A recent ruling by the New York Court of Appeals (highest court) held that a local nighttime curfew law "violated the substantive due process rights of minors to enjoy freedom of movement and of parents to control the upbringing of their children." An example of state courts having an important role in interpreting the law, lest we forget in the midst of the Sotomayor talk and references to the powers of the federal courts, particularly the Supremes.
But, why not just stay in and watch late night television? On that note, a bit more about David Letterman's Palin jokes. Keith is gleefully spending days on the matter, his usual habit of beating dead horses, but Salon and others have called David out while still noting that Palins are going overboard. As I noted earlier, Keith did the former too, but in effect thinks the Palins continue pushback is over the top. This would include comments like "It would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman."
Salon noted that:
"Slutty flight attendant" is not just a sexual put-down; it's a socioeconomic one.
I will say a bit more about this below, but this is a selective quote, the joke being about "buying makeup at Bloomingdale's to update her slutty flight attendant look." Another article, which links the one with that line, has a 'pox on both your houses' sentiment. Jokes like that and "Sarah Palin went to a Yankees Game yesterday … during the seventh inning stretch, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez" are bad, but so was her response:
She's absolutely right that jokes like that contribute to an oppressive culture for women and young girls. But on this rare occasion when she's absolutely right about a couple of things, she can't just stop there. She has to blow straight past reasonable outrage and into disingenuous, over-the-top accusations.
That is, that Letterman really meant Willow, etc. The article is right to note that the apology was somewhat half-hearted, with the audience laughing, but he did apologize, and his tone was in part a result of that fact he thought it stupid that it was assumed Willow was the brunt of the joke. Or, that he was joking about the sexual abuse of 14 year olds. Two comments to the article are on the money. One spoke about the difference of the people involved:
The difference between the two to me, the difference between the two is their roles. Letterman is a comedian. Not one I particularly like, and I didn't find his recent Palin jokes funny, but a comedian. He made a joke. When it wasn't received well, he clarified and apologized.
Palin, however, is an elected public official and former vice-presidential candidate. She implied Letterman is a child molester, and when given the opportunity to clarify or apologize, she didn't. This is different from making a bad attempt at topical humour, this is an active attempt at defamation. Isn't she open to a defamation or libel suit for this? If absolutely nothing else, she more than overreacted to a bad joke.
The other focused on one of the jokes. Likewise, other comments suggested the jokes about Bristol (sic) were more about A-Rod and Spitzer, about their loose sexual ways, than about Ms. Palin. Not so sure this is totally true, since Bristol's pregnancy and so forth adds juice to the joke, but it's at least half-true. The discussion of the Palin joke hits home though, the criticisms really setting up a double standard:
Letterman didn't call Sarah Palin a slut. What he did say was perfectly accurate: that McCain/Palin/RNC spent a fortune to sexualize Palin during the campaign. This mischaracterization of Letterman's joke is as bad as Palin's.
What about the suggestion that there was a "socioeconomic" edge to the joke? It is not like he said a "stewardess" ... "slutty" was added, suggesting that stewardesses alone are not always slutty. To be honest, that image does fit the clearly intentional sexualization here. This includes the skirt uniforms traditionally seen among stewardesses and their use of glossy makeup. It seems a bit of a stretch to make this about class. A lone use of "slut" would be rather harsh, less funny, so they needed to water it down somehow. What should the writers have used here?
The audience's reaction during his apology (half-hearted or not, he spent the time to address the matter) appears justified. There is less here that meets the eye, especially when he admits to taking the path of least resistance in many cases to get a laugh. Clinton appealed to the MTV generation and had to deal with it when people did not give him the respect someone who was less low brow in various ways might deserve. Palin used her sexuality, and made her children into public figures (exploiting them in the process, particularly making Bristol/Levi into some nice couple, which bit her in the ass as events progressed), and people make jokes. And, she gets more air time.
Are some in poor taste? Sure. Is she full of herself? Definitely.