Saturday, February 27, 2010

Sick "Humor" is Apparent as Family Guy Targets Sarah Palin's Beautiful Baby


A H/T goes to MAINFO

 There are some cast members of Family Guy that disagree with Seth MacFarlane's humor attacks on Palin and her son Trig.  Patrick Warburton, who is a cast member of the show, told the Washington Post:
“I know it’s satire but, personally, that [joke] bothered me, too…I know that you have to be an ‘equal-opportunity offender,’ but there are some things that I just don’t think are funny.”


Soloman said...

Good for Patrick Warburton. Too bad more Hollywood types won't stand up and say something... where's Brad and Angelina, and Madonna, after all? They're so in touch with the most needy children, you'd think they'd be all out in support of Palin on this issue.

Teresa said...

Or are Angelina and Madonna only in touch with "perfect" needy kids? I hear ya about those Hollywood types. Compassion only for liberals' kids? So disturbing...

cube said...

If Trig was born into a liberal politician's family, there would be high moral dudgeon if a show targeted him.

Seth should do a show targeting Al Hunt and Judy Woodruff's son with severa spina bifida and see the media s***storm that ensues.

Malcolm said...

Actually another "Hollywood type" did say something: it was the actress who provided the voice for the character that had Down Syndrome. Her name is Andrea Fay Friedman and she also has Down Syndrome. She came out in defense of the "Family Guy" episode. She also opined that Sarah Palin has no sense of humor.

One of my problems with Sarah Palin and many of her supporters is a lack of consistency. Rahm Emanuel uses the word "retards" and he gets raked over the coals. Rush Limbaugh uses the word numerous times and it's called satire. "Family Guy" (a satirical show) makes a Sarah Palin reference and all hell breaks loose. I watched the entire episode and thought that the character of Ellen was portrayed as a normal teen who just happened to have Down Syndrome. I think Seth Macfarlane put in the Palin reference just to see how she and her supporters would react.

On a side note, I have yet to hear Palin, conservative pundits, or any of the conservative blogs I read condemn the comments about disabled children that Virginia Republican Bob Marshall made last month. I have a question for you Teresa and any of your readers who want to answer: Where is your outrage over what Bob Marshall said about disabled children?

Teresa said...

I don't think that any child whether "normal" or special needs and regardless of whether they have raised by liberal or conservative parents, should be targeted for attacks in any way.

But, I do see your point. If it was reversed, the Left would have gone bonkers.

Teresa said...

If Family Guy had targeted Sarah Palin that's alright, but, not her kids.

If the episode hadn't targeted one her kids and was in totality funny than I am sure Palin would have been laughing.

Family Guy used the episode to target a former politician's child and Rush was using satire to make fun of Rahm Emmanuel. There is a huge difference in targeting politicians kids and targeting the actual politicians.

I haven't heard one peep in the news about Bob Marshall and his comments. I will check it out. No person should be demeaning or targeting disabled children.

Teresa said...

For some reason the commenting function went whacko and I haven't been able to post comments for the past hour so for now I changed it to unmoderated comments.

I will post your response to Malcolm under my name.

Sorry about this. Dang computers-can't live with them, can't live without them.

Teresa said...

Malcolm, this is really a question posted from Soloman. Unfortunately, something went whacko with blogger comment moderation. *UGH*


My answer to your question about Bob Marshall is easy. Sounds like he put his foot in his mouth pretty badly, and perhaps has some pretty twisted views. However, he's not a national candidate, and he also issued an apology. His apology does not absolve him of wrongdoing, but it's a far cry better than we hear from many.

Having said that - he is not on the level to which the left has elevated Sarah Palin, and you certainly must recognize and admit that.

Every time Palin speaks a word, regardless of what she says, the left froths at the mouth and goes ballistic with hatred I've personally never witnessed.

One more thought - I'm sorry, but your attempt to put Rush and MacFarlane on the same plane is ridiculous.

Rush was clearly jabbing at the left, attempting to draw the exact response he received. It is also highly likely that he and Palin had a conversation beforehand.

MacFarlane on the other hand was beating a dead horse, because by the time his episode aired the topic had already been closed. Additionally, his was a repeated jab at the right; if you remember he tried to make a Nazi joke about McCain/Palin during the campaign.

I understand he tries to be an equal opportunity ridicule kind of guy, but he and the rest of the "comedians" on the left would be better served leaving Palin alone. Every time they pull this kind of crap, they simply strengthen her resolve and garner her more support from undecided independents.

Malcolm said...

Teresa: I'm a bit surprised you didn't hear anything about what Bob Marshall said because it made the national news. At any rate, I'm looking forward to hearing what you have to say about the matter.

Soloman: Your excuse that Bob Marshall is not a national candidate is terribly weak. That has nothing to do with it. Regardless of whether or not Marshall is a national candidate, if he had been a Democrat and said what he did, conservative pundits/bloggers would have been all over him and you know it.

Regarding the "Family Guy" controversy, Stewie made some insensitive remarks about the character Ellen. How those remarks got twisted into an attack against Trig makes no sense to me. Furthermore, the character of Ellen was not a negative depiction of people with Down Syndrome. This whole controversy just looks like another case of selective outrage to me.

I doubt that Palin and Rush talked beforehand. When news hit about Rush's comments, Palin came out with a short statement through her spokesperson that didn't even mention Rush by name. Then she gave him a pass calling it "satire" and her supporters fell right in lockstep. I doubt that Keith Olbermann would have earned a pass if he had said the same exact thing as Rush.

As for the left going ballistic over Palin, I hope you aren't putting me in that group. Although I don't like many of Palin's views and will criticize her when I think it's warranted, I have nothing personal against her.

Palin would serve herself better if she chose her battles more wisely and studied up on politics. For all we know, the more she plays the game of selective outrage while showing a lack of knowledge when it comes to politics, she could very well be turning off those undecided independents.

Teresa said...

I am surprised that I didn't hear of this since I sunscribe online to the NY Times, Huffington Post, and The Politico and I would have thought that one of those news outlets would have mentioned it. But, there was a period of about two weeks where I was sick and wasn't paying close attention to my inbox either.

His statement did cross the line and it was outrageous. But, now he has apologized, further clarified his comments and now I do understand what he was trying to say in the beginnng. Yes, his oringinal comments is one example of words gone real bad. But, I do think that is over the top to call for his resignation.

I haven't heard Seth MacFarlane apologize for any of the outrageous, over the top things he has dirceted and made a statement about via Family Guy- targeting Palin's family via Family Guy. This was an outrageous jab at the Palin family. Palin has become the target of about half of the attacks against all conservatives by the MSM and about 5-10% of that have targeted her family as well. I think if it was a liberal with a speacial needs child than MacFarlane would have either tread more lightly and been more sensitive to the family's feelings or he would have directed the episode in a much different manner.

Soloman said...


Sorry, I do not see it as "weak" when I say that because Marshall was not a national candidate I didn't comment on it and see it as a non-issue for me personally. I told yout how I feel when you asked - I see it the same regardless. It was a rude comment.

You are misunderstanding my point. I had to do a Google search to find out what you were asking about - so what I mean when I bring up his being local is that it didn't make the same kind of national coverage that other stories do.

Had a Democrat party state representative from Vermont made such a statement, I doubt I would have known of it either, and even it it did hit Conservative blogs, I would not have touched it. I'm an Arizonan, and what some idiot from either party says on the other side of the country doesn't really affect me.

I do not doubt at all that Palin and Limbaugh talked beforehand. Rush actually discussed on his show that the two have a friendship that was born before she ever hit the national scene, so it is quite possible.

I can't say I understand your Olbermann reference at all, becauase clearly he would not have made such a mockery of Rahm Emanuel - he's in the tank for all things Emanuel and Obama. Rush's bit that day was classic Rush Limbaugh. He baited the leftist screamers, and they bit hook, line, and sinker.

You do realize that many days Rush has what he calls the "Drive-by tweak of the day," don't you? He literally pulls their strings and he's very good at it.

Palin, Selective outrage? How about selective and shameless self-promotion on the part of MacFarlane? I did a post on the topic, you may want to see my opinion at the time.

Regarding including you or not in "the left" - well, I didn't say Malcolm, I said "the left." However, you are here making every effort to put Palin in a bad light; not once have you commented in this thread that you give her any benefit of the doubt regarding this situation.

And I just have to say... a supporter of Obama saying that the opposition needs to "study up on politics" is hilarious.

She doesn't need to study up on anything. She knows what will fix the mess America is in, and clearly Obama does not... and as it's turning out even he, the "outsider" who looks to be such a shrewd politician is actually showing himself to be a joke.

Malcolm said...

Soloman: I think that if a Democrat party state representative from Vermont made such a statement, you would have known about it... Fox News would have made sure of it. To be fair, I have seen selective reporting on both sides of the political aisle.

I am well aware of Limbaugh's "tweak of the day". As I alluded to in one of my previous comments, I think that Seth did a similar thing with the Palin reference. It worked because some of you were foaming at the mouth over it.

You said:

"However, you are here making every effort to put Palin in a bad light; not once have you commented in this thread that you give her any benefit of the doubt regarding this situation."

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. I could easily say that you are going out of your way to put a halo over Palin's head regarding this incident. If I didn't think that Palin was off base on this one, I would give her the benefit of the doubt.

Yes, I am an Obama supporter. However, I am not a blind supporter of him or anyone for that matter. When he and other liberal politicians/pundits have done things I've disagreed with, I've called them on it.

What gets me about many of the Palin supporters is that they will defend remarks by her that anyone with an ounce of objectivity would find indefensible:

1. Not knowing the functions of the Vice President

2. Her conspiracy theory about how the phrase “In God We Trust” had been moved to the edge of the new coins.

3. The embarrassing speeches/interviews she's given since coming on the national scene. I almost expect a laugh track to kick in sometimes.

Not to mention the allegations raised about her in the book "Game Change". If Palin supporters say that the stories about her in the book are a bunch of lies, I hope they are also questioning the validity of some of the negative anecdotes about Democrats as well.

When I read your comment about Palin saying, "She doesn't need to study up on anything", I was glad I didn't have any food or drink in my mouth because it would have ended up all over my PC screen and keyboard. Although he has his faults, I give Bill O'Reilly credit for coming out and saying that Palin needs to go to "political/world affairs" college. People like Dick Cheney and Jeb Bush have said similar things too, but one could argue that their motives are political.

Although I think Palin would be a disaster if she was elected POTUS, I neither hate nor fear her. Me and many other liberals want her to get the GOP nomination. She is basically the political version of a "Chatty Cathy" doll. Pull her string, she spews right-wing talking points, and some of you fall for it every time.

Teresa said...

Actually, Biden couldn't give an accurate account of what the vice President's responsibilities are. And, she hit it out of the ballpark in the Vice Presidential debate. Biden had a number of screw ups during the debate.

In some of the interviews Palin was hit with gotcha questions from the media that Obama never did get and hasn't gotten since he was elected. Granted, the Couric interview could have been much better but she explains what she would have done differently in an O'Reilly interview.

Palin does need to work on her knowledge of foreign policy which she has been doing since the election process. But, Obama is not much better when it comes to foreign policy issues, if at all. I don't call a President who apologizes for America and its values too understanding of what America is all about. But, I guess that's understandable for someone who wants to "remake" America and change or shred our Constitution.

Actually, if she spewed right-wing talking points than the elitists would love her. Instead she goes rogue and challenges the elite establishment within both parties. She does in fact speak for the comman person. She does speak out on some right-wing issues or talking points, as you call them. That is because her beliefs are very strong with regards to pro-life policies, lowering taxes, energy independence, and special needs kids. She has had quite a bit of experience with energy independence policies. She is far more knowledgable than you realize.

Soloman said...


"Fox News would have made sure of it."

Get a grip.

You will never understand the true difference between what Limbaugh does and what MacFarlane does, because you buy what the popular culture and mainstream media are selling, so to you they and MacFarlane are perfectly fine in their actions. I won't even get into the fact that MacFarlane is selling his political propaganda to children, because Obama is doing the same and I'm sure you see that as a non-issue.

I'm sorry you have such issues with an American leader believing in God, and believing that our history of faith in God should be displayed prominently.

My comment of "However, you are here making every effort to put Palin in a bad light; not once have you commented in this thread that you give her any benefit of the doubt regarding this situation" is extremely relevant, since in your previous post you said you hope I was not associating you with the group who goes ballistic over every little thing Palin does.

If you had any class at all you would see Palin's son as an innocent, and completely understand and support his mother attempting to defend him. Instead, you are attempting to defend the cretin Seth MacFarlane for his immature and irresponsible behavior. Again, you buy what the popular and mainstream culture and media are selling, and unfortunately those two sources of information are very lacking in class, ethics, standards, truth, and respect for America's traditional greatness.

And by the way - for all the complaints you have against Palin, your hero Obama doesn't even understand (or respect) the Constitution, or he would kill the health care bill and never attempt to resurrect it, but that's probably a subject that's way above your head, given that you don't see any of Palin's speeches as worthwhile yet you clearly believe Obama is some kind of hero.

I thought you were worthy of reasonable conversation, but you're proving yourself to be just another blind ideologue who will defend your party's platform at every turn.

Malcolm said...

Teresa: Since I'm not in the guessing business, feel free to elaborate on the "gotcha" questions you say that Palin has been hit with in interviews. I won't bother countering the digs you took at Obama because we'll wind up engaging in a back and forth that strays from the topic (Sarah Palin) of this post. I am glad to see you admit that Palin does need to work on her knowledge of foreign policy.

Soloman: Because your arguments are weak, you are using an old trick: muddying up the conversation with off-topic comments. President Obama, his plan to reform health care, his so-called lack of understanding of the Constitution, etc. have absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about.

If you're not muddying up the conversation, you're making up things about me that aren't even close to being true:

"I'm sorry you have such issues with an American leader believing in God, and believing that our history of faith in God should be displayed prominently."

I never said nor did I imply that I had issues with anything that you claimed in the above statement. Since it's not clear that you have a clue as to what I was referring to regarding Palin's comments about "In God We Trust" on our coins:

Had Palin done her homework, she never would have made such a foolish statement about the placement of "In God We Trust" on our coins. Have fun trying to spin that into a positive for Palin.

" clearly believe Obama is some kind of hero". "'re proving yourself to be just another blind ideologue who will defend your party's platform at every turn."

What's clear is that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to me. In various postings on conservative blogs and in my personal life, I have criticized both Obama and Democrats/liberals in general. Whether you believe that or not, I couldn't care less.

Let me add that I understand Palin wanting to defend her family. If she or anyone had slammed Bill Maher for comments he made on his show on 2/17, there is no way I would have defended what he said. However, I feel Palin's off base with the "Family Guy" controversy.

On your blog you say "I used to be a liberal, until I learned to think for myself." From what I've witnessed, I can't say that I've seen much independent thinking on your part.

Teresa said...

You pick any interview that Palin had with MSM journalists and there was at least one gotcha question in each of those interviews- One example was the Bush "doctrine" question by Charlie Gibson. There hasn't been a Bush doctrine established like a Reagan Doctrine or a Clinton Doctrine has been established.

Since you made many digs directed at Sarah Palin in the name of equality and fairness I threw out and directed some digs at President Obama.

Malcolm said...

Teresa: It seems that whenever Palin is hit with an interview question she cannot answer, her supporters term it as a "gotcha". The Bush Doctrine was established early in his presidency, so Palin should have been able to answer that question.

Even when Palin is thrown what some might consider a softball question, she sometimes struggles to answer in a coherent manner. When Bill O'Reilly asked her if she was smart enough, incisive enough, intellectual enough to be President, she gave a "Mad Libs" style answer that didn't make any sense. Also, I was glad that it was Glenn Beck doing the interview when she said "all of them" to his question asking her to name her favorite founding father. If it had been someone like Chris Matthews who responded to her answer by saying "bull crap", conservatives would have tore him a new one.

The only reason I made the so-called digs about Palin is because she is the topic of this post. Even though you may disagree with my "digs", I don't think you can say that I was nasty or malicious in my criticism of Palin. As for your criticisms of Obama in this thread, if you feel the need to engage in a form of payback, go for it.

Teresa said...

She has folksy but intelligent understandable answers for people who live on main street with regards to both answering softball questions or hardball questions. She just doesn't put on airs or have a teleprompter like Obama does. And, five words on a hand doesn't even compare to the crutch Obama clings onto when giving speeches.

Does Sarah Palin really have to have a favorite Founder? I mean maybe she likes them all. I think your mistaking lack of eloquence with lack of intelliegence. Anyone can be eloquent when being reliant on a teleprompter.

If Chris matthews would have questioned her in a respectful and decent manner like Beck did than I would have no problem with Matthews challenging her on that type of question/answer.

Soloman said...


There is one person who knows more about the "Bush Doctrine" than any other, since he is responsible for coining the phrase: Charles Krauthammer.

Read his article and learn something.

Malcolm said...

Teresa: Playing the "teleprompter" card is one of the more tired/weak GOP criticisms of Obama. It's akin to criticizing someone for typing out a letter instead of handwriting it.

Do you believe that every other politician is giving speeches from memory? If they aren't using a teleprompter, they either have it written out on paper or they use index cards. It's all a matter of personal preference. Ronald Reagan reportedly preferred using the teleprompter too. Now if one had the time to go back and look at the speeches Reagan gave during his Presidency, it's possible they might learn he used a teleprompter just as much as Obama does.

You say that anyone can sound eloquent relying on a teleprompter. Sorry, but GWB couldn't and that's not a knock against him. According to Ari Fleisher, GWB was more comfortable giving speeches using large index cards instead of using a teleprompter. Again, it's all a matter of personal preference.

No, Palin doesn't have to have a favorite founding father. The only reason I cited that incident is because I believe if a member of the so-called MSM had said "bull crap" to her answer, conservatives would have crucified the interviewer for picking on poor old Sarah.

One last thing about Obama's reliance on the teleprompter... he sounded mighty eloquent without one when he spoke at the GOP summit last January. Not surprisingly, most of the conservative blogs I read didn't touch this story.

Soloman: In regards to your choice of a link title to the C.K. article, your knack for condescension runs neck-and-neck with your stunning lack of objectivity when it comes to politics.

Teresa and Soloman: You and I will likely continue to have differing viewpoints of Sarah Palin. However, one thing I think the two of you and I can agree on is that it's time to put this debate to rest.

Teresa said...

Actually not weak but rather your using that argument as a cop out in your being against any criticisms of Obama (at least that is the way it seems).

Here is why it is legitimate:

Obama uses the teleprompter at 99% of his speeches but Reagan only used the teleprompter for important speeches.

Your right. We will have to agree to disagree about Sarah Palin. So, before this is the neverending set of comments I will end the discussion here.

Malcolm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Malcolm said...

Teresa: I considered this discussion ended when I said in previous comment "that it's time to put this debate to rest." However, I wanted to clarify one thing. As I told Soloman, I have criticized Obama on conservative blogs and in my personal life. On the other hand, I will defend him when I feel the criticism is lame. By the way, I read the Politico article awhile ago. :-)

OK, now this discussion is over. Agreed? Enjoy the rest of your week.

Teresa said...

Malcolm, This is what I stated before in agreement to end this discussion:
"Your right. We will have to agree to disagree about Sarah Palin. So, before this is the neverending set of comments I will end the discussion here."

Your the person who had to have the last word on my blog and act like King blog cop determining when the discussion would end when you have no authoritative power on my blog ot do so.

Stop honing in and trying to control my terf. This is my blog so I may end the discussion at my discretion. You may end discussions on your blog at your discretion.

Have a good weekend :)

Lafartuna said...

Hello..."Sick "Humor" it's People of all ages and cultures respond to humour. The majority of people are able to experience humour, i.e., to be amused, to laugh or smile at something funny, and thus they are considered to have a sense of humour. The hypothetical person lacking a sense of humour would likely find different sex positions
the behaviour induced by humour to be inexplicable, strange, or even irrational. Though ultimately decided by personal taste, the extent to which an individual will find something humorous depends upon a host of variables, including geographical location, culture, maturity, level of education, intelligence and context. For example, young children may favour slapstick, such as Punch and Judy puppet shows or cartoons such as Tom and Jerry. Satire may rely more on understanding the target of the humour and thus tends to appeal to more mature audiences. Nonsatirical humour can be specifically termed "recreational drollery".

Penis Enlargement Pills said... is an all-natural Penis Enlargement, safe, and guaranteed alternative to painful and dangerous Penis enlargement methods such as surgery, straps, or rings.
penis enlargement pills or male enhancement pills will immediately boost your performance, improve your orgasms, and increase the size of your penis within just a few weeks!