EPISODE NUMBER: 5096 (July 20, 2009)
GUESTS: Geoffrey Canada, Bob Park
SEGMENTS: Stephen Colbert’s Sport Report
VIDEOS: Monday, July 20, 2009
Some mornings, it’s really hard to get going with the episode guides. Stupid real life and getting a bad night’s sleep. So today, I’m going to do something different. Put your comments and thoughts in the comments, and I’ll pull a few and feature them as the commentary on tonight’s guide.
Can’t wait to see what you come up with, and keep checking back to see what your fellow Zoners thought of the episode!
READER COMMENTS
Thanks for being so wonderful in the comments, like you always are. Here are some of my favorite observations about the show:
- I’m a beer snob so I was laughing pretty hard at his descriptions of what those beers taste like. – Michelle B.
- The Bob Park interview was like pulling teeth, Stephen had to work REALLY hard to get it to go somewhere, anywhere. That was interesting in itself. – Vigwig
- I have mixed feelings about the Walter Cronkite tribute – juxtaposing the death of Michael Jackson coverage was actually kind of creepy the more I think about it, and oh so wrong! It was funny, though – especially the album cover. – Juice
- I was thrilled that Stephen highlighted the debate Rachel Maddow had with Pat Buchanan on Thursday night’s TRMS. On her show last night, Rachel responded to some of the things Pat Buchanan had said so it was cool to see Stephen cover it on the TCR the same night. – Jenny with a Y
- While I strongly believe that man landing on the moon was one of humankind’s greatest accomplishments, I think that Prof. Park has a legitimate point about the cost and risks of using humans in space exploration rather than robots. Though he wasn’t able to offer his reasoning as succinctly as he might have wanted, Park seemed to have a knowledgeable, slightly cranky twinkle that I enjoyed. – laughing at nothing
- “How else is a hobbit supposed to get laid?” HAHA! Hearing that from a Tolkien fanatic just added to the lolness. – SajiNoKami
- On Friday, a great man passed – broadcasting legend Walter Cronkite. The man known to many as Uncle Walter, and to a select few as Dr. Funkenstein.
- And at Woodstock, he warned us about the brown acid.
- Other parts of his legacy have become obsolete. For instance, dispassionate reporting is fine for reporting the 1968 Democratic national convention, but not for an issue as complex as Octomom.
- And that’s the way it is. Thank you, Mr. Cronkite.
- As a white male, I am being reverse discriminated against. Thank you, reverse Civil Rights leader Pat Buchanan.
- People tell me I’m white, and I believe them because I am not a New Haven firefighter.
- Yeah! Where were the black guys during the Civil war?! I’m not saying they all should have volunteered, just 3/5th of them.
- No excuses? Oh, as soon as white people start being black, [Obama] takes away the excuses!
- First of all, as a tall, thin black man, I want to thank you for kind of looking like Barack Obama for this discussion, because people surfing by might stop for a second and think that I got him on the show.
- You’re going to have to trust me, here. You’re going to have to trust me, and Pat Buchanan, and Rush Limbaugh. And we should know.
- I can play it all.
- This finally puts an end to the infamous Jessica Simpson curse. You know the curse, where you’re a quarterback for an NFL team, make $12.8 million a year, and your girlfriend looks like this. Man, he must have really pissed off some old gypsy woman.
- Normally, I don’t condone brothels, but in New Zealand, they’re legal. Makes sense – after all, how is a hobbit supposed to get laid?
- I hope your story has a happy ending, apart from the ones you already sell.
- Everyone knows I’m a huge Ultimate Fighting fan. Ultimate Fighting has it all, from the occasional moment of action, to the 40 minutes of awkward spooning.
- You don’t bite the hands that feeds ya, even if that’s legal in ultimate fighting.
- Have you forgotten that Bud Light has drinkability, in that it is possible to drink it?
- Bud Light Lime, it’s like drinking a Bud Light downwind from an artificial flavor factory.
- Palmolive – Oh, they’re a sponsor too?
- Bob Park: Until you’ve seen a toilet back up in zero gravity, you don’t know what ugly is.
- No, what we want to find is oil. If there’s life there, that’s also good.
- Bob Park: They live on sunshine, can you do that? Stephen: That and Bud Light with Lime.
- “One small step for man, who cares?” That’s what he should have said, “Aw f@#k it, I’m going back up the ladder.”
- But he’ll tell us how it feels to be on Mars. A robot can’t tell us feelings, because once they develop feelings they’ll rise up against us.
I enjoyed everything about this episode except for the interview with Bob Park. I liked Stephen’s responses during the interview but I didn’t warm up to Park or agree with what he had to say.
I was thrilled that Stephen highlighted the debate Rachel Maddow had with Pat Buchanan on Thursday night’s TRMS. On her show last night, Rachel responded to some of the things Pat Buchanan had said so it was cool to see Stephen cover it on the TCR the same night.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I loved Stephen’s take on “Reverse Civil Rights Leader Pat Buchanan.” Rachel Maddow handled the interview very well, I though, calmly and quietly disputing Buchanan’s fevered rantings.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Random thoughts: There is NO way that was dishwashing liquid (Palmolive or any other brand). Nuh-uh! Although, it is pretty funny to think of soap as improving the taste of Bud Light Lime!
“Reverse civil rights leader” and “Aw, #@&% it, I’m going back up the ladder!” were my favorite quips. I really enjoyed the interview with Jeffery Canada. Too bad he wasn’t the main interview. However, I found the interview with Bob Park to be one of the most annoying interviews I’ve seen – and I watched it a second time to make sure it wasn’t my inattentiveness. He kept trying to one-up Stephen. I’ve heard an argument similar to Park’s from one of my cousins, and there are valid points for that perspective. But by the time Stephen mentioned Buzz Aldrin decking Park, I was kind of wishing it would happen!
I have mixed feelings about the Walter Cronkite tribute – juxtaposing the death of Michael Jackson coverage was actually kind of creepy the more I think about it, and oh so wrong! It was funny, though – especially the album cover. I got the point, too; actually, I was disgusted with CBS that their whole “Remembering Walter Cronkite” tribute was one measly hour instead of showing “60 Minutes.” What, you couldn’t pre-empt a couple of reruns during Prime Time for Uncle Walter?! Grr! [Cleansing breath. OK]
Loved the little character breaks tonight, especially the sheep.
DB, hope you sleep better tonight.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Ok, so it wasn’t just me who found Park annoying. Good. I got what he was saying and I also see valid points there but I didn’t particularly care for him.
I enjoyed Geoffrey Canada the last time he was on but I’m embarrassed to admit that I was too sleepy last night to really pay attention to him this time. I should try to find some time today to go back and re-watch it.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I loved the Legacy of Walter Cronkite! That was just perfect! And the rest of the show was enjoyable too. I’m a beer snob so I was laughing pretty hard at his descriptions of what those beers taste like.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
The Bob Park interview was like pulling teeth, Stephen had to work REALLY hard to get it to go somewhere, anywhere. That was interesting in itself.
I appreciated the black tie/suit which seemed a gesture for Cronkite’s passing. The Jackson/Cronkite parody was a little weird but since he was sticking his finger in the eye of the media’s skewed priorities once again, it was cool.
His hair is starting to curl! :)
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I didn’t like the Jackson/Cronkite piece at the beginning. I’d rather Stephen approached it like he was the obvious successor to Cronkite or something…but I don’t write the show. I don’t know why what they had wasn’t funny to me but it made me feel uncomfortable.
I liked Geoffrey Canada besides marveling again at what a neat name he has. he is definitely an expert at communicating his message and Stephen cannot knock him off track.
the interview with Park wasn’t great, but I didn’t have any issues with the man himself. I felt like at the beginning Stephen was not letting him say anything, and if he had given him an expository sentence or two so that we’d all know what the argument was.
I am not well-informed about this spaceflight topic but my “gut” is generally against sending more humans into space than absolutely necessary. I am not that enthusiastic about it. I don’t have problems retroactively with the Apollo missions but I feel like today’s technology should have computers and therefore robots that are better equipped to gain information from space than humans are. unless we plan on trying to colonizing Mars, there is no reason for humans to be there. as for the ISS, it’s my understand that there’s tons of experimentation of all sorts going on there, and I really have no idea of the feasibility of using robots on that case. I have never read a really good justification of space travel, but I must admit I don’t go searching either.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
NASA, ESA and other scientists have all written extensively on why it is necessary to send humans to outer space. There are many things that robots cant do – reason, show initiative when something unexpected occurs and lots of other reasons – things that cant be controlled by mission control on earth. In short, having a human in space is NOT just because we can, or merely to test human endurance. Rather, until computers develop human-like brain functions, their contribution to the space program will be sub-par compared to having humans in space.
Its worthwhile looking for this info online if you are interested.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
thanks for the information. I’ve done a little searching around as a result, and I am finding some very sound arguments for humans in space. I was also thinking, after I’d written my comment, that if robots are always better suited for these tasks, then they would probably be filling all our terrestrial science labs, but they’re obviously not. those against space travel are focused on the precision possible with robots, but choices are better when they have the benefit of all the input and synthesis possible with a brain. nevertheless, while I admit there are definite benefits, I’m still not certain that they outweigh the costs (all costs, not just $$), but I do have a better feel for both sides of this argument now.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Curmudgeon!
The above word best describes in my mind the household name “Bob Park” when mentioned around my house with near reverence by my chem. prof. husband, Bern, in relating the latest news from Park’s “What’s New” online newsletter. His disclaimer, “opinions are the author’s and are not necessarily shared by the university, but they should be,” noted at the bottom of each issue, has “curmudgeon” hypothetically written all over it.
With the speed and pace of technological advances, I find myself agreeing with Park’s viewpoint far more readily than I have done before; unmanned or robotic probes and satellites in space seem far more practical, efficient, and feasible these days as opposed to sending up actual human beings. I start losing pace with Park (loosely quoting and paraphrasing Thoreau ) because I hear a different drummer and must step to the music which I hear, when he begins discussing matters of faith, religion, theology, whatever term one chooses to use here. Park is a thorough (no pun intended on “Thoreau”) skeptic.
Anyway, I truly, truly enjoyed this interview. I couldn’t help but applaud Stephen’s handling of Park and kept likening what I saw to how a grandson might deal kindly with an elderly, curmudgeonly grandfather. The grandson had grandpa smiling, laughing, and quipping with him on Jesus and robots and other things. I do hope Stephen takes a second look at himself in this interview. It would be nice to know if he thought too that perhaps this time, not only his improv skills but also his position as the youngest member in that grand family of his, makes his experience in dealing with older family members a big plus here. Simply put this was a delightful interview.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
An excellent show. I liked *both* guests and I’m putting in the love for Bob Park. While I strongly believe that man landing on the moon was one of humankind’s greatest accomplishments, I think that Prof. Park has a legitimate point about the cost and risks of using humans in space exploration rather than robots. Though he wasn’t able to offer his reasoning as succinctly as he might have wanted, Park seemed to have a knowledgeable, slightly cranky twinkle that I enjoyed. I may not agree with all of his opinions, but he didn’t strike me as a nut job — just an opinionated (with justifications) old scientist. ;-)
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Buzz Aldrin, NASA and ESA have all written extensively on why it is necessary to send humans to outer space. There are many things that robots cant do – reason, show initiative when something unexpected occurs and lots of other reasons – things that cant be controlled by mission control on earth. In short, having a human in space is NOT just because we can, or merely to test human endurance. Rather, until computers develop human-like brain functions, their contribution to the space program will be sub-par compared to having humans in space.
Its worthwhile looking for this info online if you are interested.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
The Jackson-Cronkite bit. Yeesh. (Loved the Dr. Funkenstein line though.)
“How else is a hobbit supposed to get laid?” HAHA! Hearing that from a Tolkien fanatic just added to the lolness.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
enjoyed Stephen drinking beer and “soap”
is it bad that i want to see what that boy is like drunk?
-Everyone knows I’m a huge Ultimate Fighting fan.
-Ultimate Fighting has it all, from the occasional moment of action,
-to the 40 minutes of awkward spooning.
Bob Park…. I found this interview interesting..
i have seen and know people that have the same attitude as him…
so it was entertaining to see Stephen humorous/awkward interview.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Great banter between Stephen and Geoffrey Canada. I love his name, too. :)
I was almost expecting the cranky Bob Park to blow up at Stephen’s questions at some point. I do appreciate the points he’s raised, except that he probably could have expressed it better.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I see juice beat me to it about the Palmolive, that must have been water with food coloring in it, it was way too thin to be soap!
I didn’t mind Bob Park, I remember being excited about the moon landing myself but after all it is a risk to send humans into space and his point of view is a legitimate one. I do think he and Stephen were having a fun time in an odd kind of way. I did find it funny that Stephen chose to celebrate the moon anniversary with this contrary gentleman, but I’m sure he was well aware of the direction it was going to go.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0