Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Letterman Clarifies [Dan Collins; UPDATE]

Via Fausta, David clarified that he didn’t mean to imply that Willow Palin, 14, was a slut, but that Bristol Palin, 18, was a slut. Because, you know, all unwed mothers are sluts, except for his wife. Especially if their moms look hot in a skirt. And it’s important for you to know that it was supposed to be consensual between Bristol and A-Rod, because that’s the kind of people they are. He wasn’t saying A-Rod would rape her, and the idea that it would be a rape is repugnant, because rape is about domination and humiliation. So, see, she’s legal and she wanted to do it with womanizing A-Rod in the middle of Yankees Stadium, had she been there, in front of her mom and the whole world, so that’s what makes it funny, because of the hypocrisy and because trollops just deserve to be smacked around, generally.

He also invited Sarah Palin to appear on his show. Class.

Somebody wants me to justify something ugly that Limbaugh said 16 years ago. Not going to.

Somebody else says that I’m representing myself as a stalwart defender of women’s dignity. Yawn.

But imagining that I had a daughter who had a child out of wedlock, how would I react to having her treated this way because someone didn’t care for my politics? Would I treat someone’s daughter this way because I didn’t care for her parents’ politics? Would I laugh at someone’s joke directed at someone’s daughter because I didn’t care for her parents’ politics? Under the first hypothetical, probably not as mildly as Palin has. Under the second, no. Under the third, not appreciatively at all.

And contrary to what some right-leaning pundits have said, there are those on the left who are sickened by Letterman and have made that clear. Those of you who think it was okay for him to use a puppet A-Rod to screw a puppet Bristol Palin in Yankee Stadium, I want to hear it justified.

J. Waite isn’t buying the apology.

Down the memory hole, even as Wikipedia delete’s von Brunn’s hatey crap from their site.

UPDATE: Kathleen Parker figures Palin was asking for it. It’s okay, Kathleen: Obama’s defending your right to wear a hijab; I suggest you exercise it.

157 Replies to “Letterman Clarifies [Dan Collins; UPDATE]”

  1. DerHahn says:

    I was gonna ask why he invited Sarah and not Todd but on second thought he’d probably be safer with Todd. Sarah is likely to give him an on-stage vasectomy without benefit of anesthetic.

  2. Bob Reed says:

    Weasel words by a washed up weasel, to try and walk back something he had no right to do…

    Changing the target doesn’t change the disgusting tactic he employed; classic politics of personal destruction…

    Nobody is justifying what that blowhard Limbaugh said about Chelsea 16 years ago; nor do 2 wrongs make a right…

    I think Palin should do what Jeff G outlined yesterday. Publicly call for Hillary to support her on this, as another woman who has been unfairly attacked through her daughter, by denouncing Letterman and demanding a formal apology from CBS. Hell, maybe fond a way to get O! involved too, by calling on him to denounce it as being contrary to the new tone, the new kind of politics, he was striving for…

    And that, as Jeff said, would be checkmate!

    Lettermans disingenuous and stilted apology was weak; I’d still like to see him get a beat down, on A-Rods behalf, by some upset Latino brothers from uptown…

  3. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    The apology still doesn’t change the fact that he’s a humorless old lefty pervert desperate for relevance again. All it really does is cement the fact that he’s an idiot, by not knowing who was at the game with Palin.

  4. JD says:

    Letterman is just doing what all of the trolls have been doing, deflecting and being disingenuous. That “joke” was wrong if it was about an 18 year old every bit as much as it would be for a 14 year old.

  5. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    And I agree with Bob, actually Jeff, that would be a shrewd move by Palin. It would mean nothing to the lefty apparatchiks, but the sensible among them would understand the depravity of both Hillary and O!bama should they refuse to empathize with the Palins.

  6. JD says:

    Compare and contrast the coverage and outrage over this with that of the Imus/Rutgers fiasco.

  7. guinsPen says:

    I’d still like to see him get a beat down…

    By these guys.

  8. sdferr says:

    So you have this big pot of brown stock and you’ve strained it through a sieve lined with cheese-cloth. Now you want to clarify it, you add beaten eggwhites, lots of ’em (make mayo or Hollandaise or whatever with the yolks) and you bring those stirred in eggwhites slowly up to temp, they congeal around all the little particulates in your stock and float to the surface, creating a nice light brown gloppy raft of foamy trash, to be carefully skimmed off and thrown away. Only after you go through this whole long complicated bunch of bullshit removal do you actually get down to something clear, something worth keeping. Dave’s not there yet.

  9. JD says:

    It would be fun to introduce my size 14’s to his nutsack.

  10. Cowboy says:

    JD:

    I’d add my pointy-toed size 15 boots to the effort.

  11. ignatov says:

    “give him an on-stage vasectomy without benefit of anesthetic.”

    “I’d still like to see him get a beat down, on A-Rods behalf, by some upset Latino brothers from uptown…”

    “introduce my size 14’s to his nutsack”

    “I’d add my pointy-toed size 15 boots to the effort.”

    Those of you who think it’s okay to advocate violence against a senior citizen, I want to hear it justified.

  12. Danger says:

    “I think Palin should do what Jeff G outlined yesterday. Publicly call for Hillary to support her on this, as another woman who has been unfairly attacked through her daughter,”

    In a sane world the newsmedia would be questioning Hillary about this but I guess they have their hands full asking every GOP Senator and Congressman about the latest Rush Limbaugh Statement.

  13. Bob Reed says:

    Down the memory hole, even as Wikipedia delete’s von Brunn’s hatey crap from their site.

    OK, at first this kinda stuff was simply noteworthy…

    Now, it’s starting to get frighteneing. We’re not far from the point where, like in the former Soviet Union, the government could order you sent off to a camp and all traces of you removed from record!

  14. joey buzz says:

    Sooo, may we call Letterman the de-facto leader of the Democratic party now?

  15. Jennifer Waite says:

    Whichever way you look at it the premise remains that Bristol is a slut. Sadly, these days sloppy contraception with your high school steady seems far from slutty. In fact, it even seems more wholesome than say, a television personality still practicing sloppy contraception in his late fifties.

  16. Bob Reed says:

    Why ignatov,

    They’re jokes, man…

    Kinda like Dave’s…

  17. ignatov says:

    “They’re jokes, man…”

    My point exactly. This is a thread for fauxtraged pearl-clutching over jokes, isn’t it?

  18. Bob Reed says:

    Jennifer,

    Slut seems like a pretty strong condemnation…By what measure?

    Is there evidence she slept with more than 1 guy? While she is an unwed mother, there’s no proof the she gang-banged the hockey team, or any such promiscuous behavior..?

    What is your definition of slut?

  19. guinsPen says:

    …whatever with the yolks

    Hamm’s!

  20. Dan Collins says:

    ignatov, you are correct. Guys, please no more hatey wishing to relocate Letterman’s testicles in his throat. It’s not as though he’s done something really provocative, like get pregnant.

    Now, ignatov, just what do you advise as regards censuring Letterman? What do you say we punish him with a baby?

  21. Dan Collins says:

    Bob, I think you need to reread Jennifer’s point, which is that the premise itself is sad.

  22. maggie katzen says:

    Kinda like Dave’s…

    well, except that your target actually did something deserving of scorn.

  23. Bob Reed says:

    Ignatov,

    Jokes about a public person, whose “entertainment” often involves snark and ridicule as well, is a far different matter than trying to ridicule a public official through their children…

    And speaking of faux outrage? Aren’t you doing that now? I sense that you’ve done it before…

  24. Mr. Pink says:

    15 was for you ignatov. That is what wishing harm on a senior citizen looks like.

  25. BJT-FREE! says:

    I’d like to point out that by Jennifer’s definition Letterman’s knocked up girlfriend qualifies as a slut.

    Unless, of course, Jennifer would like to create a diagram of acceptable and unacceptable points of argument concerning the meaning of the word “slut.” Underage? Unmarried? Daughter of a prominent conservative former VP candidate? Hillbilly Alaskan hick dork?

    The trap grows wider and wider.

    As for ignatov, I’m wondering what his reaction would be if Letterman has said such about his daughter … or Nancy Pelosi’s granddaughter or Chelsea Clinton.

  26. JD says:

    Fuck you and the imaginary high horse you rode in on, ignatov. You are going to get all frothy because Letterman and the Left and smarmy asshats, with no discernible class, and they are getting called on it? Fuck you. You clowns have wall to wall outrage over the murders of an abortionist and a murder by someone that has a lot in common with Barcky’s preacher, but little to nothing for the murder of an American soldier and wounding another by a black Muslim with actual ties to terrorism. Fuck you.

  27. sdferr says:

    I wonder Danger, whether or not in a sane world Letterman’s bosses would have already fired him and the writers who penned the joke? Though maybe in a saner world, none of them, neither Letterman nor the writers would have felt free to use humor in this way in the first place.

    They may have, in this hypothetical world I’m creating here, they may have stopped to think how their actions reflect on themselves and on how offending against not just a pair of teenagers but against plenty of people who’ve been in a similar situation or who can imagine as much sympathetically would look upon the jokester. And how having taken the easy shot at frozen targets might repay those jokesters with widespread social shunning or other forms of disapproval of the sort that bullies receive, in that hypothetical saner world, of course.

    So that, rather than finding themselves having to apologize or, as we seem to find nowadays, appear to apologize without apologizing, they’d have been able to go on about their business with none of the timewasting backtracking and potential groveling for re-newed favor.

  28. BJT-FREE! says:

    Whoops! Sorry, Jennifer. Reading is fundamental. Reading for comprehension is an art lost on me.

  29. Dan Collins says:

    BJ, you, too, are missing Jennifer’s point. You can read her point at the link above to J. Waite.

  30. Danger says:

    “Whichever way you look at it the premise remains that Bristol is a slut.”

    Let he/she who is without sin cast the first Stone, JENNIFER

  31. Bob Reed says:

    OK Dan,

    I still am not getting something though. And, I give Jennifer the benefit of the doubt…

    It’s just that I always associated the term, “slut”, with wanton promiscuity, and not simply unwed motherhood…

    Do you think she means that the whole meta-narrative that Bristol is a slut remains entrenched in the public’s mind?

  32. sdferr says:

    Bob, yes, the premise belongs to DL and his audience, not Jennifer. Dan’s right about Jennifer, you guys need to read her again.

  33. Rob Crawford says:

    “Danger”, you need to invest in some remedial reading courses.

  34. Dan Collins says:

    I think she means that in order for the “joke” to “work,” that is what Letterman assumed. Which was kind of Jeff’s point, yesterday.

  35. ignatov says:

    “just what do you advise as regards censuring Letterman”

    Until the 1st amendment is repealed, there is only one sanction against offensive speech: shame. Letterman has rightfully been receiving it by the bucket-load. I just thought the violence-mongers deserved a little, too.

  36. Bob Reed says:

    Well than I would like to waste no time in apologizing for my poor reading comprehension this morning and the ensuing misunderstanding.

    Please forgive me Jennifer, for mistaking your intention.

    Best Wishes and my regards

  37. Dan Collins says:

    Censure and censorship are not the same thing, ignatov. But I’m glad that you think that Letterman had the criticism coming.

  38. Danger says:

    Bob, I think you need to reread Jennifer’s point, which is that the premise itself is sad.

    Dan,

    If that was her intent then I would beg forgiveness as well, but she might want to rephrase it since I was not the only one to misinterpret her.

    The point I made about stones still applies to the likes of Letterman and his apologists.

  39. Danger says:

    “Danger”, you need to invest in some remedial reading courses.

    Rob,

    I guess I am not the only one. The servers in Iraq are awfully slow so my posts are a little behind the discussion.

    I may have missed it but I hope that jennifer will clarify her earlier statement and intent and forgive me if I was mistaken.

  40. ignatov says:

    “But I’m glad that you think that Letterman had the criticism coming.”

    And I’m glad that you share my distaste for beating up old people.

  41. physics geek says:

    Dan, I posted some of your bullet list of this “rightwing crazy” over at Batshit Crazy Balloon Juice and forgot to give you credit. My bad. I hit publish before inserting the linky thing; these Innertubes confuse me. However, I still await the wave of stupidity to wash over me from the comments there. After all, I needed a good laugh and those mental midgets will be good for several now.

  42. Buckeye says:

    Yes, whether Letterman was referring to Willow or Bristol, his “jokes” were disgusting and dispacable. But I do not think that this obfuscation should be allowed to stand unchallenged.

    I’m guessing that one of Letterman’s staff picked up on the JournoList-style PR washing of their bosses sick jokes and told him to use the same angle. These informal but coordinated propaganda campaigns have been quite effective. In blurring the lines for Letterman, they utilized techniques such as disinformation, labeling/name-calling, rationalization, and stereotyping – all in an effort to redirect the issue from it being a joke about statutory rape (always off limits, even to “progressives”) to it being a joke about an adult “Christianist.”

    Willow Palin was the only Palin daughter in NYC and at the baseball game. How were Eliot Spitzer and/or Alex Rodriguez supposed to molest Bristol Palin DURING the game, if Bristol was at another distant location? It strains all credibility that Letterman’s NYC audience would have thought he was talking about the daughter WHO WAS NOT IN NYC when making jokes that explicitly reference the Palin family visiting NYC and Yankee Stadium. I’m curious, did the Yankees t.v. broadcast flash to the Palin family during the game? Did New Yorkers who follow the news tend to know which Palin daughter was accompanying her mother?

    No matter what, the leftist response is/will be: Maybe Letterman didn’t know it was the 14 year old and not the 18 year old who was in NYC. Well, then shouldn’t he at least apologize that he got the two mixed up, since he claimed that he would never wish to cast a 14 year old in such a joke? But that would require him to acknowledge an error, which in turn would highlight the recklessness and inaccuracies behind many Palin attacks and possibly cast a new light on the Palin “narrative” in the process.

    Perhaps this is why many “progressives” seem to be going so far out their ways to cover for a has-been comedian who does not even have a connection to the Democrat Party.

  43. Dan Collins says:

    Aw, geez, and I even linked approvingly to Cole, yesterday, over his reaction to the Letterman stuff.

  44. geoffb says:

    Monday morning news.

    Palin was being honored Sunday at an anniversary celebration for the Long Island-based Independent Group Home Living Inc. She was joined by her husband, daughter Willow and a sister…The former Vice Presidential candidate spent the afternoon in Bronx with Giuliani at a Yankees game.

    Monday night Letterman.

    You know who was in town this weekend, went to a Yankee game? Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska. And she was up there with Rudy Giuliani. They were sitting together. And their seats were, well, let me tell you where their seats were. They were way, way in far right field. They were so far right. Crazy.

    And, they had a wonderful time. The toughest part of her visit was keeping Elliot Spitzer away from her daughter. That was tough.

    One awkward moment during the game. Maybe you heard about it. Maybe you saw it on one of the highlight reels. One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game. During the 7th inning her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.

    Sarah Palin got there early and she was taken to her seat, shown to her seat, by Joe the Usher.

    While she was at the Yankee game, Sarah Palin managed to spend $150,000 on hats and t-shirts.

    But Sarah Palin — it was exciting, because everybody loves New York City and she spent the entire weekend here in New York City.

    Tuesday night Letterman

    “The hardest part of her visit [to New York] was keeping Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter,”

    Wednesday night Letterman

    “We were, as we often do, making jokes about people in the news and we made some jokes about Sarah Palin and her daughter [Bristol]… and now they’re upset with me…” Letterman says on tonight’s show. “These are not jokes made about her 14-year-old daughter. I would never, never make jokes about raping or having sex of any description with a 14-year-old girl…

    This is the, I’m sorry you are too stupid to get my sophisticated, smart, humor, put down. The non-apology apology. It will work for those who agree with him that they are among the “smart set” and those hicks, those peons, are just second rate. Bound for second class status that they deserve. What will be the “yellow star” this time around the fascist maypole?

  45. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “violence-mongers”

    Were they the cute little monsters in Where the Wild Things Are?

  46. Dan Collins says:

    ignatov, I do, and it really bothers me that some cop tased a 72-year-old woman the other day. A lot of recent tasings bother me, regardless of age, but that one took the cake.

    Having said that, I wish David would act a little less adolescent.

  47. JD says:

    Ignatov – Again, fuck off. Cheney is a senior citizen, no? You and your ilk have wished far far far worse on him.

  48. Rob Crawford says:

    I guess I am not the only one. The servers in Iraq are awfully slow so my posts are a little behind the discussion.

    Sorry if I was too strong on my response.

  49. ignatov says:

    “You and your ilk have wished far far far worse on him.”

    Attack me, if you must, but leave my ilk out of it.

  50. JD says:

    Ignoranus completely misses the abject and naked hypocrisy of the Left.

  51. geoffb says:

    And I’m glad that you share my distaste for beating up old people.

    I’m Letterman’s age so would it be alright for one “senior citizen” to beat down on another?

    When did “senior” evolve downward from at least 65? Soon we shall go directly from late adolescence to senior citizen with out any phase labeled simply adult.

  52. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “Ignatov – Again, fuck off. Cheney is a senior citizen, no? You and your ilk have wished far far far worse on him.”

    !IDEA!

    Dan, can we wish for Cheney to punch Letterman in the junk? That way it’s old guy vs. old guy and we’re no longer violent, mongering, violence-mongers.

    Better check with Ignatov first.

  53. Dan Collins says:

    Let’s give ignatov a chance here, JD. I’m not even sure that he’s what I would classify as a troll.

  54. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    GeoffB, like I said, the only thing, other than extremely bad taste, that this proves is that Letterman is an idiot. A grade A fucking moron. Willow was at the game. He knew this. He’s either excpetionally stupid or a liar. I’m betting both, but for this occasion it is one or the other. Take your pick, Dave.

  55. sdferr says:

    So what you want ignatov, is a justification for violence against Dave Letterman? Is that right?

    Why, by the way, did you choose to characterize Letterman, if that’s who you’re referring to, as a “senior citizen”? Why not “jerky comedian” or “abusive asshole” or something a bit better related to the cause of the controversy he has created? I mean after all, what does his being a senior citizen have to do with his slander of Willow Palin and her sister, or his cheap shot at Gov. Palin herself, other than, say, remove any excuse he might have had for the stupidity of the acts, since as a senior citizen he ought to have accumulated enough experience in the world to know better than to behave as he has?

  56. Buckeye says:

    ignatov: “Attack me, if you must, but leave my ilk out of it.” Don’t worry. If you are ever attacked for real, your ilk run away and leave you to fend for yourself – so they will leave themselves out of it.

  57. psycho... says:

    The mistake of presuming that there was a joke with a premise is leading to a lot of nonsense-talking. There was only a target and an audience. The line didn’t mean, denotively. You can’t aim it at another target and “What if?” it. It’s empty.

    Somebody wants me to justify something ugly that Limbaugh said 16 years ago. Not going to.

    It can be justified as a joke, because it was one. “Not the kids, douche” objections can still be applied, if you believe that. But you can ignore the butt of Limbaugh’s joke and still parse it.

    Letterman’s literally can’t be understood, except as a tribal howl.

    there are those on the left who are sickened by Letterman and have made that clear.

    Liars all.

  58. JHo says:

    And I’m glad that you share my distaste for beating up old people.

    Any old people getting beat up hereabouts?

  59. Squid says:

    I think ignatov means to say that Letterman is a doddering old fool whose masters should have put him to pasture a long time ago. Really, it isn’t nice to gang up on a poor, confused old fuddy-duddy like that.

    Am I close, iggy?

  60. maggie katzen says:

    since as a senior citizen he ought to have accumulated enough experience in the world to know better than to behave as he has?

    actually, sdferr, this just made me think of how my grandfather started saying some really interesting things a few years ago. It’s like he has no self censor anymore. no swearing, just really blunt, “my you’ve put on a few pounds” kind of things. or the “I don’t want to go to that nursing home because there are too many black people” never knew he cared.

  61. The Monster says:

    I still want the David Shuster standard to be employed.

  62. cranky-d says:

    Letterman’s literally can’t be understood, except as a tribal howl.

    I like that turn of phrase.

  63. ignatov says:

    “Let’s give ignatov a chance here, JD. I’m not even sure that he’s what I would classify as a troll.”

    Thanks, Dan. I’ve tried to be polite.

  64. SarahW says:

    I’m kinda ticked that JeffG is all “It’s just a joke”. I know how the joke worked, I know how it worked on the level JeffG suggested. The fact remains its an inappropriate sexist joke.

    I’ts a joke targeting the reputation and worth of a teenage girl. The hostility behind the jokes lands on an undeserving target, and the content of the jokes is a vulgar slap at her virtue. (FWIW, The writers read the pressers on which the joke was based. They knew. The joke was written about the trope of the wild daughter – any palin daughter would do – which to them is seen as a highly amusing knocking S. Palin down for trying to promote a set of values that Palin wasn’t able to enforce in her own family, and to keep focus off the good work she was doing in town.

    Maybe there’s a place for that kind of vicious vulgarity but IMO I don’t care for it. I resent it and hope he gets all the benefits that come with making nasty cracks about other peoples family members who aren’t part of the quarrel.

  65. Joe says:

    Letterman is also a douchebag.

  66. alppuccino says:

    ignatov has just given me a great idea. I’m going to get a gang of octogenarians together, feed them Mexican, and have them crap in paper bags, light them on fire (the bags, not the octo’s) and have them ring the doorbell. They’ll, of course, wait on the porch to see the homeowners’ reactions.

    Ha! It’s the perfect crime!

  67. alppuccino says:

    ….and, I’ll let Clint Eastwood kick Letterman’s butt. Checkmate ignatov……checkmate.

  68. Jimmie says:

    And I’m glad that you share my distaste for beating up old people.

    I’m sorry, but I believe your dudgeon is blocking my sunlight.

    However, allow a retort? A gentleman knows that it is proper, indeed even necessary, to adminster a good thrashing betimes to a churl to besmirches a lady, even if the churl is geriatric and especially if he seems intent on doing it again. Some listen to reason; others heed only a more direct means of communication.

  69. happyfeet says:

    She’s a whore cause she didn’t have an abortion which that’s what makes it not just funny but super CBS funny. That’s sorta denotey I think. You can swap out any hoochie in that joke what’s a non-aborty slut and it’s still just as funny. Not just funny but super CBS funny to where Katie Couric can’t stop smiling all day. Me I smell Emmy.

  70. Carin says:

    Sarah, if I understand Jeff’s position it isn’t so much that we shouldn’t be offended. It’s that the manner in which we temper our reaction is tantamount to how our (what’s another word for “outrage?” but not spittle-flecked?) registers with broader society.

    Whether, in the end, we can chalk this up as a win for our team.

    But, I could be completely wrong.

  71. geoffb says:

    My take on ignatov saying that Letterman is a senior citizen is that he thereby has put Letterman into a protected “identity” group. That is a left leaning thing to do. The cute use of the word “violence”, equating the original attack and the defense of it as equivalent, is another leftist trope.

  72. Carin says:

    The reason why the joke is a fail anyway, is that Bristol is the whore suggested in the punchline. I mean, you do the joke with Paris Hilton … you’ve got traction. But Bristol merely had unprotected sex with her long-term boyfriend. I thought liberals were all for that?

  73. Carin says:

    isn’t. goes somewhere up there. I need to go eat lunch.

  74. JD says:

    Dan – I don’t feel like being nice to fucktards. Sorry. Ignoranus chose to introduce some bullshit Leftist identity politics by saying that we were advocating violence against Senior Citizens. It is like Leftist cannot keep from doing that on any issue. It was/is disingenuous the first time, and it remains so.

  75. Joe says:

    UPDATE: Per ABC News’ Kate Snow: Gov. Palin pushed back at Letterman again this morning, issuing a statement via Palin PAC spokesperson Meghan Stapelton.

    “The Palins have no intention of providing a ratings boost for David Letterman by appearing on his show,” Stapelton said in an email to ABC News. “Plus, it would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman.”

    If I understand Jeff’s suggestion, it is to turn to Obama and ask the question if Letterman’s commnents are okay with him. You know what the answer to that will be. Obama is going to say no, attacking kids is out of bounds. Merely attacking Letterman will not work.

    And we do not want to engage in false outrage. That happens.

  76. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Ignatov, don’t think of Dave as a senior citizen (because he isn’t). Think of him as a doddering dimwitted shit head. It’s easier to smack him around that way. There are lots of old people who are assholes.

  77. sdferr says:

    I’ve run into that disposition in older folks too maggie, though for the most part those folks have been a good deal older than Letterman, nor were they performing on nationwide tv four or five nights a week. Letterman’s 62 (is it?) years may qualify him under some strict definition of senior and while even I have tossed something along the lines of doddering at him, he probably wouldn’t fit the profile of the aged for whom we’d be inclined to cut a heap of slack for their age-priviledged incivilities. He’s still in the range to be categorized as jerky I think.

  78. Jimmie says:

    If I understand Jeff’s suggestion, it is to turn to Obama and ask the question if Letterman’s commnents are okay with him. You know what the answer to that will be.

    Actually, I think his suggestion (which is a damned good one) was to turn to Hillary Clinton and ask her if Letterman’s comments were okay, while also naming Clinton as a recipient of the same kinds of attacks. That would remind people, especially the PUMAs that those attacks on Clinton came from within the Obama campaign.

    Then the question would move to the Presidnt (probably through someone like Jake Tapper, who hasn’t been particularly shy about asking tough questions).

  79. Joe says:

    Medved had on Richard Wolffe yesterday. Wolffe was an observer through the Obama campaign and wrote the book about it. Wolffe was an Obama supporter to be sure. But some of the things Wolffe says are really thought provoking.

    The Obama campaign thought Jerimiah Wright would kill them. Apparently no one from the campaign has researched Wright at first and they were caught flat footed. Had the Wright statements come out earlier, the concensus of Obama senior campaign staffers is Obama would have never have gotten off the ground and Hillary would have been the Democratic nominee.

    Wolffe also claims that the Obama team did not know specifically about the Edwards allegations (other than rumors of the affair that were circulating at the time), but admit Edwards also saved the Obama campaign by giving him some space with Hillary.

  80. happyfeet says:

    Merely attacking Letterman will not work except if you have a Nielsen diary and what you do is… you pick two nights that week and you mark that you watched the show on CBS right before Letterman and then you mark that you watched his NBC competition. Then fill out the rest of the diary honestly. They supposedly have an algorithm for detecting a too-contrived schedule but I kinda sorta wonder how sensitive it is but anyway don’t overdo cause just remember that diary represents maybe a couple hundred thousand viewers and you can have a big impact without going overboard.

  81. Joe says:

    Jimmie–good point.

  82. ignatov says:

    “Ignoranus chose to introduce some bullshit Leftist identity politics by saying that we were advocating violence against Senior Citizens.”

    Well, there were 4 threats of violence in the first 10 comments, which is ironic in a post denouncing offensive speech.

    “My take on ignatov saying that Letterman is a senior citizen is that he thereby has put Letterman into a protected “identity” group.”

    No, the fact that he’s old just makes the threats more shameful, the way Dave’s jokes were more shameful if they were about the 14 year old.

  83. maggie katzen says:

    He’s still in the range to be categorized as jerky I think.

    well. yeah. there’s the whole being scripted thing, too.

  84. JHo says:

    Per #84, I just think you’re a useless troll, ignatov.

  85. sdferr says:

    I’m not disagreeing with your characterization Jimmy but there is also available the somewhat more direct route to ask Pres. Obama, why in the case of Imus’ calling Rutgers Womens B-Ball team nappy headed ‘hos were you willing to call for Imus’ firing and yet, when this higher profile late night host as much as calls the 14 yr old daughter of a sitting Gov. a fit object of a 7th inning quickie by A-Rod or someone to be confused for a prostitute by Elliot Spitzer, you have nothing to say at all?

  86. JHo says:

    But #36 wasn’t bad.

  87. Pablo says:

    Those of you who think it’s okay to advocate violence against a senior citizen, I want to hear it justified.

    I’m glad they shot that von Brunn prick. And if they execute him, I’ll be okay with that too. And if Todd Palin wants to punch Letterman’s lights out, I’ll be okay with that as well.

    There. How’s that?

  88. JD says:

    Troll now, Dan?

  89. Jimmie says:

    sdferr – I’d actually like to see both options happen at the same time. Let the Palins do their thing with Hillary Clinton while the rest of us go the direct route that you suggest.

  90. sdferr says:

    So ignatov, tell us your working theory on human violence then please? What is the stance from which you’ld judge when violence is an appropriate response and when not, for instance? When is violence offered a thing to be admired and when a thing to be shamed? Flip-floppywise, when is violence not offered a thing to be shamed and when to be praised?

  91. happyfeet says:

    I don’t advocate violence I think slipping in the shower would do the trick or just plain old keeling over while clutching at something with a sort of pained expression on his face would be cool. And then we can have one of those threads where we all say nice things and I will go to my quiet place.

  92. JD says:

    The “advocating violence against Senior Citizens” thing is pure Leftist bullshit.

  93. Dan Collins says:

    Up to you guys, JD. I don’t want Dave beat up in an alleyway. I just want him to be forced, step by unhappy step, to apologize to the Palins, and I don’t want it sidetracked by tu quoque.

  94. Mr. Pink says:

    Ignov click on the link on 15. If you want to see advocates of violence and death there it is.

  95. Pablo says:

    Well, there were 4 threats of violence in the first 10 comments, which is ironic in a post denouncing offensive speech.

    Uh, no there weren’t. Methinks you’re unclear on the whole “threat” concept. And you’re a tool.

  96. Pablo says:

    If Todd knocks Letterman’s teeth out, I hope it makes it to You Tube.

  97. Pablo says:

    Also, I hope his kidneys fail. Pretty funny, eh, Mr. President?

  98. Carin says:

    I’m glad they shot that von Brunn prick. And if they execute him, I’ll be okay with that too. And if Todd Palin wants to punch Letterman’s lights out, I’ll be okay with that as well.

    There. How’s that?

    I’m with Pablo (of course, swoon.)

    Cause at issue here isn’t RANDOM violence against Dave. Just the “father-outrage” violence carried out by Todd, should he choose to do so. That would earn him an “ATTA-BOY” from me.

  99. sdferr says:

    Well could be it is JD (leftist bs). I’ve lived in a pretty violent world most of my life, though I don’t mean that to be restricted to human animal on human animal sort of violence (even while there has been some of that too) but intend to expand the definition to include the very real violence, real to me anyhow, that gets done in building anything or tearing anything apart, the sort of stuff that goes on day in and day out the world over. I’d like to see where the non-violent stance is going to take us, if it can be explained that is.

  100. Carin says:

    Letterman is obviously incapable of apologizing to the Palins. He did nothing wrong, you see …

  101. JD says:

    Pablo – I was not going to bother pointing that out to him. Saying it would be fun to ride in an F-16 is not a threat to ride in an F-16. Saying it would be fun to play golf this afternoon is not a threat to do so, though it is entirely possible. Nuance, and all. But, Ignoranus is not interested in that. It wants it some fake outrage, and imagined moral superiority.

    Dan – Understood, but it is still just a garden variety fucking troll.

  102. SarahW says:

    Carin, No, Jeff’s position is that it.is.just.a.joke, (no REAL sexism, no REAL targeting of teen, No REAL aim to undermine Palin as torchbearer of x values, Nothing beyond a tasteless surface snicker at pop culture memes available for the evening) therefore high dudgeon is unwarranted, – but if you’re going to have it, make the most of it.

  103. SarahW says:

    For “real” I suppose one might subsitute “intentional.”

  104. JD says:

    sdferr – Violence, measured and appropriate, is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, it is necessary.

  105. N. O'Brain says:

    “No, the fact that he’s old just makes the threats more shameful, the way Dave’s jokes were more shameful if they were about the 14 year old.”

    Why don’t you take your smug condescension, fold it until it’s all corners, and shove it up your ass.

  106. ignatov says:

    I was merely pointing out the irony of responding to hate speech with hate speech. I thought it was an obvious joke. I didn’t expect to have to endlessly discuss the issue.

  107. sdferr says:

    Wholeheartedly agree with you JD, I’ve mostly like the violent world. That’s one of the reasons I’ve chosen to stick around in it.

  108. sdferr says:

    d

  109. SarahW says:

    Maybe there was even a hint of an accusation from JeffG – if you’re going to have it, or FEIGN having it, make the most of it. Beat the left at this cheap fake outrage game.

    Which ticks me off, because it was real sexism, a teen who should be unmolested by such jokes on national TV was an undeserving target, and it was a joke meant to diminish Palin as any kind of “values” candidate, or at least laugh at her hypocritical attempt to be one.

    And followed up as it was by the spitzer joke, it would be inexcusable not to call DL on it for all the intentional rotteness it contained. For the principle of the thing and not to gain political advantage, but to shame him.

  110. Pablo says:

    I was merely pointing out the irony of responding to hate speech with hate speech.

    Methinks you’re unclear on the whole “hate speech” concept too. And you’re still a tool.

  111. SarahW says:

    Ignatov, why would you use a ridiculous term like “hate speech”.

  112. Carin says:

    I understand where you’re coming from Sarah, I do get it. But, I understand that if people we’re upset with all the bullshit that was heaped on Sarah and her family last fall … well, they’re simply going to laugh at our “outrage” here.

    I honestly don’t know how to get through (to people on the left) who are unfazed by this shit simply because it’s aimed at someone on the right. It either should piss ’em off ALL the time, or none of the time.

  113. Rob Crawford says:

    Methinks you’re unclear on the whole “hate speech” concept too.

    No, he’s got it right. “Hate speech” is any speech a lefty doesn’t like, or any speech by a conservative that would pass without notice on the left, but which allows a lefty to strike a moralistic pose.

  114. The Monster says:

    No, Jeff’s position is that it.is.just.a.joke, (no REAL sexism, no REAL targeting of teen, No REAL aim to undermine Palin as torchbearer of x values, Nothing beyond a tasteless surface snicker at pop culture memes available for the evening) therefore high dudgeon is unwarranted, – but if you’re going to have it, make the most of it.

    I still can’t understand how Jeff, of all people, could excuse going after someone’s kid with sexual comments. Everything he said to excuse Letterman could also be said to excuse that vile allegedly human D*b F****h.

  115. JHo says:

    What’s ironic is that ignatov and His Ilk don’t realize won’t admit that whatever it was Lafferman said (or intended to say) it’s the epic-fail leftist turnabout that’s bullshit. Making the point about threatening the physical security of old persons of age who are seniorly seniors is as fraudulent an argument as the one that says that free speech permits — nay, encourages — outrageous crap being said…because on its moral petard shall be hoist Teh Right, what with all Teh Right’s universe-ending hypocrity hypocrisy about Oxycontin, toilet stalls, teen pregnancies, and such.

    Have at it, Ilk. Speech is indeed free, and, even as Lafferman points out by way of bad visuals, Teh Right is as much a blight on decency as humans naturally are. But think not that thou’st made a point about Teh Right’s morality as much as thou hath about thine own.

    See, the religion of postmodernism and its oxygen-starving, PC, left-leaning, myopic moral relativity are to reason like fishies in barrels are to large scatterguns. Blind fishies. And that’s kinda the point, at least probably around here.

    Knocking Lafferman’s teefs out might just be quite a just rejoinder. So never shalt thou make it about moral equivalency when thou largely can’t spell moral and can’t begin to do equivalency.

  116. happyfeet says:

    even if, why would that be ironic?

  117. Carin says:

    Methinks you’re unclear on the whole “hate speech” concept too. And you’re still a tool.

    Pablo, how many times I have I asked you folks not to call them that?

    My beloved Tool.

  118. happyfeet says:

    oh. that was at #108.

  119. Danger says:

    Sorry if I was too strong on my response.

    Rob,

    No worries, I generally try to take a charitable interpretation of someone’s intent unless they have a history that warrants otherwise. This time I fell short of that standard.

    “I still want the David Shuster standard to be employed.”

    Monster,

    I think the Don Imus standard would be more appropriate.

  120. Pablo says:

    even if, why would that be ironic?

    It’s like rain on your wedding day…

  121. JHo says:

    I didn’t expect to have to endlessly [sic] discuss the issue.

    It shows.

  122. Pablo says:

    I think the Don Imus standard would be more appropriate.

    Vis a vis Obama, very much so. The drawback is that if pressed, Baracky would toss Letterman under the bus before you could say “past-racial healer” and boost his centrist wonderfulness creds. Who’s really going to give a shit if Letterman gets skewered from the left, let alone the very top of the left? Certainly not those who are defending him from the slings and arrows coming from the right. He’s expendable.

  123. Carin says:

    Good advice, Pablo, that you just didn’t take.

  124. JD says:

    Ignoranus – please let us know when you start discussing the issue.

  125. The Monster says:

    Imus called an entire group of young ladies “hos”, rather than just one. None of those women are in politics.

    The only differences I can see between Chelsea and Bristol: Chelsea was almost a decade older when Shuster made a comment with multiple interpretations, one of which was that she’s a ho; she hasn’t had any children out of wedlock (but if she’s had an abortion no one would know if she’d gotten knocked up); her mother’s a liberal Dem.

  126. Danger says:

    Pablo,

    I would just be happy with the “pressed” part irt the newsmedias dealings with Clinton and Obama.

  127. JHo says:

    What’s interesting, Pablo, is that Lafferman was evidently and historically motivated to joke on national media about the minor daughter of a rival and often-cartooned political family being impregnated by, gasp, a largish person of color and reputation, in public, at a nationally-televised sporting event, and in view of her parents.

    Imus simply used the vernacular.

    For this one of them lost his job.

  128. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    GASP! Hate speech! Moral equivalency claims another. Dave Letterman is a celebrity with a bully pulpit making an extremely crass and sophomoric joke, on national television, against the Palin family (especially Willow) on one hand and on the other you have commtenters on a web site venting their frustration with Letterman. Yeah, those are the same two things exactly.

  129. Danger says:

    Monster,

    Willow Palin, (and Bristol as well) are not in politicks either.

  130. JD says:

    It is always interesting to compare and contrast Leftist responses to these things. Imus/Chelsea – wall to wall coverage and fauxed moral outrage. This one, not so much.

  131. […] to Protein Wisdom homepage « Letterman Clarifies [Dan Collins; UPDATE]  |  Home  |   June 11, 2009 protein wisdom rises to the […]

  132. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Btw, one person’s target was a child, the other peoples’ target was an adult. Not remotely the same.

  133. The Monster says:

    Willow Palin, (and Bristol as well) are not in politicks either.

    But their mother is, just like Hillary Clinton. Both Bristol and Chelsea were over 18 when they were allegedly called whores. By anyone’s reckoning, someone over 25 is a fully-grown adult. Chelsea could even have been a candidate for Representative while her mother was running for President.

  134. Danger says:

    Monster,

    I believe Shusters comments involved the Clintons pimping Chelsea for political gain. A poor choice of words for sure but not the same as Lettermans comments; which by the way, he (Letterman) doubled down on the next night.

    Lettermans comments were worse than even Don Imus’s IMHO.

  135. JD says:

    Hillary was using Chelsea as a shield, and would gin up some faux’d outrage when anyone criticized Chelsea or what she had to say, and she was like 28 years old at the time.

  136. David Shuster was suspended for his comments about Hillary pimping out her daughter. Will CBS suspend Dave?

  137. Comment by ignatov on 6/11 @ 9:13 am #

    “just what do you advise as regards censuring Letterman”

    Until the 1st amendment is repealed, there is only one sanction against offensive speech: shame. Letterman has rightfully been receiving it by the bucket-load. I just thought the violence-mongers deserved a little, too.

    You seem to isolate Dave from the “violence mongers.” Rape is violence & not a joke, iggy.

  138. wayne says:

    I want to ask a question.

    Why is it when some psycho like that Roeder guy or some Islamofascist goes all postal, instead of shooting someone who will get all the lefty causoids up in arms about their favorite crusade, can’t they decide to pack a couple of rounds into some like asinine media clown like Letterman, Olbermann, Chris Matthews, or – please Lord – Janeane Garofolo?

    The sudden silence would truly be golden.

  139. Good Lt. says:

    Maybe all of the major network anchors and cable news peeps should ask random Democrat politicians if Dave Letterman speaks for the entire Democrat Party or if he’s their new “leader.”

    I mean, if Rush Limbaugh is dubbed the de facto leader of the GOP by the media and tons of GOPers were asked repeatedly by memebers of the Enchanted Media if they thought Rush Limbaugh spoke for them, then why does Dave get to skate with his “raping 14-year-olds is teh funniez” nonsense??

    It’s called consistency, media. Try it.

  140. donald says:

    David’s son harry got ass raped by barak obama!

    Now that’s funny.

  141. B Moe says:

    Apparently I already boycott all of his sponsors, Heidi. How about that?

  142. Mary says:

    For those who freely call Bristol Palin a slut for being an unwed teenage mother….

    I might remind you that Barak Obama’s mother was and underaged unwed teenage mother, and per your definition, is now fair game to be called a SLUT.

    Not to mention David Letterman’s wife, who birthed Dave’s son out of wedlock.

    Sluts all around, eh?

    Fair game, says Donnie the Douche, on MSNBC, making excuses for white trash David Letterman.

    Let’s hear slut jokes about Obama’s mother.

  143. happyfeet says:

    Getting pregnant in high school isn’t defiantly unslutty.

  144. JD says:

    Meya, you ignorant slut STFU.

  145. happyfeet says:

    The Barack Obama, he is eying our little country to where our little country should be afraid to bend over in the shower I think. Drudge linked it and it’s in the WSJ so it’s not just made up.

  146. happyfeet says:

    *eyeing*

  147. JD says:

    Good Allah, happyfeet. Does their mendacity know no bounds?

  148. JD says:

    I suppose Barcky will call that a tax increase that he saved.

  149. happyfeet says:

    It’s wrong wrong wrong to be underestimating my resolve not to be taxed more.

  150. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    meya’s not just unbelievably mendacious, but also without a doubt the most boring and witless troll here. Congrats, meya.

  151. Apparently I already boycott all of his sponsors, Heidi. How about that?

    me too, I think. citibank in particular. We have a mutual boycotting going on. They started it.

  152. mj says:

    Dave fathered a child out of wedlock. Now, what conclusions can we draw about this?

  153. Rusty says:

    It’s wrong wrong wrong to be underestimating my resolve not to be taxed more.

    That should be a banner somewhere. If I ever have to carry a protest sign, that would be it.

  154. Doxycycline. says:

    Doxycycline….

    Doxycycline. Doxycycline mycoplasma. Doxycycline side effects. Doxycycline hyclate 100 mg. Doxycycline erythromycin tetracycline….

Comments are closed.