Sarah Palin Accepts David Letterman's Apology for 'Coarse' Jokes - (Is it finally over?)

Sarah Palin has accepted comedian David Letterman’s apology made during Monday night’s broadcast of “The Late Show” for crude jokes made about her and her teen daughters last week.

Read the rest of the article HERE, and what others are saying about it at Memorandum

I'm as sympathetic as the next guy. The jokes were crude, rude, and unnecessary. But once he said he was sorry... the first time... that should've been the end of it.

No one was, say, tortured. It wasn't like anyone used a picture depicting the imminent death of a whole lot of innocent Americans to deliver a punchline.

Dave (& really, some writer, more'n'likely) was just foolishly insensitive. It happens, especially when someone is trying to be funny. It wasn't done maliciously, with the intent of hurting anyone or achieving some further political or social end. And, contrary to the rightwing spin, there is nothing to suggest that it was intentionally or knowingly aimed at a 14 year old. (Yep... along with telling a bad Joke, Dave got the facts wrong, and thought the person about whom he was telling the joke was of age. Is it better that the joke was aimed at an 18 year old? Well, only if it's worse that the joke aimed it at a 14 year old, I guess... These things swing both ways...)

The fact is, it was just a really bad, really insensitive, rude, crude, vaguely lewd joke. I hope everyone understands where I'm coming from, and that I'm in no way defending the joke, or the people responsible for it being told.

Now...

Is it finally over? Is our long national nightmare, with every reporter & right wing blogger following Sarah & Dave's every bloody word on the subject, finally ended? Is the campaign of intimidation, which caused one company, Embassy Suites, to buckle under and pull advertising from CBS.com--they never were Letterman Show sponsors in the first place, making their quick fall to their knees even stranger--(& I know where I'm never staying, anymore...) going to end--perhaps with Embassy Suites reversing their decision, after realizing how foolish they now look?

Or are we going to keep milking it for all it's worth, trying to squeeze every last drop of publicity for one's own side, and scorn for the other side out of this silly, stupid story? Palin's gonna need a new reason for people to keep talkin' about her, ya'know... Besides, Letterman still hasn't been fired, yet... ...and I bet he has one more big ol' apology in him, if he really strains for it...

Let us pray that if they must prey, they at least find new victims...

Beck: People ‘Pushed To The Wall’ By ‘Political Correctness’ Launch Spree Killings

Matthew Yglesias on Glenn Beck

There was a remarkable segment on Glen Beck’s show yesterday, thankfully captured by Matt Corley in which Beck was basically outlining his view that the reason you see spree killings like the one in Alabama is that conservatives are so deranged, and so racist, that when people point out that they’re being racist they can’t help but fly into a psychotic rage and commit multiple murders. Really:

BECK: But as I’m listening to him. I’m thinking about the American people that feel disenfranchised right now. That feel like nobody’s hearing their voice. The government isn’t hearing their voice. Even if you call, they don’t listen to you on both sides. If you’re a conservative, you’re called a racist. You want to starve children.

O’REILLY: Sure.

BECK: Yada yada yada. And every time they do speak out, they’re shut down by political correctness. How do you not have those people turn into that guy?

O’REILLY: Well, look, nobody, even if they’re frustrated, is going to hurt another human being unless they’re mentally ill. I think.

BECK: I think pushed to the wall, you don’t think people get pushed to the wall?

See it here:



Combine this with Beck's earlier thoughts on the looming apocalypse and the worst case scenarios that may result--like anarchy in America, for which many Beck type crazies are already planning, apparently--and we have a pretty good case that Beck himself is calling out--& perhaps begging--for help and intervention.

How long before Mr. Beck himself feels "pushed to the wall," and creates his own self-prophesied tragedy, incites someone else to do so with these nutty lowbrow rantings, like fellow wingnut Bernie Goldberg did in TN, or starts his own little right-wing terrorist militia compound deep in the woods, readying he and his followers for the coming anarchic (if not post-apocalyptic) America?

Related discussions on Beck's unique understanding of spree killers and killing here.
More on Beck's Worst Case Scenarios here.

The Swartout's may be victims, but...

Update 3: Replaced the link to the dead motionbox video with the youtube embed, and deleted the link to the rightwing site (to the motionbox vid) that was in update 1.

Update 2: New video, from a different angle.



Update: Added the best video I can find, to replace the one that is no longer available on this site. (which has now--update 3--been replaced by the YouTube video.)





It's kinda hard to tell exactly where this all went wrong, but the "in your face" style of the Swartout family as regards anti-war protests and protesters has led to several other incidents where they were the unfortunate victims, including one in which the 82 year old wife of a WWII veteran kicked Mr Swartout in the ass, and when he pressed charges, was fined $25.00 for her crime. As with serial peace victim Joshua Sparling, I wonder why these few are repeatedly attacked while counter-protesting against anti-Iraq war groups, while so many others escape such a fate. Is it pure dumb luck (or unluck?), or is there anything in the behavior of the victims that leads to such troubles?

To the extent that the peace folks were the agressors in this (or any) situation, they were wrong. But I also wonder whether putting a camera to one's face gives one care blanche to walk among those with whom one disagrees, mocking and insulting them until a verbal or physical confrontation ensues, and then claim victim status, as though there was no way they might've avoided such trouble. While one has the right to walk in any public place at anytime one wants, and to say whatever one feels, actually using those rights isn't the smartest thing to do in every situation... ...unless one wants a nifty little youtube video and the right to whine about poor treatment at the hands of hypocritical peace protesters, anyway...

Along with rights come the responsibility to use them intelligently and appropriately, and I suspect that some of the latter was lacking in this situation.

See also: What'd I Say?: Joshua Sparling: A swiftie spitting swiftly

no comment

Tasering dissent

Police state USA: Student assaulted and tasered by police for asking John Kerry the wrong question

Pro-war thuggery

And typically, they're proud of it.

Like the comment one person posted to the video yesterday (since removed, as any dissent from or discussion of the party line lends not to be tolerated in some circles), it's confusing strength with rightness. Getting physical with Code Pink protesters & damaging their property doesn't make you right about continuing the occupation. It only proves you're a thug who chooses not to be civil.

It's thinking like this (& Melanie Morgan, who ripped up a sign taken from a "moonbat" on stage with glee, and a few other leaders in their movement) that encourages & celebrates violence as a way of getting what they want, that leads us into these conflicts. It is often far more courageous to refuse the temptation to violence than to give into it.

Watch the video & decide for yourself whether we want this kinda thinkin' to have any influence over American foreign policy.

(As the poster of the vid is deleting any negative comments about it, I figured I'd bring them here, as I see them. Both sides deserve to be heard.)