September 2, 2009
No really, say it aint so, so I can call you a liar. It’s always about the money, especially when they say its not about the money. Her entire rise to fame is premised off a show that I used to watch as a kid called Night Court.
The shows premise was pretty simple….for me, the funny part was how he got the job. He was the last of the people that they called for the job assignment, since he was home on a Saturday night, and all the other judges were out probably gallivanting around town.
Night Court is an American television situation comedy that aired on NBC from January 1984 until May 1992. The setting was the night shift of a Manhattan court, presided over by the young, unorthodox Judge Harold T. “Harry” Stone (played by Harry Anderson). It was created by comedy writer Reinhold Weege, who had previously worked on the award-winning and wry series Barney Miller in the 1970s and early 1980s.
Night Court, according to the first season DVD, was created without comedian/magician Harry Anderson in mind, but Anderson auditioned with the claim that he was Harry Stone. Anderson had developed a following with his performances on Saturday Night Live and made several successful appearances as “Harry the Hat” on another NBC sitcom, Cheers. (For the first several years of its run, Night Court aired on NBC Thursday nights after Cheers.) In later seasons, while Anderson remained the key figure, John Larroquette became the breakout personality, winning a number of awards and many fans for his performance as the lecherous Dan Fielding.
The comedy style on Night Court changed as the series progressed. During its initial seasons, the show was often compared to Barney Miller. In addition to being created by a writer of that show, Night Court (like Barney Miller) was set in New York City, featured quirky, often dry humor, and dealt with a staff who tried to cope with a parade of eccentric, often neurotic criminals and complainants. Furthering this comparison, these criminals and complainants were routinely played by character actors who had made frequent guest appearances on Barney Miller: Stanley Brock, Philip Sterling, Alex Hentlehoff, and many others. But while the characters appearing in the courtroom (and the nature of their transgressions) were often whimsical, bizarre or humorously inept, in the early years of Night Court, the show still took place in the ‘real world’. In fact, in an early review of the show, Time magazine called Night Court, with its emphasis on non-glamorous, non-violent petty crime, the most realistic law show on the air.
Gradually, however, Night Court abandoned its initial ‘real world’ setting, and morphed into what could best be described as broad, almost slapstick comedy. Logic and realism were frequently abandoned for the sake of a joke.
The show featured several defendants who appeared before the court again and again—notably the Wheelers, Bob and June (Bob was played by Brent Spiner later known for his role as Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation), who initially pretended to be stereotypical hicks from West Virginia but were later revealed as Yugoslavians, and at one point even ran a concession stand in the courthouse.
Sarah Palin is the modern day Harry Anderson. She was in the right place at the right time. She was a symbol that the GOP needed at the time in order to mount a credible attack to President Obama. But, as the curtain closes, we begin to see the real Sarah Palin, behind the scenes.
Levi Johnston slams Sarah Palin, saying she schemed to hide daughter Bristol’s pregnancy
By David Saltonstall
DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Wednesday, September 2nd 2009, 12:19 PMSomodevilla/Getty; Sabo/NewsIn the wake of his most recent Vanity Fair article, Levi Johnston is making his way further down former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s Christmas card list.
Sarah Palin‘s almost son-in-law has launched a flurry of new slapshots at the former GOP veep hopeful — saying she’s not a real hockey mom, plotted to hide her daughter’s pregnancy, and quit as Alaska‘s governor to make money.
The scathing allegations by Levi Johnston, 18, the father of Palin’s grandson and a frequent critic of the Palin family, can be found in a first-person account by Johnston in this month’s Vanity Fair, entitled “Me and Mrs. Palin.”
It’s not a pretty picture: Johnston casts Palin as virtually the exact opposite of her image as the moose-hunting matriarch of a large and happy family.
“Even before she was nominated,” Johnston writes, “there wasn’t much parenting in that house. Sarah doesn’t cook, [her husband] Todd doesn’t cook — the kids would do it all themselves: cook, clean, do the laundry, and get ready for school.”
Johnston — who fathered a child with Palin’s daughter, Bristol, but ended up cancelling wedding plans after last year’s election — also said Palin quit her job as governor to cash in on her fame.
It was a payday Palin started mulling within a few weeks of returning to Alaska after her failed run for vice president, Johnston wrote.
“She started talking about how nice it would be to quit and write a book or do a show and make ‘triple the money,'” Johnston said of Palin. “It was, to her, ‘not as hard.’ She would blatantly say, ‘I want to just take this money and quit being governor.’
Palin has said she quit to avoid becoming a lame duck and to push her conservative agenda from outside the political system.
Calls to Palin’s political action committee seeking comment on Johnston’s allegations were not immediately returned on Wednesday.
In one of the story’s more explosive charges, Johnston also alleges that Palin asked him and Bristol not to reveal Bristol’s pregnancy, and that she pushed to adopt the child as a way to keep the birth a secret.
“That way, she said, Bristol and I didn’t have to worry about a thing,” Johnston wrote.
“Sarah kept mentioning this plan,” he added. “She was nagging — she wouldn’t give up. She would say, ‘So, are you gonna let me adopt him?’ We both kept telling her we were definitely not going to let her adopt the baby.”
Johnston said that Palin’s own family life was far from the image of wedded bliss presented to the nation — she and Todd rarely slept in the same room, Johnston alleged, and the couple often screamed about getting divorced.
“Todd would say, ‘All right, do you want a divorce? Is that what you want? Let’s do it! Sign the papers!’ They’d either stop and be fine or Sarah would go to her room. That’s just how it was with them,” he wrote.
But Todd always knew who was boss, Johnston added.
“\[Sarah\] would tell Todd to mow the grass, hang things up, and clean the house. And Todd would listen to her when she spoke,” he wrote. “If she told Todd to do something, he’d do it.”
What Palin didn’t do much is two things for which she became famous during last year’s campaign: go to her son’s hockey games, or hunt wild animals.
“She pays no attention to her kids when the cameras aren’t around,” Johnston wrote. “[Her son] Track and I grew up playing hockey together, and I only saw her at about 15% of his games.”
As for hunting: “She says she goes hunting and lives off animal meat — I’ve never seen it,” wrote Johnston.
“She had a gun in her bedroom and one day she asked me to show her how to shoot it. I asked her what kind of gun it was, and she said she didn’t know, because it was in a box under her bed.
The real shame is that the created caricature of Sarah Palin will fail and our political jokes will not be as funny. For Levi, he is the hater of the week. In addition to that, he also helps Palin win the Whoops! I got caught up award…
I love Jerry McGuire. If I wasn’t making millions as a teacher, it would have been as a sports agent. The lifestyle and the money that they get is sick. So, when thinking about the reasons why Sarah Palin resigned, we here at Too Old thought that this could be the reason she left…
According to Levi Johnston, it is…for those of you that were living under a rock during this time, Politico explains who he is and what loot the former Governor was talking about…
Johnston claimed that in December he heard Palin talking about “how nice it would be to take some of this money people have been offering us and just run with it, and saying, ‘Forget everything else.'”
The 19-year-old father of the governor’s grandchild said he believed the factors Palin listed for her resignation were part of the reason, but were not the deciding factors.
Johnston, the former fiancé of the governor’s daughter, said the offers Palin was referring to came from “books, talk shows, whatever, things like that.”
Who would turn on a reality show about a former governor and her family? oh that’s right, Americans would. We already have more than just the Real World, but for the Love of Ray J and Real Chance at Love, a show about two seemingly homosexuals trying to find girlfriends.
But the loot angle is interesting, since we know that famous political figures earn massive dollars at speaking engagements, book signings etc. Levi throws around some figures to chew on.
The 19-year-old father of the governor’s grandchild said he believed the factors Palin listed for her resignation were part of the reason, but were not the deciding factors.
Someone is going to get the money, why not him? Even if this isn’t true, it is true. Do you really think that Sarah is not going to write a book? If it is not about the struggles of raising a special needs child ( which would make a bunch of money IMHO) then it will be about the glass ceiling of being a woman and trying to run for some of the highest offices in the land. Arab money indeed…
Deion Sanders, take us to the bridge…
The Guardian speculates that she stepped down in order to start her presidential run
Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice-presidential candidate who electrified her party’s campaign last year, has resigned as Alaska’s governor in a dramatic decision that has fuelled speculation she is positioning herself to run for president.
For me, it gives me time to have fun at someone’s expense.
Did you hear the rambling, incoherent speech? It sounds like someone else we know.
But there is a difference. You are never sure of the questions that you might get asked in the contest. You can practice, but the heat of the moment can get you caught up. Sarah Palin has no excuse. She called the press, didn’t give all of them the opportunity to get there to hear her rambling statement of quitting. In fact, it was so incoherent, the only thing that seems strange is that she would step down now. You don’t have to run for re-election, but finish what you started. Excuse me, what war did you fight?
But after an at times rambling speech in which she compared herself to battle wounded American soldiers in Kosovo and said only dead fish go with the flow, Palin’s critics accused her of a “flaky” decision and walking away from her post.
Palin, who built strong support among conservative Republicans as John McCain’s running mate last year, said she will step down in three weeks because she can contribute more away from politics.
“We know we can effect positive change outside government at this moment in time on another scale and actually make a difference for our priorities,” she said.
But, this where I get to have fun. PUMAS are claiming the pie in the sky dream of having Palin run with Clinton…what are you smoking? 1) Hillary would never align herself with a loser like Palin. 2) Different Party, even allowing for your dream, there are so many other people she would align herself with than Palin it isn’t even funny. 3) Hillary lost against the incumbent and then went to work for him.
Well, if Palin is “Clintonian” than she has my vote, no doubt about it!
Here is my crazy ass speculation/theory: Sarah is resigning so she can Campaign in the lower 48 and build up money/grassroots support. Then, in 2010, Hillary resigns from the State Department, perhaps because Bill is sick or maybe she is pushed out or she resigns- all we know is, she all ready has her ‘No Limits” PAC and is raising money and building grassroots support that way all ready.
Then, in 2011, The Clintons and the Palins join forces to form a viable third party based on fiscal conservatism, responsible, activist government, and social liberalism. Hillary and Sarah join a ticket for their new party in 2012 and win the White House. Viola! Change is here!
Fundraise? Right…good luck with that project. PUMAS, how did retiring Hillary’s debt go? Your fund raising ability has been called into question before. The change you are bringing is the same that caused the Democrats to lose elections…
So this is who you want to align yourself with? Republicans, who she kinda depends on now, think that her 15 minutes are up, oh about an hour ago. You tried to pimp Letterman for some extension time, but that didn’t really work. It didn’t work, because it was a joke. Remember your boycott PUMAS? That also didn’t seem to work out too well for ya. Get some facts and get back to me…All we learned after a year is that PUMAS are synonymous with losing.
But the timing, coming during one of the biggest American holidays of the year, independence day, raised questions among some of Republicans who accused her of attempting to escape falling poll numbers in Alaska as a series of economic problems and ethics investigations take their toll.
A prominent Republican strategist, Ed Rollins, who directed Ronald Reagan’s election campaign, said Palin had made a serious mistake.
“She was a shooting star who dimmed in recent months and now she’s crashed,” he said.
She is clearly seeking attention. Thanks for putting you above the country. This really could not have waited until Monday? What was so pressing that you had to do it on the eve of Independence Day? Or, what are you hiding? Are you pregnant again and need to keep the preying eyes off your impending birth? Either way, the move doesn’t look good…
Palin’s resignation was swiftly criticised as “flaky” by her Democratic opponents who said it was part of a pattern of “bizarre” behaviour.
The Democratic National Committee said she is “leaving the people of Alaska high and dry … or she simply can’t handle the job now”.
The timing of the announcement on the eve of independence day led some critics to accuse her of trying to bury the news of her resignation. But given that almost nothing else was going on it might have been a move to dominate the news bulletins as it forced Michael Jackson’s death from the top slot.
Can’t MJ just get his moment in the sun where we can look back at his life? Well you have something in common with him, in that your career is dead too…
“Some are going to question the timing of this, and let me say this decision has been in the works for quite a while,” Palin said.
Palin addressed the numerous ethics investigations launched in to her alleged misuse of office by saying that taxpayer money was being wasted and deriding them as part of the “superficial political blood sport” against her since she shot to prominence as McCain’s running mate.
So, you could have waited for everyone to get back from the holiday weekend, but you didn’t. What is the pressing issue to release this now, if the decision had been in the works for a long time? I think that it’s a rouse to avoid the hot lights of a full press corp. That and the ethics things…it’s not a good look to have that hanging over your head.
I hope that you are still getting your advice from Mr. Greta Van Susteren. It didn’t work for you then, what makes you think that it is going to work now? Remember when I claimed that it could be because of ethical violations? You shouldn’t be shocked, since it comes from the leadership positions. This is what he (as well as Greta) were found guilty of…
“By the end of 1996, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia had ruled that Coale and his wife were both guilty of professional misconduct in such solicitations, stating:
‘Accordingly, we find that respondents Allen, Coale, and Van Susteren engaged in professional misconduct by inducing others to initiate the improper telephone solicitations which we found violative of Rules 7.3(a) and 7.3(b)(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.’”
So we are just supposed to follow her after this…? ABCNews.com gives me something else to laugh at…BTW it would not have happened to us, because 1) We are trained speech professionals, 2) its called preparation, which she clearly didn’t have.
Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you’ve said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?
Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.
Couric: I’m just going to ask you one more time – not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.
Palin: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.
You can have your Maverick, I will stick with Obama…
June 13, 2009
I think that I am finally tired of hearing about David Letterman and Sarah Palin. There are some quick housekeeping things to get out of the way right now, before we go any further on this topic.
1) Apologies. How does someone know intent? How do you measure it? Well, according to our favorite kooks on the blog, they have a device that measures whether your apology is sincere or not. According to them, the apology is not sincere.
See, that is what you get when you make an apology that you didn’t need to make. It was and still is a joke. It was not in the best taste, but political figures are always up for lambasting. The “Off-Limits” quote that Sarah and the others who feel outrage at this joke fees the need to throw around was directed AT THE OTHER CANDIDATES, not the media, and CERTAINLY NOT COMEDIANS. That is the price you pay to be in the media spotlight. Good thing that most of the haters feel this isn’t an apology, so we give him a pass.
2) Willow/Bristol Palin and “Rape” joke. If you had not seen the Top 10 show (and I find that funny that so many people who express outrage are the same people who are claiming that they never watch him, or that they stopped decades ago, since he stopped being funny. Really? Then who is watching him? I mean he is finalizing another large contract extension and clearly, they wouldn’t sign him if nobody is watching?) then you would have thought that Letterman said that a group of baseball players should hold her down and forcibly rape her.
Here is a section of the Chicago Tribune that is asking for an apology. Note that they state what Letterman said…
Until he does, the Alaska governor and her husband, Todd, have parental rights, even a duty, to press Letterman on the main point: that his jokes Tuesday night about the Palins’ visit to New York and Yankee Stadium — “There was one awkward moment during the seventh-inning stretch; her daughter was knocked up by [Yankee player] Alex Rodriguez” and “The hardest part of her trip was keeping [former New York Gov.] Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter” — were in terrible taste. (emphasis mine to highlight the joke(s) told)
So, the first part of the outrage is that he made a joke about AROD and one of the Palin daughters having ARODS baby. I think that I missed the rape part of the joke right there. See, that is a joke… Seriously, where can we insinuate that David Letterman is suggesting that AROD rape her daughter? Wait for it… I dont think that you can. Here is what the offended will say about it
But, it’s Willow Palin that he is talking about and she is 14!
First, before answering that, IF he is talking about Bristol, then case closed, you have no right to be offended or outraged, as she already has carnal knowledge, and like Levi stated, they sometimes didn’t practice safe sex and they had a kid. She is 18, and that is an adult in every state.
That is getting knocked up. Consensual sex without practicing safe sex, or the Ronin pull-out, can lead to having a child. How can you get mad at that? Where is the rape? Where is the joke about rape? That only leaves Willow as the possible “victim” of the “verbal rape” perpetrated by Dave Letterman.
So, let’s assume you don’t believe his statements about the joke.
Letterman, on Wednesday’s show, stepped up to the edge of an apology but did not get there. He defended himself by saying that he was joking about 18-year-old Bristol Palin, mother of a child out of wedlock, not 14-year-old Willow, the daughter who accompanied Sarah and Todd Palin to New York.
But he acknowledged that “I can’t really defend the joke. I agree: unpleasant, ugly.” And: “Do I regret having told them? Well, I think I probably do.”
Then why would you still call it rape? Age is just a number right? Where is all your outrage here?
But there is not any here, because it’s Hollyweird, and she is somewhat famous because of her skillset as an actor/singer, so it’s okay. Condemn it in all areas…
But, back to Willow. The best argument that they have is that for Willow to get knocked up, she would have to fall victim to “statutory rape.” To actually figure that out, lets turn to Sandra Norman-Eady, Christopher Reinhart and Peter Martino for some answers
Most states do not refer specifically to statutory rape; instead they use designations such as sexual assault and sexual abuse to identify prohibited activity. Regardless of the designation, these crimes are based on the premise that until a person reaches a certain age, he is legally incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse. Thus, instead of including force as a criminal element, theses crimes make it illegal for anyone to engage in sexual intercourse with anyone below a certain age, other than his spouse. The age of consent varies by state, with most states, including Connecticut, setting it at age 16. The age of consent in other states ranges from ages 14 to 18.
You might want to save your faux-outrage for women/men who are actually being violated and not just made fun of. For basic research, the authors continue to lay out what the law has in mind.
First-degree sexual abuse of a minor for someone age 16 or older to engage in sexual penetration with someone under age 13.
Second-degree sexual abuse of a minor for someone age 16 or older to engage in sexual penetration with someone who is age 13, 14, or 15 and at least three years younger than the offender.
Fourth-degree sexual abuse of a minor for someone under age 16 to engage in sexual penetration with someone under age 13 and at least three years younger.
So, your best argument is that he made (allegedly) a joke that IF IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED, would be considered a sexual assault. Which is flimsy. I found the end of the Chicago Trib article interesting, in that it made a point that rings true…
But instead of apologizing — and he didn’t Thursday, either — he labeled them two of many bad jokes told over the years for “cheap laughs.”
That’s no excuse for careless wording and thinking, especially when minors are involved. Calling any teenager in the public eye promiscuous is, indeed, ugly.
And while Palin trying to play the incident to political advantage, casting it as, yawn, Hollywood vs. America, isn’t exactly pretty, she has every right to press her advantage until Letterman says the magic words: I’m sorry. (emphasis mine)
Here is the HuffPo on the same subject
Letterman said so in a nine-minute chat with the audience on The Late Show the following night, reiterating that, whether the joke was dumb or even tasteless, it was Bristol he was talking about, and that she was eighteen and therefore a legal adult. He repeated, almost too much for me — I didn’t think he had to — that he would never make fun of a fourteen-year-old girl in a sexual context. And I think most sensible people believed him.
Focus on most sensible people. Fanatics trying to promote their causes or trying to make amends for previous sexist comments are usually not sensible. We get it My1/2IQ, you are sensitive and you have reformed your sinner ways. Congrats for that. But, you take your recently found pulpit too far. As for Sarah, quit trying to continue to ham for the camera. Enough of you trying to make issues that can keep you in the limelight. Yes, you are trying to position yourself for 2012. You need to worry about your own party and get that house in order, before trying to “clean” Hollywood’s house. The Huffington Post catches Sarah at her game and makes an apt comparison to Dan Quayle
The woman was a flash in the pan, invented by John McCain’s handlers to spark interest in his flagging campaign. With all the competent women he could have chosen, he picked a fly by night governor of one of our smallest states, who’d only served a year and a half and yet was expected to inspire confidence she might lead the free world.Okay, enough said. That’s the recap. The election’s over. However, there are still conservative — make that right wing — diehards who’d love Palin to bring about resurgence to the Republican Party. In their dreams they believe she should be president. And while some might remind me similar jokes were made about Ronald Reagan’s chances for the White House, at least he was a two-term governor of our largest state and before that had built a nationally prominent nice-guy reputation as a popular actor in movies and television.
Sarah Palin is a lightweight, desperate not to fade away, as happened to Dan Quayle, and he was actually an elected vice president. And with her audience generally limited to fringe groups, she recently seized upon some silly patter on a late night talk show, and with the Media’s help has turned it into a cause celebre.
EXACTLY! Don’t fade away, just continue to govern your state. Get some practical experience and run your race in 2012. You hamming it up for the cameras and attempting to make a campaign issue is not going to work. And the calls for Letterman to be fired? Only in your dreams, where Hillary Clinton won the election.
Don’t know if you have this in any other threads, but I found a site called “Fire David Leterman”
Anthony | Homepage | 06.12.09 – 12:20 pm | #
I guess people are not all buying the ‘pretend’ statement that some are calling an apology.
I think that most sensible people bought it, since you really can’t measure intent, and I am glad that he didn’t apologize, just clarified what his statements were about. What people forget is that Dave Letterman would have to know which daughter attended the game with her. I think the “knocked up” part was lost on people trying to condemn him for joking about a serious issue in rape. Too bad your straw man fell the fuck hell apart. The HuffPo continues…
So, what’s the beef? Earlier this week, Letterman had a dumb joke about Palin in his top ten list: “Bought makeup at Bloomingdale’s to update her slutty flight attendant look.” I wasn’t offended. It just wasn’t that incredibly funny. What was intriguing was Palin didn’t take note of another joke, which had her involved with a kilo of crack.
Being a slut, not okay, slingling a kilo of crack GOOD TIMES!
So, why does the author of the HuffPo get it, but others can’t?
Palin sensed an opportunity and accused Letterman of promoting date rape of her fourteen-year-old daughter Willow. As it turned out, she was the daughter who attended the game with her parents, but there’s not a doubt in my mind that most of the viewers watching the show reacted to the joke with the vivid image of Palin’s older daughter Bristol, who had gotten “knocked up” by her high school sweetheart.
The author gives her two barrels (and the rest of the media) for pushing a meme that is a flat out lie.
Sarah Palin is simply a Media hog, hypocritical and ruthless as it gets. Was it a coincidence that it was only after the campaign ended that Levi Johnston was summarily banished, no longer needed and later decried by Palin and her husband for cashing in on the family name. As if they hadn’t used him as well?
Reprehensibly, the Media lapped all this up and went about it as if they were chasing an ambulance. Many replayed Palin’s accusations or interviewed her, and she repeated what was now a lie — because she knew better — that Letterman had somehow violated her daughter. And worse, many of the Media journalists didn’t follow up her comments with the fact that Letterman insisted he was talking about Bristol.
Here is what I continue to not get about groups like PUMAS. They sit and complain about things when it suits them, but they are not consistent about them. My1/2IQ makes a rash of sexist statements, then apologizes for them and we are supposed to forget them. Jon Favreau makes a gesture THAT IS INTERPRETED as he is groping Hillary Clinton at a party. he makes an apology, the SOS accepts it, but he is forever known as a sexist in the eyes of PUMAS everywhere. Why doesn’t it work both ways? Convenience is the only answer.
She further described David Letterman as a “so-called” comedian, a description that might better be associated with her political future. She also referred to him as a 62-year-old to somehow make the comment appear smarmier, as if he were an old lecher flashing young girls at the local middle school.
Exactly. Either words have power and can hurt ( classic hate speech rhetoric and theory) or they don’t. Her use of his age was calculated to draw a highlight between the disparity in ages of her daughters and the comedian. To make it seems like Letterman is the new Chester the Molester.
This, too, was disgusting on her part, because it was ageist and uncalled for. Would the joke have been less offensive if Letterman were 35 or 40?
Then the biggest point of her hypocrisy is that she turned down his offer to appear on the show and discuss the comment. This is the first time I have ever seen her turn down a chance to promote herself. This site has video of her at the I Kill a Dog races with her husband, but the Tonight Show, with a bigger audience, she turned down. Did she forget youtube and SNL?
She then refused his offer to have her come on his show saying that she didn’t want to help his ratings. This, from a woman who has been gallivanting around the broadcast Media with her false depiction of Letterman, an American treasure. A woman who appeared on Saturday Night Live last fall, a show in which Tina Fey frequently made Palin appear like an idiot, in a desperate attempt to appear cool and bolster the doomed campaign of her and her running mate.
Sarah, you want some coverage, Too Old will happily grant your desires…
Finally, with all this, here is comedy at its finest, no apologies needed.
This is what Dave Letterman is:
He uses this in his daily course of work
- S: (n) sarcasm, irony, satire, caustic remark (witty language used to convey insults or scorn) “he used sarcasm to upset his opponent”; “irony is wasted on the stupid”; “Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody’s face but their own”–Jonathan Swift
WOW… the amount of outrage from the blogosphere about David Letterman and some of his comedy routine recently has got me thinking…”Really?” You are up in arms about some jokes? Some of the people that are outraged are the same people who make jokes all the time. One of the resident frontpagers makes similar “sexist” comments. When is a joke just a joke? That’s right, when you can generate faux outrage about it with others. Here is what he said, and some commentary from Kevin over at Rumproast.
That said, I did find yet another example of myiq2xu behaving like a vulgar misogynist and, in this case, applying the “it was just a joke” defense is going to be virtually impossible. Less than two years ago Balloon Juice’s John Cole posted the much-snickered-about video of Miss Teen South Carolina Caitlin Upton severely bungling a response to a question about why so few Americans can find the U.S. on a world map. Here’s what myiq2xu, the shameless hypocrite who specializes in kneejerk branding of his opponents as misogynists and sexists, wrote about this innocent nineteen-year-old woman at the time:
myiq2xu August 27th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Just stare at her boobs and don’t pay any attention to what she says. If she talks too much put something in her mouth.
She needs to marry a rocket scientist so her kids will be half-wits.
And then, believe it or not, it got worse:
Andrew August 27th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Her reoccurring use of “such as” is a result of a dialog coach training her out of rampant use of the word “like”. They instruct kids to substitute “such as” for “like”. She must not have had this coaching trick for very long.
Do they use an electro-shock collar for this conditioning process?
myiq2xu August 27th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Do they use an electro-shock collar for this conditioning process?
They hit her in the back of the throat with the meat prod.
So, I went over to the Confluence to do my daily reading and I look to see that the thing that has people up in arms is the fact that David Letterman made some jokes, and they were none to happy with him. My1/2IQ is on his feminist soapbox about what an outrage we all should be feeling. I think the same thing when I look at your comments then. Why are more people not outraged at you? The reason that they will give is that they KNOW you are not that way. Considering none of us really know Obama, then how can you call him a sexist from very tiny sound bites?
I went to a Conservative source, to get what they thought of the skit. So, I went over to the Examiner and here is what they had to say about the whole thing.
I don’t agree with Letterman’s point of view, but I agree wholeheartedly with what he does. I wish we had more people mocking government leaders. I wish we had even more people mocking government. The result of government intervention in civil society is hilarious, as long as it is mostly theoretical.
Now, what the feminists at the Confluence, Hillbuzz, and others want you to do is protest the sexism of the comedian. Their argument is that they want to tear down a woman, regardless of what side they sit, since they have scary woman parts. Funny, but this person continues with something that they would totally agree with…
When people get the idea that politicians are something other than a mockery to real human beings, and that politicians can really help them, we get screwed. When people aren’t reminded that government is nothing more than a perpetual failure to be avoided whenever possible, we get things like Medicare, the National Endowment for the Arts, and Barack Obama. We need less mocking of government and its leaders like we need more self-righteous moral indignation. Enough already.
See, that’s a joke. He throw Obama under there of things that he dislikes and you keep moving on. He even had a funny picture of Obama. I looked, thought it was kinda silly and moved on. People will say that how do you move on from sexism on TV like this? The same way you kept it moving when you saw your boy halfwit IQ make his sexist remarks.
I laughed at most of his list. Laughing beats the hell out of self-righteousness, is more productive, and makes you look less like a weenie.
Now, I am sure that they will cry sexism over the use of weenie, but who really cares? Maybe they missed the part about Letterman being the host of the Late Show, which is a place for comedy and interviews. I bet if Sarah gets another shot at the White House, I bet that she will be trolling the late shows to get some free face time.
Letterman did what he does. He ridicules everything except liberalism and its practitioners. That’s his job, and he’s made a good, long career off it. And this was Letterman at his tamest. Only one line, the “slutty flight attendant” quip, would likely be considered offensive to Palin herself. Now I love Palin, I think she’s exactly what the Republican Party needs, and I laughed most at that line.
Comics are a lost, and treasured art form and I hope that CBS doesn’t kowtow to a small group of liberals that did not find the jokes funny about Sarah Palin and her daughter. The one thing about comedy is that you should never have to apologize about making a JOKE. If it is not funny, don’t laugh. But, comedians are supposed to push the edge. Even if you think that they have gone over it, they have not.
This is like playing the dozens or making momma jokes. We know that they are not true, but its a game of verbal brinksmanship, designed to cause the other to quit. It’s a battle of wits and quickness, similar to freestyle battles.
It’s an art form that you wouldn’t understand. It doesn’t always work, but you go where the beat takes you.
Plus, where was this outrage when you were ripping Michelle Obama to shreads?
angienc, on December 3rd, 2008 at 10:25 am Said: Delphyne:
And that ring – it resembles one that is given to the NFL super bowl winners.
Well, honestly, ME Chelle is about the size of an NFL linebacker, so there ya go.
was that too mean?
If we were to talk about Hillary like that, then we would be the worst people on earth? Here is an average NFL linebacker. This is DeMarcus Ware of the Dallas Cowboys and his child.
Here is a picture of Michelle Obama
But, we get it, it’s snark they will say. We are just pissed by the fact our choice was not elected and we feel that by running the better campaign, President Obama stole the election from us and our time to shine! We get it… He stole Democracy away from you and you want it back.
Here is what another frontpager said about the Michelle Things…
dakinikat, on December 3rd, 2008 at 10:46 am Said: I think the entire jewerly thing shows a level of shallowness benefitting a hollywood diva, but frankly, i think that some of these personal attacks on Michelle are reminding me of the ones on Palin and Hillary …
can’t we just leave it as it showing a high level of insensitivity on the part of a role model to go bling shopping during the worst recession since the 80s? It strikes me similar to what George H Bush did when he was clueless in the grocery store …
But it doesn’t stop there…that is the real lone voice of dissent. It is similar and either you have to be mad and vigilant ALL THE TIME or remain quiet and surrender the OUTRAGE card. Here is one more comment on the subject
catarina, on December 3rd, 2008 at 10:59 am Said: I apologize for nothing.
This King and Queen stuff is a slap in the face to the American people.
And as a self-proclaimed fashionista MO has sucky taste.
She is ugly and hard to look at b/c her insides are ugly.
This can apply to men too.
Everyone probably knows someone who could me attractive but anger or meanness has found it’s way to the exterior.
Ok I admit I have the flu and may be babbling deliriously.
But MO as first lady is just too much.
So why should Obama/Favreau/Letterman have to apologize if PUMAS and other so called “feminists” don’t??? So, snark is only for the non-famous bloggers to use against political candidates and their partners?
UPDATE The halfwit doesn’t understand….
The clown doesn’t understand why his previous comments that he apologized for doesn’t end there. To understand, when does it end for Jon Favreau?
An Obama spokesman says Favreau has apologized to the former first lady, who gave Obama a run for his massive piles of money during the Democratic primaries.
The transition official said Favreau has “reached out to Sen. Clinton to offer an apology,” an unfortunate choice of words under the photographic circumstances, as the Swamp’s Frank James points out in his item.
So, Jon reaches out and apologizes and he is still the subject of debate and discussion.
That is why halfwit. You put him in the detention cell of sexism, he apologizes and you don’t let him out. You make some comments about Ms. South Carolina, offer a mea culpa and then become the biggest feminist? The fact that you are having this conversation and justification is the reason you are a hypocrite on the subject.
myiq2xu, on June 10th, 2009 at 3:08 pm Said: I made those comments when I was still a regular at Baloney Juice. If I was a Failbot I could still be there telling sexist and misogynist jokes all day every day and they not only wouldn’t complain, they would laugh their asses off.
Then a commenter JUSTIFIES their sexism
meeee2, on June 10th, 2009 at 2:38 pm Said: I really can’t stand sexism, but the Ms Teen South Carolina contestant was just begging for jokes after the answer she gave. I laughed loudly at the comments you made. There are some arenas where women need to be very careful if they don’t want to be made fun of….men, too…the big dumb football players come to mind.
That losing is hard and losers don’t take stock in their shortcomings…
That sounds harsh, and looking back at what I typed, without some context, you would think that might be somewhat misplaced. But, as a former debate type, I come with evidence of my claims.
1) McCain support.
Some of the PUMA factions loved up John McCain, after Hillary dropped out of the race. John McCain’s sacrifices are admirable for the country, and should not be forgotten. But, as the leader of the country, I would definitely stop short before giving him the keys to the car. But, some PUMA supporters STRONGLY PUSHED FOR HIS ELECTION.
Pat Johnson, on January 1st, 2009 at 11:05 am Said:
Most of us Dems voted McCain/Palin in protest. This was something new to the party who expected “unity” no matter what or who the candidate was or offered. This is what set us apart. We never gave in.
What you fail to realize is that not only is that NOT a protest vote, you do actually what John points out here...
Fortunately, the one who makes the biggest stink isn’t the one who wins. Just because you have a cult like belief, doesn’t make your religion the right one for everyone.
What leader would urge you to protest your vote (something that they fought long and hard for the right for all of us to do so) to vote for the side that has done the least for your cause, historically and recently?
Politico talks about the boost that McCain received from Palin nomination.
ST. PAUL, Minn. — The selection of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate has electrified conservative activists, providing a boost of energy to the GOP nominee-in-waiting from a key constituency that previously had been lukewarm — at best — about him.
By tapping the anti-abortion and pro-gun Alaska governor just ahead of his convention, which is set to start here Monday, McCain hasn’t just won approval from a skeptical Republican base — he’s ignited a wave of elation and emotion that has led some grass-roots activists to weep with joy.
Now, don’t you feel a little suspicious about the pick? Are you so blinded about the choice that you fail to see why the choice was made? This had all feeling of a choice of convenience and political gain. Kudos to McCain for attempting to get elected, but choosing him was a vote designed to punish your opponent. Again, for PUMAS, they live the “the enemy of my enemy is my friend…” to the fullest.
Most importantly for McCain, the two constituencies who are most energized by Palin just happen to be the twin grassroots pillars of the GOP: anti-abortion activists and pro-Second Amendment enthusiasts and sportsmen. Without these two camps making phone calls, stuffing envelopes and knocking on doors, Republican presidential candidates would severely lack for volunteers. They are critical to the health of the conservative coalition that has dominated Republican politics for a generation.
Republicans say the primary source for the passion can be found in Palin’s example and authenticity.
Not only is the 44-year-old governor opposed to abortion rights — but she carried and gave birth to a child with Down syndrome earlier this year, a profound and powerful motivating force to both opponents of abortion rights and the parents and relatives of special needs children.
Even if you think that Obama has not done all he can to get to abortion, the right wingers won with the murder of Dr. Tiller. Your reproduction rights would not have been safe.
Here was McCain on Abortion from Time
McCain’s straightforward answer, along with his assertion that he would not have nominated any of the Supreme Court’s four liberal judges (notwithstanding that he voted to confirm all but John Paul Stevens, who was named before McCain was in the Senate), had social conservatives breathing sighs of relief. “I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies,” McCain said to cheers from the audience.
So, even if you think that Obama is not pro-choice enough, he is more than McCain. But, the usual story of Hillary supporters who voted for McCain make the argument that the candidate supported their views. That is a difficult one to reconcile.
2) Random Obama Hatred
Yes, he beat your choice. That happens all the time. But, this was the year that a small and vocal crowd never let up with their belief their candidate was the best one for the job and that she really won. I really would have respected a write in campaign for her, and allowed that to be the measuring stick of her power. Now, that the election is over, you don’t need to hate. Hate the ballot measures, no need to hate the man. You can go to any random post at the Confluence or other PUMA affiliated sites and STILL see the pain that they face with Obama winning. They take the slogan hate the player not the game to a new level.
Sophie, on June 1st, 2009 at 7:46 am Said: The infatuation matters because Obama’s ambitions are so grand.
If only. I’m still reeling from yesterday, its history and significance. This last year has been the worst of my life and I lay it squarely at the feet of whoever this puppet master is. There really is no where for me to go politically in America. I disagree with the Republicans on 98% of the issues and I think the Democrats are too stupid to vote or govern their way out of a paper bag.Regency, on May 31st, 2009 at 5:59 pm Said: I thought I was crazy for still grieving over this day. I know now that I’m not. I keep feeling robbed and it’s just hard to even see the words “President Obama” knowing that the ending should have been very different. This was the turning point if there ever was one.
Did the message get through? Well, consider this: people who voted early went overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama; those who made up their minds during the three days after the ad was broadcast voted heavily for Mrs. Clinton.
For more than a century, American politicians have played on racial fears to divide the electorate and mobilize xenophobic parties. Blacks have been the “domestic enemy,” the eternal outsider within, who could always inspire unity among “we whites.” Richard Nixon’s Southern strategy was built on this premise, using coded language — “law and order,” “silent majority” — to destroy the alliance between blacks and white labor that had been the foundation of the Democratic Party, and to bring about the Republican ascendancy of the past several decades. The Willie Horton ad that George H. W. Bush used against Michael Dukakis in 1988 was a crude manifestation of this strategy — as was the racist attack used against John McCain’s daughter, who was adopted from Bangladesh, in the South Carolina Republican primary in 2000.
It is possible that what I saw in the ad is different from what Mrs. Clinton and her operatives saw and intended. But as I watched it again and again I could not help but think of the sorry pass to which we may have come — that someone could be trading on the darkened memories of a twisted past that Mr. Obama has struggled to transcend.It is significant that the Clinton campaign used its telephone ad in Texas, where a Fox poll conducted Feb. 26 to 28 showed that whites favored Mr. Obama over Mrs. Clinton 47 percent to 44 percent, and not in Ohio, where she held a comfortable 16-point lead among whites. Exit polls on March 4 showed the ad’s effect in Texas: a 12-point swing to 56 percent of white votes toward Mrs. Clinton. It is striking, too, that during the same weekend the ad was broadcast, Mrs. Clinton refused to state unambiguously that Mr. Obama is a Christian and has never been a Muslim.
bostonboomer, on May 5th, 2009 at 7:24 am Said: I think you’re right about the people who are using reaction formation as a defense. Many Obots voted for Obama *because* he is part African American and his skin is light brown, in order to assuage their own guilt and fear. Some of us were actually able to look at Obama’s past history and his stated policies instead of the color of his skin.
Defense mechanisms are entirely unconscious, and that makes it very difficult for people to see their own behaviors and their consequences. The over-the-top reactions are the key. Overreaction that can easily be seen by others is typical of reaction formation.
Of course these Obots are also using projection–seeing their own extreme emotions in others.
The arguments being raised about Mr. Obama’s blackness — or his lack of blackness — seem positively antique at a time when Americans are moving away from the view of ancestry as a central demographic fact and toward a view that dispenses with those traditional boundaries. Even so, the complaints about Mr. Obama provide an interesting opportunity to examine the passing of the old and the rise of the new.
The claim that the candidate isn’t really black because his mother is white carries little weight under either system. It makes no sense at all to the young Americans who checked more than one box when identifying themselves by race in the last census. They subscribe to a fluid notion of race and seem perfectly willing to let people describe themselves racially any way they choose.
Nor does the charge make sense in the black community itself. That community has historically and eagerly embraced as black anyone and everyone with any African ancestry to speak of. That embrace often included interracial families, who lived in black communities long before they were accepted elsewhere. It included even blue-eyed, sandy-haired people like the civil rights leader Walter White, whose black ancestry was imperceptible to the naked eye.The carpetbagging black Republican Alan Keyes opened up this racialist can of worms when he opposed Mr. Obama in the Illinois Senate race back in 2004. Badly outmatched and reaching for any brick he could find, Mr. Keyes blurted out that Mr. Obama was not black because he was not descended from slaves. The Daily News columnist Stanley Crouch later seemed to second that view, saying that Mr. Obama had not “lived the life of a black American.”
His critics are at least right when they describe his journey as a departure from the customary stereotype. But they are fundamentally wrong when they try to argue that the journey described in his affecting 1995 memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” is somehow incompatible with blackness.At bottom, the hue and cry over Barack Obama’s identity stems from a failure by black traditionalists to recognize multiracial versions of themselves. Soon enough, perhaps by year’s end, however, the Obama story, which seems so exotic to so many people now, will have found its place among all the other stories of the sprawling black diaspora.
Joanelle, on October 31st, 2008 at 10:43 am Said: Oh, boy, I went to an awards dinner last night and ended up being invited to sit at the “reserved” table (head table) but when I sat I found that five out of the seven of us were Obots – who carefully assured us all that Obama will be elected next week so we had nothing to worry about. The other three of us just sat there and smiled – mainly because we knew they were wrong but didn’t want to ruin their meal.
You MEANT that you HOPED that they were wrong, but they ended up being right. How do you feel now? I bet rather foolish and if you saw those people again, they should be like, ” IN YOUR FACE!”
The Prologue: Where do they go from here?
If I was the Confluence, I would stop the label of PUMA. It was a funny, off the cuff quip that has lost its flavor like a piece of gum that that has been chewed for an hour. It’s stale and the rhetoric is stale around the Confluence house. Change the diapers of the baby!
You have some things that are definitely worth saving. Most of the people there are not ignorant, in fact they are mostly very bright individuals who are so tied up into their cause, they reject others with ad-homs. Gotta build bridges, not continue to build trenches around your position. If you have beliefs, don’t shy away from debate. Good ideas rise to the top and bad ones sink to the bottom.
The tradition in the blog-o-sphere is to aviod debate and limit discussion of various topics if they are opposite than yours. It should be exaclty the opposite. If someone has a different view, invite them to debate. Facts will stand at the end of the debate. You should never feel the need to ban discussion or commentors unless they can only go to ad-homs, which some frontpagers are great at. (You know who…lol)
Here is what I am going to do…you should too…
This is where the blog first took it’s turn as a step away from the childish toys of our youth, but not quite towards our fathers Vitalis…
The Maxim Top 100 is a list of the most beautiful women that have caught our eye. The First Lady has managed to crack the list with a grace and beauty that captivated the masses.
The First Lady is No. 93. according to Philly.com.
Yesterday, Maxim magazine released the first 10 names on its annual “eyeball-searing, fantasy-fulfilling, brain-exploding” Hot 100, and there, between an “awesome Aussie” TV star and a “mind-blowingly sexy” supermodel was Michelle Obama.
Yes, the one in the White House.
What’s she doing in such a “stimulus package”?
Well, Maxim says its knows a “political bombshell” when it sees one, pledging its allegience to “the hottest First Lady in the history of these United States. (Sorry, Martha Washington!)”
This is a lot better than all the discussion Michelle’s footwear has brought. This is what the LA Times is speculating on, instead of worrying about their financial future
They’re trendy Lanvin sneakers. Which look really nice and comfy and all. Trouble is, they cost $540. If you can find a pair anywhere.
And, of course, if you’ve got $540, plus — what? — 9 or 10% tax in some places. Which seems like a lot for two shoes not guaranteed to benefit your jump shot.
So, if she was a basketball player, her footwear would be okay? She can spend that on a pair of Jordans, but no other brand? Do you know how much a nice pair of comfortable dress shoes cost for men? Exactly… People need to get over themselves. Shoes are not an issue and this post further proves that. While we would disagree on Palin’s (more to me Republican issue of spending campaign contributions on fashion, not that she wore any one thing) clothes and MO’s clothes, this shouldn’t be an issue
The other trouble is that — wait for it — she wore them to a poverty event, a Capitol Area Food Bank for Feeding America to provide much appreciated help and publicity to benefit the food bank.
Mrs. Obama also has gone to serve a lunch hour at soup kitchens in Washington, where an unidentified presumably homeless person showed up with a camera cellphone to capture Mrs. Obama, who kindly posed for the man.
We have a video review below of Michelle Obama’s first 100 days too.
The sharp-eyed Amy Diluna was first to spot the first lady footwear contradiction here.
Sharp-memoried politics readers will recall all the positive attention Mrs. Obama garnered during the presidential campaign for her everyday, every-woman $150 dresses from Black & White Market.
While Cindy McCain, John’s wealthy wife, and some woman from Alaska both attracted negative attention for their expensive clothing, some of it reputedly borrowed.
(FYI, Michelle Obama is a Democrat. The other two women are Republicans. But what could that have to do with anything?)
Diluna also notes about Mrs. Obama: “A week ago, she shoveled dirt at a tree planting while wearing the line’s chiffon tank. Dresses and strappy pumps cost upward of $1,500, while tops go for $400 to $1,000.” An online poll by the N.Y. Daily news finds 59% think the shoe choice was in poor taste for a poverty event.
Now, the video below.
How many of them actually voted? So, the lady goes to help out at a soup kitchen and you are worried about what shoes she is wearing? This is trying too hard, or as my kids in Richmond used to say, “You are doing too much….”
— Andrew Malcolm
Just behind Obama at 94 was Yvonne Strahovski, the Down Under actress who costars in NBC’s Chuck.
And just ahead at 92 was “blonde and Polish” supermodel Joanna Krupa, star of some sizzling PETA ads.
The countdown continues today, with numbers 81 to 90, at Maxim.com.