The Hot Blog

Where have you been for the last 20 years that only NOW are you amazed what "we're" discussing? :p

First of all, I blame Dave's writers-- first, for continually being unable to create funny Top 10 lists, and more importantly, for failing to realize that the Palins were traveling with their 14-year old daughter. Unbeknownst to Letterman, the scenarios he was joking about involved this girl, and in that context, were in terrible taste. In this regard, the Palins' anger is justified.

Personally, I find the jokes a little tacky even when directed at Bristol, but I suppose she's fair game. Letterman doesn't shoulder any blame, imo.

Finally, I think the Sarah Palin's response was over-the-top, and felt a little like she was trying to score some political points, which is a little tacky in and of itself.

I shake your virtual hand.

Tacky tacky tacky. Palin Letterman...all of it.

Mystery - When Dave gives you kudos on a subject like this, that should give you pause and think twice.

I ended with a dig on Palin. ALL IS FORGIVEN.

Who's the punchline of the jokes involving Palin's daughter?

Sarah Palin? Nope

Was it Todd Palin? Nope

The daughter herself? Nope

ELLIOT SPITZER AND ALEX RODRIGUEZ? Maybe? Maybe, DUHHHH?

The Palins' reaction isn't justified as much as it is disturbed and pathetic. Just the act of taking that Spitzer line and warping its meaning to the point where they're claiming that Letterman was all but saying, "Ha-HAAA! Raping a 14-year-old is funny!" is not an intelligent response on any level. You have to be sunk into a deeply narcissistic bunker mentality to think that this joke was actually about your daughter and not the sleezy politician.

Here's what I don't get about the right. Mystery, maybe you can help me here. Many conservatives (my father-in-law is big on this) constantly gripe about how PC liberals/the left are. Everything offends them, everything requires sensitivity training, you have to watch everything you say, etc. Yet David Letterman, who has been around forever and making off-color jokes for just as long, gets Palin and Co. up in arms? Really? I find it hard to believe that Sarah and Todd (and others) are really that offended. She seems to enjoy and crave attention, which isn't unusual for someone like her, but makes her just like all the rest, despite claims to the contrary. The lady may gripe about the media every chance she gets but she loves seeing her name on TV and in the paper.

And now she is on the Today showing stating that a Letterman joke is representative of cultural rot and ruin in America today. Doesn't she have a state to govern? Or is that just a part-time job to supplement her full-time campaign job?

Mystery - Letterman's a renown control freak. He read that joke, pre-airing, probably a half-dozen times in as many hours. Letterman didn't give an F who was with Palin, because he wanted to take shots at Palin...which is what he does when someone passes coming on the show. Which she has. Several times. Forget whether you like Letterman and dislike Palin, (coughPolandcough), it's a pussy's response to blame the writers especially when you're a micro-manager.

Stella - yeah, she does love the attention. Just as Prejean does and they know how to play the Christian Conservative base as well as Obama knows to play the hopeychangey crowd. The reaction you're seeing from her and her supporters is because the barrage has been non-stop, whether it's national media or shit drummed up at home. Think of it this way - look at the shit Michelle Obama got during the election, now picture if Barack lost and it didn't end. Michelle would have still been a public figure and invited to national events, but that doesn't mean everything she did was fair game.

In Palin's case, is it really all the media's fault? She will not go away; in fact, she seems to insist on not going away. This is not an attempt to absolve the media of any blame or responsibility here, but Palin has been trying to have it both ways for a while now: bash the "liberal" media but court and use the media every chance she gets. There she is bashing Letterman; there she is going after Obama's Special Olympics joke; there she is taking on Levi; there she is releasing a statement on the murder of Dr. Tiller. So on and so forth. And, somewhat ironically I think, recently she said something along the lines of "screw political correctness." Yet she is outraged by a late night comic's joke.

Hallick- It was a SEX JOKE that, intentionally or not, involved Palin's 14 year old daughter. Doesn't matter who the ultimate butt of the joke is. Like the Aristocrats joke, its not about the punchline. Perhaps you lack a needed parental perspective.

Stella's Boy- The fact that conservatives bemoan political correctness doesn't mean that one can't be personally offended by mean-spirited jabs directed at their family. Until Palin calls for some speech-chilling legislation, I see no contradiction.

"Doesn't she have a state to govern?"

This is ridiculous. Obama went to a Broadway show. Doesn't have have a nation to govern? You're exhibiting a huge double-standard, ignoring the hundreds of politicians that do the exact same thing. She hasn't made a tenth of the appearances Barney Frank has.

Martin S- Letterman said that the joke was meant for Bristol (yes, still tacky). I believe him. And maybe I need to watch the clip again, but I don't remember Letterman blaming the writers. I blame them. Was it a careless mistake? Yes. Maybe this incident will jolt them out of their complacency.

As for your "fair game" comment, it really is a borderline call. Bristol has made herself available for interviews, and I believe she has proactively made speaking engagements for herself. Undeniably, she is being treated differently because she is the daughter of a Republican. There is no pretense of equal-opportunity ribbing on Late Night. But that's nothing new.

Did Letterman never make fun of Chelsea Clinton? My doesn't she have a state to govern comment was just a little throw away line. The fact of the matter is Palin wants to have it both ways. I'm sure you don't see any contradiction. I'd expect nothing less from you, but it is amusing to me that the same week she loudly declares "screw political correctness" she picks a fight with a late-night comic.

On MSNBC this morning Peggy Noonan rightfully argued that Palin does herself no favors when she decides to pick fights with the likes of Letterman, and Margaret Carlson has written a good piece where she says the same. Palin sure does seem to enjoy getting into it with people.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-12/palin-cant-outsmart-letterman/full/

Still, Sarah Palin attacking the vulgarity of Letterman while standing next to that bigoted sack of hate speech and de facto leader of the GOP, Rush Limbaugh, is reason enough to ignore her.

I thought going after Bristol was fair game because she's on record as saying abstinence doesn't work until someone handed her a big fat paycheck to say it does work.

She accepted money to be a public spokesperson for a cause she looks more than a little hypocritical on. Thats red meat for a comedian, irregardless of party.

Should letterman been aware who Palin was at the baseball game with and made it clear he was talking about Bristol in the joke.
Yes,
In that way, the jokes were sloppy. But point to me another time Letterman has made a joke about underage rape being funny before you ascribe intent.

Is Palin using this to try to score some cheap political points. No question.

Does this story need to go away...absolutely

Stella - In Palin's case, is it really all the media's fault? She will not go away

This is exactly my point, Stella. She came to NY for an Autism walk, went to a Yankees game, then went through a speaking/attending charade for a GOP fundraiser, where she opted not to speak. Outside of a Hannity interview, did she appear anywhere pre-Letterman blowup? So what exactly did she do wrong, other than turn Letterman's crew down, again? She's not allowed to be an advocate for autism? She can't attend a Yankees game?

If you really want to be rid of her, yell at the MSM outlets that cover her, but we both know she draws eyeballs so they won't. It's the ultimate double-dip for the MSM; they get to use her to pull audience - like or hate viewers - and discredit her at the same time. She, in turn, tries to counter that with the shot she did on Today. Her problem is that whatever serious issues she talks about, get buried under the tabloid coverage. Even when its Alaska-based stories, such as the failed slander attempts, the MSM covers the charge but not the outcome.

Mystery - Letterman took no blame. As anal retentive as the d-bag has been from his first days, it shows alot that he couldn't even muster the backbone to say the non-clarification was his fault. By saying what he did, he's passing it on to everybody else. Can't tarnish that image with Leno gone, because he'll bail in a year if he loses to Conan.

"Did Letterman never make fun of Chelsea Clinton?"

Sure he did. Has Letterman made 1000 other jokes at the Palin's expense? Yes. Do we, in turn, have 1000 public statements condemning each one? No. So maybe this particular subject matter was different? Perspective.

"I'd expect nothing less from you"

Uh oh, gettin' a little testy. The correlation you're trying to make between political correctness and the reaction to Letterman's comments is tenuous.

Martin S- I agree that Letterman's mealy-mouthed statement was mostly defense, and I didn't detect any contrition. I don't respect him. But I've never been big on "the buck stops here" posture. People are responsible for their own actions. I don't think it was too big of a stretch to assume that his writers would know what they were writing about. He knows better now.

It's not like the joke sprung up out of a vacuum, there was a specific and hugely publicized event from which became the reference. Randomly calling her daughters sluts had Bristol not gotten knocked up would've made the joke much more mean-spirited and antagonistic. This is not to blame the victim but the circumstances of someone getting knocked up coming out of a “pro-abstinence” provided the irony to become monologue fodder. Such things as extra-marital affairs aren’t funny, so maybe one person like Howard Stern would make jokes at Kathy Lee’s expense, most stayed away from the topic. However, when LaToya Jackson is involved in an unfunny matter of domestic violence, her sponsoring a 976-psychic hotline is gonna bring out the “shouldn’t she have seen that coming” retorts.

I think the thing got traction in part because it was a slow news day. Also to deep gulf that often divides this country. I’m not sure how seriously Palin was ever taken by the media but say if it had been Tipper Gore’s daughters in the ‘80’s who’d gotten knocked up when she was campaigning so hard for what was seen as a pro-censorship movement, I don’t doubt that the jokes would’ve come out for her. (no current example off the top of my head). I don’t think it was a lefty-righty slam, in and of itself, but the fallout quickly spreads along those lines.

I personally just thought of it as a joke without much need for attack. Now sure it’s within Sarah’s right (for lack of a better word) to come out swinging. The fact that it was her 14 yr old daughter who was there gives her more of a righteous leg of indignation to stand on. While it’s not “fair” for the kids, actions by parents wishing to be in national politics or in the limelight, puts them at risk for public scrutiny. In an instant message, internets, 24 hr news world that we’ve been in for some time, no one can feign ignorance of the microscope their loved ones would be put under.

What I don’t like is trying to re-class lexicon to aid a position. Getting knocked up has never meant anything to do w/rape, only carelessness. It reminded me of that female basketball player who played in Seattle a few years back who (she) made the bet w/the local radio dj about being able to spank her on the air if she lost the bet. There were definite camps over how it should be handled and categorized. Inappropriate, demeaning, poor taste, I could respect people’s pov’s regardless what side they were on but I took exception when an outside group brought it as an example of violence against women. Maybe even if consensual they’re on the same continuum and maybe me being a male should take an automatic stfu on this round but in sort of an over prosecution of charges, I think it can weaken the offended party’s position in the court of public opinion.

Other TV personalities have commented on the lack of joking that people are sort of allowed to make at politicians because of the animosity and hidden agenda assumption that correlates to the ideological divide. I don’t wanna say oh wouldn’t it be great if the world was less pc or who needs to lighten up more, but I think if people would take more time to sniff the what & why something is up for public consumption, it might allow for better jokes and longer laughs. Which really shouldn’t that be an important element of life?

"Hallick- It was a SEX JOKE that, intentionally or not, involved Palin's 14 year old daughter. Doesn't matter who the ultimate butt of the joke is. Like the Aristocrats joke, its not about the punchline. Perhaps you lack a needed parental perspective."

Ummm...not every joke is like the Aristocrats joke. Hence that's one of the reasons the Aristocrats joke has the reputation it has. It's own individuality.

Besides which, Elliot Spitzer was the punchline AND the target AND the butt of that particular joke. It didn't matter if the girl in the joke was Palin's daughter or Miley Cyrus. The girl was just a McGuffin in a stock joke that wouldn't have made me laugh except for the circumstances of Letterman's reading it again in the above (now-removed) clip.

If anyone had cause to be upset by the joke, it was the guy being accidentally made to look like a pedophile.

for what it's worth, i agree with hallick. i saw that letterman episode a few nights ago and thought it was all about spitzer, not bristol (and i assumed it was bristol letterman referred to because i didn't know about the younger sister), talk about a storm in a teacup

It's also worth noting--and not the least bit coincidental--that Palin decided to make an issue of this only hours after a new poll asked who was the presumptive spokesman for the GOP. Palin placed SEVENTH, behind Nobody, a radio host, three disgraced ex-office holders (Bush, Cheney, Gingrich) and a losing Presidential candidate (McCain). Obviously she needed to get the spotlight back on her any way she could, and even went so far as to imply Letterman is a child molester, which is far, far worse than any of his jokes. And if she'd ever bother listening to McCain, he would tell her that taking on Letterman is a battle she will lose...and badly.

Triple - very good breakdown. I never thought Letterman was making a rape joke, I just know what kind of prick the guy is and his motivations for singling Palin out at every opportunity got a deserved, disproportionate blowback. The problem I have with him throwing her daughter into the mix is that she did nothing but go to a Yankees game. The basic fact is there's a contingent of people whose disdain for Palin and what she represents overrides logic and foments a double-standard. By comedians relevancy is utmost and the pregnancy as a punchline has expired, but because it's Palin and a bitterman like Dave, there's no clock. Yet it's a safe bet Letterman has killed Obama and Biden jokes for that very reason.

Cadavra - my god are you digging blind. She turned down the speaking gig at the GOP fundraiser because of the attention it would bring since she would have had to talk about national issues. If polling and the spotlight was such a concern, she would have spoke, and taken the appearances she turned down, like Letterman's, and The View, and GMA, etc...

As for the child molester insinuation, boo-effin-hoo. There's a dozen more personal cracks that were passed on.

And she did listen to McCain...on a number of issues...and it went badly...because his people told her not to fight back...and that the MSM loves John so they'll love her...

Yeah, they told her not to fight back, and she blew them off and upped the crazy all the same. Polling clearly showed she was a drag on the ticket.

A storm in a tea cup indeed.

Martin S, you're so damn smart but do you really think that Palin was somehow unfairly represented during the campaign and was "watered down" by McCain? She said so many stupid and insulting things about "the real America" etc that she's fortunate she's even governor still. America rejected her bigtime. She helped McCain lose.

And again, anybody like Palin who considers the hateful sleaze that Rush peddles as conservative values deserves her arrows -- but I agree, not her poor family whom she herself dragged into the web of GOP hypocritical moral crazy.

I can't believe a guy like Martin S. who's generally smart and probably around my age and definitely in the biz is so ruthlessly bagging on a TV INSTITUTION like Letterman. Really, you didn't grow up on the guy, idolizing him and watching Late Night on tape after school every day? "D-bag"? "Prick"? REALLY? It's just our curmudgeonly old TV friend Dave... It's so odd that this MINOR AND OBVIOUS JOKE (and to a lesser degree that McCain thing last year) have placed a genial and goofy TV host in the right's rarefied "enemies of Jesus, backyard BBQs, marrying your high school sweetheart, and The Flag" (BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, JESUS IS AMERICAN) status with Sean Penn, Chavez and co.

IT'S LETTERMAN. Seriously. Anytime I want to just go whole-hog with my increasing grumpy conservatism, right wingers have to demonize Hollywood or comedians when it's "Mock Outrage O'Clock"... the same right wingers you can see on Big Hollywood or on Ziegler telling us all to "lighten up!" and that "political correctness has gone too far! Retards and gays are FUNNY, people."

Hannity and Greta all going on with panels full of humorless white squares who act like every hardon authority figure and unfunny high school teacher EVER, dissecting this INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS joke with this hair splitting: "BUT, BUT IT WAS WILLOW AT THE GAME! WILLOW WAS THERE! NOT BRISTOL! HIS WRITERS SHOULD DO THEIR RESEARCH."

As if ONE PERSON on the planet would've made that leap and not believed it was about the ABSTINENCE POSTER GIRL WHO GOT KNOCKED UP. Jesus.

Any politician instantly loses me when they start playing the "family values" card, but the "blame Hollywood's morals" card TAKES THE FUCKING CAKE, whether it's video games or Beavis or Marilyn Manson or torture flicks or... or... a 62-YEAR-OLD COMEDIAN MAKING A JOKE about a "slutty flight attendent" look. Who fucking CARES?

This is like taking on Carson or Bob Hope. It's absurd a pretty big miscalculation; It also shows a PROFOUND LACK OF HUMOR AND IRONY, but then again Palin is like the ultimate competitive, no-humor, no-irony, bullyish small-town SPORTS WIFE who's all about WINNING and taking oneself SERIOUSLY with no SELF-DEPRECATION or awareness.

It's funny that Sarah's inability to admit that the joke makes sense only in the context of being about Bristol has put Willow in the middle of this. I wonder how she feels about that. The whole thing would've quickly evaporated into the atmosphere if Sarah hadn't expressed her faux outrage everywhere to gain political points.

1. The saddest part of this is Letterman used to be a genius. In the 80's - nobody - influenced comedy like him. When he went to CBC and started coming out with the dancing Vegas showgirls he became a hack. No longer was he counter-culture but he kissed the ass of every elite Hollywood star out there. That is what is sad about this. A genius of comedy, over a decade has become a bitter, paranoid, delusional, partisan hack.

This occured before the world even knew who Sarah Palin was.

2. Can hacks like Letterman and Jon Stewart lay off the "I'm only a comedian" rubbish. They do not believe it. We do not believe it. Letterman believes he is a barometer of culture and can influence the way America sees the world. He does. So does Stewart. Most under 40's get their news from these hacks and they know it and feed off of it.

3. The Marx Brothers were comedians. Lenny Bruce was a comedian. Richard Pryor was a comedian. George Carlin was a comedian.

Will Letterman really argue that all of these had the same agenda and the same effect on the culture? Comedy can come from a place of hate, pain, cruelty, joy, love etc. The "I'm only a comedian" defense from a previous genius now hack like Letterman is getting tired. It's like the "it's only a movie argument." Only people who do not understand art use it.

Personally I wish I had seen his Willow Palin dig but I cannot bother. I was a huge Letterman fan in the 80's and went to high school many times bleary eyed because I stayed up to watch him. Then, he was king. But like Howard Stern, he is no longer counter culture and is the culture. An old man telling establishment jokes that have no rhyme,no meter, no wit and no insight. Just a hack.

He never got over Leno getting The Tonight Show and now is content to piss whatever little legacy he has left down the drain.

Sad really. He should not be fired. He should just retire for the betterement of that age old institution we call comedy.

let's play 'how many times can i use the word 'hack'!

'Personally I wish I had seen his Willow Palin dig but I cannot bother.'

nicole, maybe you should bother to get your facts straight before you post like a HACK (that's one for me, 38 for nicole, clearly the all-time HACK champ)

Why oh why am I about to respond to Nicol D's above idiocy? He probably won't read it and almost surely won't clock back into this thread again now that he's delivered his Pearl Harbor attack of joyless assholedom.

But let me address the central argument at play in the EMINENTLY COUNTER-CULTURE Nicol D's angry screed:

"I liked movies and comedian better before I became a joyless old prick." Too bad I don't think he's even old. Or American.

If AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANY of that older stuff you're singling out for praise dropped TODAY, you would not like it. Hannity, Ziegler, Breitbart, Rush and O'Reilly would issue the edict that Richard Pryor, or 1982 Stern, or Carlin, or Bruce was an official ENEMY OF THE STATE, and you and your likeminded Big Hollywood Posse would follow in perfect lockstep formation. You're basically singing their praises for the way they pissed off THE OLD RICH WHITE HUMORLESS ESTABLISHMENT in their day.

I have several friends and former coworkers who follow the Nicol D political line to a T -- and hell, you can read Ziegler or John Nolte on Big Hollywood for more evidence of this -- and they almost all have that "THEY DON'T MAKE 'EM LIKE THEY USED TO" attitude toward popular culture: movies, music, comedians, celebrities etc. When in fact the art hasn't changed, the comics haven't changed, music hasn't changed... Just that Nicol and his far-right pals HAVE CHANGED, into the very authoratarian, humorless schoolmarm types THEY would've mocked when they were kids.

Your argument reeks of that whole "white man getting older and tuning out to anything new and current" vibe. I am not speaking for Nicol but I can speak for the SEVERAL very, very Republican friends who follow his same logic. All of them will blather on about how great GNR or AC/DC was, back when "rock had balls" before everyone became so P.C. Same as Nicol's comedian argument. But if any of those bands came out today, they'd be marginalized as "evil influence" Hollywood scum, Hannity would have his Great American Panel decrying the war on TRADITIONAL VALUES, and My Fellow Republicans would turn up their noses at all that stuff. Ask Ludacris, of all BENIGIN and goofball acts, who had O'Reilly tearing into him like it was the fucking Salem Witch Trials. It cracks me up when Hannity goes to commercial playing some "man's man!" cock rock from like 1979, because, yeah, square rich white guys in suits TOTALLY FUCKING ROCK.

Again, I skew right on a LOT of shit: taxes, the environment, some law and order ass-kicking kind of stuff. But there are certain things that right-wingers know FUCK-ALL about, and COMEDY is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY up there.

"Letterman believes he is a barometer of culture and can influence the way America sees the world. He does."

^^ Also, really? REALLY? How exactly does one equate Letterman with Jon Stewart? Letterman, who's 99.9% of the time doing Top 10 lists and Stupid Human Tricks and interviewing Julia Roberts-- ie, THE SAME SHIT HE WAS DOING IN 1982? I'd ask if you even watch the show, but since you tow the PARTISAN RIGHT LINE to a T with ZERO diversion EVER like a good tool, it doesn't matter, since clearly your guys now view Letterman as if he has "Dave's Political Corner" every night for 44 straight minutes of telling the masses how to vote.

I'm always kind of curious to hear what the "conservative" answer to the comedy equation is? Like, what kind of jokes would even out this woeful liberal onslaught? What is "conservative" humor, exactly? Making fun of poor people? Some fat white guy in a suit coming out, "Hey, I was COUNTING MY MONEY on the WAY HOME FROM CHURCH THE OTHER DAY, and I saw some UGLY HOMELESS GUY. And he WASN'T EVEN PRAYING TO JESUS! So I tripped him and he busted his jaw... I'm telling you, folks, this guy didn't even have a 401K!" ZING!

Idiots like Nicol make me glad that despite all my Republican instincts, I don't put too much stock into any of this shit and barely vote.

If you really want to know what conservatives consider to be humor, you could watch Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld. Except I fear that you actually would kill yourself afterwards.

Gutfeld's the only guy I know who could have Tommy Wiseau on his show and not get any funny material out of the experience.

And if you want the 21st century version of conservative ha-ha, you could've just watched all six episodes of THE 1/2 HOUR NEWS HOUR from that FOX comedic mastermind, Joel Surnow. Where else could you see Dennis Prager and Ann Coulter team up for laugh-tracked skits on liberals? Nowhere now...

So is Letterman a hack, or is he pushing an agenda? Those are two separate things.

And honestly, I think the answer is, a little from column a, a little from column b. He's very hackish when he gladhands a band or Generic Hot Actress #26, and his disinterest is often palpable. He's obviously pushing an agenda when he goes after Bush or Palin, which I personally can't say that I mind. And he's still more relevant and funnier than anybody on TV after 11pm as far as I'm concerned. I don't see Conan rocking a lot of political boats.

DOES he really push an agenda THAT much though? The stuff people are complaining about just seems to fall within the usual monologue jokes and asides that Dave's done since '82. Is there really some expanding Stewart/Maher-esque leftist blowhardism that's been unleashed in the last year or so? The McCain snub stuff didn't seem that far removed from the antiestablishment G.E. skits Letterman did at NBC back in the day--

And out of curiosity, did Nicol and Martin S laugh back then at those classic bits? And would they laugh at them today, or opine that Dave was taking cheap anticapitalist shots at big business?

Again, I'm maintaining that his show is still 99% the same old grumpy Dave, taking on douchebags in any form, mixed with his traditional showman/host role. If you wanna complain that he's gone stale, or he's repeating material, or it's just not as funny anymore, anyone's welcome to that opinion. But Nicol and Martin are making it sound like genial, goofy, CARSON-ESQUE DAVE has suddenly turned into this Sean Penn-esque ideologue ranting about his political opinions day in and day out.

Which I'm just not seeing. Though I'm wondering if Nicol took issue with Dave LECTURING THE COUNTRY AND INFLUENCING POLITICAL DISCOURSE during eight years of Lewinsky blowjob jokes and Bubba weight jokes.

Again, Nicol Douche, not that you'll answer, but WHY do you tow the Republican conservative line 100% of the time when YOU ARE NOT AMERICAN, and NO ONE is RIGHT 100% of the time?

And do you honestly -- HONESTLY -- think that Sarah Palin is an intelligent, witty, well-spoken, self-aware person of integrity... or do you just BLINDLY BACK anyone who pays condescending lip service to the JOE SIX PACK boner-points of RELIGION, FAMILY, THE FLAG!?

The only FLAG you should worry about is that red maple leaf and your Mounted Police, you snowbound Canuck.

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAW, PRAISE JEEEEEEEEEEEESUS!

The biggest agenda he's been pushing for the last several years is 'Bush is an idiot'. Not exactly controversial.

It would be awesome, though, to hear Nicol provide one instance where he disagrees with the Republican party line on something like torture, or immigration, or anything.

Oh, and just to further ANNOY Nicol D, allow me to quote THE GREAT BILL MAHER'S GREATEST LINE OF ALL TIME, for which he should have won the Pulitzer:

"I don't mind that you're part of a dress-up cult that hates sex and worships magic..."

AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWESOME. Now process the fact that I can laugh at that and think BILL MAHER IS GOD, they should ban ALL MARRIAGE, NO ONE should have kids, RELIGION IS BORING and pointless since they all cancel each other out so why WASTE YOUR TIME thinking about that bullshit for a SINGLE SECOND as an adult...

yet I also don't give a damn about the environment, think hippies are assholes, burgers rule, and I watch O'Reilly AND Hannity every single night, and think that Jon Stewart is the biggest douche on television.

See, Nicol? It's called FORMING YOUR OWN OPINION, MR. DUE NORTH. YEP YEP YALL.

Honestly, Nicol, without this getting too indepth or obnoxious, for all your faults (and there are very, very many), you are at least a real person, and not an assemblage of talking points and debate strategies, which is what I think of Nicol.

Whoops, replace that first 'Nicol' up above with a 'Lex'. Sorry.

Apparently Leno told a similar joke back in September, but no one made any fuss about it. I guess Letterman is an easier target.

Yeah, I was waiting for someone to bring that up. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/13/leno-told-similar-joke-ab_n_215261.html

Man, from a half-dead thread to a Lex-fueled eruption...

Re: Leno's joke. That goes to what I said earlier. In September, the reference was timely because it was in the midst of that story unfolding. It wasn't nine months later.

Lex - Re: Letterman. He's always been hit-n-miss with me. I saw fractions from the 80's, a lot more in the 90's, and while not as irreverent as the 80's, he was still goofy. His attitude changed after the heart attack and I cannot recall him ever turning an 80's/90's interview into a political debate like he's done over the past several years. Shots at GE while collecting a check are not equal to admonishing presidential candidates.

There are certain moments you can lay a Powerpoint to, such as Finke's interview with Leno when she called him a Republican lackey. Jay, obsessed with being loved, did everything he could to prove his left credentials and it overtook his opening. The other factor is Stewart. Once the media started tossing his salad, Stweart became a demo ratings threat so the need to co-opt his territory became paramount. The big difference is that when Leno comes back, he'll take the populous joke where he finds them and Dave will wait to follow Stewart's lead.

This really comes back to a universal issue - are you broadcasting or narrowcasting? The path of least resistance wins every time in the industry, and for Stewart, Letterman, SNL, Maher, etc...that path is to hook left because their beliefs and sounding board - industry, colleagues, reporters - are left. Year after year we see audience corrosion, and the sound board reinforces to go more left because it's what they want, leading to a doubling-down on the same viewers. So not just does a CBS end up in-fighting for the same audience, the shows become even more beholden to that audience allowing less flexibility or risk losing that percentage. This is why I find bitching about Fox News so funny; it's total counter-programming and if ideology wasn't as dominating in the media world as so many proclaim, then the natural response would have been to make a play for that audience. Instead, we're told FNC viewers are zombies and will watch nothing else so there's no point but to counter-counter-program. So what happens? FNC gains more viewers.

As for right-humor versus left, it's actually about consistency. Pelosi is and has been a walking, breathing gag for years, only to be passed by Barney Frank and Biden in ripeness. Yet, the week Pelosi lies her ass off, blows a news conference where she tires to crab walk out of the room - SNL opens with Ferrel as W. Really? And have you seen Wig's Pelosi? It's as edgy as a Rich Little take. At what point am I not supposed to think Seth Myers open, personal agenda is not influencing his decisions as head writer? Am I not supposed to acknowledge skecthes that were aired then pulled from re-broadcast because certain people threw a shitfit to Zucker? Or how about how the Biden parody was dropped once word got back that he felt it wasn't right to mock him and not invite him on the show.

So the sole difference is the nine months? No outrage then because it was timely, but outrage now because it's nine months later?

If only comedians knew the joke goldmine they missed out in the 90's from the Clinton saga...but nope. All those liberals shut their mouth.

And which liberal comedian lost his show over knee-jerk Bush-era fear and loathing a few years back? Lex know this one.

And while I'm on a coffee roll, let me add how tired I am of media conservatives twisting the truth to prop up their outrage, and the Palin flap reminds me of the GOP nonsense over John Kerry's statement that not having an education would lead you to Iraq - a line having nothing to do with the troops but the idiot leaders who took us there.

Sarah Palin is a divisive, seething idiot and the more she pops up the less chance for her 2012 run, no matter the fantasies of conservatives, who actually think that these "attacks" on po' Palin equal public sympathy and ultimately, votes.

Epic Fail.

I must be misunderstanding, christian... you can't possibly mean to say that comics didn't shred Clinton - and still do - for The Blow Job. Right?

As for Letterman... still the best of what happens in Late Night. And when did Letterman turn anti-McCain? When McCain LIED to him about skipping his appearance... and LIED to him about bringing Palin on to make up for it.

Perhaps personal lies taken to a public comedy arena is petty. But it's what happened.

And what are STILL the Clinton jokes? The two big lies of his era... "I did NOT" and "I never inhaled."

Getting caught and lying is death. Letterman knows this, which is why he gave such a direct and truthful explanation. Did the writers know which kid it was? Probably.

Truth is, the joke works with either kid. Do we think that the elder sister was a virgin at 16? 15?

The joke was about A-Rod first, Palin Hypocrisy second. Not the greatest joke ever, but it works on multiple levels. If you are the parent of a not-anywhere-near-wedlock 17-year-old pregnant girl and you are a conservative who screams, "I am proud of my no birth control, no abortion, no marriage, no future except by dint of being born to a financially successful family daughter for having her baby and being a single parent," you are fair game... especially a couple of weeks after your frontgirl is on the cover of People (or US or whatever piece of crap).

The good part, however, is that Palin is further marginalizing herself. Letterman's audience is not huge by national standards, but it is loyal. Conan is raunchier, by a lot. The great irony of all of this is that Letterman is going to take a long lead in late night because he is the traditional one.

David, I was being ultra-uber-facetitious. All I recall of the 90's were Clinton jokes that you still hear today. There was no lib conspiracy to silence then either.

Though to be fair to the right, there was an endless liberal media whine, first that it was a vast right wing conspiracy and then that it was JUST about a blow job and that somehow the right was afraid of sex.

The same "conspiracies" work on both side to these days... selling their team's story. And it was always more than a blow job or just an attempt to derail a popular, relatively successful presidency. He was the top dog in the government and he did lie under oath.

This is what drives me nuts about some of the Bush stuff. It's as though he was not wrong enough going into Iraq for the bad reasons stated based on the bad intelligence that The Clintons had too. He had to be something more horrible with some sort of personal daddy issues added.

It is a classic right wing position to build the military industrial complex with wars, without which the military businesses would fade a bit. And indeed, the rebuilding of Iraq is a cash cow for Bush-friendly conglomerates.

None of that is impeachable or a war crime. It is horrible and inexcusable. But there is always the need to oversell when people want to attack or defend, which is unfortunate.

Flip side, I find, is my situation with other media, where some people focus on the fact that I am smacking whomever... and don't seem to absorb the substance of what I am saying. My hyperbole may well be what gets in the way. But I always also offer factual issues... and those rarely get as much attention in here as the nasty words. On the other hand, off of the blog, I hear about the substance of those posts - and am offered more detailed examples - almost every day.

Passions...

Well David, the history of Bush Jr. and his unsavory collusions are more revealing than the Clinton's. I can't trust a president who came into power under cloudy electoral chaos and whose daddy was the head of the CIA and rigged elections. Plus I lived under Governor Bush and saw firsthand his chicanery. He's not evil, but he's got a mean spirit.

Stella - So the sole difference is the nine months? No outrage then because it was timely...

From me, and a number of others, yes. Honestly, Yes. Letterman could have made that crack last fall and there would have been no major response. Look at it this way - when someone starts beating the Ayers/Wright drum from out of nowhere, what's the reaction? It's over.

Christian - And which liberal comedian lost his show over knee-jerk Bush-era fear and loathing a few years back?

Wow Christian, I didn't think anyone believed that bullshit anymore. Garafalo made the same claim about her sitcom that wasn't even aired and only on the bubble of a pickup. Wasn't true then, isn't true now.

Sarah Palin is a divisive, seething idiot and the more she pops up the less chance for her 2012 run, no matter the fantasies of conservatives, who actually think that these "attacks" on po' Palin equal public sympathy and ultimately, votes.

And let me quote myself from earlier...

The basic fact is there's a contingent of people whose disdain for Palin and what she represents overrides logic and foments a double-standard

Thanks for the validation.

Poland - And when did Letterman turn anti-McCain?

For a guy who worships at the Letterman alter, you sure have a wonderfully selective memory. The reason McCain skipped was because of all the shit Letterman was piling on the ticket. McCain's mistake was not telling Letterman to blow it our his ass. But typical McCain, his wanton love of the media is greater than much else.

Truth is, the joke works with either kid.

Relativism at it's finest. Letterman didn't give an F which kid it was. She turned him down, again, and put herself in the cross-hairs.

The great irony of all of this is that Letterman is going to take a long lead in late night because he is the traditional one.

I'm sure that wouldn't have anything to do with Leno's audience going with Leno.

ABC didn't cancel Maher because of the protest over his joke?

"Last year, on the first episode of his "Politically Incorrect" show since the Sept. 11 attacks, he infamously compared the bravery of American politicians with that of al-Qaida terrorists. "We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly," Maher said on the Sept. 17 episode. "Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it's not cowardly."

It was classic Maher, as infuriatingly un-p.c. as ever. But the times, at least momentarily, had changed. And few wanted to hear -- or defend -- Maher's comments. Enemies of Maher, on both the left and right, seized the opportunity and called him unpatriotic. A protest ensued. Even the Bush White House (a frequent Maher target) stoked the outrage, with spokesman Ari Fleischer calling Maher's remarks "a terrible thing to say" and the subsequent contretemps a reminder "to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is."

Maher apologized for his statements to "anyone who took it wrong," but the damage was done. Major advertisers pulled their commercials from the ABC show; 17 ABC affiliates dropped the program from the air. It was canceled May 14.

http://archive.salon.com/people/interview/2002/12/11/maher/index.html

For 11 years, Letterman made--and continues to make--Clinton/Lewinsky jokes. Clinton never once acted like a whiny little baby about them; he took his lumps, like any mature adult would. Moreover, he still appears on Letterman whenever his schedule permits. THAT is the difference between a grown-up and a self-righteous prig.

Martin S, by any rational and logical standard, Sarah Palin is indeed a divisive idiot.

Martin do you mean to say that this joke is inappropriate not because of its content but because of its timing? In September a joke like this is perfectly fine but in June it isn't? I get the impression that Palin really enjoys this stuff. Watching her with Lauer on Today last week, she had a mile-wide grin and didn't appear to be truly troubled by the joke. I just don't believe that her media hatred is sincere. It plays to the base and she can use the Letterman joke for her next round of interviews on talk radio and Fox News, but Palin is a media savvy modern politician. She is not a throwback or some breath of fresh air from Alaska. She knows how to use the "liberal media" card when she needs to but also knows how to use the media. The media, which cares about ratings and sales above all else, is happy to oblige.

Stella - The reaction now is not the same as it was or would have been. Believe me or not, but the main sticking point is that Bristol was nowhere near the scene in any sense of the term. So Letterman tells a joke that, to a lot on the right, is a long reach back to hit Palin just because she had the audacity to attend a Yankees game with a daughter. So the excuse of "woops, wrong daughter", doesn't fly because there was goddamn video of them at the game.

As for Palin and the media, I agree completely. She has a lot of disdain for the MSM but knows how to play it. The Letterman reaction didn't start with her. Righty blogs picked out the Yankees joke. Hannity and co tried to make a bigger deal out of the "slutty flight attendant" line, but it didn't stick.

Jeff - you and Christian can call her an idiot all you want, but she's running a state in the black, and you guys are doing what?

Cadvra - do you not see the difference? One is about the politician, the other is about her daughter. Have Letterman spend 1 month making fun of Chelsea, and let see how Bill reacts. If you were awake, you'd notice Palin didn't say shot about the Top Ten list - that made direct fun of her. Why? Because it's about her.

So, let me quote myself again

The basic fact is there's a contingent of people whose disdain for Palin and what she represents overrides logic and foments a double-standard

Christian - yeah, great. Maher has said on several occasions that Ari's quote was not in context. He lost his gig, as even Salon had to point out, Major advertisers pulled their commercials from the ABC show; 17 ABC affiliates dropped the program from the air. Let's be clear - anyone who loses a network advertisers, is going to lose their show.

Palin is a rotten cunt. Letterman is a cantankerous old bastard.

Palin is spending a lot of time monitoring the internet. The little regional mag i write for did an article on Palin called "Does Palin still matter?" And the article got 18 times the traffic as any other article ever posted on the site and a lot of the traffic came from strange addresses.

The media thing is ridicuous. Our politicians and our media are so intertwined. It's such a sad little scam. I was watching footage of the Iran elections which had 4 guys on the ballot. They did mention all 4 guys. usually, we have 4 guys on a presedential ballot, but we only hear about the democrat and the republican, unless ralph nader fucks up an entire election.

The media sponsors the debates and chooses 'not to invite' anyone other than the Democrat and Republian candidate.

Shouldn't every candidate on the ballot have the right to participate if the candidates are using the public's airwaves to broadcast them?

People who say we're living in a free society better think hard about what the word 'free' means. Nothing's free in a capitalist society.

Oh yes, the irony that ABC just HAD to cancel a show called POLITICALLY INCORRECT because some advertisers bailed in the Bush-led fear of the day.

Martin, I know what you're trying to do here, and like most conservatives, you're trying to revise history and pretend there wasn't a climate of censorious fear in the land after 9/11 up through the invasion of Iraq. I call BULLSHIT LxG style.

I was there my friend, and I recorded the MSM "liberal" media falling backwards to declare their allegiance to the powers-that-be. Send me your address and I'll send you a fun compilation of newscasters propping up Bush and the Invasion with lotsa high-fives. To say Maher got cancelled because a few advertisers pulled out is not the truth at all. And you know this! And who did they replace Maher with? Jimmy Kimmel, at the time an admitted Republican. Nice shift.

And you know Sarah Palin is a loudmouth hypocrite divider who helped McCain lose. And please, give me and Jeff a state with oil bubbling underneath and I'll keep it in the black too. With socialistic sharing of profits to boot!

If the Palins are so concerned about statutory rape they should have had Levi Johnston arrested.

Aside from that, this non-story is the biggest non-story of the year. I read somewhere that conservatives are going to use Letterman as their new evil-liberal spokesperson. Yeah, that'll work.

Anghus - that's her PAC. Rabid group, no doubt. I've gotten into it with them a few times. I also agree about multiple candidates instead of the two-party loggerhead.

Christian - call what you want, whatever style you feel like. You need the Bush years to be how you perceive them or what was the point of the last eight years of your life?

Iraq had nothing to do with Maher. Nothing. He was gone, IIRC, before we even entered Afghanistan. Whenever you can make a coherent argument that includes some facts, let me know.

I was there my friend, and I recorded the MSM "liberal" media falling backwards to declare their allegiance to the powers-that-be...

Good God...I really don't have an answer. If this is how you want to spend your life, I hope it brings you joy.

To say Maher got cancelled because a few advertisers pulled out is not the truth at all. And you know this!

I'm beginning to wonder if you're a real person or a gimmick. Maher doesn't even believe your theory.

give me and Jeff a state with oil bubbling underneath and I'll keep it in the black too...

ohmygod - Do you know what state you live in?

As for Letterman - ...It’s the perception rather than the intent.’ It doesn’t make any difference what my intent was, it’s the perception. And, as they say about jokes, if you have to explain the joke, it’s not a very good joke. And I’m certainly – ” (audience applause) “– thank you. Well, my responsibility – I take full blame for that. I told a bad joke. I told a joke that was beyond flawed, and my intent is completely meaningless compared to the perception. And since it was a joke I told, I feel that I need to do the right thing here and apologize for having told that joke. It’s not your fault that it was misunderstood, it’s my fault. That it was misunderstood

"I get the impression that Palin really enjoys this stuff. Watching her with Lauer on Today last week, she had a mile-wide grin and didn't appear to be truly troubled by the joke."

No shit. Sarah Palin is one of the biggest media whore/limelight junkies in North America right now.

Oh shoot - I just called her a whore. I guess that's 15 more minutes for the camera hog!

"If this is how you want to spend your life, I hope it brings you joy."

Right, Martin. That's a pithy talk radio response. Watching our nation driven to a bullshit war (also one of the reasons our economy is kaput) was the opposite of "joy." I know I shouldn't care. Those who forget the past...you know the quote. But rewriting the past is more insidious. And the GOP lost so you don't get to do that just yet. You betcha!

Yes, California is the third-biggest oil producing state in the U.S. It also has about 50 times the population of Alaska.

Martin: Again--the joke was about Spitzer (caught with prostitutes) and A-Rod (leaving his wife for Madonna). Had the Bushes been in town, he would've said the twins. And yes, had he used Chelsea, nobody would've complained, because THE JOKE WAS NOT ABOUT HER!

Palin Gag? Comedy's All in the Mis-Timing
Letterman Contrite, But Hosts All Joked

By Paul Farhi
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Did Sarah Palin not notice when late-night comedians were making fun of her daughter's pregnancy last fall, or did she simply get fed up with one-too-many cracks when a now-contrite David Letterman weighed in last week?

Bristol Palin, the Alaska governor's then-pregnant 17-year-old, was a punch line for almost all of the late-night TV crew -- Jay Leno, Conan O'Brien, Jon Stewart, as well as Letterman -- almost as soon as her mother was chosen as Sen. John McCain's Republican running mate.

Facing enormous criticism for his Palin-daughter joke, Letterman on his show last night apologized to the Palin family, saying it could not "be defended."

Yet similar jokes never drew much objection from Palin's camp until Letterman's gag last week about Palin's daughter getting "knocked up" by baseball player Alex Rodriguez during a visit to a New York Yankees game -- a line Palin suggested was really a reference to her 14-year-old daughter, Willow, who attended the game.

On Sept. 2, during the presidential campaign, Leno, for example, told this joke on "The Tonight Show": "Governor Palin announced over the weekend that her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is five months pregnant. And you thought John Edwards was in trouble before! Now he has really done it."

On Oct. 10, O'Brien, then host of "Late Night," quipped: "Sarah Palin is going to drop the first puck at the Philadelphia Flyers hockey game. Then Palin will spend the rest of the game trying to keep the hockey players out of her daughter's penalty box."

While the pregnant-daughter theme was most common on late-night shows during the fall campaign, it has never fully disappeared. And Letterman told far fewer of these jokes than some of his late-night brethren.

Through mid-March, Leno had made 15 jokes about the Palin daughter's pregnancy, Stewart had told four on "The Daily Show," and Letterman checked in with eight, according to an analysis of late-night humor by the Center for Media and Public Affairs, a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with George Mason University.

The comedian most likely to bash Bristol Palin? O'Brien, with 20 jokes at her expense.

"Saturday Night Live" has also parodied the Palin family in questionable ways. In a skit last September, a mock reporter joked about incest in the vice presidential candidate's family, saying, "I mean, come on. It's Alaska!"

Palin not only didn't protest, she appeared as a guest on the program a few weeks later.

So why did Palin ask Letterman -- and only Letterman -- for an apology? And why did she wait until last week?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/15/AR2009061503131_pf.html

DP- "The good part, however, is that Palin is further marginalizing herself."

Actually, at this point, Palin is clearly the winner. Letterman had to come out AGAIN and actually apologize, which seems sincere in word except, along with that news is the news that he lost an advertiser. He's handled the entire affair like an amateur.

"Letterman's audience is not huge by national standards, but it is loyal. Conan is raunchier, by a lot. The great irony of all of this is that Letterman is going to take a long lead in late night because he is the traditional one."

I don't know how many will switch from Leno to Letterman, but I believe that this flap has hurt his audience. It appears that the Late Show producers think so, too, hence, the second apology. How can you possibly quantify how "loyal" Letterman's audience is? You have some friends that are long-time fans?

On the other end, I think the Fire Letterman campaign is ridiculous. But the libs got Imus' head, so...?

And Palin's outrage from the party that calls women "baby killers." Good Grief.

"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country... This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America."

No apologies from Palin on this divisive slanderous sleaze. But America responded by rejecting her beauty-pageant idiocy. Yeah, she's so concerned about women's rights. "Drill, baby, drill!"

I wonder if Letterman's apology is in any way tied to the fact that many of Palin's supporters are whackjobs with guns and have no qualms about using them?

Cadavra FTW.

"I wonder if Letterman's apology is in any way tied to the fact that many of Palin's supporters are whackjobs with guns and have no qualms about using them?"

And now this discussion has officially derailed.

Is there really a "winner" in this? And Christian is right, that comment is just as offensive as Letterman's joke.

Stella - Interesting article...the jokes transcribed are from last fall...In mid-March Levi Johnston was running around like a jackass and IIRC, didn't the "engagement" bite it around then...I was totally aware of Conan being the heaviest Palin hitter, but that has multiple reasons behind it...so we have a three month gap, where Bristol and Palin were off the national map, then Sarah shows in NY for a non-speaking engagement and benefit with the other daughter and somehow that makes Bristol fair game..

Christian - Since the objectivity of the fourth-estate means so much to you, I guess you'll have the DVR's burning all next Wednesday when ABC hands the news reigns over to Rahm.

Cadavra - That's not how Letterman sees it.

Before we go off into the relativism known as the '08 electoral weeds, let me clarify a few things.

If the adult Palins are in the news for something they did, including Bristol, they are fair game. That is a simple comedic standard, but it has become a blatant one-way street. Last Thursday, Barney Frank, a Mel Blanc character come to life, walked out of a CNBC interview. Did he get any heat, any pot shots? Of course not. Will Durbin for cashing out before the burst or Dodd for his ever-valuing Irish cottage? No. Why? Because you don't ridicule your own.

Why did Letterman apologize? Because he saw Bill Maher as his future. Lose enough advertisers, lose support from the higher ups. Would they fire him? No, they'd simply set up an exec-level Standards and Practices just for the Late Show and that, for Dave, would be unbearable and turn into another corporate war. So I'm sorry Dave sold out all his defenders to protect his bubble, but that's the way it goes. For record, I never agree with going after advertisers over free speech.

Martin, Sarah and Bristol were off the national map for three months? I don't think that's true at all.

Wasn't the young father on all those talk shows slamming the Palins and vice-versa? I truly hate families being dragged into any poltical debate. But then I imagine if that "family" woulda been placed in the White House. Imagine.

"Christian is right, that comment is just as offensive as Letterman's joke."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Berg

Cadavra - really? Is that all you've got. The Guy Talk Radio is based on? What's wrong, don't want to drag in the latest shooters because a little research shows they reside in the realm of Alex Jones and Michael Moore? What an inconvenience when these lone gunmen turn out to hate neocons as much as Garafolo and Matthews.

You cannot be serious. Moore, Garafolo and Matthews do not incite their fans to violence or hate speech. (And anyway, most liberals aren't gun collectors.) I would also point out that Matthews' "hatred" of neocons is a political expediency, especially given his 17 years of Clinton-bashing (both of them) and seven years of Bush ass-kissing until he finally realized he was in the minority.

Oh yes, I recall Matthew's neo-con Bush hate:

"I thought in listening to the president, I was listening to one of the great neoconservative minds who's worked in this administration, the former deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz, who had lunch with me way before this war began...

We were given a rare opportunity to hear the real philosophy of this administration with regard to the war in Iraq. A powerful rendition by the president of why we’re there. When he talked about the fact that we can support emerging democracies in the Middle East, and that’s the only way we can prevent future 9/11’s, you’re getting to the heart of why this administration is fighting that war in Iraq."

And that's from 2007.

But my favorite Matthews Bush hits:

“I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left.”

"We're proud of our President. Americans love having a guy as President, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton.... Women like a guy who's President. Check it out."

Cadavra - I agree about Matthews. I was an avid watcher from his CNBC days. He swivels with the moment, but he still vilified neocons for the past several years.

As for inciting who to do what, my point is that these recent shooters do not carry some cut-n-dry perspective that Krugman and company what to purport. FNC can't be the neocon mouthpiece while also inciting hatred of them, because the Holocaust shooter also had the FNC DC address and the Weekly Standard's on hand.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Weekly_Standard_may_have_been_shooter_target.html?showall

As for the Pittsburgh shooter...

http://www.slate.com/id/2215826/

This is the crossroads of Alex Jones and Michael Moore. But I still don't blame Moore for making someone pull the trigger which is an individual choice.

Again, it's not the loons on the left who are stockpiling guns because Beck and FOX have told them Obama is gonna take them away...

How was Palin off the map if I kept seeing her face on the news? Maybe not like she was in the running to ruin another Presidential campaign, but she was still around.

She had fallen to 8th place in anticipatory GOP polling for the 2012 nomination, Perm.

Which has no bearing on her media overexposure.

Poland - you, of all people, would be the last person I would've suspected as thinking any poll 3.5 years ahead of a race would mean jack squat. In '04, I was telling people Obama was probably going to run in '08, but the polls said it was Hillary and nothing.

Perm - I know this is a meandering thread, but it goes back to the earlier comments; she's a media gold mine. Whether she seeks the attention or not, the press covers her. Just look at some of the bullshit in-state accusations she's been hit with and beat. They have zero bearing on a national scale, but it gets coverage. So there is a distinct difference between being the catalyst of a story and being in the crosshairs. Just last week, Mika Brzezinski admitted the MSM's disdain for Palin was and still is obsessive.

Christian - This isn't about stockpiling guns. I've known more Dems who were hunters than Repubs, and neither used a bow. It's about the person on the end of the weapon. Ron Paul Truthers went after Beck's tour bus last election by trying to drive it off the highway. It got to the point where Paul had to go on Beck's show and publicly state no one should be threatening to kill or attempting to hurt anyone in the name of his campaign. I understand you have an action-line to follow, but events make reality.

"So there is a distinct difference between being the catalyst of a story and being in the crosshairs."

How many governors make appearances on Today? Did all 50 of them release statements to the media after the murder of Dr. Tiller? What about engaging young Levi in a war of words? It seems to me she is the catalyst or active participant far more than innocent victim in the crosshairs. Can the MSM be unfair? Of course. But as I have already said, they care more about ratings than anything else. That takes precedence over the promotion of any political agenda. Palin does herself no favors when she picks a fight with Letterman. Do you think she was unaware of the media storm it would ignite? Of course not. I find it difficult to sympathize with those who try and have it both ways, bashing the media while constantly seeking their attention. I feel like Palin actively courts "controversy" in order to have more ammunition the next time she appears on talk radio or speaks in public to a conservative audience.

Stella - I agree about the Tiller statement. A quick search shows Patterson as the only other one. That was undeniably a play for national interjection. As for Levi, didn't it have to do with what goes in her own home? I really don't remember. I don't know if she likes controversy, but she certainly likes the camera.

We're actually closer on this issue than it might appear. IMO - She's not aiming for 2012 because it's a double-edge sword; If things improve, Obama will be hard to beat. If things don't improve, no one is going to gamble on another novice in dire times. She wants to run for Senate, but that will be an inner-party bloodbath and will leave her with no national support. Running for Gov again gives her a 2012 Senate shot. If her legal debt gets erased, she might disappear until 2010.

"Is there really a "winner" in this?"

Yes, and it's Palin. Letterman went from brazenly targeting her to half-apologizing to apologizing AGAIN after losing a sponsor. She flexed a little muscle, and Letterman got taken down a few notches. I hope you're not asking some bigger philosophical question. Its politics.

Also, you mentioned something about the SNL incest joke. For my money, that was worse than Letterman's joke. Why didn't Palin protest then? Because she was second fiddle on a presidential ticket. She wasn't calling the shots. Going on SNL was seen as a political imperitive. I'm sure she was probably pissed.

I am not convinced that Palin won anything here. I think something like this Letterman thing will only play to the base, and they love her anyway. As for the SNL thing, if she is truly a maverick, shouldn't she have expressed her true feelings about that joke? So what if she wasn't calling the shots. It just proves she is no different than the rest.

Martin, I think you're right.

"I am not convinced that Palin won anything here. I think something like this Letterman thing will only play to the base, and they love her anyway."

In the final analysis, Letterman was made to eat crow. You're right to suggest that aren't really any spoils to claim beyond that.

"As for the SNL thing, if she is truly a maverick, shouldn't she have expressed her true feelings about that joke?"

Nope. Biting your tongue over a relatively trivial matter is not any sort of capitulation worth noting. You have to pick your battles.

"She wants to run for Senate..."

Why? Its a less powerful position than Governor, and traditionally has been a harder road to hoe on the path to the White House.

Palin is a joke and will continue to be the butt of them because of her own actions. Condemning others as she has and does while ignoring her own dirty backyard is how she opens herself up. And a former beauty queen doesn't turn down any publicity. She loves it. Wink wink.

And Martin, I've yet to hear you respond to Palin's sleazy attack on Obama and his "pallin' around with terrorists who would attack their own country." That's more offensive than anything that's been said about her. And neither Obama nor Biden have criticized her in that Limbaugh manner.

She lost in 2008, and she'll never win again.

Mystery - Re: Senator. Because it's the only guaranteed way to get international credentials. It's the Hillary model. The MSM established the criteria to qualify Hillary for high office and now they can't take it away, even though some will. The other factor is careerism. Senators are hard to change.

Christian - During the election, I walked away from the Ayers issue on this blog because Dave offered up some personal, relativistic bullshit that still makes me sick. Ayers, like the guy who shot Tiller, are domestic terrorists no matter what higher education says about the former. He should have spent life in jail along side Kaczysnki. Obama can deny it all he wants, but he's as tied into this guy as W is with the Sauds.

You want to relive the '08 election, have fun. All the concerns I aired, mainly with Jeff, are bearing fruit. The Chicago machine...clowns and whackjobs like Reid, Pelosi, Frank trying to run the show by proxy...the living disaster that is Biden...I laid it all out months ago. It took some time, but I know what Obama is up to. I'm several degrees removed from some of his economy hires, but these guys are not Socialists in any sense. They are Corporatists of the W/Enron mold, and those in the hinterlands of the hard left are going to stroke out in 2011. The problem for all of us, is Congress. Has been, always will be. It took the Republican base six years to see it, it will take the Dem base less. End of Soapbox.

Palin doesn't want 'international credentials'. Her drawing card is that she's the Washington outsider ('maverick'!). Sacrifice that for 2 or 6 years in the Senate and she's just another Kay Bailey Hutchison. Hillary was already an insider, her route was completely different.

This is assuming Palin still wants to be President. If her goal is simple careerism, getting out of Juneau will indeed be her goal.

And I don't remember most of your 'concerns' from last fall, but they're only bearing fruit in the sense that Congress is the obstacle to real reforms occurring, not any other sinister Obama agenda that you're hinting at.

Jeff - Re: Palin. She can keep the outsider credentials by playing Mrs. Smith goes to Washington.

And I don't remember most of your 'concerns' from last fall, but they're only bearing fruit in the sense that Congress is the obstacle to real reforms occurring, not any other sinister Obama agenda that you're hinting at.

WOW. You've either got a selective memory or you spend so much time on line life has become a blur.

I called Biden a timebomb, laid out his love affair with the banking industry, and pointed out from the first "she's a looker" comment that this guy is not "Obama's Cheney" as Newsweek and company tried to paint him as. You were the only one to understand the Delaware references and commented as such that it would be a problem.

I explained my concern isn't with Obama per say, but the people he's surrounds himself with because he's a novice. I called Pelosi Mommy Dearest and that's who the Repubs would run against. You shrugged it off. I specifically talked about the Chicago Machine, mentioning Blago waayy before anyone else here, and you blew it off. I laid out how his response to Georgia was a bad sign of indecisiveness, and lookee lookee at his Iranian/N Korea reaction. This is without getting into TARP or mass nationalization.

What I didn't expect was for Obama to hold onto W's executive policies as tightly as he has or the hardline against gay issues. The former must be about power, the latter a mid-term ploy.

"Obama can deny it all he wants, but he's as tied into this guy as W is with the Sauds."

Oh really? Tell it to the GOP, Martin:

"In fact, it was a panel funded by a wealthy Republican--one of John' McCain's top supporters, no less--which first hired Bill Ayers to work with Obama.

On October 8th, the McCain camp proudly released its list of a hundred former ambassadors who were
officially endorsing the Republican for president.

Second on that list was Leonore Annenberg, who currently serves as president and chairman for the
Annenberg Foundation. The widow of conservative philanthropist Walter Annenberg, Ms. Annenberg herself previously had served as "chief of protocol" at the Reagan State Department.

Her Annenberg Foundation was the group that bank-rolled the Chicago education board which hired both William Ayers and Barack Obama. It is on this board where the two first sat together with others--including Republican leaders--in the same room a total of six times, to aid needy Chicago schoolchildren.

Others who served on the two Chicago charitable boards at the center of the Obama-Ayers "connection" include the ex-publisher of the famed conservative newspaper, The Chicago Tribune, officials from banking giant UBS and multi-national petroleum company BP--whose Political Action Committee (PAC) leans heavily
Republican--and the former head of Northwestern University.

A former GOP lawmaker in Illinois told National Public Radio on Oct. 6th that slandering Obama for mere board work with Ayers simply is "nonsensical."

http://www.americanspark.com/2008/10-20-08_ayers-worked-with-republicans.html

Martin re: your point 1 - she won't. You know as well as I do that's a myth. Name me one Senator in the last fifty years who actually accomplished that 'Mr. Smith' pipedream. The closest one is the former Junior Senator from Illinois.

Re: your other points, Biden has been quiet and generally inoffensive, the second shoe of a personal debt implosion has yet to happen and may have been forestalled, Pelosi is an idiot but still has lower name-recognition than Gingrich, Limbaugh, or Cheney, the 'Chicago machine' is what it always has been without bogging Obama into anything and Blagojevich and Burris are in their own world of crazy, and Obama's responses to Georgia, North Korea, and ESPECIALLY Iran have all been completely appropriate and strategically astute.

Everything you say I 'blew off' was completely blow-offable. I'm not happy about the executive privilege stuff or the gay stuff, but nobody's perfect.

And Martin, you're revealing yourself as less interesting with every one of these recent screeds, far from the reasonable almost-moderate that you used to appear to be.

The only place Biden is a "disaster" is on right-wing blogs. The average person only hears about him when he commits one of his extremely infrequent gaffes, which are innocuous anyway.

Additionally, most people know nothing about and care even less about Nancy Pelosi. As much as the GOP would love her to be a flashpoint of negativity, she simply isn't. Except, again, on those conservative blogs.

Martin's entire assessment on the new Obama administration is completely wrong. The so-called Chicago cabal has not manifested itself in any way, Obama is considered by both the general public and those in Washington as a strong leader and manager.

The primary criticism that Republican leaders can (and should) focus on is the growing deficit. Although they didn't care at all about it during the entire Bush administration, it's a perfect political point to hang your hat on now, especially when running off-year congressional elections.

Christian - The address for Ayers Small Schools and CAC were in the same building, with Obama having an office on the third floor, the same floor as Small Schools. Obama was there for at least a year and held that office for another two after he became State Senator. Obama gave Ayers Small Schools a total of around 2Mil, from CAC, Joyce and Woods.

Wreck - These are not the Droids you seek.

Jeff - Re: Mrs. Smith. I would agree with you, but only if she sees that as the pinnacle. Otherwise, she's more unpredictable than Obama ever was. Obama doesn't eat his own.

Re: Other points. Let me take your approach; Biden has become a joke, Obama has even copped to this. Pelsoi's approvals tanked which is why she's in hiding. Blago and Burris are tied directly to Obama because it was his seat because they have endorsed and worked for each other, along with Rahm, in every race since '02. And foreign policy, I'll say it's subjective on the diplomacy.

As for my screeds and being moderate..."Moderate" only means when I agree with your outlook, not vice versa. Yet, as Gallup just showed, the center-left is still the same 20% now as it was a decade ago, while center-right is back up to the 40% it was in '04. So while party affiliation favors the Dems, ideology does not. As Wreck pointed out, the Repubs strayed so far from principle under Delay they have little credibility. But when you look back to as recently as '02, you see the same issues plaguing the Dems with somewhere near 60% not being able to identify a Dem leader. And that's probably the thing I do like - watching the left follow the exact same path the right did under W. The bills and issues may be different, but the dogma is the same. So while the left may not be happy with certain decisions, they ain't gonna say shit lest ye give ammo to "the other side". Power over principles.

I think the line is "these aren't the droids you're looking for" and I have no idea what you're talking about.

So that proves Ayers and Obama are as tight and colluded as the Bush oil family and the Bin Laden oil families? It's the exact same thing in scope, influence and geo-political power? And the Reagan beloved Annnenbergs hired this terrorist professor?

Sure. Ayers = AM Talk Radio Meme FAIL.

I don't even KNOW who the FUCK Nancy Pelosi is or what she does.

Every time one of my super-conservative friends or aunts or uncles calls me, they're always on some tear about Nancy Pelosi, like she's the default knee-jerk equivalent of what Palin or Rush is to liberals.

Like, I couldn't pick her mug out of a police lineup, I don't care about what she does, and I even think she's from California where I live. And still I don't care or fear her in the least, no matter how hard FNC tries to pump her up as some universal figure of derision.

The Right tried that with JOCEYLYN ELDERS, of all buffoonish nobodies during the Clinton years, making her out to be some liberal hair-trigger nutcase we should all FEAR.

And guess what? Guess what JOCELYN ELDERS was pimping that Rush was mocking so hard? That POOR DUMB PEOPLE SHOULD MASTURBATE INSTEAD OF FUCKING WITHOUT A CONDOM.

I TOTALLY remember Rush mocking this on radio and on his jackoff TV show... But guess what? ELDERS WAS SPOT ON because I have a BRILLIANT THEORY that POOR DUMB PEOPLE DO NOT MASTURBATE, that EVERY TIME they're remotely horny, they go knock one out sans condom and make another equally POOR AND STUPID CHILD. Because poor, dumb people either don't know or don't care about birth control.

Turns out Elders was the most brilliant person EVER for suggesting this, so if they're ragging on Pelosi, she must be OK too.

And I say this as a Semi-Republican capitalist who agrees with all the Republican ass-kicking, rich-people-are God shit but also thinks religion and family are the two roots of ALL EVIL on this planet.

RELIGION AND FAMILY are BULLSHIT.

MAN IS GOD. CHURCH IS BORING. KIDS AND WIVES ARE DEPRESSING.

Christian - I didn't say the Bush and Saud families, that would be impossible. I said W and the Sauds, and the false choice you presented doesn't work because, again, it would be impossible for Obama/Ayers to have international impact before he became President, just as it was for W. But the question wasn't about impact - that means you are admitting Ayers and Obama are connected. The question was if I think he was "palling around" with a domestic terrorist. And any guy who shares office space with a dude for three years and ends up granting him over 2Mil in funding is not simply a guy from "around the neighborhood". So - Obama knows Ayers as well as W knew the Sauds and it's politically expedient business that neither want to discuss.

You've done a great job of completely changing the conversation. What's Rule 3 - Whenever possible, go outside the area of expertise of your opponent.

No Martin, YOUR PARTY brought up Ayers in the campaign. And the fact that REPUBLICAN POWERHOUSES like the Annenbergs actually set him up to do business with people like Obama and other politicos in Chicago doesn't prove anything about his relations.

Unless you first castigate the GOP who set him up -- which neither you nor Hannity have done yet -- you have no argument. And comparing this to Bush and the Saudi's is the height of apples and oranges. Does not compute.

I like Martin S. just fine, but...

Isn't the guy like a 23-year-old Wunderkind talent agent in Hollywood? How'd you get to be this stuffy and conservative at such a young age in this town at the heart of the movie biz? Mad props to sticking to your guns and all, but, Christ, dude, by my estimation YOU ARE LIVING THE DREAM, so while I understand you wanting to KEEP YOUR MONEY, how can you so wholeheartedly be down with a party that HATES SEX and BELIEVES IN RELIGION?

I like that Martin is a rebel that way. It's the contrarian Sag in me.

My assumption all this time has been that Martin S is in his 40s or 50s and has some successful desk job in the industry somewhere. That's what he sounds like.

i'm pretty sure martin s. has previously stated that he's middle-aged and some sort of industry accountant

He's a 25ish agent. I know because IO said so.

And Martin told IO he was not an agent but wanted him to hit up CAA anyway to confound him.

Christian - It's not my party. One more time, I'm an F'ing Libertarian and have been since the early 90's. I'd vote Dem but I do not believe in American Socialism, as pushed by the Dem leadership. It's Corporate Socialism and when it's been practiced, it leads to bad, bad things. Try this - In the 90's, because I saw the ramifications of Clinton's corporate protectionism, I wrote-in Nader.

And as for who brought up what first - I mean in this thread. I could personally give an F about Ayers. As for the Annenbergs - you keep showing how little you know about them. They were fiscal conservatives, at best. He was a hybrid Hearst/Murder Inc throwback that dropped a ton of money in his late 80's as an attempt to rehab the family name. This guy had no clue who was on the challenge and wouldn't have given an F if he was told. You're trying to make Annenberg an issue because you think it should give me pause because he knew Reagan, yet you have no clue what I think of Reagan. It kills me that I'm the typecasted moralist, yet you're the one who argues everything in black-n-white. Seriously, one human to another, you need to de-program. I'm not Hannity.

I'm must thank you for reminding me I told IO to call me at CAA. I've actually come to like IO, but that was the height of crazy.

Lex - Leah is close with the accountant line. I've spent more time as an analyst so I know the unknown firms and financiers who get hit up. I now live in a nexus between tech and entertainment. I can't stomach passive-aggressive so you can guess how well I do in some circles. I'm a "conservative" here because it's a film site, but among the Hannity/Palin crowd, I'm an undesirable. I've seen full-on that her devotees are sheeple, just like Ron Paul's and Obama's.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)