SNL Lampoon Michelle Obama? They Haven’t Got The Guts
Posted by Dirty Harry on Friday, October 24th, 2008
Saturday, the New York Times did a takeout on Cindy McCain that delved back into her problem with prescription pills. Yet when Hillary’s campaign manager, Mark Penn, brought up Obama’s cocaine use on “Hardball,” he was savaged by folks for whom the Times is the gold standard.
The people apparently had a “right to know” of Bush’s old DUI arrest a week before the 2000 election, but no right to know about how and when Obama was engaged in the criminal use of cocaine.
The media cannot get enough of the “Saturday Night Live” impersonations of Palin as a bubblehead. News shows pick up the Tina Fey clips and run them and run them to the merriment of all.
Can one imagine “Saturday Night Live” doing weekly send-ups of Michelle Obama and her “I’ve never been proud” of my country, this “just downright mean” America, using a black comedienne to mimic and mock her voice and accent?
“Saturday Night Live” would be facing hate-crime charges.
How do we know? When the New Yorker ran a cartoon of Michelle in an Angela-Davis afro with an AK-47 slung over her shoulder, New Yorker editors had to go on national television to swear they were not mocking Michelle, but the conservatives who have so caricatured Michelle and the Messiah.
Is there a media double standard? You betcha.
With a few exceptions like the South Park boys and the Fox News crew, the most gutless, simpering people in America infest the entertainment and news business.
All they want is to fit in.
And what’s more pathetic than someone desperate for approval?
Filed in General |
steevyon 24 Oct 2008 at 8:54 am 1Surprisingly good column for MSDNC’s favorite “conservative”.He also is an apologist for Hitler but hey….
Avery Bullardon 24 Oct 2008 at 9:06 am 2apologist for Hitler
Spoken like a true leftist.
Zundfolgeon 24 Oct 2008 at 9:20 am 3I’ve come to the conclusion that conservative complaints about leftist MSM bias is counter productive.
For one thing complaining about the bias still adds credibility to the MSM.
We don’t complain about the bias in the Weekly World News because they aren’t worth commenting about.
I think conservatives would do best if they applied that same thinking to the entire MSM.
David123456on 24 Oct 2008 at 9:38 am 4I think conservatives would do best if they applied that same thinking to the entire MSM.
Rubbish. The MSM’s liberal bias has become as normative as the sky is blue. Nobody questions it except us. It’s our job as conservatives to deligitimize that bias. No other way to do it other than exposing it. Those who accuse us of “whining” only do so because they feel stung by that exposure. Let them keep whining about our “whining.” Means we’re doing something right.
David123456on 24 Oct 2008 at 9:39 am 5He also is an apologist for Hitler but hey….
Right. And Joe the Plumber is behind on his taxes so ignore Obama’s answer to his question, you disingenuous jackass.
ExUrbanKevinon 24 Oct 2008 at 9:40 am 6I think you nail something important here: It’s not that the media is liberal, it’s that it’s lazy. They pick a narrative and then frame the facts to follow that narrative. While they pride themselves in Speaking The Truth To Power, they’re unwilling (as are we all) to really look at themselves and ask tough questions, because the answer might force them to change, and change is something we all fear.
Stephanieon 24 Oct 2008 at 9:44 am 7at 8:54 am
1Surprisingly good column for MSDNC’s favorite “conservative”.He also is an apologist for Hitler but hey….
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Unless your a girl Thteevy you ought to change your name to Steve. Cause thsteevy is so effeminate…..and so hilarious speaking of someone apologizing for Hitler when you idiots march around singing songs to Obama like a bunch of jackasses at a Nazi rally. After hearing of a McCain supporters home being shot up and that girl in Cleveland getting beaten up you can take your smuge bullshit and shove it. You want to get in our faces…oh you won’t like the direction it will take. So shut your pie hole and back off. Loser.
Joe the unlicensed conflict resolution counselloron 24 Oct 2008 at 10:09 am 8Stephanie, you’re blocking. You need to get in touch with how you really feel.
MSM? Dead to me. And soon dead to the world. Lovin’ it.
Johnny Ed's Babyon 24 Oct 2008 at 10:28 am 9Buchanan has some views about why WWII was started and what the Allies, particularly England, could have done to stop it. I disagree with him but to call him a hitler apologist is not just wrong but just malicious.
You could argue that Obama has a lot of people in the circles he runs in that are more hitler apologists than Buchanan. Khaliddi would be a good one to start with.
Similar to that jerk Wexler accusing Palin of being a nazi sympathizer because she had a Buchanan button on.
Buchanan thinks WWII could have been avoided by having Poland give Gdansk to Germany. But just as Hitler did not stop at Austria or the Sudetenland, he was not going to stop at Gdansk. You can argue that without being a hitler apologist.
EPon 24 Oct 2008 at 10:34 am 10While not as bad, per se (ya honor), as the double standard/hypocrisy of the left, what’s up with having no senses of humor, or at least ones that seem to be stuck on Palin-as-bubblehead stupid? Maybe it’s the self-deprecating style I use so much, but whatever happened to being able to laugh at ourselves and our foibles?
Oh, that’s right, we’re the side with no sense of humor…
Katoon 24 Oct 2008 at 11:22 am 11Anybody watch SNL last night? They had a long, repetitive skit at the beginning that did everything in its power to tie Bush and McCain together.
Not a peep about Obama. Obama (or the guy who plays Obama) wasn’t even on the show at any point during the whole half-hour. Not even the slightest semblance of balance.
Same thing the week before. They did a mock debate then, but every time the Obama character spoke, he simply repeated Obama talking points, straight. Meanwhile, they mocked McCain for being delusional (oddly, they pretended that Joe the Plumber didn’t exist, that McCain made him up).
In five minutes, I can think of a dozen possible skits about Obama. (Or how about a skit showing the media savaging Joe the Plumber for the most trivial details?) No, the SNL writers aren’t being lazy. They’re merely showing their true colors.
In the past two weeks, SNL has run 2-1/2 hours of programming. And somehow the entire writing staff of SNL couldn’t come up with one Obama joke in all that time.
SNL is so in the tank for Obama, it’s embarrassing itself, like preteen girl at a Jonas Brothers concert. It’s like an in-kind donation of inestimable value. SNL has never before held four half-hour prime-time specials before an election. I wonder why they picked this year to do it? Hmmm.
Obama is planning to buy a half-hour of network time before the election. I don’t see why he bothers. SNL is giving him loads of free advertising.
I don’t favor a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine. But I would hope that the doctrine of basic decency would shame SNL into providing at least the bare appearance of balance.
billypaintbrushon 24 Oct 2008 at 11:37 am 12You do not mock The One.
maatkareon 24 Oct 2008 at 12:12 pm 13SNL hasn’t made fun of Cindy McCain, have they?
Did no one see the EW cover with John Stewart and Stephen Colbert mocking the New Yorker cover?
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20228603,00.html
whiskeyon 24 Oct 2008 at 12:19 pm 14Buchanon is an apologist for Hitler because he’s the Old School Catholic anti-Semite ala Father Coughlin. Fortunately there are few of those guys left, they belong to the Eamon de Valera types (Ike detested pro-Nazi Valera, who turned Ireland into one giant spy base for the Nazis). Buchanon is like that. From an Irish Catholic background, believe me, I know the type, which is thankfully dying out.
I detest the guy.
That being said, is his argument correct? I think it is.
In assessing an argument, the most important aspect is the argument not the personality or person who makes it.
Katoon 24 Oct 2008 at 12:27 pm 15maatkare - I agree, Buchanan made a rhetorical mistake using Cindy McCain vs. Michelle Obama as an example. I haven’t seen comedians mocking either. But there’s no question that they’ve piled on McCain and Palin, but left Obama and Biden untouched. Biden’s many gaffes alone provide a rich vein of jokes that SNL et al. could easily tap. Instead we get endless gags about Palin’s every foible.
maatkareon 24 Oct 2008 at 12:30 pm 16Guess what y’all? Maya Rudoph’s coming back to SNL to play Mrs. Obama:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/24/snl-casts-michelle-obama_n_137547.html
Avery Bullardon 24 Oct 2008 at 12:41 pm 17whiskey,
Maybe he just opposed saving Stalin and Soviet communism.
Carolynon 24 Oct 2008 at 3:19 pm 18“Perhaps the only institution in America whose approval rating is beneath that of Congress is the media.”
Call me Pollyanna, but I think Buchanan’s warning signals something dire about to happen to the media and Congress.
I admit I’ve been scared witless by the media and Congress - they just seem so damned arrogant about their evil. Barney Frank’s male lover runs a homosexual brothel out of Barney’s basement - yet Barney’s still in Congress. The New York Times gets caught trying to frame 3 innocent white Duke students for a rape that never happened, yet the Editor just laughs and says ’so what’. I mean, they just act as if nothing can stop them. And that kind of arrogance has to have an effect on you.
But, you know - I think their end is near. I mean, I just can’t help thinking that on November 4th, Congress’s abysmal (14%) approval rating or New York Times’ blue chip now rated as ‘junk’ are facts which will have to have an effect at the ballot box.
There just has to be an enormous, unheeded, iceberg of disgust that’s going to rip a hole in that damned Titanic that Congress and the media are sailing on.
steevyon 24 Oct 2008 at 6:04 pm 19Wow now I’M a lefty??????I’m somewhere to the right of Jenjis Khan(Kerry pronunciation).I’m not a big fan of Pat Buchanan but geesh I was being sarcastic.MSNBC does use him alot to bash Republicans.I would have handled WW2 differently too in hindsight.My preferred solution being to sit back and let the Nazi’s and Commies kill each other in droves feeding in just enough help to Stalin to keep them in the fight than mopping up Hitler and his exhausted armies when the thing was over.Steph relax I’m on your side effeminate or not.
whiskeyon 24 Oct 2008 at 6:17 pm 20Avery — Buchanon thinks Churchill a War Criminal and Hitler “forced into” WWII. That the holocaust was Churchill the war-monger’s “fault.”
Buchanon is a well-known anti-Semite, of the type that used to infect in particular Irish Catholicism, believe me I am quite familiar with his particular type. You would not have found it unusual in the 1930’s and 1940’s. Father Coughlin indeed. Buchanon has made no secret of his opposition to US involvement in WWII, or his wish of seeing Israel destroyed. He is no true Republican nor conservative.
However, he is correct in his assessment of the treatment of the media worship of Obama.
Re: WWII — we had to defeat Hitler. Any price was worth paying. The tragedy is that pacifism, driven by demographics, caused that defeat to be a near-run thing hinging purely on luck on so many occasions. No wonder Pat Buchanon is the favorite “conservative” of Liberals — they both hate Israel equally, and both wished the US had let Hitler win, by staying out.
USS Benon 26 Oct 2008 at 1:55 am 21Whiskey-
While I haven’t read anything by Buchanan to indicate he is a Hitler apologist (at least not yet), I do agree with everything else you wrote, because Buchanan said so while commenting from excerpts from his latest book a few months ago at Townhall.
In fact, he also criticized the US for the Dresden bombings as well as for helping the British.
Anyway, he really pissed me off, and just about anyone who read his book or columns back then.
He certainly doesn’t represent Reagan conservatives anymore (personally, I think he’s been losing his mind).
If he always thought this BS he is now spouting about WW2 he never brought it up during the Reagan years.
That being said, he is sane sometimes, and this post is one of those few times I happen to agree with him.
The Almighty Turtleon 26 Oct 2008 at 3:03 pm 22RE: Buchanan:
The key to understanding him is to realize that he is a knee-jerk Anglophobe. The man thinks the British Empire can hardly do any right, and thus he is inclined to villify it while excusing the crimes of its opponents.
I know the type, having read John Mosier’s “Exploding Myths” regarding WWI, which only serves to spread Pro-German propaganda even when it is CONTRADICTED by all serious sources. These guys tend to be old-school isolationists, often from German or Irish backgrounds (no offense to Germans or Irish, them’s the facts), and often bunk comfortably with a wide range of scum.
Don’t take them seriously, as their view of history is so utterly warped from what actually happened. This is for a couple reasons, but Buchanan in particular seems to want to destroy or bring down Interventionism and return to the head-in-the-sand isolationism that worked SOOO well in the 30’s. In order to do this, however, he seems to have an obscene fascination with excusing or lionizing Hitler and painting him as someone who could be reasoned with to a just compromise in an attempt to destroy a cornerstone of all interventionist arguments for seventy years: opposition to appeasement, even through force. If he can do this, he can cut the legs out from under the War on Terror and other foreign engagements and he can go back into his hole and sun himself.
At least until the first nuke drops.
Non-intervention worked when nobody liked us and the world was “larger” in the past. In this industrialized and digitalized age, with firm allies, fanatical enemies, and precious few hours needed to cross the Atlantic, one is forced to become involved.
Also, if you doubt PB’s Pro-Hitler and Pro- (Nazi and Imperial) German credentials, take a look at VDH. He did a few cutting critiques of him in the past, and he outlines the case rather well.
That, and his paranoia about the “Jewish Lobby” and Israel should seal the deal.
anarchoreon 11 Nov 2008 at 11:27 am 23Whiskey, the pig Churchill started the war, not Germany but the victors right the history and the children are propaganda victims, not seeing the real cost of war, and the atrocity of the just war is the myth in people’s minds that justifies future war.
anarchoreon 11 Nov 2008 at 11:31 am 24They “write” the history.
The Almighty Turtleon 02 Sep 2009 at 7:32 pm 25Well, nobody is here anyway, but this deserves a rebuttal:
Anarchoridiot:
“Whiskey, the pig Churchill started the war, not Germany”
So, Churchill was able to invade Poland when he wasn’t even Prime Minister? The man’s better than I thought he was.
“but the victors right the history and the children are propaganda victims”
In addition to piss-poor grammer, you still don’t realize that “propaganda” can be entirely true, and often was in WWII.
” not seeing the real cost of war, and the atrocity of the just war is the myth in people’s minds that justifies future war.”
Given the ludicrous fact that the “real cost of war” was largely inflicted by the Germans on the innocent, that doesn’t come out the way you think it does.
Wherever you are now, I hope you have learned your lesson.
But I highly doubt it.