I agree with you that Imus was fired because of the uproar (rightfully so from a business perspective) and that Letterman should not be fired (because it is his right to make lame jokes and the NBC bosses have no reason to fire him- in fact, this probably got them more publicity!).

 

However, perhaps the double standard that is being referred to is not in that Imus was fired and Letterman is not, but instead to the way people react. I think what people are saying is that people were outraged at Imus's mildly offensive comment, but not outraged at Letterman's sexually explicit comment.

 

These are not necessarily my thoughts on the "issue", but perhaps that is the double standard being referred to.

 

Would you make 20 posts defending a stupid joke if not for your bias for Sarah Palin? If Letterman made a joke accidentally referring to Lindsey Lohan's 16 year old sister instead of Lindsey, and StickerMann posted it in Gen. Disc., would you feel the same passion to defend Letterman? The anger at Letterman is politically motivated, but I wager that your vigorous defense of the rights of comedians is politically motivated as well- correct me if I am wrong.

 

For the sake of transparency, my political affilation of 3rd-party, my general condescending attitude for these types of issues, and my frustration for the politicization of every issue and neverending biases of American voters are fueling my posts in this thread, and I'll admit that. :lol:

 

I'm going to take you up on your offer and correct you when you're wrong.

 

I put my disclaimer at the beginning of this thread about my dislike for Palin.

 

It has zero to do with this.

 

My issue is not with her. My issue, again, is with the overreaction to comedy. Make a joke about anyone I support/follow and if I think its funny, I'll laugh. I laugh at many inappropriate jokes simply because of the humor itself.

 

The second reason for my posts is no different than any other thread. If I think you're wrong, I'm going to challenge you. Heck, I'll challenge your logic sometimes even if overall I think you're right. Come strong with logic/reasoning or I'll challenge it. You know that. You're not new.

I agree with you that Imus was fired because of the uproar (rightfully so from a business perspective) and that Letterman should not be fired (because it is his right to make lame jokes and the NBC bosses have no reason to fire him- in fact, this probably got them more publicity!).

 

However, perhaps the double standard that is being referred to is not in that Imus was fired and Letterman is not, but instead to the way people react. I think what people are saying is that people were outraged at Imus's mildly offensive comment, but not outraged at Letterman's sexually explicit comment.

 

These are not necessarily my thoughts on the "issue", but perhaps that is the double standard being referred to.

 

Would you make 20 posts defending a stupid joke if not for your bias for Sarah Palin? If Letterman made a joke accidentally referring to Lindsey Lohan's 16 year old sister instead of Lindsey, and StickerMann posted it in Gen. Disc., would you feel the same passion to defend Letterman? The anger at Letterman is politically motivated, but I wager that your vigorous defense of the rights of comedians is politically motivated as well- correct me if I am wrong.

 

For the sake of transparency, my political affilation of 3rd-party, my general condescending attitude for these types of issues, and my frustration for the politicization of every issue and neverending biases of American voters are fueling my posts in this thread, and I'll admit that. :lol:

 

Where were the sexually explicit comments? All I heard was the comment about keeping Spitzer away from her daughter and the "knocked up" comment. Those are not explicit. Did I miss one?

Oh, please! You can't have it both ways. For the record, people certainly make mistakes - not knowing/researching all the facts can be one of them.

 

I don't have time to offer a full response right now, but I will later.

I'm going to take you up on your offer and correct you when you're wrong.

 

I put my disclaimer at the beginning of this thread about my dislike for Palin.

 

It has zero to do with this.

 

My issue is not with her. My issue, again, is with the overreaction to comedy. Make a joke about anyone I support/follow and if I think its funny, I'll laugh. I laugh at many inappropriate jokes simply because of the humor itself.

 

The second reason for my posts is no different than any other thread. If I think you're wrong, I'm going to challenge you. Heck, I'll challenge your logic sometimes even if overall I think you're right. Come strong with logic/reasoning or I'll challenge it. You know that. You're not new.

OK. My mistake.

Where were the sexually explicit comments? All I heard was the comment about keeping Spitzer away from her daughter and the "knocked up" comment. Those are not explicit. Did I miss one?

 

I do not and did not watch Letterman. I was under the impression that the joke was something along the lines of Sarah Palin's daughter got knocked up by A-Rod during the 7th-inning stretch.

 

FWIW, I'm hardly commenting on the joke in this thread, just how bewildered I am at the politicization of people's reactions.

OK. My mistake.

 

 

I do not and did not watch Letterman. I was under the impression that the joke was something along the lines of Sarah Palin's daughter got knocked up by A-Rod during the 7th-inning stretch.

 

FWIW, I'm hardly commenting on the joke in this thread, just how bewildered I am at the politicization of people's reactions.

 

I didn't realize that you consider the term "knocked up" explicit.

 

If I were the Palins, I would be outraged when I thought that the comment was about my 14 year old daughter. Once that was cleared up, I still wouldn't like it, but moreso because I wouldn't like the added stigma attached to my daughter who already has a lot to bear.

 

Again, personally, I would condemn the joke about the 14 year old. I would condemn ANY joke about rape (this was not the case here). However, 18 year olds are considered adults.

I didn't realize that you consider the term "knocked up" explicit.

 

If I were the Palins, I would be outraged when I thought that the comment was about my 14 year old daughter. Once that was cleared up, I still wouldn't like it, but moreso because I wouldn't like the added stigma attached to my daughter who already has a lot to bear.

 

Again, personally, I would condemn the joke about the 14 year old. I would condemn ANY joke about rape (this was not the case here). However, 18 year olds are considered adults.

I can't win. I'm just going to quit.

 

All I was getting at was that it was a sexual comment about a young woman with an unfortunate stigma attached to her. The only criticisms that I've offered in this thread was at Letterman for making a dumb joke and to those who have based their arguments not on the "issue" but on the politicial affilation.

 

I'm out, and noting that there is a reason I normally don't participate in these threads.

I don't know what you are getting at. An acceptable excuse for what? The intended butt of his joke was an 18 year old. There was no rape joke.

 

He needs to show remorse for not having his facts straight.

 

As a science teacher, do you not expect your students to have the facts before they make a statement?

As a science teacher, do you not expect your students to have the facts before they make a statement?

 

Certainly. But mistakes DO happen. Letterman is at fault for assuming the daughter with the Palins was Bristol and not Willow. I apologize if I have not made that clear. I thought that the second line of my reply (that you didn't quote) "he needs to show remorse for not having his facts straight" was enough.

 

However, some are arguing that he intended the remarks to actually be about the 14 year old, which I believe is untrue.

I don't recall an uproar when Sen. McCain told the joke about Chelsea Clinton being so ugly because Janet Reno was her father. Funny? Maybe. But it was about a kid. I don't recall it when Rush held up a picture of Chelsea while saying the White House had a new dog.

 

The "double standard" cry is silly and completely inaccurate.

 

Jokes are equally offensive.

 

 

What is at stake here is common decency, of which I have found that too many in today's world do not have.

What if your mother had been the butt of a similiar joke? Would you just let slide? How about jokes about Jews in concentration camps, would that be OK because some bigot finds it funny.

 

If Letterman wants to be funny, he should study the antics of Bob Hope or Red Skelton, guys who could be funny without being trashy.

What is at stake here is common decency, of which I have found that too many in today's world do not have.

What if your mother had been the butt of a similiar joke? Would you just let slide? How about jokes about Jews in concentration camps, would that be OK because some bigot finds it funny.

 

If Letterman wants to be funny, he should study the antics of Bob Hope or Red Skelton, guys who could be funny without being trashy.

 

Or even jokes about the Spanish Inquisition, or maybe one involving a black man dressing up like a member of the KKK or someone doing a musical about Hitler...thank God people don't do anything like that. People who are uptight might go insane if that kind of stuff happened.

I agree with you that Imus was fired because of the uproar (rightfully so from a business perspective) and that Letterman should not be fired (because it is his right to make lame jokes and the NBC bosses have no reason to fire him- in fact, this probably got them more publicity!).

 

However, perhaps the double standard that is being referred to is not in that Imus was fired and Letterman is not, but instead to the way people react. I think what people are saying is that people were outraged at Imus's mildly offensive comment, but not outraged at Letterman's sexually explicit comment.

 

These are not necessarily my thoughts on the "issue", but perhaps that is the double standard being referred to.

 

Would you make 20 posts defending a stupid joke if not for your bias for Sarah Palin? If Letterman made a joke accidentally referring to Lindsey Lohan's 16 year old sister instead of Lindsey, and StickerMann posted it in Gen. Disc., would you feel the same passion to defend Letterman? The anger at Letterman is politically motivated, but I wager that your vigorous defense of the rights of comedians is politically motivated as well- correct me if I am wrong.

 

For the sake of transparency, my political affilation of 3rd-party, my general condescending attitude for these types of issues, and my frustration for the politicization of every issue and neverending biases of American voters are fueling my posts in this thread, and I'll admit that. :lol:

 

On your belief that it was Letterman's right to make a lame joke, was it not Imus's right to make a lame statement? Once again it is the double standard as one was about black women and the other was about a white, conservative woman.

Do you not agree that if you're going to be making jokes about people, you should have your facts straight first?

 

So no one should ever make mistakes? Wow that's a good idea!

The jokes weren't funny just because they weren't funny, IMO... Nothing to do with being offensive.

I can't win. I'm just going to quit.

 

All I was getting at was that it was a sexual comment about a young woman with an unfortunate stigma attached to her. The only criticisms that I've offered in this thread was at Letterman for making a dumb joke and to those who have based their arguments not on the "issue" but on the politicial affilation.

 

I'm out, and noting that there is a reason I normally don't participate in these threads.

 

Because people disagree with you?

 

Letterman intended the joke for the 18 year old. If people still think it was offensive, boo hoo. She's 18, she's going to, or she probably already has heard much worse. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. This is comedy. I have heard MUUUUUUUUUCH worse at comedy clubs. Comedy is meant to be funny and sometimes to cross the line. That's what makes it funny. It's not serious and it's not meant to hurt feelings. It's meant to be funny.

 

I'm not sure, but was Imus trying to be funny when he made his comment? Or was he being serious?

The jokes weren't funny just because they weren't funny, IMO... Nothing to do with being offensive.

 

:thumb: