Golf announcer David Feherty apologized this weekend for a column in which he joked that U.S. troops returning from combat might wish to shoot Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
Conversely, comedian Wanda Sykes garnered guffaws at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner by comparing Rush Limbaugh to Osama bin Laden and suggesting that he was the 20th 9/11 hijacker, but was too strung out to make his flight. She also wished for his kidneys to fail. No less a figure than The One was seen to enjoy these exceptionally well-crafted rhetorical stylings.
Just remember: if the joke is at the expense of liberals, it is highly inappropriate. It is an outrage. We must all be “saddened and disappointed.” It is an occasion for somber, hand-wringing reflection upon the still-poor state of our political dialogue, and a poignant reminder of just how far we remain from true harmony.
But if the joke is at the expense of conservatives, it’s hilarious!
To be fair, White House Worm Press Secretary Robert Gibbs made some minimal conciliatory noise about it yesterday. Let’s not get excited, though. It was firmly in the realm of conditional and suggested violation, and stopped well short of an apology. I wouldn’t anticipate a forthcoming Sykes apology, either.
I offer no specific comment of my own on how funny or inappropriate either of these jokes were. I do, however, suggest delusion as a distinct possibility if you don’t see a double standard defined wholly by political ideology here.
You might also like:
- White House tours to resume soon
Theater is part of politics. I get that. It is still incredibly childish and disingenuous of Preside… - Applauding President Obama’s leadership
I’m glad, at a time like this, we have a president who will boldly and accurately assess a crisis an… - The endless Trumpoplexy is getting old. Perhaps some context?
Look, I get it. It’s displeasing and disturbing, all the way around, but it’s reality. Some substant… - Pelosi: The CIA is lying
Well, you may have heard by now that Speakeress of the House Nancy Pelosi has called the CIA a bunch… - Civility for thee, not for me
“I’ve asked leaders of both parties and both houses of Congress to come here to the White House on T…
This would probably explain a lot about my most recent episode with a certain somebody, wouldn’t it? 🙂
nhfalcon: My long experience is that many of those making the most racket about tolerance and acceptance are among the most capable of demonstrating lack of same.
A mutual friend of yours and his reports he is delightful in person. I have no reason to doubt her, having seen several previous examples of people whose online and in-the-flesh personae are markedly different.
‘Course, to me, that then begs “why would someone cultivate a different personality online?” I’m not sure there’s an innocuous answer to that question.
What are you talking about? I have at least 3 online personas. I like to be mysterious.
‘seester: Are you kind and gentle in person and a belligerent, incoherent asshole online? That’s what I’m talking about.
No. I am kind and gentle online, but a belligerent asshole in person.
At least in “my head.”
OMG I am laughing at my seester. She hit the nail on the head with that one!
This double standard is kinda like the one where the conservatives would lambaste anyone as completely unpatriotic who didn’t stand behind the President of the United States (Bush) or support his wars. But now those same conservatives are yelling that those who support the current President of the United States are completely unpatriotic because Obama is leading us straight down the path to hell.
Well … is it “support the President no matter what” or is it “support the President as long as he’s of the same party as us” ??
I’m sure it goes the other way, too, with the “other side” being all upset that not everyone is totally behind our President while they were the first to scream civil disobedience in not being behind the previous President.
Personally, I think we put way too much stock in anything a particular President does. It’s Congress that has the power to make our lives miserable.
wxchick: I never made any claims linking patriotism and support of the President, and utterly reject “support the President no matter what” as a reasonable statement, no matter who’s making the statement, and no matter who the President is.
I do think there are substantial differences–moral, ethical, and practical–between hoping for a successful outcome for U.S. troops (whether you support how they got there or not) and hoping the most massive socioeconomic power grab in the history of the country (again, whether you think it’s a good idea or not) succeeds.