Contessa Brewer v. John Ziegler: Mic cut

Seems she can dish it out with her low road "palling around with terrorists" but in typical form....can't take it!

If you think Sarah Palin "documentary" maker and GOP apologist John Ziegler is bad on his cable news appearances, wait until you get a load of this. Maybe not the world's worst date, but he sure was doing his best to try to deserve the honor.
.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/palin-filmmaker-john-ziegler-makes-fool-himself-dating-show

Until the Repuglicans quit using morons like John Ziegler to spead their "message" (whatever that is), they're never going to recover.

'Liberal bias?' IU professors find network TV election coverage favors Republicans:

"A visual analysis of television presidential campaign coverage from 1992 to 2004 suggests that the three television broadcast networks -- ABC, CBS and NBC -- favored Republicans in each election, according to two Indiana University professors in a new book.

"We don't think this is journalists conspiring to favor Republicans. We think they're just so beat up and tired of being accused of a liberal bias that they unknowingly give Republicans the benefit in coverage," said Grabe, who also is a research associate in political science at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. "It's self-censorship that journalists might be imposing on themselves."

Grabe and Bucy's book is the culmination of the first major research project analyzing the relatively unexplored territory of visual coverage in presidential elections and how that influences public opinion. Between 1992 and 2004, they found, candidates were steadily shown more visually, in what they call image bites, while their verbal statements, or sound bites, decreased in average length.

They examined 62 hours of broadcast network news coverage -- a total of 178 newscasts -- between Labor Day and Election Day over four U.S. presidential elections between 1992 and 2004. Cable news outlets, including CNN and Fox News, were not included in their research. The professors are now looking at 2008 election coverage."
.
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/9993.html

Of course, nuts like John Ziegler will just dismiss this kind of data, choosing instead to listen to the voices in their head telling them that this is further proof of "liberal media bias."

Dave is just having some fun with the Republicans !! You know, the laughable lot, from Getrich to Limpbag, that spews hate and lies to protect their petty fiefdoms !! They have hamstrung the democratic process for 75 years and have fought to deny many Americans their birthright. Now, all of sudden, they are concerned with civil rights to the evils of tobacco !! What hypocrisy, these Republicans are capable of, only to secure another feed at the public trough !! Get back to your districts and introduce yourselves to your constituents !! I'm sure they would like to know, what you look like !! Before you do, though, I suggest you clean yourselves up and get that Corporate stink from yourselves !! You don't want that cat out of that bag, do you !!?
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

MSNBC cut off Ziegler's microphone. Showing once again that great devotion to free speech that media lefties always display.

David Letterman is part of the taliban media.

The constant attacks on Palin , her young daughter is uncalled for.

Is Letterman going to say something about Malia and Sacha Obama, is this american taliban going to denigrate his own wife, mother and other women?

He is insulting and disgusting. How could his lovely mother produce such a p rick?

Contessa Brewer’s turned in a flawless performance as a flat-footed, dim-witted news commentator. At least, I hope it was an act. Anyone who couldn’t figure out why Sarah Palin was a little upset with Letterman is too senseless to have a career in television, much less in the news media.
.
Comments like Letterman’s, regardless of whom they are directed at, are so totally offensive and tasteless that I’m surprised the FCC isn’t jumping down his throat. Recall, again, what he said. He implied that Palin was a crack-whore (#6 on the Top 10: “After a wink and a nod, ended up with a kilo of crack” - cf. “strawberry” in the ‘Urban Dictionary’), stated that she had a “slutty flight attendant look” (#2 on the Top 10), and joked in his monologue that her daughter got knocked up by Alex Rodriguez at a ball game. Even if the FCC doesn’t take any action, I would hope that decent, self-respecting women would give Letterman the Don Imus treatment for such offensive dreck.
.
This brings us back to Contessa Brewer. She claimed the same things had been said of her, but that she’s “fine” and “still here” - as if she didn’t think anything of it. I hope she was kidding about this too. Because, if it’s true, it speaks volumes more about Ms. Brewer than it does about Sarah Palin or any other normal, self-respecting woman. That Brewer then had to have John Ziegler spell the whole thing out for her was ludicrous. She deserved every barb that came her way, and then some. What's this world coming to?

Just look at who the leading GOP luminaries are ... an old impotent sadist (Gingrich), a brainless ambitious woman (Palin), a colorless cardboard cutout Mormon (Romeny), hack radio clowns (Limbaugh, Ziegler etc.), and a governor (Pawlenty) who cut infrastructure funding to cover tax cuts and had a dozen commuters go into the river.

Calling the GOP the "Party of No" is actually being nice.

It is about time that we stand up to the democrats propaganda machines. The tripe I've heard from the "major news outlets" reminds me of my Army days listening to Radio Moscow in West Germany.

These people (Ziegler) are so head-shakingly stupid that I don't know if I can stand it for the next eight years.

And how can the electorate continue to be so damn dumb as to vote for these clowns again and again? Aren't they tired of all the 24/7 hate, hate, hate? I know that I am.

I knew that having a Democratic president was going to make life in the USA different, but I didn't know we were going to turn into Bizarro World so fast.

Thank you, Contessa. You gave him every chance to stay on topic before (blessedly) shutting off the blather.

It is about time that we stand up to the democrats propaganda machines. The tripe I've heard from the "major news outlets" reminds me of my Army days listening to Radio Moscow in West Germany.

Posted by: Carl | June 10, 2009 6:24 PM
--------------------

Yeah, the National Republican Party Propaganda outlet at Fixed News Channel would never do anything like that, right Carl?
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edYeqzTJci4

Conservative Misinformation University Salutes The Class of 2009:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8vro-ecUIQ

There is a divide in America: The ignorant and those who listen and learn.

If you don't see the bias in the Mainstream Media, if you see and hear hate in Rush Limbaugh it's only because YOU, liberals (socialists) don't want to see anything that differs from your world view.

How many people drove hours to see Palin in upstate New York? If someone says something smart and the MSM chooses not to report it...is it still smart?

Yes.

Go get 'em, Ziegler!
Contessa? Let's see you put up with what Palin has put up with. If someone called you a slut they were paying you and other media whores a compliment.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/06/09/letterman-attacks-sarah-palins-slutty-flight-attendant-look

The left continues with hate speech. Since the daughter with Sarah Palin was 14 year old Willow. Wouldn't that make Alex Rodriguez a child rapist?

The hate from left continues to spew.

Here's the latest tactic by the Republicans to become 'mainstream' again;

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/conservatives_warn_quick_sex?utm_source=a-section

Ziegler, Palin, the Cons., all have such thin skin.
I guess these cretins never heard what Dave L. had to say about Clinton.??

“Dave is just having some fun with the Republicans!!”
* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | June 10, 2009 4:15 PM
.
No, Don:
.
There is a certain line of behavior that divides decent from barbarous cretins. Decent people do not pass that line. Regardless of a woman’s political party, or the political office she holds, it is despicable to insinuate that she is a crack whore, to say she has a “slutty airline attendant look” or to joke about her daughter getting “knocked up” just because she went to a baseball game. No, Don, this is not “just having some fun.” It was outrageous and damnable. If the shoe was on the other foot, and the same remarks were made about Michelle Obama and her children, you would be up in arms - and rightly so. That you could give someone a pass for such rude and foul behavior because the victim is a Republican is vile, Don. It’s vile. You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking such things.

Say hey, Ziegler! I thought they were better known as Greedy Old Pricks, maybe white 99 % of the time! Remember that the Republicans never do anything FOR this country, they only do things TO this country! whiteagle38

Man, if any of you are not ashamed at a 60+ year old dirty man for making up jokes about sex at a minor, aimed at Gov. Palin, then you need to reevaluate what's right and what's wrong.
The things Letterman said were sick and dirty. And before you come back at me I hope I read where some of you who attacked Imus over the "hoe's", will take the same stand against this Letterman filth.

I've often wondered why networks continue to put this repulsive creep Ziegler on the air when they know full well that he has a screw loose? They should just let him waller in the mud over at Fixed News Channel with all the other wingnut goons.

Contessa was very polite, gave him every opportunity to have a halfway decent discussion and yet he continued to carry on like some kind of demented moron. His behavior is indicative of some kind of mental problem. I say this based not only on this interview but on other whacko behavior he has displayed on other on-air occassions.

And the way Ziegler fawns over Palin is absolutely creepy. The guy is insane.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQjo1k0kTLE

I think she just looked foolish...

Yeah John W! I totally agree. Don, as liberal as you are is no excuse. I can not see how you could justify Lettermice's comments other than offensive and vile.

John W, with all due respect, I wish you were as outraged about the slaughter in Baghdad, the outrage for the despicable treatment of our veterans, under the Bush Administration, at the Department of Veteran's Affairs, about the victimization of the citizens of New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina and the victims of Abu Grab, just to name a few, in the last 8 years !! That, of course, would cause you to admit that the Republicans, and their agenda, has outraged the world, not only, our nation, with their brutal, unconscionable and malicious behavior, for the last 8 years !! These are issues to rave about, John W, but some comic's cheap laughs, no, that is what I would call deflective outrage !! Redirect the deserved criticism from those, who played no small part is trying to rip apart America, to score political points !! No, John W, you can be as outraged as you want to be, at whom ever you want, but I still say it is misguided and disingenuous !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Terri,
What about the hate, lies, and intolerance spewed from Limpbaugh and O' Reilly and Hannity?? You certainly live in a little world. How many times did Letterman and others joke about the Clintons?? Maybe Palin should stay in Alaska.

What Letterman said is so vicious and so vile that anyone that thinks this is funny has a real problem. This is not an issue of Republican vs. Democrat. This is just plain being civil. Regardless of what your station in life is, family is off limits. One last comment, this guy{Letterman} could not carry Red humor', Johnny humor, Jay humor or any decent comics shoes.
Only someone who is sick would laugh at this type of so called humor.

"There is a certain line of behavior that divides decent from barbarous cretins. Decent people do not pass that line."

John W just described the entire Fox News team, and Ziegler.
And once again, I guess he never heard what Dave had to say about the Clintons.

John W, the great libertarian, calling for the government to limit Freedom of speech in regards to a politcal figure? I would have thought that the arch-defender of the libertarian ideal would support the right for the prress to say anything about anyone, especially political figures, as the Constitution clearly supports. But no, John W wants the FCC to crack down on Letterman for his joke. I don't ever recall John W the "libertarian" angrily demanding that the government fine the media for a statement about a Democrat, do you? Apparently his devotion to Ms. Palin is greater that his devotion to the Freedoms of Speech and the Press. I think he should turn in his libertarian credentials.

RE: Don Fitzgeralds June 11, 2009 7:41 AM post.

What deflection! Dickhead Letterman and our men and women in uniform in the same sentence.

You are an idiot.

What Ziegler says is right-on… and the guy’s pretty funny, too.

That’s how the free market system works… people are dying for someone to call Obama and the MSM on this stuff, and Ziegler is stepping up to fill the demand- how bout that.

If Sarah Palin is SO silly and irrelevant, why the obsession? Clearly the Left noted her appeal, and are out to eliminate the threat- it’s not like it’s not obvious.

And she’s been highly successful in life while ignoring the left-wing feminist model… this helps to explain the extra dose of venom in the attacks.

Go get em, Sarah- and don’t mind the press, nobody will be listening to them anymore after the pending Obamamania implosion-

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/

You would think someone who was called a "fat a$$" by the likes of Don Imus would have a modicum of sensitivity about gender bias and sexism in the media. But as a member of the MSNBHO network, Contessa Brewer has to stick with the company talking points: anything related to King Obama, Queen Michelle and their princesses is "godly," (see Evan Thomas) and supernaturally cool (see any video of Olbermann, Tingles Matthew, Shuster, etc.). However, anything related to Palin, Hillary Clinton, or their daughters is fair game, funny, and ok because the media views them as white trash.

God help America as the media is now state-run.

This comes from a liberal Democrat who voted for Hillary, Kerry and Gore and who counted the days to the end of the Bush debacle.

I didn't think anything could be worse, yet it is.

Boy. The media sure doesn't like being called on it liberalism. They don't seem to care to be held acountable for they're hatred of conservatives either. Good for you Ziegler. The media could use a few more voices to even things up a bit.

"Vote Democrat. It's easier than working."

* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | June 11, 2009 7:41 AM
.
With all due respect, Don, your entire response is a red herring. We aren’t talking about Iraq or Katrina right now. We are talking about the despicable behavior of a second rate talk-show host. I do not preface all of my responses with my views on Iraq or Katrina. Nor does anyone - except you, apparently - expect others to self-flagellate over Iraq and Katrina in order to say something relevant or intelligent about a separate topic. You simply insist on giving David Letterman a pass for his nasty attack on Sarah Palin because she is a Republican. You can’t come up with a good reason to support it this distinction, so you cloud the issue with nonsense.

John W -- talk about reading too much into a comment! The Top 10 item you reference: “After a wink and a nod, ended up with a kilo of crack” is not insinuating that Palin is a crack whore. It simply means that her habit of winking & nodding at everyone is going to have different outcomes depending on where it is done. A wink & a nod at an auction house? $10,000 worth of artwork. On the street in NYC (and many other major metropolitan areas)? Drugs. Complete overreaction on your part.

Gee where was all this outrage when Letterman did a top ten list suggesting that Obama was having affairs twice in one list?
http://news.therecord.com/arts/article/392030
I guess Palin is just too special to be made fun of like everyone else.

But they thought the "magic Negro" was great.

* * * * *
“John W, the great libertarian, calling for the government to limit Freedom of speech in regards to a politcal (sic) figure?”
* * * * *
Posted by: Lou | June 11, 2009 9:55 AM
.
You are imagining things, Lou. I wrote, “I’m surprised the FCC isn’t jumping down his throat.” I didn’t say the FCC should. I suggested, by way of comparison, that the content of his monologue and Top 10 met the FCC standards for indecency - as a means of emphasis. The FCC prohibits more than obscenity. It also prohibits “indecency” which includes the depiction of excretory or sexual functions in terms that are patently offensive as measured by community standards. If Letterman’s shtick regarding Palin didn’t meet the standard, it came awfully close.
.
Please learn to make distinctions where they exist.
.
Furthermore, I didn’t know you’ve known me all my life to know what I’ve said or thought, or that I am supposed to record all of my feelings of outrage on this board. I’ve only been on the Swamp for about two years. What attack on a Democrat did I miss that was equally scurrilous as the one against the Palin family? I’ve voiced my displeasure at a lot of abuse on this board, and you know it. So don’t give me this half-assed hypocrisy crap. I think you should turn in your credibility credentials.

Whatever political side you are on, I don't care. Politicians are fair game. But you do not insulate, innocent children. It's not funny. Any parent, would and should be fighting mad. If I were Todd Palin I would be camping out to take a poke at Letterman. I have been watching Letterman for 20 years and the older he gets, the less funny he is.

* * * * *
“And once again, I guess he never heard what Dave had to say about the Clintons.”
.
Posted by: C.Morris☭ | June 11, 2009 9:05 AM
.
And once again, IT DOESN”T MATTER. How many times do I have to tell you that two wrongs do not make a right? I don’t give Letterman a pass for what he said about the Clintons or the Palins, any more than I give a pass to the John McCain for the horrible stuff that he said about Chelsea. The one does not justify or mitigate the other.

Although I thought Dave's comments were over the line, I'm curious why the flight attendants are not outraged over comments of Palin buying "sluty flight attendant" makeup. Where's the outrage from the flight attendants. Maybe the next time Dave flies his cocktail should slip from the flight attendant's hand!

* * * * *
Posted by: SettleDownPeople | June 11, 2009 1:19 PM
.
You’re not even warm. No one gets a kilo of crack cocaine without paying for it. It doesn’t say she paid cash, and a wink and a nod aren’t payment. Thus, there is the implication that something other than money was exchanged for drugs. Given that Letterman also painted Palin as having a “slutty … look” and that she has a slut for a daughter (as exemplified by the way she got “knocked up” by A Rod), the natural suggestion is that she paid for it in flesh. That is not a far and plausible interpretation of #6 given the totality of the circumstances.

John W.,

My gawd, man, you need to get out more. I guess you've never heard some of the cracks Letterman has made about Madonna and other celebrities (I'm pretty sure M. is not a Republican). Yeah, it's in bad taste, much of late-night comedy is, but let's not overreact, and no need to add to the Pugs ongoing persecution complex.

Ziegler, Palin, the Cons., all have such thin skin.
I guess these cretins never heard what Dave L. had to say about Clinton.??

Posted by: C.Morris☭ | June 10, 2009 9:41 PM

C Morris, last night I used the same Letterman jokes in a post to the Swamp, except that instead of Sarah Palin and her daughter being the object, I substituted the daughter of a "journalist," Chelsea Clinton and the Michelle Obama. Have you seen that post here?
So, when it comes to "thin skin" the reality is it's the Left. It is OK to call the former vice presidential candidate a slut and that her daughter apparently is an easy lay, but you use the same "comedy" on icons of the left or in regard to "journalists," and low and hehold that same comedy apparently isn't funny anymore!

By the way, Letterman said he meant 18-year-old Bristol in his joke and not the 14-year-old daughter. Sorry, Dave, it still doesn't wash. It was wrong and mean-spirited, regardless.

The joke was in bad taste and Dave apologized for it. On the other hand, I don't have any sympathy for someone (Palin) who has gone around saying things about their political opponents (Obama), like accussing them of 'palling around with terrorists'. Palin is white trash and has no business whatsoever of ever holding any sort of political office outside of being governor of the nutjob Republican state of Alaska.

Calling someone's clothing "slutty" meets the standard of indecency in your opinion John? Are you serious? Your anger is way overblown on this one.

But of course, being the staunch and committed Libertarian you are, you believe the FCC shouldn't be allowed to regulate the content of speech at al , indecent, obscene or otherwise, and in fact should be completely abolished, right John?
http://www.lp.org/platform

Let's hear it John. Tell us that while you don't support what Letterman said, that you'lll fight to the death for his right to say it on national TV.

I can tell you one thing. If I was Todd Palin, I'd walk on to his live set, and confront him.
I can see the rat run, and Letterdickhead would be screeming like he'd just boned Rev. Wright. And enjoyed it.

Just words right and nothing to complain about. Next tax return will say "comedian", then I can say whatever I want because I'm an artist.

Lou and C Mo,

Libertarian = cowards who are ashamed to call themselves Republicans.

That sums up our little unemployed pal John W. pretty well, don't ya think?

Brewer said: "I don't know what to do with that..."

Well, Don Imus says you have a big, fat-@ss... maybe you can find some room up there to put it.

Palin is so far to the right that it's actually scary to think that she was the Vice Presidential candidate nominated by a major political party in America. This is so far out there, you actually can't make this stuff up. The strangest part of this whole thing is that this woman Sarah Palin will say and spin almost anything in order to keep herself in the limelight to include accusing David Letterman of stating, that her 14 year old daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez. In fact that appears to have been the job of Palin's then 17 year old daughter Bristol.

Now I'm not saying we should judge Bristol, I'm merely saying that is who David Letterman said would be knocked up by Alex Rodriguez in the 7th inning. That Palin would spin this as an insult to her 14 year old daughter is clearly a testament to the fact she is willing to use her 14 year old daughter to keep herself in the limelight and make people feel sorry for her, which just goes to show how tawdry the antics that Sarah Palin will stoop to really are, just to keep herself in the limelight. It really makes me feel sorry for the people of Alaska.

One other thought occurs here and that is how the Palin's have beem using their child who has Down's Syndrome for their political gain. PATHETIC!

* * * * *
Posted by: Lou | June 11, 2009 4:50 PM
.
In the first place, Lou, he didn’t merely call her clothing “slutty.” He said she had a “slutty flight attendant look.” He also implied she was a crack whore. He also suggested her daughter was either raped or prone to promiscuity, in that she got “knocked up” by A Rod during a ball game. The daughter with Sarah Palin at the time was her fourteen (14) year old daughter, Willow. That’s a pretty nasty thing to say about a fourteen year old girl. All of this should be despicable in anyone’s book. No one should have to take it.
.
And, yes, despite the fact that I find Letterman’s behavior despicable, I do very much believe in his right to say such things. You don’t have to remind me of the Libertarian Party position on this issue. I totally agree with it.
.
But my concern for free speech ends with seeing that people like Letterman aren’t censored or punished by the government. Believing that someone has a “right” to free speech does not also mean that I must blink at its abuse, that I must like it regardless of what is said, or that I must remain silent if I don’t. In the free marketplace of ideas, the remedy for bad speech is more speech; and that includes criticism. Libertarians believe that, with freedom, comes the duty to use it responsibly. We’re not anarchists (at least most of us aren’t.)
.
David Letterman had a duty to use his right to free speech responsibly. In my humble opinion, he seriously violated that duty in making his vicious, sexist cheap shots against the Palins. I am, therefore, well within my rights to criticize him as I have - and without the slightest taint of hypocrisy (as you seem to imply). Criticism like this may induce him to act more responsibly next time.

* * * * *
Posted by: alex | June 11, 2009 3:51 PM
.
Alex,
.
Madonna arguably brings that kind of feedback onto herself. She has spent years cultivating the kind of controversial image that invites it. For her, its good press. Getting mentioned in the media, even in connection with some infamous episode (like the one she pulled off with A Rod), means more music and concert ticket sales.
.
On the other hand, despite the post-modern, post-gen-X world we live in, some people still prize their good reputations as valuable possessions. Consider:
.
“Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls:
Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands:
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed.”
.
(Wm. Shakespeare; Othello, Act 3, Scene 3.)
.
One’s reputation is an important human right. So important, in fact, that even First Amendment rights do not absolutely prevent lawsuits for defamation. In the not too distant pass, what Letterman said could well have been the subject of such a suit. So, when David Letterman comes along with his verbal graffiti to besmirch Sarah Palin and her daughter, I get upset; and I understand why others do too. Letterman stole from them something that didn’t make him rich, but did make them poorer - even if only slightly.
.
I am not going on about this because the target was Sarah Palin, or because she is a Republican. I don’t particularly dislike the lady, but neither do I particularly hold her or any current Republican politicians in high esteem as leaders. So, no, I’m not trying to feed the Republican persecution complex. I would have been this outraged had Letterman unleashed an attack on someone else with equal vigor, including Democrats.

Lou, Letterman can say what he wants. No one is saying he can't say what he wants. The issues are several, though. Whether Letterman was joking about Palin's 14-year-old daughter or 18-year-old daughter, the general practice has been to leave the kids of politicians out of it. The problem, though, is the media and Hollywood recently has only applied that principle to the kids of Democrats and it's open season on kids of Republicans. Even last year, while on the campaign trail, the Clintons made it known that the adult Chelsea was off limits. The media left Chelsea alone. But last year, the media and Hollywood made issues of Republican kids, even a new-born baby, saying Palin's new born actually was the belonged to Bristol.
Also, it is rather offensive for Letterman to call Palin "slutty." On the item about Michelle Obama's horrid outfit in London, I joked about what it made Michelle look like, using the same principles applied by Letterman to Palin. The Swamp Censor Thugs didn't like it. So, not only is it a question of taste, but it's also a question of hypocrisy.
But then taste and fairness never were qualities that the Left has been known for.

Doogie,

Have the above radio hosts joked about a 14 year-old being a participant in statutory rape?

Darla,
Really, she isn't qualified to be elected dog catcher let alone governor of a state.

Neither man took either woman seriously. Both men were quite arrogant and dismissive of the women. Though it was really low of Letterman to extend it to Palin's kids.
*
Reminds me of Gov. Paterson and SNL.

lol...so Contessa cuts the mike and you get all riled up? Billo the clown does it all the time, but he is a rightie so thats different...right? You are all so full of crap and downright hypocrites. You can dish it out...but you can't take it. Quite an entertaining bunch republicans are. Good for a laugh a minute these days.

* * * * *
Posted by: Tasha Robertson | June 11, 2009 5:45 PM
.
Tasha,
.
1. Before I can agree or disagree with anything you said, you had first better tell me what you mean when you say, “Palin is so far to the right …” What does “right” mean in this instance?
.
2. David Letterman didn’t mention any of Palin’s daughters by name. Bristol Palin wasn’t with her mother in New York during the relevant time period of which Letterman spoke. Palin’s 14 year old daughter was with her. Therefore, it is rather less than clear from his statement that he was targeting Bristol. It seems to me that a person like Letterman had better get his facts straight, especially before he launches into such an intentionally tasteless attack.
.
3. Are you trying to tell us that his sexist smears against the Palins would have been better or okay had it been more unequivocally directed at Bristol Palin? Does Bristol or her mother deserve to be belittled in such a crass fashion? If so, please give whatever possible explanation you have. I can’t wait to hear it. We’ll then apply it to you and see how you like it.
.
4. Given that Bristol Palin wasn’t there, and Palin’s 14 year old daughter was there, why do you think it is such a stretch or a “spin” for Sarah Palin to complain about slurs to her 14 year old daughter?
.
5. Tell me, please, how Palin is using her Down’s Syndrome child for political gain. I have never heard that one before.
.
Inquiring minds want to know.

We have more to worry about from the lunatic fringe and their enablers than we do late night talk-show host:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/opinion/12krugman.html

And why should we have empathy for poor Sarah who took the low road while campaigning against the Obama ticket? The same Sarah that said rural America was the "real America", in effect, giving the big (screw you) to urban America.

And John W. worries about Sarah's reputation. She wasn't too concerned about Obama's, when she charged that he was "palling around with terrorists.."

If Sarah wants the national stage, and apparently she does, then she needs to quit whining about cheap shots, she's delivered plenty herself.

But my concern for free speech ends with seeing that people like Letterman aren’t censored or punished by the government. Believing that someone has a “right” to free speech does not also mean that I must blink at its abuse,
Posted by: John W. | June 11, 2009 7:02 PM
*************************

When you start coming on here and doing something other than defending the Limbaugh's, Hannity's, Beck's and O'Reilly's etc on the right, I'll believe you, but you don't. You're a hypocrite period, end of story.
.
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/bill-oreilly-has-dr-george-tillers-b
.
http://www.newshounds.us/2009/05/06/is_hannity_inciting_civil_war.php
.
http://newsone.blackplanet.com/obama/top-10-racist-limbaugh-quotes/
.
http://boards.hbo.com/topic/Maher-Member-Created/Glenn-Beck-Inciting/1900012539

If this country was left to unemployed fantasy driven whackjobs like you we'd all still be riding horses, trading gold and shooting each other over political differences. That's why you're a very small minority in this country, clownboy.

To everyone else out there, here's a sure-fire method of discussing anything with a libertarian nut like John W - DON'T.

They're a bunch of insecure whackjobs, like the guy who shot up the Holcaust Museum the other day. That's why John W. comes on here and writes chapter long spiel's that no one reads - he's insecure.

Libertarianism is political/economic insanity dressed up in logical fallacies. Just chuckle and give him rhetorical pats on the head for being so gosh-darn cute. It has no real constituency and is basically a hobby for a handful of cranking old men who have to much time on their hands, like John W.

"Quite an entertaining bunch republicans are. Good for a laugh a minute these days."
Posted by Laurie/June11--10:24 p.m.

We'll be laughing at you and your bunch Laurie-when Obama starts taxing [you] up your wazoo! Can't touch "us" though...we're capitalists and have very good accountants...the jokes on you, you dope.

Paulo

This is hypocracy at it's finest. The Palin's have used Bristol as a shield (children are off limits) and a weapon (Abstinence only). I personally feel sorry for Bristol, she has been forced to do things that she might not be comfortable with doing, in service to her moms ambitions.

Did Palin ever critcize her running mate, John McCain, about his rape jokes or when he called his wife a trollop and c*nt?

Must have missed it....

John W, Are you equally outraged about the Top Ten list Paul linked to above that twice said Obama was having affairs? Not just saying his "look" was that of a man having affairs, but that he was actually cheating on his wife. I'm sure that has you even more upset. Are you outraged at this slander against his fine repuitration? Does, that fit your extremely broad definition of "indecency"? Let's hear it John. Let's hear the anger at Obama being besmirched.

This is so amusing. The Palin machine really works well. Sarah wants some headlines and some sympathy so she makes a big deal out of a lame Letternman Top Ten, and all the good little Republicans work themselves into a lather on cue. Call the FCC! Slander! Indecency! Mean spirited! Oh the humanity! Will the Palins survive this trauma?
What a joke. These guys are all being played for fools, and they don't have a clue.

John W is right. Letterman's Lese Majeste is unacceptable. The Palins are above being mocked, especially by a commoner like Letterman. We must be properly deferential to our betters like the Palin family. A simple courtsey or touch of the forelock would be appropriate when approaching any member of the Palin clan. Do not speak to them until spoken to. When leaving the presence of the Palin's , back away, never turn your back on them. They should always be spoken of in tones of hushed, revential awe.

* * * * *
Posted by: Lou | June 12, 2009 7:49 AM
.
Had I heard of it, I would have been. My opinion of Letterman as a performer and comedian decreases by the hour.

* * * * *
Posted by: Emily Post | June 12, 2009 10:59 AM
.
Emily,
.
I’m sorry if I gave you the impression that the Palins were above being mocked. I think it’s perfectly fine for someone to mock the Palins or anyone else. What I think is reprehensible is for someone to cast cruel, negative sexual aspersions against another, especially upon women or minor female children.
.
I also think it’s perfectly fine to mock people like you, who know what someone says, yet intentionally twists it in order to make an entirely invalid point. Actually, it’s pointless to mock people like you. In the end, you mock yourselves and your own intellectual integrity by making such transparently foolish satire.

* * * * *
Posted by: dt☢ | June 12, 2009 1:38 AM
.
Go back and look at what I said to C. Morris. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Why is it that so few on this board seem to understand that basic message? If karma were the only rule of what is right and wrong, no one (including you) would be safe from attack, and our civilization would devolve into chaos. Instead of assuming that a person’s prior behavior means that he or she “deserves” an attack, or doesn’t “deserve” a defense from one, start off with the assumption that everyone is entitled to protection from attack. Once you do, you will have rejoined John Locke’s social compact.

* * * * *
Posted by: unemployed lawyer | June 12, 2009 1:41 AM
.
Hi JohnEEEE-boy. It’s nice to see that you still don’t have the faintest clue what Libertarianism is, and that you still can’t tell the truth.
.
Quit stalking me, you boob.

John W., you're like an adult trying to explain this to a bunch of children. I don't know where you get the patience. I'm also not sure if the people you are arguing with are really this stupid, or just feel they have to make some token partisan argument, no matter how silly, because the issue involves lighting rod Palin. Everyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows Letterman's comments were indefensible. Even Letterman essentially admitted that.

Quit stalking me, you boob.

Posted by: John W. | June 12, 2009 1:46 PM
***********************

Quit collecting unemployment and get a job, you loser.

Go back and look at what I said to C. Morris. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Why is it that so few on this board seem to understand that basic message? If karma were the only rule of what is right and wrong, no one (including you) would be safe from attack, and our civilization would devolve into chaos.
Posted by: John W. | June 12, 2009 1:04 PM
**********************

Johnny W. Bush,
I don't know, maybe it's because you're a HYPOCRITE!

Like I said before:
When you start coming on here and doing something other than defending the Limbaugh's, Hannity's, Beck's and O'Reilly's etc on the right, I'll believe you, but you don't. You're a hypocrite period, end of story.
.
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/bill-oreilly-has-dr-george-tillers-b
.
http://www.newshounds.us/2009/05/06/is_hannity_inciting_civil_war.php
.
http://newsone.blackplanet.com/obama/top-10-racist-limbaugh-quotes/
.
http://boards.hbo.com/topic/Maher-Member-Created/Glenn-Beck-Inciting/1900012539

PS - you need to quit living off the government and get a job like everyone else does, you long winded buffoon.

John W lives in a self made fantasy world where time stands still around 1950.

John W and Terry are the same schlubs who believed all of Bush's BS campaign crap back in 2000, only now John W is embarrassed and prefers to call himself an Independent/Libertarian....or something. It doesn't bother Terry, he's a full fledged sociopath.

John W.,
The "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is valid if you're comparing say, what Dave said about Obama vs. what he said about Palin.

But the moral relativity thing doesn't absolve Sarah for playing the victim, when she willfully slandered Obama and millions of Americans with her scorched-earth campaigning tactics. Hypocrites don't deserve sympathy--and did I mention this whole thing is nothing more than a tactic that the Republicans perfected to distract people from the important issues.

It's no different than the feigned outrage over Kerry's comments on "ending up in Iraq", or the recent statement by Homeland security of wing-nut domestic terrorist threats (which proved prescient).

Pugs have no ideas, so they play the "gotcha" game, or the fear game to ramp up their brain-dead base. Just look at these blogs, triple digit responses guaranteed over inane and manufactured controversies. It's the Jerry Springer hour every day on here. This is what's wrong with America;
why aren't we discussing how we should deal with N. Korea and Iran, not the silly rhetoric like "Obama is soft on terror", but a real discussion on how to proceed with a serious problem?

We always end up bogged down on something stupid, like this. Honestly, I think there is no hope for America.

Trickled On John E (Unemloyed Fry Cook),

As compared to the crap being spewed by Algore, backing George Bush was a slam dunk.

ul,
How dare you! John W and T. are number one! You are number 10!!

* * * * *
Posted by: Herbie H. | June 12, 2009 2:18 PM
.
Actually, Herbie, this takes no patience at all. At the very least, it is a verbal experiment to illustrate just how wide the chasm is that divides people in this country along world views. It’s not that these people are stupid (or dumber) either. They have simply devolved in consciousness and sensitivity to such a degree that they simply cannot comprehend the moral imperative anymore. It is as if they have sunk into a post-modern tribalism of sorts - in which it is excusable or forgivable to harm someone as long as the victim doesn’t belong to a cultural or political with which they identify. The only thing that surprises me is that, apparently, feminism and equality of the sexes have become a casualty of this new world view. I am also a little dismayed because it is definitely not the world view of a free people.

Actually, Herbie, this takes no patience at all. At the very least, it is a verbal experiment to illustrate just how wide the chasm is that divides people in this country along world views. It’s not that these people are stupid (or dumber) either. They have simply devolved in consciousness and sensitivity to such a degree that they simply cannot comprehend the moral imperative anymore
Posted by: John W. | June 13, 2009 6:10 PM
**************************

Spare us, Johnny W. Bush,

You've have an intellect on the level of a box turtle and you're so insecure in your beliefs that you spend all of your time (unsuccessfully) writing chapter long screeds on here that no one reads. All in a vain effort to convince people that you're not a nut.

You are nothing more than a paranoid second rate version of George W. Bush.

backing George Bush was a slam dunk.

Posted by: Terry | June 13, 2009 5:08 PM
.

Ol' Terry here is my favorite kind of Republican - dumber than a bag of rocks and proud of it.

I find it hilarious the way John W always acts like he's so much more brilliant and intelligent than everyone else on here.

He fits the profile of todays Conservative perfectly:
.
"A pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy." The narcissist is described as turning inward for gratification rather than depending on others, and as being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power, and prestige. Narcissistic personality disorder is closely linked to self-centeredness. It is also colloquially referred to as "the god complex".
.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

* * * * *
Posted by: dt☢ | June 13, 2009 4:30 PM
.
I’m sorry, dt; in my world-view, moral relativity doesn’t exist. Things are right and moral, or they aren’t. Actions are justifiable, or they are not, regardless of the relative “moral” positions of the parties or victims involved. In which case, the “two wrongs don’t make a right” argument is correct 100% of the time.
.
Your approach involves counting up the relative merits and demerits of one side, and then balancing them against what other people do. There is an inherent flaw, a vice, in that approach. Once a person has done something “wrong” according to the subjective view of another, that “wrongdoer” is then subject to any number of actions which may be viewed as anything from “karma” (getting what they gave) or “retribution,” and without any regard to whether any response is necessary to protect other interests. The subjective nature of the assessed “wrong” leads to a wide variety of responses, many of which may be totally disproportionate to the action. It is no longer that “something” must or may be done, but rather that almost anything may be done. That approach may be properly described as totally amoral.
.
So, for example, if what you are telling me is true, then I would be justified in saying that all of Barack Obama’s lies should leave him and his family completely bereft of any protection from scurrilous attacks. Or, perhaps, his fiscal irresponsibility in the teeth of his claims of fiscal accountability should justify or excuse the making sexual slurs against his wife or kids. Just as you said, “Hypocrites don’t deserve sympathy.”
.
I totally reject that approach. There are some things that are just beyond the pale in all circumstances. This is part of the objective, non-relative system of ethics from long, long ago in the before-time. The basic principle is worded in many ways. Immanuel Kant formulated it in his “moral imperative” as: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” In other words, don’t do it unless you want everyone else to do it everywhere and all the time. Jesus’ version was a little different. He said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” In other words, don’t do it unless you too are willing to accept others doing the same to you. Both formulations, unlike yours, leave out the relative culpability of the victim as part of the calculation. Also unlike yours, both start with respect for the equal dignity and integrity of other people.
.
People may have been justified in criticizing Sarah Palin for many things. In which case, they should have criticized her for what she did wrong. That was the remedy. However, regardless of whatever perceived peccadilloes she may have committed, she did not deserve to be demeaned, or to have her children demeaned, in the manner meted out by David Letterman. She had every right to be upset and indignant about his remarks, even if she wouldn’t have been justified in deflecting criticism for some of her other flaws.
.
Furthermore before you go dismissing her response as just so much Republican victimization, consider the possibility that you have adopted this view simply because of her out-of-tribe status. Democrats complain loud and hard about slurs against Democrats, yet I don’t see Democrats telling other Democrats to suck it up and quit moaning. It’s only appropriate for Democrats to say that to Republicans and Indies. It’s your world view that both sets the moral value of others, including the protection they deserve from damnable behavior, and divides you from others who don’t belong to your cultural or political tribes.

More right-wing domestic terrorism is in the news today:

An executive director of the rabidly conservative anti-immigrant Minuteman is accused in a double muder (two died, one survived) in Arizona.
.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/407189_activist13.html

It's no wonder these nuts, who John W and Terry cheerlead for, can't win elections anymore.

Jeezus, JW, who ever said two wrongs make a right?
It's a simple matter of 1; Free speech and 2; Nobody ever complained about what DL said about Clinton, least of all the Cons. I even enjoyed it.

As compared to the crap being spewed by Algore, backing George Bush was a slam dunk.
Posted by: Terry | June 13, 2009 5:08 PM

Yeah--How'd that work out Terrence? Which part of two hopeless wars, a world economy in shambles, the planet in peril, are you most proud of?

John D, Inky---this means you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html

dts and little mind Janet,

Iraq was won. Afghanistan is very winnable. Now its up to BO to not screw it up. What would Algore hae done after 9-11? The only thing we have to go on was how did the Clinton administration go after terrorists -as a law enforcement issue. There would have non-response after non-response as there was during the Clinton Administration. He would have kept punting the situation down the road as he mentor had done.

I enjoyed the six years of economic growth during the Bush administration. Let's see what Algore would have done during the recession of 2001 which started 40 days after he would have taken office. Would Algore have lower incomes taxes to all that pay income tax? Would he have lowered taxes on those that create jobs? He would have consolidated power in the gov't and the economy would have faltered since the gov't does not create jobs.

As far as Algore playiong chicken little on Global Warming, thank God he wasn't elected because that would have been his focus and not the war on terror nor the economy. As a matter of fact, the regulations, such as cap and trade, would hve slowed the economy.

John W.--I think you might be over- analyzing this. Your black and white thinking is not palatable to my "world view".

Comedians, entertainers, etc., make their living testing the boundaries of what is acceptable. Whether it's Dennis Miller or Lewis Black, that's what they do. How long do you think we'd have political comedy (which can be liberating) if everyone followed Kant's "moral imperative". I'd rather be on the tolerant side of the issue than start calling for someone's head like radical Muslim clerics re: Rushdie.

And in your "world view", who gets to decide what is morally objective and what isn't? My "tribe" doesn't dig the Taliban, o.k.?

And, let me reiterate, I would have a lot more sympathy for poor Sarah if my "perceived peccadillos" didn't include insinuations that urban blue staters weren't part of "real America" and that Obama "palled around with terrorist".

Letterman, Leno, Miller, the whole lot of them insult celebrities every day--for laughs. Sarah took the low road in campaigning by exploiting the cultural divide in this country, for votes--big difference! Context matters here.

And BTW, Obama's approach to ending the monetary crisis in this country is consistent with the recommendations of many top economist, including Krugman--taking into account such factors as "the paradox of thrift" when the economy is in meltdown. Whether you agree with it or not, you might want to withhold judgement on Obama's pledges until the economy gets turned around (assuming it will). He inherited a train wreck, remember?

You are right about one thing--Tori and myself are "not from your tribe".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yIVVmhUwBMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yIVVmhUwBM

Terry,
Your last post is so delusional that it doesn't even deserve a response.

Let me just say this, only 24% of Americans indentify themselves as Republicans right now and as long as delusional cretins like you are what represents them I'm willing to bet that that 23% number will drop below 20% before 2010.

Heckuva Job, Terry
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/fewer-than-one-in-four-identify-as-republican-2009-04-29.html

Terry say's "Iraq's won"--what a laugh riot. Geez, I love the smell of victory, A theocracy friendly to Iran, continued bombings, basic services below levels before the war, armed militias and segregated communities. And since it's "won", I guess we can bring all the troops home, huh Terry?

And "screw up" Afghanistan? Bush already did that when he invaded the wrong country, that would be Iraq, Terry.

I'm not even going to comment on the "chicken little" charge, you dense flat-earther. There's a reason why voters won't give you fools the keys to the car again.

John W's world:

Conservatives are right, moral and good. Liberals are wrong, immoral and evil. Nothing inbetween.

There is only black and white. No grey. This is true in all things: religion, economics, politics.

Of course, in this world of complete absolutes, John W's personal views are always that of the pure white, moral and good variety. Any opposing view is wholly wrong, and immoral. John W trully believes he is ALWAYS right, and that there is no legitimate disgreement with his views.

* * * * *
Posted by: Lou | June 15, 2009 10:08 AM
.
If that’s what you want to believe, go ahead and believe it. Knowing you, it’s pointless to try to persuade you otherwise, so I’m not even going to try.

J.W.--Krugman's latest. He's got a pretty good track record in these matters:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/opinion/15krugman.html

* * * * *
Posted by: Lou | June 16, 2009 5:38 PM
.
No, Lou, it’s not a non-starter. You were once ranting and raving about how the GOP is a racist organization. Well, guess what? The GOP also has a rather large collection of conservatives within its ranks. At least, it had a large collection of them. Thus, if one paints the GOP indiscriminately as a racist organization, one is likely to get some paint on conservatives - and many conservatives are going to resent the gesture.
.
And even if what I said about you isn’t exactly true, it doesn’t matter. You are no fastidious stickler for detail. Don’t you remember where you wrote just a few threads ago:
“John W's world:
.
Conservatives are right, moral and good. Liberals are wrong, immoral and evil. Nothing inbetween . . .”
.
and that:
.
“… in this world of complete absolutes, John W's personal views are always that of the pure white, moral and good variety. Any opposing view is wholly wrong, and immoral.”
.
What I said about you is no less true or fair than this stuff. It’s easy to write, awkward to refute, and hard to discuss without making one’s self the center of attention. Don’t do it again, and I won’t return the favor.