Palin vs. Letterman: Righteous Outrage or just Outrageous?
It is not often that I comment about the personal characteristics of public figures on this blog because I acknowledge that I don’t know these people personally. So we try here to keep things focused on the issues and the policies, leaving the partisan nonsense behind, and attempt to walk a tightrope with0ut falling into personal commentary. I’m probably going to violate my rule in this post, because this feud between Sarah Palin and David Letterman is nonsensical, and part of a larger problem.
To catch you up, this all started when David Letterman made a joke about Palin’s 18-year old daughter Bristol who as the whole world knows gave birth to a son and was engaged to the father of her child for a time. You can hear Letterman explain the joke along his response to the scandal here:
Sounds like a pretty sincere apology and a genuine misunderstanding, although he probably shouldn’t have used his response time as an opportunity to make some more jokes.
Then we get Sarah Palin on the Today Show being interviewed by Matt Lauer. This is where the room starts to spin for me:
Notice Palin says “if we must” in response to Lauer asking if they can discuss the Letterman issue, as if she is resistant to the conversation. But moments later, she’s reading a supportive comment off of a printout her blackberry that she had ready for that very reason. The whole thing reeks of political opportunism; such is the trend in our country. Politicians use kids, sex, and sometimes both to stir up a firestorm, even when the problem at its core is often far less (or completely different) than alleged. This is political theater by definition. If you’ve been to a comedy show or seen one on unedited TV, you know that this joke is nothing compared to some of that content. This is getting play for one very simple reason: because it’s about the daughter of a celebrity politician.
I am not saying “if it’s less than the worst thing you’ve ever heard then it must be okay.” I get that the joke is in poor taste. I am only saying that it is very much within the range of jokes that are done regularly at the expense of celebrities on late night network television. Letterman says that the joke was aimed at Bristol, and not the under-aged sibling, which is the only way the joke can even work- being that Bristol was recently pregnant. So I find it amazing that Palin continues to question Letterman’s honesty by saying things like viewers would be “naive” to trust his explanation. Are we to assume that Letterman is a liar just because he made a questionable joke?
But the most outrageous part of Palin on The Today Show is when Lauer reads aloud an earlier statement from her spokesperson, saying that it would be sketchy for her 14 year old to be around him. So first Palin questions his honesty, and next she implies that he is liable to prey on underage girls? Palin responds by saying “take it however you want to take it.” What if Letterman responded that way; would that be satisfactory for those offended? He admits that his joke was in poor taste even though he never meant for it to suggest Palin’s 14 year old daughter, but Palin is in the right when she questions his honesty and suggests that he can’t be trusted around minors? Good for Lauer for pointing out the double standard, and boy does Palin squirm when he catches it.
Are comedians really the worthy fight right now? Are we actually going to form the Joke Police? If you want to read something worth your outrage and action, read my wife’s article about her trip to Cambodia where truly horrific and unthinkable things are happening to underage kids. Let’s not rush to outrage over jokes, and perhaps we should apply a greater amount of caution before saying that jokes advocate (or even lead to) immoral and illegal activity. Comedians make a living saying a range of questionable, “edgy” things. If people don’t like their content, they are free to ignore it. Vote with your TV remote.
I am not saying this because I am a Democrat (which I’m not) or because I dislike conservatives (some of my political philosophy is tied to old school conservatism). I am saying this because we have the tendency to get caught up in the trivial while glossing over the world’s true horrors. And it is far more concerning to me when a public servant, and one rumored to be making a run at the White House in 2012, shows fragile and vindictive behavior, and sets up a non-existent boogeyman just for political points. I don’t count it as a qualification that this potential leader of the “free” world is eager for a petty fight.
Saturday, June 13, 2009 at 4:40 pm
I’m not a Palin fan in the least bit, but I have to agree with her when she said that there is a political double standard. It is unacceptable for comedians to make fun of a politicians family. It is them atacking people who do not have the means to defend themselves. It is okay to tease and even judge harshly our public servents but to hold their children to the same standard is unacceptable.
Saturday, June 13, 2009 at 6:39 pm
I have had this situation on my mind lately as I was discussing it with some good friends last night. One of my friends, no fan of Palin’s, said she could “see her point of view” and understood being offended. Honestly, I can’t see Palin’s point. The joke CLEARLY wasn’t about her underage daughter, it was about the ADULT daughter who just had a baby. Nobody with any objectivity in the least could have assumed he meant the underage daughter. So, in my opinion (and Ian’s) this is a manufactured outrage meant to score easy and shallow political points on Palin’s part. She and her handlers are very aware to bang away at a ‘liberal’ outlet of the media like CBS (I don’t believe there is a perception of Letterman himself being known as ‘liberal’) is a winner for her fans/supporters. Its a craven and pathetic bit of opportunism on her part.
Was the joke in poor taste? Perhaps, even leaning to ‘yes’. But for anyone who says her oldest ADULT child is “out of bounds” or ‘untouchable’, I submit to you this rule was applicable BEFORE Palin’s oldest daughter went on a media tour regarding teen pregnancy and abstinence. While I still don’t see how the daughter is a worthy spokesperson for that method of birth control, I am even less impressed when Palin’s people attempt to have it both ways — she is a public figure when attempting to score political points for her mother, but off limits when someone makes a joke at her expense. Palin AND her daughter have every means to defend themselves…does anyone seriously think her oldest daughter can’t be on camera tomorrow giving her false outrage at the comedic assault on her honor?! Its akin to the former Miss California saying she is being censored after her anti-gay marriage answer in the beauty pageant; censorship is when you are not allowed to speak, not when you are criticized for what you say. As far as I could tell she had a mic in her face multiple times after the pageant was over and done.
And, really, the most insulting bit of all this is to imply that Letterman is some kind of sexual deviant. Guess what, Palin the Genius, the odds are VERY long that David Letterman wrote the damn joke. Really, what reality do people live in when they pretend that late night comedians come up with monologue jokes of the top of their heads? I would be insulted, actually, were I a Palin follower — this implies she thinks her followers are so dimwitted and uneducated in the ‘ways of lefty Hollywood’ (even though Letterman’s in NYC) and this is how things work.
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 12:52 am
Great post Ian. Couldn’t agree more.
Much ado about nothing.
However, just to clarify, the mistake Letterman (or his writer) made, was to make a joke about Palin’s daughter getting “knocked up” by A-Rod during the seventh inning of a Yankee’s game when the only daughter who was at the game with Palin was the 14 year old. Obviously an oversite, but they clearly didn’t think it all the way through.
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 6:40 am
Bear – thats noted, but the truth is the joke works whether a daughter was there or not. Its a joke and shouldn’t be taken literally on any level.
Its interesting to see the actual reaction of the audience to the original joke: nobody groaned. NOBODY thought it was about her 14 year old. I bet you can count on one hand the number of people who even knew one of her daughters was in the stadium.
Btw, I also noticed she complained about another Letterman joke wherein she went to Bloomingdale’s. Palin complained that the joke sucked because she never went there…..*blank stare*…..
So, if EVERY joke is meant literally, then they are not called jokes. This is what is known as a ‘lack of a sense of humor’ when jokes have to be explained over and over to someone. She has a serious lack of one.
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 11:48 am
Hey Brian.
Now that I think it through, I’m not sure I even agree that the joke had to have been about the older daughter. The crux of the joke is that her daughters have a tendency to get knocked up unexpectedly. Most of the humor in that comes from how it contrasts with the Palin’s Turbo Christian Family Values way of presenting themselves (we all love it when the self righteous are shown to be hypocritical), and on that level it almost works better if it’s one more pregnant teen daughter. Combine that with A-Rods penchant for Philandering, and you have the making of a great (if in very poor taste) joke.
I think it’s entirely possible that the joke was meant to be taken at face value and was in fact about the daughter who was actually at the game. It’s also possible that it was only later after they realized that they made a joke about the statutory rape of a fourteen year old, that they tried to back pedal with “Oh, we meant the other daughter who wasn’t at the game”
Regardless, as Ian said, we’ve all heard way worse. He a comedian, that’s what he does. Who cares. It was a joke.
The Palin camp should have taken the high road and maybe issued one statement that they found the joke extremely offensive and then refused to speak of it again. While the Letterman show should probably just said they made a mistake and didn’t think it all the way through and then sincerely apologized. End of story. Or really end of non-story.
But why should either side do the right thing when they have so much more to gain by fanning this little flame into a huge fire.
Sarah and Dave, the new Jon and Kate.
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Bear — I just watched this “Jon & Kate” debacle/show with a visiting friend of mine. Please, say it can NEVER happen again!
What is this fascination with living one’s life in front of a camera out of choice and then damning it over and over? Do people not learn from others’ televised nightmares??
Good comments, Bear.
Sunday, June 14, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Great comments for sure- Bear, Brian and Jasen.
The only thing I’ll add is to Jasen and part of what I’m getting at ties into Brian’s comments- I’m not so sure politician’s families should be off limits.
In the Palin case, Brian explained why the mother has already more than paraded Bristol in front of the public (with the daughter doing even more to make herself known by speaking out). Suddenly she is joke-proof? Lame.
More than that (and I feel like Buzz Aldrin on Ali G explaining how humor works which is slightly embarrassing) but comedians make jokes at the expense of people’s goofs. These late night guys follow the news and then run with it until it’s way past funny. It happened with George W. Bush’s daughters because they were known as partiers and underage drinkers. Eyewitness tabloid stuff and photos came out, and the press were off to the races. When those jokes happened, nobody cared. I have never heard a sexual joke about Chelsea Clinton because she never landed on anyone’s radar that way. There was no news of it, and therefore, there were no jokes about it. The point is, the jokes follow behavior. These late night guys aren’t out there creating smears out of thin air.
The public often weighs their political conclusions by the private (and soon public) behavior of the politicians AND their families. I don’t agree with it, but people look at the kids to judge how capable the parents are. So I think it’s more the responsibility of Palin and her husband to keep her family out of the public eye by not running for Vice President if scrutiny is going to be a problem, especially when things like teenage pregnancy are obviously going to be front and center.
Monday, June 15, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I think that the whole fiasco shows just how much the lines have been blurred between entertainment and news. Sometimes it seems like everyone has a part to play; everyone has a 24-hour news cycle to try and manipulate; everyone knows how to play the victim or feign outrage or make a fake apology in order hook viewers, get votes, or sell advertising. It’s all a show.
To me, it’s a bit like the Miss California vs. Parez Hilton thing. When that sideshow was making it to the 6:00 news each night, I just kept wondering, “Can’t we find better spokespeople for each side of this issue? Can’t we raise the level of discourse just a little?”
Letterman was out of line. Palin is capitalizing.
And they’re both making the news….so they both win.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 8:57 am
Hey Rachel- good comment and normally I’d agree with you. But did you happen to catch Letterman’s second response to this whole incident which (I think) came out yesterday? He seems pretty remorseful about the whole thing. More so than I think he should be.
Some will probably argue that’s only because people are now calling and threatening to boycott his sponsors, but that seems a bit cynical in this case.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 9:05 am
It is too hard for me to watch Palin….ack…Although many of David Letterman’s jokes make me cringe…They are JOKES and her reactions to them are ridiculous.
Even sadder, she doesn’t see the irony of her own response to Matt Lauer. I am amused people take her seriously. I really am.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 8:14 am
Hey Beth! Welcome back. Been wondering where you disappeared to.
Palin reminds me of Rush Limbaugh in that both never seem to take a break from politicizing everything. They do a real disservice to the national discourse.