The wingdude at Newsbusters (no I will not link there – you can Google it, if you are so inclined), whose initials are B.B. and according to his bio, “…lived in Massachusetts through high school, whereupon he fled the liberal commonwealth for George Washington University in DC and, since graduation, a life in Northern Virginia,” characterized the CBS TV spot last night about Hillary Clinton on 60 Minutes as “fawning,” and thereby has joined the ranks of Men On My List, that ever-growing litany that includes Dennis Miller, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and Bill Maher, along with supposed comics Robin Williams and Dana Carvey, all of whom have said and done less-than-flattering things about our Head Homegirl.
Fawning! Harrumph! Hillary Clinton sparkled and shined throughout that spot. As hard as she works, she was accommodating and gracious as she always is with the press. Yes, indeed, Bush-Cheney-Rice left a good deal of torn friendship behind, and Hillary has gone many, many miles, literally and figuratively in repairing it. If it is “fawning” to recognize her unflagging dedication, well the Homegirls and Homeboys here are more than happy to fawn all over her.
The Department of Homegirl Security 
Well there’s always Imus asking Chris Wallace if Sarah Palin was going to be sitting on his lap when he interviewed her, and Wallace responding, “one could only hope.”
The wingDUDS (on the right, but also from the ugly underbelly on the left as well)would rather see women interviewed as madonnas or whores, monsters or mother teresas, wife-in-chief or ballbuster… they don’t know what to call an interview where a woman in position of authority is interviewed simply as such, nothing more, nothing less, and as a result it shines through that she has a complete command over the work she’s doing and the influence she has. Apparently when the interviewer doesn’t openly sneer at a woman in power (as if to say Iron My Shirt, Go Back to the Kitchen, Sit on My Lap, etc.)…well that’s obviously a “fawning interview” to the wingDUDS since they have no point of reference for showing a modicum of respect toward a woman who has something to SAY (rather than only an outfit to wear) and isn’t afraid to let it show.
LikeLike
And they are ever so threatened when there is a brain behind the pretty face ( = Hillary).
LikeLike
I’m probably an outlier around here–I don’t support Palin’s politics, but I don’t think she’s without a brain behind that pretty face either. It’s not policy smarts, but people smarts.
LikeLike
I don’t think Sarah Palin is brainless either, though I have no use whatsoever for her politics or her opinions on major issues in general. To say I disagree with her is usually quite the understatement, but I hate the way she is treated just as much as I hate the way many female politicians are treated.
As for comedians making jokes about them, it’s got to be really beyond the pale for me to get upset. Politics makes the people involved in it become almost caricatures of themselves. If they like a position they really like. If they oppose it, it’s because that one idea will unravel the very fabric of our nation. Even their mannerisms become larger than normal life and their quirks – both physical and social – seem to as well. If I started listing examples, we’d be here all day. That stuff is rife with comic potential and I don’t think for a minute that having a laugh at any politician’s expense it a bad thing. It beats demonizing them and making certain individuals – average humans with families, friends, homes, groceries, favorite films, weaknesses, and a rather out of the ordinary job – the absolute embodiment of every dark, malevolent force in existence. The demonization of a person or a group of people, as history shows, has never brought about good things. Comedy at least make some people laugh and, on occasion, even laugh at themselves.
LikeLike
Palin’s politics are dangerous. She should be more careful selecting her words.
In comedy, for me, the line is the difference between what you do or say and how you look. Making fun of people’s physical characteristics that they cannot change is beyond the pale for me – something Carvey and Williams did about Hillary.
Yes, it is good to laugh, but not AT people. That teaches the same dangerous lesson as demonization.
LikeLike
The physical appearance stuff bothers me when it comes from journalists of pundits – people who should really be focused on issues, but comedians can make the occasional joke about Dubya’s or Obama’s ears, John Kerry’s long face, McCain’s chubby cheeks, Bill Clinton’s propensity to get a little on the fluffy side, or, yes, Hillary’s fuller hips and rounder backside – they are prominent characteristics, but none are really outlandish in reality. I don’t want it to be a comedians whole routine, but I’m not bothered by it in moderation. It’s like political cartoons – usually unflattering caricatures of politicians – they’ve been poking fun at elected officials on behalf of us – the general public – for hundreds of years. Sort of like some fool like me saying “Yes, you’ve got the power, prestige, and money I don’t, but I’ve got a cuter butt/better ears/[insert opposite of another politician’s body-snark here].” It’s kind of mean but generally harmless unless their message becomes that no one can get anywhere without being a vision of physical perfection. I don’t have a problem with the jokes themselves, but the fact that, more and more, they’re coming from reporters, news anchors, and pundits whose focus should be on policies and issue thus taking them into the realm of accepted facts as opposed to comedic license.
Demonization is never ok. Saying someone’s evil and a threat to the country’s existence creates far more and far stronger animosity than saying they have ears like the kid on the cover of MAD magazine’s.
BTW, in the interest of full disclosure, I posed the question to my mother and she completely disagrees, saying that jokes based on appearance are entirely inappropriate. So it’s probably me.
LikeLike
* journalists or pundits.
LikeLike
If you are going to poke equal opportunity physical fun, maybe (I still think it is mean). But the context wass that is was ONLY Hillary, it was MORE than one characteristic, and it was downright mean. Nope – I cannot excuse Williams and Carvey – way out of line. ll.
LikeLike
As I said, moderation is key. I don’t know what either man said, but it sounds like overkill on the physical appearance jokes.
Speaking of political cartoons, I thought I’d post a favorite. I know Bill’s doing a lot of important work, but I still love it.
LikeLike
Cute cartoon! LOL!!
It wasn’t what they said – it was the physical imitations that were offensive – especially Williams – and his was not just about Hillary – some of it was aimed at women in general. Sexist! Offensive.
LikeLike
Well, if it was such a fluff piece they should have left out the occasion in Africa when got pee’d off. It seems to me they just love to keep replaying that(it was in the T.Smiley interview as well. And seriously, MO introducing her as Sen. Clinton, and then joking about ‘almost calling her president Clinton? That was a nasty dig if I ever saw one. Almost MO, almost.
LikeLike