one, you appear to be
Submitted by BosTarus on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 5:55pm.
For one, you appear to be implying that Colbert is an atheist, and therefore any discussion of a "corporate soul" is moot-that's just not true. The guy is a catholic, and not just in shtick. So I'm sure he does have pretty strong opinions about souls.
Also, no one claiming that corporations AREN'T people are trying to claim that the people that make up a corporation are also not people. They have the same rights as the rest of us, they aren't being denied anything.
fair enough
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 01/19/2012 - 8:50am.
I did imply that he was atheist and for that I should correct and clarify - Comedy central as a whole takes many shots at religion and religious people. To be fair this probably has nothing to do with the religious affiliation of anyone appearing on or running Comedy Central but the unfortunate truth that they are taking shots at the safe targets more often than not. (Though South Park did try a shot at Islam but it wasn't received well.)
And while your second paragraph is factually correct I would ask you to look what the media, the court of public opinion and some liberal judges are doing with the idea of the personification of corporations. Instead of allowing that the corporations stand on their own as a unique entity they are attaching the demagoguery used to attack corporations to any business leader they wish to tear down. Hence, Romney becomes Bain, Murdoch becomes Fox, etc.... In this way they can use any action taken by any number of thousands of people of decades of time to attack the target of their choice.
Of course, a corporation is not a person but they are unique, made of various people and have distinct personal characteristics that are a product of many, many facets. It is not an incorrect comparison to make. You attack a corporation and people are hurt.
The media and politicians would love for the viewing public to be desensitized to the idea of corporations as people because they would be able to attack with immunity. They could attack until the company closes their doors and then they could paint whatever person was political convenient as the 'corporate entity' and blame that person for the loss of the company.
Ah, but corporations do have a soul.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 01/18/2012 - 6:19pm.
They just don't call it that.
It's usually called 'Code of Ethics', and most take it quite seriously.
Except for MSNBC (and many other MSM outlets), of course.