I read with some interest former White House correspondent Bob Moore’s remarks on his attendance at the White House Correspondents’ dinner in Washington on April 29th. It was an amusing article, but I admit I was rather bemused by his throw-away critique of Stephen Colbert as "not much to write home about." This, to me, seems to point out one of the ways that Americans are becoming more and more divided on the current administration -- where they get their news: on the internet; from TV, radio, or newspapers; or (in its own special class) Fox News.

If you had heard about Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner on TV or radio, or read about the event in newspapers, you would have heard A) he wasn’t really funny, B) he was terribly rude, or C) nothing. On the other hand, if you do a google search on "Stephen Colbert" on the internet, you will find over 12 million hits. (That’s in contrast to under 2 million hits for the "O’Reilly Factor," just for a point of comparison.) If you check out Google top ranking videos, you’ll find Colbert’s monologue at the dinner still ranked Number 1, as of today, May 12th. That makes him a bit larger than a nine day wonder, at least on the internet. Why such a difference?

In just under 25 minutes, Colbert manage to skewer the administration on such unpopular topics as the illegal NSA wiretapping, outsourcing jobs, the military’s stop-loss program, the gratuitous outing of a CIA agent and the doublespeak that followed, the Iraqi "government," the U.S. secret prisons in Eastern Europe, and more. He touched on Bush’s low poll numbers, Cheney’s shooting accident, and Justice Scalia’s rude Italian gestures. Oddly enough, these all got laughs from the audience. But the laughs subsided when Colbert accosted the media itself, with a few special digs for Fox news, the media’s complicity in Bush photo ops, and a passing allusion to Jeff Gannon. (Who? Google him). His advice to the media, who he congratulated for merely writing down the information the White House fed them and consequently saving themselves lots of valuable time: "Write that novel you’ve got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know, fiction." Gosh, why oh why was the media not amused?

No, the media was not amused. But for the past six years the netroots community has sat and watched this administration stumble from one scandal to another -- either from reasons of abject ineptitude or outright criminality -- with a congenial and complicit mainstream media offering explanations, excuses, red herrings, and the occasional faint "Hey!" trailing along behind. Colbert’s pricking of their self-congratulatory bubble was hysterically funny.

And just who is Colbert? Since last fall, he is the host of "The Colbert Report," a spin-off from Jon Stewart’s "The Daily Show." Both are dubbed "fake" news shows, but it’s rather telling to note that "The Daily Show" won Peabody awards in 2000 and 2004 for the best election coverage. That’s a fake news show beating out all the major networks, folks.

And what’s been the upshot of all this internet hoopla? Suddenly, folks other than the usual political news junkies are watching the video and then doing searches on Colbert’s references. Who’s Valerie Plame? Google her. What’s that deal with Helen Thomas all about? Google her.

No, I suppose Colbert’s speech wasn’t much to write home about. E-mail’s much quicker. ROTFLMAO.