marolyn Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 "The Palins have no intention of providing a ratings boost for David Letterman by appearing on his show," said Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton. "Plus, it would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman." So is she saying his a Pedophile? There's a lawsuit just waiting to happen! ...anybody else notice he didn't even invite willow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Bill Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 If you said my 14 year-old daughter got knocked up by A-Rod, even as a joke, I'd at the very least expect an apology. Haven't you heard, it was obviously aimed at the daughter who wasn't there rather than the one who was, even though it makes no sense what so ever, because of something some 17th century guy wrote? Come on man, get a clue. I'm sure everyone who heard it made that connection and not the obvious one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 Haven't you heard, it was obviously aimed at the daughter who wasn't there rather than the one who was, even though it makes no sense what so ever, because of something some 17th century guy wrote? Come on man, get a clue. I'm sure everyone who heard it made that connection and not the obvious one. No abstinence stance, no joke. It's not because some 17th century dude wrote but the dude was used to make the point that taking this literally means you're missing the point. Nuance, yeah? So go ahead and persist that Dave made that comment to exploit a young girl. I'm sure the audience laughed at that and not at the fact that Palin's stance blew up in her face. Obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarlaxle 56 Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 Most people don't know who Jonathan Swift is, Patrycja, much less great classic satire. I'm afraid most people are horribly uneducated in that respect. I blame the left, as they are the sole cause of all problems in modern society. But why should people bother with that "art" shit? It has no real use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 ...anybody else notice he didn't even invite willow? It's understood her underage daughter goes where she goes because the last one she left at home got pregnant. Eye Thank Yew ^^^ P.S.: Dave, THAT is funny. Glad I could be of help here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 Most people don't know who Jonathan Swift is, Patrycja, much less great classic satire. I'm afraid most people are horribly uneducated in that respect. I blame the left, as they are the sole cause of all problems in modern society. nice - Me too! Thanks, Jarlaxle, and EDIT: nevermind the rest...Swift rocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 It's understood her underage daughter goes where she goes because the last one she left at home got pregnant. Eye Thank Yew ^^^ P.S.: Dave, THAT is funny. Glad I could be of help here. Gotta give credit where it's due, that IS a good one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Bill Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 No abstinence stance, no joke. Why do you keep saying this? I'm sure Palin's abstinence stance is the same with the younger daughter as was with the older daughter. It remains to be seen if they learned anything from what happened to the older daughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrycja Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 Why do you keep saying this? I'm sure Palin's abstinence stance is the same with the younger daughter as was with the older daughter. It remains to be seen if they learned anything from what happened to the older daughter. Because as crass as DL's joke was he was actually criticizing Palin's position on abstinence. I'm not anti-abstinence, just anti-abstinence-only. And yes, it does remain to be seen whether their position changes for the younger daughter. Anyway, I have to go now to do a fundraiser but the larger picture of what I take issue with is outlined in my response to Reggie1971. I find many of Palin's political positions potentially dangerous, and so much has been made of this crass joke that it overshadows them so much that she seems to be getting a pass in not addressing them. It's just that I think the focus is too narrow and I guess I would like to know what people think about her policies, too. I find it scary that she may run for office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveAJones Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 I guess I would like to know what people think about her policies, too. I find it scary that she may run for office. I presume you mean "run for US President" considering she is already a publicly-elected official. Anyway, she's a politician and her policies are what they are. I don't see the potential for compulsory abstinence any more than I see the potential for compulsory procreation. These are personal, parental and individual choices ordinary people can and do make on their own without the need for government intervention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reggie1971 Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 You may be right, but time will tell. Right now he's certainly got a looooot of leeway....scary? And this is exactly my contention, Reggie, the abstinence thing. This is at the heart of the issue. I'm not arguing about how people SHOULD react, ie/ should they or should they not be offended. If someone's offended I understand and respect that. But my whole point is that the conversation or issue should not end there, because without Palin's stance on abstinence there is no joke (however a poor attempt it was at making the point). I'm not even against teaching abstinence in and of itself, so long as it isn't preached as the only option to young people. The larger context, therefore, is that someone like Palin runs with it to the Today Show, for instance, and calls for people to "rise up" against people like Letterman who do harm to girls. Why is her position, however, not under scrutiny? Isn't her stance insufficiently preparing young girls for adulthood? Not once has this been addressed and in my opinion it should be. I object to the witch hunt Palin has jumped on, and frankly, I'd rather see her policies stay away from my kids more than Dave's lame jokes. These are fair points. Though I don't think her policy stance should in any way, shape, or form necessitate Dave's stupid attempts at humor. If you believe Palin's position on abstinence education in public schools is wrong, take her to task over it. On that issue, my position is that schools are for readin, ritin, and rithmatic, and advice regarding sex is in the domain of the parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~tangerine~ Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 It's understood her underage daughter goes where she goes because the last one she left at home got pregnant. Eye Thank Yew ^^^ P.S.: Dave, THAT is funny. Glad I could be of help here. That's good Steve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evster2012 Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Haven't you heard, it was obviously aimed at the daughter who wasn't there rather than the one who was, even though it makes no sense what so ever, because of something some 17th century guy wrote? Come on man, get a clue. I'm sure everyone who heard it made that connection and not the obvious one. Gee Uncle Bill, we've always got on so pleasantly. Why so harsh all of a sudden? "I'm sure everyone who heard it made that connection" Evidently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bong-Man Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 This was probasbly a well-thought out poke by Letterman's writers. They needed a little attention thrown their way because Conan's new time slot has gotten all the recent press attention. It worked, because Dave has now taken over Conan in the ratings. A cheap shot ? Yes....but a Late Night cheap shot. Hardly a moral rallying point for the Republican party to embrace....but they will try won't they ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 This was probasbly a well-thought out poke by Letterman's writers. They needed a little attention thrown their way because Conan's new time slot has gotten all the recent press attention. It worked, because Dave has now taken over Conan in the ratings. A cheap shot ? Yes....but a Late Night cheap shot. Hardly a moral rallying point for the Republican party to embrace....but they will try won't they ? Leave it to a lib to trivialize the incident as a "cheap shot" but ignore the double standard of CBS. How ironic that CBS would fire Don Imus for doing something similar but show no outrage toward David Letterman's tasteless jokes. In fact, CBS has finalized a new deal with Letterman that will keep him on the air through 2012 for a salary reported to be $32 million a year. It appears that CBS not only condones, but rewards insensitive remarks -- as long as they are aimed at Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Leave it to a lib to trivialize the incident as a "cheap shot" but ignore the double standard of CBS. How ironic that CBS would fire Don Imus for doing something similar but show no outrage toward David Letterman's tasteless jokes. In fact, CBS has finalized a new deal with Letterman that will keep him on the air through 2012 for a salary reported to be $32 million a year. It appears that CBS not only condones, but rewards insensitive remarks -- as long as they are aimed at Republicans. Paris Hilton is a Republican? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthekingshorses Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Paris Hilton is a Republican? lol, great point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 Paris Hilton is a Republican? No, but she is a grown woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 No, but she is a grown woman. And Sarah Palin is not? Wilderness governor and leading light of the GOP Sarah Palin is keeping her name in the news by adding fuel to her feud with David Letterman, who cracked a bad joke about teen pregnancy and one of Palin's daughters the other night. She's mad that the curmudgeonly comedian is using her daughter in his act. Much like, one could argue, Palin is using her daughter to stir up publicity. But never mind that right now. mercurynews.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Bill Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Gee Uncle Bill, we've always got on so pleasantly. Why so harsh all of a sudden? "I'm sure everyone who heard it made that connection" Evidently not. I forgot to include the sarcasm tags, my comments weren't aimed at you. Sorry. cheers, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babs Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 All this fuss over a bad joke You'd of thought he did the 'Aristocrats' schtick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cryingbluerain Posted June 13, 2009 Author Share Posted June 13, 2009 And Sarah Palin is not? No, but her daughter should be off limits to those kind of media attacks. In his media avail, Obama just responded to reporters' questions about the Bristol Palin story. Noting that his mother had him when she was 18 years old, Obama said families are "off limits" in campaigns. He was very impassioned. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...01/1321281.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 No, but her daughter should be off limits to those kind of media attacks. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...01/1321281.aspx It was a joke made for entertainment purposes that displayed bad taste and a very poor choice of words that illustrated how being callous and insensitive to young people is not the behavior that polite society prefers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L 7 Posted June 13, 2009 Share Posted June 13, 2009 Maybe we are all idiots and the Palin-Letterman war of words is just a ploy to boost sagging ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misty Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 Boy, people sure are sensitive. That joke is funny. you wouldn't find it funny if it was about your daughter, or your sister or your mother or maybe your friend. it was a sickening "joke" about a child. don't you see that? what is wrong with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.