Not that it matters, but I really didn't mind Colbert busting on the President much. Which he didn't do all that much of, anyway. Sure, some. But that's why he's there.
What annoyed me was his attacking the media.
I'm not a media defender, of course. I'm annoyed he attacked the media as being too "right wing." And of course the media takes this sort of criticism seriously. We on the right have been documenting the media's shameless shilling for Democrats for twenty, thirty years now, and yet when the far left suddenly begins making specious claims about a "right wing media," or the media being "poodles" of the GOP, they take that as important criticism that they have to consider seriously.
Every time a left-leaning group charges the media with bias against them, the media is all too willing to consider the charges, and they often admit some degree of guilt, and promise to do better. All through the eighties and nineties I saw "Special Editions of Nightline" where, for example, a panel of media donyennes would consider if the media were too bigoted against blacks, or not sufficiently "fair" as regards the black liberal agenda. The media-types would flagellate themselves, saying "We're not doing enough," etc.
Same with women, gays, Muslims, Hispanics. The media is quite willing to admit it's biased against groups associated with the leftist coalition.
But, of course, there's one sort of bias they dismiss out of hand. There's one sort of bias they do not devote special hour-long town-hall discussion panels to exploring. There's ONE group on the entire planet they insist they are congenitally incapable of being biased against.
Methinks they doth protest too much. Surely if they're willing to admit the possibility of unconscious racism, a group of people who votes 90% Democratic can show the courage to admit the possibility of unconscious media bias towards the people they're consciously biased against politically.