Last night I watched the Colbert Report. I usually just Tivo it and then forget to watch it later but last night I was feeling a bit wound up (my online shift that was supposed to end at 10pm didn't end until 10:45pm) so I stretched in front of the tube for the Daily Show and then got sucked into Colbert. I watched Colbert from bed when I would have normally been reading. The reading lamps I installed on the wall next to the bed give off just enough heat that it is uncomfortable on a hot summer night (or so I have discovered) so I watched TV for a bit since that didn't generate heat.

I do like Stephen Colbert when I watch him. I know he has a cadre of writers so not all the smart humor on the show is his. I do wonder, however, how much of the interviews with guests are just him. Perhaps the writers can provide some one-liners and "zingers" for him to toss out, but it seems like his witty banter is innate (some might say innane, but I happen to like it). And based on this I have decided that Stephen Colbert is an intelligent, witty person.

Anyway, Barbara Ehrenreich was on promoting her latest book, This Land is Their Land. I have read Nickel and Dimed and I enjoyed it. I am assuming that the woman is somewhat intelligent (her writing seems to evidence that) but I don't have any first hand knowledge of that. Well last night Barbara could not keep up with Stephen's banter. He tried joking around with her. He's really good at the persona he has adopted of right-wing self-righteous idiot and that is who he was with Ehrenreich. And she has to know that this is what the show is all about. So her book comments on the richest of the rich and when Stephen says something about how she isn't starving to death and has a nice haircut, she didn't know how to flip it back. She seemed to take his banter almost personally. She certainly didn't know how to respond. Now in some interviews Colbert wants the interviewee to look stupid. If the interviewee is right-wing or has a stance that Colbert disagrees with, he will use his wit to get the person to say things that betray the stupidity of their stance. But when he agrees with the stance of the interviewee (not when his persona agrees, but when liberal Colbert himself agrees), he plays the bad guy and says ridiculous statements to help the more liberal side look good. And he does it well. He was trying to make Ehrenreich look good but she couldn't handle it. So he tried to save the interview (and help her save face) by lobbing softballs at her and she couldn't volley those either. It was a disappointing interview.

So it has reminded me that I was thinking about banter and wit. I would like to add a line about that to my list of highly desirable qualities in a partner. I was raised in a home where the words flew fast and you had to be quick or you got left behind (and that isn't some sort of Tim LaHaye Left Behind). People often tell me that I am quick-witted but in my immediate family, I'm just one of many. Out in the "real world" I am a bit odd in that way, I suppose. Few people can really keep up with me in that sense. And fewer can match it. If I found a man (yes, I'm going to limit the search to men) who had the below-mentioned characteristics and could match my wit, I would propose to him. Okay, maybe that's extreme. But I might. You never know with me. Seriously though, if I found that person, I think I would finally be "home." I said that to a friend the other day and it does sound a bit cheesy to say that I would be home. What does that mean? I think it means that I could be completely at ease. Not that my family didn't (and doesn't) have its share of dysfunctionality. Oh, we did and do. But I think that I could finally be completely naked with that person. Now again I realize that it will be hard to find someone who can match me. I might have to settle for someone who can just keep up and follow it. With that person I could still be myself and not have to censor myself.

I find with G that I have to censor too much. In my post from June 17th I noted that when I have to be monolingual I feel censored. I feel that I am not able to completely express myself. It's very similar when I can't just volley quips with someone. I feel like I have to shut a big part of myself down and turn it off (or tone it way way down) and I feel a bit oppressed.

I hesitate to write this here because it does sound really arrogant. "Oh, few people can match my quick wit." Yes, that does sound arrogant. But watching Barbara Ehrenreich last night made me think that perhaps wit is not a sign of intelligence. Or, better said, perhaps someone can be really intelligent but not witty. Perhaps Stephen Colbert is able to think as quickly as he does and come up with those comments on the fly only because he has been trained to do so. Perhaps my ability to do so is a byproduct of my home environment more than some indication of greater intelligence. And it is under that theory that I am willing to write it here. See? I'm not bragging about how fabulous I am. I'm just saying that I was raised to interact a certain way that I find really comfortable and stimulating and fun and it is not as comfortable, stimulating or fun to not be able to stretch those wings. Wow. How many metaphors can I mix? I think I need a sports one to make this complete.