Friday, June 12, 2009

As long as every idiot gets to share their opinion...

Here's mine, on Letterman vs. Palin:

1. Dave made a crude, thoughtless joke about a public figure -- the same thing he and other TV comedians have done for over 20 years.

2. Palin made the stupid mistake of responding and blowing the whole thing out of proportion and giving Dave MORE publicity (and herself as well?).

3. A bunch of people all across the media landscape have decided to milk the story and turn into some sort of morality lesson.

Here's my advice to all parties involved: SHUT UP. You're all making things worse.

Girard is still right: we all need our scapegoats.


Phil said...

Side Note: I don't like Palin's politics nor do I think she should be a viable candidate for conservatives.

However, Letterman did something more than just making a crude and thoughtless joke. He made mention of Palin's daughter being sexually violated by Alex Rodriguez in the middle of the outfield with her watching in the stands, or something to that nature (I only watched the video once). He additionally called Palin a slut! His comments at best were sexually perverted beyond what his show is supposed to be, and at worst his comments show just how bad and disgusting he seems to be.

My take is that it's simply too easy just to say that that's just what comedians do. Howard Stern might do that, but Letterman??? On the flip side, there's nothing wrong with Palin's response, from my perspective. This is pure chauvinism and disregard for women across the board on Letterman's part. I'm glad Palin said something. If this was, say, Hillary Clinton 15 years ago and it applied to Chelsea, then it would be just as wrong. On that note, why would this be anymore wrong to say toward a public figure relative to some "regular" everyday mother?

On that note: sure, it might be some sort of morality lesson.

Geoff said...

But, Phil, that's not what he said. He said if she wasn't careful her daughter might get "knocked up" by Alex Rodriguez. Given that Palin already has had a pregnant 17-year-old, her outrage about the joke being perverted rings hollow to me.

The "slutty" comment was rude, but that's not even what people are upset about. They're trying to make it look like he's some sort of child-rape-advocate, which is just stupid.

Accusations of chauvinism are just dumb. I guarantee if you and I recorded all of our "joking" conversations, people would say we're chauvinists too. Maybe the morality lesson is that we all should remember "the log in our own eye" before "picking out the speck" in someone else's! :-)

Geoff said...

By the way, if my comments sound rude, I apologize in advance! I certainly don't think you're dumb.

Phil said...

Ok, thanks for the note about my cognitive capacities compared to calling someone a chauvinist:-) It make me feel good good not to be dumb dumb.

Geoff, with all due respect, her daughter being 17 or even 18 for that matter rings dangerously and nastily inappropriate for a nationally televised show. It appears that you affirm that the comment was inappropriate. Ok, we agree.

This is actually a good conversation because I'll remember it the next time I make a joke behind the scenes about a 17 year old girl having sex with a guy in his thirties, all set within the framework of her previously getting pregnant outside the context of marriage. And all to make people laugh.

Even though it is indeed stupid to say he's a child rape advocate(???--I didn't say that or imply it), it is not stupid or inappropriate to be pissed off that he said what he said. If she was my sister or daughter, I'd be upset too. Think about if you were this young girl's father and someone said that about your daughter on national television for the sole purpose of taking a political ad hominem shot at the mother (I think that's what it really was).

phil said...

Follow up thought: Public figures often know the ramifications of putting themselves in the limelight, as it were. Sarah Palin and her family are no exceptions. Although Letterman's comments were dumb, her and her daughter are still accountable for their actions. I don't condone what he said and neither did you. I think that your observations are warranted.

Good post though. It got me thinking about a lot, but then again my mind is usually a soup of ideas that I can't really interpret, hehe.


Roy said...

I have no idea what you are talking about. I am losing touch with online reality.

Geoff said...

Yeah, I would be upset, no argument there. I would ask for an apology if I felt offended. But this took a wrong turn, in my view, when they decided to go with that "he's implying that it's funny for a 14-year-old to get raped" argument. That was the ridiculous part.

I think, upon further reflection, that what bothers me the most about stuff like this is the apparent need for some people who call themselves Christians to play the victim card. It's like they can't believe someone would sin against them, and they have to make a big deal out of it: Look! I've been sinned against! Come rally for me!

I see that kind of thing a lot - in many different arenas - and I'm just tired of it. Maybe I'm being rough on the wrong target, I don't know. But I do think it's about time Christians stopped playing the persecution card all the time.