There was so, so much more to this woman than I knew. Mainly, I knew her as the wife of the bumbling Gerald Ford, who took over the presidency after the Watergate Scandal felled Richard Nixon. I have since learned that the clumsy, klutzy depiction of Gerald Ford was the result of one trip, glorified by Chevy Chase on SNL, and forever associated with this former Michigan quarterback and US Navy veteran. Such is the power of the media, even those dedicated to spoofs (how many people still think Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her house after Tina Fey made the comment on SNL?).

But back to Betty Ford. In her early days, she was a dancer, modern dance in particular. She even danced in New York with Martha Graham’s company at Carnegie Hall (who knew?). There is much to this woman, including how involved she was with women’s issues, and the work of the president in general:

[snip] According to their son Jack, Betty Ford not only read through the President’s briefing papers on political issues he faced, and reviewed with him those pertaining to social programs or any which affected women. She also quietly worked as a conduit on legislative and other domestic agenda issues, both to and from him to others. Although she refused to ever discuss what issues they may have disagreed on, she did admit to serving as what she called, a “sounding board,” and exercising “pillow talk” on occasion. She also admitted to reviewing his more important speeches, offering advice to make cuts and use livelier language, without the need to always spell out details but rather leave audiences with some eagerness for further clarifications. Publicly, she gave only faint enthusiasm for the public relations effort “Whip Inflation Now,” a public relations action effort by the Administration intended to encourage cost-cutting and budgeting by citizens to counter the economic inflation of 1974-1975. In the White House, Mrs. Ford emphasized that she was reducing both her family and public entertaining food costs by serving less-expensive poultry, substituting soup for the pricier fish course, having smaller portions served. Personally, she stated, she would have her older shoes dyed rather than buy new ones for each event she needed them, and purchased her cosmetics in larger bulk to keep cost down. She also signed a “consumer’s pledge” to buy “only those products and services priced at or below present levels…” [snip]

She was an amazing woman, to be sure. If you have the time and inclination, you can read all about her at the National First Ladies’ Library.

First Lady Ford’s funeral is Tuesday, July 12th. Something else I did not know is that presidents and first ladies prepare their funerals down to the detail. According to this Washington Post article, First Lady Ford knew a few years back who she wanted to deliver her eulogy:

[snip] In 2006, Cokie Roberts got a call from Ford’s daughter Susan: her mom wanted Roberts to deliver a eulogy, whenever that time came, at her funeral.

“Wow — that’s an incredible honor,” the veteran D.C. journalist replied. Then, she recalls, Susan gave Roberts her assignment: “Mother wants you to talk about the way things used to be.”

Meaning?

“A time in Washington when Democrats and Republicans used to be friends, when their families were all friends,” Roberts told us Monday. “The main message she wanted me to say is when you’re friends, government works. It’s like she planned it for this week.”

Roberts has been friends with the Fords for decades. Her father, Hale Boggs, was House majority leader when Gerald Ford was minority leader. Her mother, Lindy, teamed with Betty on various causes. The familes went to school and church together.

“They were all friends with each other,” Roberts said. When her father disappeared after an Alaska plane crash in 1972, the Fords were “devastated. . . they were so supportive.” [snip]

Ah, yes, those were the days, were they not? Sadly, they seem long gone, it seems…(There will be two other speakers at the Washington funeral, First Lady Rosalynn Carter and the Betty Ford Center’s Geoffrey Mason. First Lady Ford will have a funeral service in Michigan, too, where she will be laid to rest with her husband.)

What an amazing, complicated, dedicated woman First Lady Betty Ford was. My sincerest condolences to her family and friends. In honor of First Lady Ford being an Episcopalian, I have the following rendition of the Nunc Dimittis* is in her honor (this is one of my favorite hymns from Vespers):

Rest in peace.

* Translation:

Salva nos, Domine, vigilantes, custodi nos
dormientes, ut vigil emus cum Christo et requiescamus in pace.
Save us, O Lord, while we are awake, and guard us
when we sleep, that we may watch with Christ and rest in peace.

Nunc dimittis servum tuum, Domine, secundum verbum tuum in pace:
Quia viderunt oculi mei salutare tuum
Quod parasti ante faciem omnium populorum:
Lumen ad revelationem gentium, et gloriam plebis tuae Israel.
Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word in peace;
Because my eyes have seen Thy salvation,
Which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples:
A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.

I realize that title pretty much says it all, but here are some of the details to fill it in (from the AP article linked above):

South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford sat in her oceanfront living room Friday, recalling how her husband repeatedly asked permission to visit his lover in the months after she discovered his affair.

“I said absolutely not. It’s one thing to forgive adultery; it’s another thing to condone it,” Jenny Sanford told The Associated Press during a 20-minute interview at the coastal home where she sought refuge with their four sons. They were her first extended comments on the affair.

She said that when her husband, Gov. Mark Sanford, inexplicably disappeared last week, she hoped he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail, as his staff told those who inquired about his absence. That he had dared to go to Argentina to see the other woman left her stunned.

“He was told in no uncertain terms not to see her,” she said in a strong, steady voice. “I was hoping he was on the Appalachian Trail. But I was not worried about his safety. I was hoping he was doing some real soul-searching somewhere and devastated to find out it was Argentina. It’s tragic.”

The Sanfords had separated about two weeks ago. The first lady said her husband told the family that he wanted some time away to work on writing a book and clear his head. “I had every hope he was not going to see her,” she said.

“You would think that a father who didn’t have contact with his children, if he wanted those children, he would toe the line a little bit,” she said.

The governor, who is staying at the official residence in Columbia, returned Wednesday to end days of speculation on his whereabouts, publicly confess his cheating and emotionally apologize.

Jenny Sanford, a Georgetown-educated, former Wall Street vice president, was not with her husband Wednesday during his pained public confession.

I have to say, it was mighty surprising to read that even SHE thought he was hiking on the Appalachian Trail. See, now, given what’s coming next, I can say I would have had a hard time believing that one:

Sanford said she discovered her husband’s affair early this year after coming across a copy of a letter to the mistress in one of his files in the governor’s mansion. He had asked her to find some financial information, she said, not an unusual request considering her heavy involvement in his career.

She would not comment on what was in the letter, except to say “enough to figure out an affair was going on.”

She felt “shocked and obviously deeply hurt. I didn’t think he had it in him,” she said. “It’s hard to find out your husband is not who you thought he was.”

The first lady said she confronted her husband immediately, and he agreed to end the affair. She said she wasn’t sure Friday whether he had done so.

“I guess that’s what we will have to see. I believe he has,” she said. “But he was down there for five days. I saw him yesterday and he is not staying here. We’ll just see what kind of spirit of reconciliation he has himself.”

The governor declined to discuss details of the letter and how he handled it with his wife.

Gee, really?? Can’t imagine why he would decline discussing the salacious details of his love letters to his paramour. Ahem:

“This goes into the personal zone,” Sanford said Friday. “I’d simply say that Jenny has been absolutely magnanimous and gracious as a wonderful Christian woman in this process.”

Jenny Sanford cried at the end of the interview, and said the couple have been to counseling.

“When I found out in January, we both indicated a willingness to continue working on the marriage, but there’s not room for three people in a marriage,” she said. “I’ve done everything in my power possibly to keep him from going to see her and to really make sure she was off the table, including asking him to leave.”

Told you this woman was no pushover, no wallflower, she. It is astonishing that the governor kept asking her to allow him to see his lover, isn’t it?? He’s damn lucky, it seems, that she didn’t throw him out on his keister long before this. Especially when he says crap like this:

About an hour after Jenny Sanford talked of her pain and feelings of betrayal, her husband brushed aside any suggestion he might immediately resign, citing the Bible and the story of David, who continued to lead after sleeping with another man’s wife, Bathsheba, having the husband slain, then marrying the widow.

“What I find interesting is the story of David, and the way in which he fell mightily — fell in very, very significant ways, but then picked up the pieces and built from there,” Sanford told members of his Cabinet in a session called so he could apologize to them in person and tell them the business of government must continue.

And he said all of that with a straight face?? REALLY??? That takes some kind of disconnected, De Nile, kind of hubris, doesn’t it? Seems like there are others, beside his wife, who aren’t buying that kind of hooey:

Some Republican leaders have called for Sanford to resign, and some lawmakers and watchdog groups are pressing for investigations into whether he improperly used state money.

Uh, yeah – those of us who pay taxes in SC would like to know that, too. Thanks for asking.

While the First Lady may care about that, too, it is not her overriding concern:

For Jenny Sanford, the focus is the couple’s four sons. During her interview, she wept as she displayed the stellar report cards earned by her eldest two sons at their private school in Columbia.

On the coffee table was a collection of devotional books, including a book of commentary on the Bible’s Book of Job, the story of a man whose faith God tests to the extreme.

“Parenting is the most important job there is, and what Mark has done has added a serious weight to that job,” she said.

I think most people would agree with that, even if we are uncomfortable with this level, or type, of religiosity. But hey – that’s this woman’s faith perspective, and apparently the place from which she draws strength. Whatever sustains her during this difficult time.

There was another article about First Lady Sanford in Friday’s paper, “Tough, Astute Jenny Sanford Let Her Man Stand By Himself.” It makes an interesting point right off the bat:

To those accustomed to watching betrayed first ladies smile stiffly through their husbands’ public confessions, the absence of Gov. Mark Sanford’s wife at the soul-baring news conference where he admitted to an affair with a woman in Argentina was striking.

Instead, she issued a tough-minded statement saying she had thrown her cheating husband out and told him to stop speaking to her while she tries to deal with his infidelity.

That came as no surprise to those who know this independently wealthy, Georgetown-educated former Wall Street executive. Around the state, Jenny Sanford is regarded as a strong-minded figure, accomplished and politically astute.

Jenny Sanford doesn’t have it in her to play the “namby-pamby Tammy Wynette,” said Donald Aiesi, a political scientist at Furman University in Greenville, the governor’s alma mater.

“She has very strong faith, very strong family values,” said Marjory Wentworth, a family friend who was appointed South Carolina’s poet laureate by the governor in 2003. “There’s no gray area about the things that matter to her.”

Many of Jenny Sanford’s counterparts have stood beside or behind their spouses for similar moments of scandal: When New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey outed himself as gay. When former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer acknowledged he was the client of a call-girl ring. When Idaho Sen. Larry Craig denied trying to elicit sex in an airport men’s room.

Some of these political wives were bitterly criticized for subjecting themselves to such humiliation, as was Hillary Rodham Clinton, who stood by her husband, figuratively, if not literally, during some of the most fraught moments of the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

You know, I wonder how these women would have conducted themselves had they not been BLINDSIDED by their husbands’ infidelities, had they not been in shock at the time of these “confessions”? If they had had five or six months to hash this out with their husbands the way First Lady Sanford did, they may have chosen differently, too. I don’t know that much about many of the women listed above, but Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards were also successful women in their own right. They may have chosen to be absent from those press conferences, too. Instead:

Kendra Stewart, a political science professor at the College of Charleston, said Jenny Sanford was wise not to appear at her husband’s side.

“The women receive a lot of criticism and even mocking on ‘Saturday Night Live’ skits, criticism from woman’s groups and other folks,” she said. “People doing a lot of speculation about their expressions, what they were thinking. And by not being present, she removes all of that speculation.”

As for whether Jenny Sanford’s absence hurt her husband, Stewart said: “I’m not really sure any more damage could be done.”

In fact, the political scientist suggested that the 49-year-old governor might have helped himself somewhat by taking his lumps by himself, and not making his wife stand there the way other politicians in peril have done.

“In a way, I think the husbands took even more flak for their actions,” Stewart said, “because everyone had to watch their wives humiliated while they apologized.”

Uh, yeah – no kidding. Because they hadn’t already been humiliated enough, of course. But the matter was different with the First Lady:

During the painfully frank news conference, the governor said the first lady had known about the affair for five months. In her own statement, Jenny Sanford said: “We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. This trial separation was agreed to with the goal of ultimately strengthening our marriage.”

Unlike other political wives, “she is laying down conditions at the outset and being very specific and emphatic that he’s got to toe the line,” Aiesi said. “The other wives sort of stood there like submissive somehow. She didn’t take that approach. She said, ‘I love him. I want him back. But it depends on him.’ She’s holding the cards.”

On Thursday, Jenny Sanford spent part of the day with her husband at their coastal home. Later, she left with some children in her car for what she said was dinner and a boat ride. Asked if she would be staying with her husband, she said: “It’s a goal.”

“I’m going to do my best to work on my marriage,” she said. As for her husband’s political future: “His career is not a concern of mine. He’ll have to worry about that. I’m going to worry about my family and the character of my children.”

Yes, that does seem to be the prevailing them for her – her children. But she, like many partners who have been cheated upon, still loves her husband. I’m guessing he’s going to be doing a whole LOT of work to keep her, though. As mentioned above, the First Lady pretty much has it going on all by her own self:

Born Jennifer Sullivan, the first lady grew up near Chicago. Her grandfather founded the Skil Corp., a power tool manufacturer. She graduated from Georgetown University in 1984 with a degree in finance, then worked for the Wall Street investment banking firm Lazard Freres & Co., where she was a vice president in mergers and acquisitions. Mark Sanford was also working on Wall Street.

The couple have four school-age sons.

This will continue to be an unfolding saga, no doubt. And it is hard to deny the pain this woman, and her children are going through. But as many have pointed out, while all of this “Peyton Place” drama has been playing out all over the nation, there have been a whole bunch of things going on in Washington. Add in the deaths of three major cultural icons, and I would check my bank account balance were I you (you know, because the Prez and Congress have been left on their own in DC to do as they wish).

No doubt, some of my esteemed fellow writers will be dealing with just some of those goings-on, so for now, I can say that the First Lady may be a woman scorned, but she sure isn’t taking it lying down. Too bad these other women didn’t have the “luxury” of knowing about THEIR husbands affairs beforehand, too – maybe SNL wouldn’t have heaped more insult to the injury. Yeah, right.

(Photo above by National 9/11 Memorial)

What made it even worse was that their “hip” New York audiences would go stone cold silent, or even boo, if they made any jokes at Obama’s expense.  There was a classic moment when Jon Stewart made a small joke about Obama and the audience kind of moaned disapprovingly.  He raised his eyebrows and said, “It’s OK to laugh at him.”  The audience wasn’t so sure.

Stewart had learned, and demonstrated, the problem with Obama as regards humor.  His minions will not tolerate dissent.  And no satire!  And mocking is right out!!

Too late, these political funnymen realized they backed the wrong horse, to the detriment of their careers.  G.W. Bush was a mainstay of political humor.  He was a virtual fountain of funny.  Funny looking.  Funny talking.  Funny ideas.  Funny fuckups.  As Bugs Bunny would have said, “What a maroon!”

Here is a cursory comparison of the difficulty comedians face with the change in administrations.  You can see in the table below how the styles of the outgoing and incoming presidents differ, and the problem this presents to the gag guys.

And there are some things that are taboo purely because of racial sensitivities.  I can’t tell you how many times I have heard Bush called The Chimp, with pictorial side-by-sides and all, but any comparisons of Obama to any type of primate will be shouted down as racist.  Early in the primaries, for example, a bar owner in the South thought Obama’s ears looked like the children’s book character, Curious George, a monkey.  He had some T-shirts printed up comparing the two.  As a result, 70 million liberals had cardiac incidents.

Perhaps the fact that the above-mentioned programs are taped in New York City is a large part of the problem.  I think they would find jabs at Obama would get much bigger laughs if they moved their studios to some place like Atlantic City or Las Vegas.  Think about it… these are places where people like Jeff Foxworthy and Don Rickles draw huge cheering crowds.  Alcohol may play a role in that, but that may be what’s needed to get white people to overcome their fear of laughing at a black president.  I’m sure there’s a certain bar owner in the South who would agree. 

Another alternative location would be Chicago.  I’d bet good money that most of the folks there don’t have to overcome a sense of awe and reverence in order to get a good laugh at the expense of their hometown politico.  In fact, maybe these comics should send some talent scouts to Chicago to find some writers who aren’t intimidated by Obama’s worshippers.  They probably have a ton of gags about Obama and his Chicago connections.  They’re proud to say Chicago has the best politicians money can buy.

Saturday Night Live has had a white guy playing Obama, which upset some people, but that makes sense to me because Obama is just as much white as he is black.  So they’d have to have a “mutt” play him to make that right with the critics.  And SNL has been about the only show I have seen satirize Obama at all.  What comes to mind is the famous skit from the primaries in which Obama crowds Hillary during the debate and the moderators fawn over him.  Having done that bit, it can’t be done again because it wouldn’t be funny twice.  In fact, it kind of makes people uncomfortable with the truth in the concept of the media being “in the tank” for Obama from the start.  They should keep in mind it’s a very short distance from being in the tank to being under the bus.

Past presidents were openly satirized, no matter how popular they were.  Kennedy had imitators who got laughs just by doing his accent.  Accents have always played well in presidential satire.  There have been lots of presidents lately with Southern accents, and they were all roundly mocked. 

I remember back in April when Hillary was campaigning in the Rust Belt, and she let her twang come out, knocked back a beer and a shot, and spoke from the back of pickup trucks.  But hey, she’s from Arkansas, you know.  That got plenty of attention from the comics, but nobody pointed out that Obama was talking hip-hop slang with a “brutha” accent at plenty of rallies, and putting on a nasal “honky voice” at others.  Most of the time, to my ears, Obama sounds like Richard Pryor did when he put on his “white” voice in some of his stand-up routines.

 And how will it go over when comedians first make fun of Michelle Obama?  She’s the only person I know who’s “smile” looks like a Fu Manchu moustache.  When she was listening to Hillary’s speech at the Convention, the corners of her mouth touched her collarbone.  And if you’ve seen the old pictures of her before her cosmetic surgeries, she’s gone through more de-Africanization than Michael Jackson.  I know many women have snarked about her taste in clothes, and I’ve wondered myself whether her clothes were selected by a fashion consultant or an upholsterer.

I think what it’s going to come down to is that black comedians will be the only ones allowed to make jokes about the Obama family.  I think there will be a rise in prominence of black comedians who do Obama impressions and make fun of the Obama family in ways that only another black person could get away with. 

Jon Stewart has already been using a black surrogate-correspondent to make all the jokes that may involve Obama’s racial makeup.  Dave Letterman is such an old white honky, he doesn’t dare joke about Obama in any way that could be construed as racial; what’s he going to do, have a running joke about his “suit pants” to replace Hillary’s pant-suits?  Stephen Colbert is so hard to read, you never know when he’s serious or not anyway.  He can probably get away with more because he is pretending to be a Right Winger (See?  He’s not being a bigot, he’s mocking bigots!). 

I can’t help but think that these guys will be hard-pressed to stay on top of their games, and some may decide on early retirement.  Or others may make that decision for them.   Let’s see, we can have Eddie Murphy take over Letterman’s Late Show, Chris Rock can replace Jon Stewart, and Wanda Sykes would be perfect for the Tonight Show. 

So, all you folks in the mainstream political comedy business, you got what you wanted.  You helped get Obama elected.  Now let’s see what you can do when you don’t have George Dubya Bush to kick around anymore. 

Hey, great name for a country mock band: Dub and the NeoCons!  I need to file a copyright on that!

However, I’m thinking that being made fun of when you are deadly earnest and feeling your self-importance is not so positive. THAT means you’ve jumped the shark and now EVERYONE knows it. Heh. Keith has been feeling very good about himself for quite some time now. His “special comments” took off when he blasted President Bush some time ago, and Keith has since become agitated by Katie Couric, Hillary Clinton, and Geraldine Ferraro – all who have merited a “special comment.” (I’ve kindly provided a list below, of SOME of the Olbermann-related posts here at NQ.)

Trying very hard to imitate if not channel Edward R. Murrow, Olbermann, sees himself as a cable tv truthteller. His rants are actually truth-optional. Watching his “news” show is indulging in the television version of caveat emptor. Just try to find the objective facts.

Read the rest ->

Anyway, SNL finally got Olbermann on both his style and pomposity. The sketch was a bit long, but if you’ve ever watched Keith lose his mind on tv, you’ll recognize every bit of posturing, spitting, snarling and tortured phrasing usually found on his show. His faux intellectualism is capped only by the ridiculous historical references during the sketch. Yep. That was KO all right.

Here’s what eonline said about the sketch:

Forget Gigli, Ben Affleck, all is forgiven. Brilliantly skeweing partisan windbag Keith Olbermann on Saturday Night Live last night, Affleck did a dead-on impersonation of the sputtering, hyper-rhetorical MSNBC anchor, with the SNL writing staff serving up a devastating satirical critique. Yo, Keith, good night and good luck!

Olbermann, himself, crashed the closed-set rehearsal to watch Ben Affleck tune up his impersonation, as Politico mentioned on Halloween.

Ben Affleck, who’s hosting “Saturday Night Live” this week, was rehearsing a skit this afternoon mocking Keith Olbermann when Olbermann himself got past security to watch, according to a source with knowledge of the incident.

A source described the skit as “savage,” in portraying Olbermann as a deranged person living at home with his mother. Affleck, said a source, became uneasy with Olbermann in attendance at the 3 p.m., closed-set rehearsal.

Ben does a pretty good job capturing the “real Keith.” But he doesn’t quite reach the level of pomposity. He can’t. Keith is in a league of his own on that.
Here you go:

NQ Keith-related articles:

MSNBC moves Keith Olbermann from sober news chair to color commentary. Wait, he was doing “news?”

MSNBC Goes Off the Rails

Olbermann v. Milbank: The Back Story

Keith Olbermann Declares: Off with Dana Milbank’s Head

Keith’s Traintrum
Keith’s demand for a first class train ticket to attend Russert’s memorial.

Keith Olbermann – Useless
Keith makes Katie Couric “worst person in the world” for saying HRC got sexist treatment

Special Comment for Keith Olbermann
A NQ response to Keith’s “she’s a killer” rant against HRC

A Special Commentary

A website devoted to all things Keith: Olbermannwatch.com

What else is going on in the world? Are there football games today? (Laughing because I have had to give up all sports until the election is over, and I don’t know anything about even my own favorite team.)

…………..

Thanks to American Girl in Italy for giving us the SNL code!

My aunt sent me an interesting piece by Michael Barone on Monday, Oct. 13, entitled, “The Coming Liberal Thugocracy.” Huh – so I’m not the only one who thinks so. Like so many other concerns about Obama, this originates from something Obama said. Big surprise. Oh, don’t take my word for it:

“I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors,” Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. “I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.” Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people’s faces. They seem determined to shut people up.

That’s what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign e-mails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg’s WGN radio program in Chicago. Mr. Kurtz had been researching Mr. Obama’s relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago – papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.

Obama fans jammed WGN’s phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest e-mails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Mr. Rosenberg’s example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.

Uh, yep. I think we have seen just recently the extent to which Obama’s followers will go to support him and attempt to obliterate anyone who has not sworn lifelong fealty to him.

Oh, but you know Obama – it doesn’t just stop at trying to “convince” (read: browbeat, intimidate, threaten) fellow voters:

Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Mr. Obama that were “false.” I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-’02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Mr. Obama’s ties to Mr. Ayers.

These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the “fairness doctrine” on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can’t abide having citizens hear contrary views.

Golly gee, I reckon Obama being a big Constitutional SCHOLAR, as his minions love to claim, simply enables him in deciding which parts of the Constitution by which he will actually abide. Free speech? Not so much.

Thankfully, there are a few who still actually care what the Constitution prescribes (remember the day when our elected officials didn’t pick and choose their favorite little bits out of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Yeah, well, me neither, but holy cow, it wasn’t THIS bad, was it??):

To their credit, some liberal old-timers – like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey – voted against the “fairness doctrine,” in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the “fairness doctrine” to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.

But you know, it isn’t just limited to these thugs at rallies wearing unbelievably offensive t-shirts, or Obama plants screaming out nasty things at McCain/Palin rallies, oh no. It is more insidious than that:

Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. “Saturday Night Live” ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC’s Web site and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Mr. Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don’t want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.

If you have tried to see that video, you know Barone is correct about this. Heaven forbid that anyone actually see that our financial crisis isn’t as simplistic as, “it’s all the Republicans fault!!” Then again, that would require a tad of analytical thinking, something in very short supply, it seems.

You know there is more:

Then there’s the Democrats’ “card check” legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions’ strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees’ homes – we know where you live – and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.

Sigh. I’m sorry, remind me which country this is supposed to be? I need to go check my passport or something, because I THOUGHT this was the United States of America, but the way it is acting now, no, the way the DEMOCRATS are acting now, is giving me pause. Barone, too:

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.

Today’s liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that once prided themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.

True that. This is the kicker, though:

“Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Mr. Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech they don’t like and seem utterly oblivious to claims this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead. (Michael Barone is a nationally syndicated columnist.)”

The Obama Thugocracy. I think Mr. Barone has coined the perfect term to describe the impact of Obama on this country – and that is the case BEFORE the election. Holy Toledo, can you just imagine the scope should he be elected (read: steal the election with the help of ACORN and Obama surrogates at your local polling place. You know, like the ones documented in “We Will Not Be Silenced” telling folks if they weren’t voting for Obama, to not even bother coming in. Ah, America – America, right??). If, indeed, Obama takes over the White House, I guess women should get used to being called despicable names, because THAT kind of free speech is A-OKAY with the Obama folk. But to actually talk about who Obama IS in ads or anywhere else? Not so much. Not at all, actually. Unless you’re loking for a big-ass lawsuit. All you need to know is he is The One. Nothing else matters, right? Welcome to the US-Obama/Wright/Ayers of A, folks. It’s a whole new world…

Thanks for the video, C.S.! Another friend — thanks, D. — sent this cartoon the other day:

UPDATE x2: Here is the Obama cartoon via Political Amnesia (since the YouTube version no longer worked). “Bamboozled,” indeed:

And the bloggers at Political Amnesia have great clips too.

I’m on the West Coast so haven’t seen it yet. Went to YouTube hoping somebody would have a video up, and sure enough!

From my East Coast pals, I hear that there are more great sketches. Will add them as they become available. If you spot the videos, let us know. susanunpc at gmail dot com

CNN: “Live from New York, it’s Hillary Clinton?” Halperin at his blog, The Page, for Time magazine: “LIVE FROM NEW YORK … IT’S..!!! Clinton ditches press corps and heads for…. Developing….”.

And here’s Jack on Hill. (How many times has Nicholson been on SNL?)

Did you miss last week’s SNL? Watch it here: “Bamboozlin’ Obama Lampooned Big Time on SNL (Videos) [UPDATED x2]”

ALSO: Catch “Geraldo” tonight on FOX News (reairs at 9pm and 1am PST). He does an extended interview of PBS host Tavis Smiley. As you know, Smiley held a national convention in New Orleans last Saturday. Smiley invited all four presidential candidates. Only Hillary Clinton made the effort to come to New Orleans. She spoke briefly and took questions. Smiley’s remarks on “Geraldo” (Fox News) are must-see TV.

And here’s Princeton professor Cornel West at that national conference, on Barack Obama and who he has become answerable to: