—–

If you watch the video above, however, you’ll see that Maher apparently used his three three days to figure out a different tactic that he thinks allows him to blame the right (though not “directly,” he claims) and to keep the meme alive a little longer. It’s the age-old tactic of desperation we call ”moving the goalposts.”

In order to avoid having to explain the extreme vitriol we’ve seen on the left for over a decade now, Maher’s now declared that anyone responsible for violent and over-the top rhetoric who isn’t an elected official, simply isn’t worth talking about.  He dismisses them as “nuts” who are unworthy of discussion and not part of the problem. Of course, in order to move the goalposts of the debate where he needs them, Maher is pretty much labeling MoveOn, MSNBC, the Hollywood left, and his pal Markos Moulitsas as “nuts,” but if it allows more smearing of conservatives, it’s doubtful they’ll mind.

But Maher is still wrong, though, and laughably so. Only Republicans who hold office are culpable? To his credit, Anderson Cooper busts the HBO comedian almost immediately by bringing up no less than President Obama’s declaration of how Democrats need to bring guns to knife fights. Listen to Maher, who’s uncharacteristically caught in the headlights with the question, try and talk his way out of that one:

No, it’s not [a fair comparison]. I mean, maybe it’s unfortunate that he would use that metaphor, but you know, there are such things as guns and knives in the world. So we’re not trying to say you can’t use those words ever in speech. But it’s a lot different than this sort of direct idea that it’s okay to threaten with bodily harm the people you disagree with.

So when a then-Democratic candidate for president uses the metaphor of bringing a gun to a knife fight, it’s, uhm, ”unfortunate.” But a standard run-of-the mill political map or Michele Bachmann joking about an opponent being afraid to leave their house, those are ”threats.”

Since Anderson Cooper didn’t bother, let me ask Maher his thoughts on Barack Obama AS PRESIDENT talking about “punishing our enemies“? Does that qualify? And he wasn’t joking, nor was he talking about Muslim extremists.

What about Obama AS PRESIDENT talking about the ass he’s looking to kick over the Gulf Oil Spill?

What about Candidate Obama urging his supporters to “argue” with your neighbors and “get in their face”?

Anything below sound worse than Bachmann’s joke or Palin’s map:

Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

Can you imagine if Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh were on record talking like that as frequently as our own president?  And Beck can’t win for losing.  He holds a bipartisan rally that was about as peaceful and generous in spirit and unifying as you’ll ever see, and Maher mocked him relentlessly over it. 

But back to the main point. Unless Maher wants to, yet again, move the goalposts for this debate and disqualify First Black Presidents, or something, I think the examples above from this particular elected official are more than  enough for now. Of course, should Maher go ahead and disqualify Obama, I’ll be more than happy to Google away further. But this is a dumb argument.

Rhetoric, metaphors, political debates, and even divisive U.S. presidents don’t kill people, and those saying different, those using this unspeakable crime for partisan gain, are the only ones crossing the decency line.

As someone who’s not a regular watcher of Stephen Colbert I have to say this clip surprised me. I thought he was supposed to be impersonating Bill O’Reilly. All I saw was Jon Stewart in a better suit and nerd-glasses.

And anyone who disagrees is racially insensitive. LMAO!

The best piece of comedy in this tired clip is by far is the few seconds of Rush Limbaugh who throws the reparations anti-thought right back in the face of the rainbow coalition of left-wing hustlers promoting it. Limbaugh’s spot-on analysis that it was the American Indian who introduced the European to the poison of tobacco, a habit that we’re told is responsible for the deaths of  untold millions, is actual satire. Instead of mocking his betters, Colbert should have taken notes during the Limbaugh segment about how bona fide satire can make you think — think things like, “Yeah, where do I sign up for a piece of that casino?”

Well, no thinking necessary in the Stewart/Colbert club. They’re on the government’s side, they back The Man every time, and only a racist could disagree.

More here.

Remember when Rosie O’Donnell was called the Queen of Nice and Janeane Garofalo was actually a fairly compelling movie actress? It’s as though they had a special operation to have their class removed … if they ever had any.  

And for those of you who think Hollywood is money and not ideologically driven, do explain in the comments why after she was let go from “The View” for all that embarrassing “truther” talk, Rosie — Fire Won’t Melt Steel — O’Donnell was given a primetime variety show on NBC in 2008 and a HBO special just this year.

Rosie’s so toxic to the American public “The View” won’t have her but NBC and HBO will?

On what planet is that a business decision?

INEVITABLY, ANOTHER SOLDIER SNAPS

Distraught pacifist conscientious objector tormented by horrors of war, as far as you know

Newsroom experts: stress, violence, stupidity, tragedy a way of life for GIs

Former M*A*S*H stars say it’s finally time to disarm the military

Hollywood insiders: Sean Penn early favorite for lead in planned Oliver Stone biopic

Nidal Hassan – not a fan of taxes Fort Hood: Another Black Eye For Teabagger Movement Connecting the dots: 2006-8 Tax returns show anti-government extremist carefully itemized deductions Like many Town Hall protesters, Hassan motivated by rage, pattern baldness Phone records: suspect tried to join Hair Club for Men Tearful Pelosi pushes Congress for new Tea Party regulations: “our lives are at stake”

Closet Dittohead? Investigation: Ft. Hood Killer Had Access to Fox, Talk Radio, Right-Wing Blogs Receipts show killer’s apartment had cable ‘03 Nissan registered to Hassan had AM radio Napolitano: “I told you so” Sources: Despite 17 citations as Countdown’s ‘Worst Person In The World,’ FBI failed to detain Limbaugh Defiant Palin rejects calls to apologize

Hassan: NRA poster boy GUN GOES ON RAMPAGE IN TEXAS Experts say shootings could have easily been prevented if guns did not exist; others argue bullets must share blame Gun facts: scary, loud, shoot people

Reverend Nidal Hassan say Gimme that Old Time Religion Fundamentalist Religion Seen As Motive in Ft. Hood Massacre Devout churchgoer evangelized conservative views Shooter’s former Virginia home was mere hours from Jerry Falwell compound What did Tilton, Swaggert, Osteen know?

Billy Ray Hassan – average American Southerner Another Typical Day in Dixieland U.S.A. In the land of cotton, some hear echoes of Civil War in latest violent redneck rampage American-born killer was son of the Jim Crow South NASCAR may have been involved Britons warned: limit U.S. travel to safe areas such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles

Hassan: owned GameStop member card Did Violent Video Games, Rap Lyrics Drive Killing Spree? Video: Grand Theft Auto, Super Mario Cart remain on shelf at Fort Hood PX Lil’ Wayne goes One-on-One with Wolf Blitzer Larry King Live Special tragedy coverage with panelists Nancy Grace, David Hasselhoff, Joan Collins

Tailgater of Terror Caught in the Middle of an NFC East Rivalry Sports psychologists: strain of being a Redskins fan in Cowboy country may have led to breakdown for former DC resident Jurgenson, Staubach team up for NFL sportsmanship pitch Skins fans fear backlash Special “Outside the Lines” interview with NFL Commissioner Goodell: “this is precisely why we banned Limbaugh”

Nidal “Ozriel” Hassan: tormented by popular kids ‘Ozriel’: Portrait of a Bullies’ Target Another Columbine? Sensitive, artistic outsider said ostracized by Army jocks, “in crowd” Found solace in poetry, music, MySpace Weekend “EmoAid” benefit concert to raise awareness about at-risk youth, reunite CSN&Y

Junk food junkie? Twinkies Claim Another 13 Victims Hostess corporate spokesman defends controversial creme-filled sponge cake, but mounting scientific evidence links mass murder to unregulated transfats Witness: Hassan yelled “I want a candy bar” during spree Kraft, Kelloggs, Hersheys bracing for lawsuits Are you raising a potential Cereal Killer? Nutritionists show you how to cut your kids’ sugar intake to prevent another bloodbath

No Country For Old Men From Fort Hood to Waco to Dealey Plaza to Bush Compound, death is a way of life in the Lone Star State Statistic: Texas still lags in access to public broadcasting Download Morning Edition’s exclusive in-depth podcast, complete with mournful banjo dirge interlude

Lessons of Ft. Hood: Military Bases Need More Mental Health Professionals

After enduring another self immolating Bill Maher monologue on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Alec Baldwin was asked if Rush Limbaugh is a racist. To which Alec fell into that trap so many of his peers have in recent days:

“I think you need to always distinguish the rank and file of the Republican Party and conservatives and voters from their media representation and media stars and I believe that the people who are in the media and prominent in the media in the conservative community, speaking on behalf of the Republican Party, have a very clear racist stripe through their commentary, consistently. Not just Limbaugh but all of those people. But I don’t think that their rank and file Republicans are like that.”

Well, at least he didn’t accuse all Republicans. I guess he wanted them to keep some of them watching his show.

If there’s a sure fire way to look old and busted in today’s media world it’s to make the sweeping generalization that people who disagree with your politics are racist. It’s such a 20th Century argument. Calling someone a racist with no proof is hack. It’s like calling someone evil just because they don’t agree with you. Oh, wait–the race card hustlers do that too! They look for any evidence they can, no matter how vague or slight, to blow up into an incident. And if they can’t find one, well, they just make it up.

None of the quotes attributed to Limbaugh were proven and in fact, they were retracted by the people who made the accusation.

But Baldwin, ever late to the game, had to throw it out there again. Way to be current, Alec! Got any Spiro Agnew accusations while you’re at it?

But let’s not pick on poor Alec, he’s not alone in his dated and lame arguments, We can add such youthful and hip (replacement candidates) as Jimmy Carter, Charlie Rangel, Maureen Dowd, Charlie Gibson, Bill Maher, Janeane Garofalo and Maxine Waters to the race card tournament. Just to name a few.

They want us to believe that anyone who disagrees with President Obama is a racist because he’s black. Hmm…that’s odd. Only two years ago the lefties didn’t think he was. That’s the power of magical thinking. You can change people’s color or invent quotes from thin air just by wishing them to be.

But it still makes you look like fools for doing it.

Fortunately, the president wisely came out and said that the critics of his policies are mostly not attacking him because of his race. He’s correct.

But there is a racist component here. And it’s actually coming from race card holders. They’re attacking Obama’s critics because of their race. They’re assuming that they’re all white. This is wrong for two reasons.

1. Not all of them are white, so in their minds, any Black, Asian, Latinos in the mix must be “race traitors,” which is a racist term.

2. It’s racist to assume white people’s motivations are always racist when it comes to people of color. A common claim from race card hustlers.

If white people were so racist they never would have abolished slavery, in fact, it’s an insult to the many who fought and died to end slavery. Oh, and by the way, the Republican party was founded on an abolition platform. President Abe Lincoln was a Republican.

If whites were so racist, they wouldn’t have voted for civil rights. Oh, and by the way, civil rights laws wouldn’t have passed without the help of Republicans. Many Democrats voted against the bills.

Oh, and by the way, it was progressive President Woodrow Wilson who segregated our military in the early 20th Century. He was a Democrat. Don’t you hate it when that happens? So was President Johnson who enslaved a several generations to the welfare state, which among other things devastated the black family. Progressives, and their social engineering. It has fail written all over it.

Calling Republicans racist when their current leader is black is as lame as calling Limbaugh a racist based on fabricated quotes that were already retracted.

Racism used to be such a radioactive thing. But because the left has so overplayed their hand, and used the race card to the point of hilarity, they’ve almost rendered it inert. People used to be cowed by the racism charge. Now they’re fighting back. Soon they will laugh at it. They risk making it cool to be called racist, when it’s lame-os that like to throw the term around.

When the left loses one of its most potent weapons, it becomes a laughing stock. It becomes the target of backlash.

They are the establishment now. They can’t blame Republicans now. The Democrats are in charge. As such, they can no longer hide behind the skirts of the oppressed. They are the oppressors.

Let’s face it, white guilt is based on a lie. Yes, you heard that right.

No other Western nation would have voted for a black man before America did. America is the least racist nation on earth. Why else do people of every color want to flock here?

Those who keep bringing up slavery and other things from generations past conveniently ignore the fact that those conditions were everywhere. Not just America. In many instances, it was much worse than here. In fact, slavery still exists in many other nations. At least America worked hard to change and improve ourselves. We’re ahead of the world in that regard.

The next time some politician or celebrity throws out the race card, they’ve revealed their irrelevance. They are old and busted.

The new hotness is to make them regret ever using it.

Even in these times when the once unthinkable is becoming increasingly unremarkable, the current controversy over whether Rush Limbaugh is potentially worthy to be an NFL owner crosses over from the simply outrageous to the utterly infuriating. I strongly believe that it also represents a seminal moment in our cultural history as well as the sad state of free speech in this country.

There are so many levels of insanity with this story that it is difficult to know where to begin.

First, the facts: Limbaugh is a part of a group that wants to buy the lowly St. Louis Rams so that the team will stay in Rush’s native Missouri. The group has not even made an official bid as of yet, is one of several potential buyers, and Rush would not even be the primary owner of the team.

Despite all of this, just the mere mention of his name has caused a literal hysteria in the public dialogue. Nearly everyone even remotely associated with the NFL (as well as many who have no direct connection at all) have expressed their, often completely ignorant, opinions on whether Rush is worthy to join the highly exclusive club of NFL owners.

The overwhelming view allowed to be expressed in the mainstream media has been irrationally negative towards Rush’s potential bid. The primary “justification” for these views has been the notion that Rush is somehow a racist and that because the league has a high percentage of black players that it would be wrong to have him be a part owner of a team.

What is the basis of this incendiary claim? Well, we all know (because the media tells us so) that strong conservatives are really racists so anything they say that sounds remotely racist must be presumed to be so. Therefore, because Rush resigned in 2003 from a position at ESPN because a legitimate observation about the media coverage of a black quarterback was deemed by Rush haters to somehow be “racist,” this is all the critics need to close the loop on their laughably inane circular argument.

Just after Limbaugh’s resignation, I wrote in my book “The Death of Free Speech” that Rush had made a big mistake because he was allowing the perception to be created that he was essentially, though unintentionally, admitting (by resigning without a fight) that he was indeed a “racist” and that this narrative would come back to haunt both him and the movement. Unfortunately, it appears that I was right.

But even more infuriating than the tactic of Rush’s opponents to take his past statements out of context (or, in some cases, just flat out make them up), is the audacity of those who have chosen to be most vocal about this issue.

It should go without saying that of the 300 million people in this country that Al Sharpton should be at the very back of the line when it comes to being the moral arbiter of who is or is not worthy of owning anything. The man was found guilty in a civil court for having blatantly lied when accusing an innocent man in the infamous Tawana Brawley case. That he is given any platform to speak on this or any other matter of social importance is a damning indictment of our entire society. And yet, here he is leading the charge in the cause to keep Limbaugh from simply buying property.

If that wasn’t enough, the first owner to speak out against the theoretical Limbaugh bid was Jim Irsay of the Indianapolis Colts. Irsay claims, “Sometimes when there are comments made that are inappropriate, incendiary, insensitive… It’s bigger than football. As a nation we have to watch the words that we say.”

Forgetting for a moment that Irsay clearly has no appreciation for free speech, any such comment on who would make a proper NFL owner coming from him fails to even pass the laugh test.

Ask the people of Baltimore about Irsay who helped his alcoholic and apparently insane father (who was known to drop profanities during live televised press conferences) take the Colts to Indianapolis in moving vans under the cover of darkness. I doubt anyone there will tell you Irsay is the model NFL owner. And by the way, under these bizarre, watered down, rules for racism, why was it not “racist” for the Colts to move from Baltimore to Indianapolis where the percentage of blacks in the neighborhood was exponentially smaller? (It should also be noted that there are quite a few black people in St. Louis who would like to keep their NFL team.)

Then there is the angle of who else is already an NFL owner. Al Davis is a clearly senile crazy man who has sued the league and moved his Raiders numerous times while turning them into an utter laughing stock on the field. But Davis is just the tip of the iceberg.

The transparent hypocrisy here could not have been more starkly displayed than on the pages of Wednesday’s USA Today. On the front page of their sports section the top headline was “Irsay, Goodell speak out against Limbaugh.” Directly under that article was a cover story on how the Miami Dolphins have incorporated numerous celebrities into their ownership team. Included among them are Marc Anthony, Gloria Estefan and the Williams’ sisters.

That’s right. Serena Williams, who recently threatened bodily harm to a lines woman on national television, is a part owner of the Dolphins. I must have missed the hand wringing from anyone associated with the NFL or the media about whether she was fit to be an NFL owner. Oh wait, I forgot. She is a black woman and is therefore beyond such scrutiny. After all, to even ask such questions would obviously be racist and, let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that the flock of celebrities picked to be Miami owners all happen to be members of strategically important minority groups.

Unfortunately, now that the momentum has started and it is more than safe (in fact, expected) for everyone involved to condemn Rush, the floodgates appear to be open. It frustrates the heck out of me that the Commissioner of the NFL has no fear at all of offending conservatives by bashing Rush. The reason? Largely because they tend to have day jobs and think for themselves, conservatives are really lousy at boycotts/protests. If a similar situation happened to say, Al Franken, the left would immediately be in attack mode and the apology would be immediate.

Quite simply, what is happening to Rush is beyond outrageous and frankly dangerous to the property and free speech rights of all Americans. This is so obvious that even Keith Olbermann (whose own appearance on Sunday night NFL telecasts should be seriously questioned) has somewhat supported Rush’s position here.

And yet my sense is that the general reaction from many conservatives is to not take this topic very seriously. Some seem to think the issue is frivolous or that Rush is doing this for publicity.

Folks, this is a huge deal. If Rush Limbaugh is not even allowed to be considered to be a minority owner of a property where his primary intent to help the community where he grew up, an incredibly dangerous precedent will have been set and the narrative that conservatism is synonymous with racist will be further cemented in the public consciousness.

Rush Limbaugh needs to fight this one right to the very end of the game, and we need to back him with everything we have.

If not, we will get what we deserve.

In its obvious zeal to create a one-party state, the Democrat-Media Complex (the natural coalition of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media) last week seized upon the horrific murder of a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington as an opportunity to ascribe blame to the American conservative movement and to further marginalize the Republican Party.

In record time, the media’s blind partisans and their feral friends in the left-wing blogosphere used the alleged “lone wolf” act of James W. von Brunn – an 88-year old self-avowed racist and anti-Semite – to try to affirm the controversial Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report that posited ” right-wing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president” and are a becoming a growing domestic terror threat.

The networks, CNN, MSNBC and the New York Times – the usual obnoxious suspects – toed this specious ideological slander, even though it smacks of the kind of profiling that the left rejects. Even Shepard Smith of Fox News jumped to the same conclusion by offering a surge of nasty notes in his in-box as proof. (You should check my e-mail, Shep!) If a newsreader on Fox News thinks it’s true, triumphal lefties crowed, then it must be!

While Mr. von Brunn is afforded the descriptor of “alleged” perpetrator before a court of law convicts him, the conservative movement is granted no such due process. In a country where the individual is “innocent until proven guilty,” conservatives have been forced to actively disassociate themselves from an ideological lineage to white supremacists, anti-Semites and other racist miscreants. And these days there’s less and less media space for them to fight this unfair accusation.

Rush Limbaugh, the bete noire of the Democrat-Media Complex, came under fire last week for disclaiming von Brunn from the mainstream political right. Mr. Limbaugh, no stranger to such high-level orchestrated slanders, righteously challenged President Clinton and his media abettors for connecting nonexistent dots between right-leaning AM talk radio and Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1994.

Fifteen years later, the glaring media double standard of putting only “right-wing” groups on public “guilt by association” trial is still on display for all who care to see.

You can read the column in full here.

Admiral Ackbar is one of my favorite characters in the Star Wars franchise.  He still looks more real than any CGI character today despite being brought to life by 1982 technology.  He also has the immortal line, “It’s a Trap,” when the rebels discover that the Death Star is “fully armed and operational.”

In case you missed it, here’s Ackbar reacting to other “traps.”

Conservatives have walked into a trap of late, or as Michael Steele might say, “have stepped in it.” Why should the liberals, with their rogues gallery of freak shows and incompetents, even sweat it when the Conservatives are too busy fighting with each other?  How much time on blogs, cable news, and Sunday talk-shows is dedicated to Conservatives arguing about the direction of the “party” or challenging each other on the authenticity of their Conservative credentials?

There are really only two core beliefs that you need to be considered a Conservative in my book.  One, as I’ve stated before, is the conviction that personal liberty is paramount.  Two, you don’t look to your enemies for validation.  Unfortunately, a few “Conservatives” fail the test.  These types somehow believe that in-the-tank media reporters and their liberal opponents must validate their beliefs in order for those beliefs to become viable and understandable.  Wrong.  Wrong.  Wrong.  It’s a trap!  You follow that line of logic and the next thing you know, you’re staring at your own robotic hand over a crippled Darth Vader with the Emperor cackling in the background.

I threw up in my own mouth several times watching Conservatives squirm as reporter after reporter asked them to disavow Rush Limbaugh over his completely legitimate, completely American, and completely logical “I hope he fails” comment.  How many liberals were asked to disavow Perez Hilton for calling a woman a “c*#*t” onYouTube?  Crickets.  Crickets.  Crickets.  Nada.

Here’s how it should go down:  The Conservative should say “Well, (Anderson Cooper, Larry King, David Shuster, Chris Matthews), Rush Limbaugh can say whatever he wants.  This is America.  What I think of the comment is irrelevant.  See, when you have a political movement based on personal liberty and independent thought, people speak their mind.  Unlike our opponents, we don’t all take our marching orders from the same source.  We are not the Borg.  Our solutions and ideology are a bit more advanced, intelligent, and intricate than our opponents.  I don’t expect you to understand, because I don’t think you’re that smart or intellectually capable.”  Smack!   Booyah!  The media would stumble back like the Iron Sheik after an Atomic Leg Drop from Hulk Hogan.

You can’t build a house with just a hammer.  You can’t fight a war without air support.  You can’t make a movie without lights and a camera.  There are a million analogies I can think of to say the same thing: you need a lot of tools to get the job done.

There are various categories of public Conservatives.  They all serve a different function.  No one is right.  No one is wrong.  As long as we all focus our arguments within the context of personal liberty and anti-statist ideology, we will pick up Independents and bring some sanity back to our country.

We need axe men like Cheney and Limbaugh.  We need Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck.  We need Dennis Miller and Greg Gutfeld.  Nobody should be packing his or her bags.  Disagreements between each other are great, but they should be reserved for internal debate and shouldn’t be moderated by a hostile talk show host to the glee of David Axelrod.

Imagine this match-up in large debate hall.  In the audience sits every Independent voter in the country.  On the one side heavyweights like Limbaugh, Cheney, Coulter, Larry Elder, Hannity, O’Reilly, Beck, Malkin, Dennis Miller, Penn Jillette, John Stossel, Greg Gutfeld, Andy Levy, Laura Ingram, Mark Levin, Thomas Sowell, Prager, Lynne Cheney, Tammy Bruce, Christopher Hitchens, Mark Steyn, John Ziegler, and Andrew Breitbart.  On the other side, in slumps Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Janeane Garofalo, Sean Penn, David Shuster, Chris Matthews, Maureen Dowd, Arianna Huffington, Larry King, Joy Behar, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, Anderson Cooper, Perez Hilton, Al Sharpton, Barney Frank, Barbara Streisand, and Al Gore.

Look at that fight card.  What are we worried about again?

Hollywood slings around the phrase “speaking truth to power” as if it were cocaine at a Sean Penn movie premiere party.  And they particularly love slinging it around at the time of the White House Correspondents Dinner.

A couple years ago, Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central was the beneficiary of the “speaking truth to power” Hollywood press machine.  He headlined the 2006 White House Correspondents Dinner, and laid ‘em in the aisles with brilliant lines like, “Over the last five years, you people were so good-over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn’t want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. … And then you write, Oh, they’re just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. First of all, that is a terrible metaphor. This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring. If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!” 

Yes, when you’re a leftist, spouting leftist Hallmark cards cribbed from Democratic Underground counts as humor.

But at least Colbert said all this to Bush’s face.  It took a peculiar kind of guts, but it took guts.  It wasn’t truly “speaking truth to power” – after all, Bush wasn’t going to send Colbert to the gulag or force him into re-education camp.  But by the watered-down definition of the media, it counted.

Wanda Sykes, by contrast, is the most gutless and feckless performer ever to grace the White House Correspondents Dinner.

Sykes, for those who haven’t seen her stellar work in gems like CondomNation, Brother Bear 2, and Over the Hedge, is a militant lesbian with a grating voice and an obnoxious strut.  She recently proclaimed during the California Prop. 8 debate that “Everybody that knows me personally, they know I’m gay … Now, I gotta get in their face.  I’m proud to be a woman.  I’m proud to be a black woman, and I’m proud to be gay.”

Well, apparently she’s not so proud to be gay.  Because when given the opportunity to make jokes about the nation’s leading proponent of opposite-sex marriage, President Barack Obama, she said precisely nothing.  Instead, she chose to gently stroke his ego with jokes about his pecs, his dog, and his basketball skills.

Meanwhile, she saved her real ire for non-federal or non-active politicians and non-governmental figures like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.  To Obama’s hysterical laughter, she said that she hoped Limbaugh would suffer kidney failure and accused him of being the 20th hijacker.  She said she wanted Sean Hannity waterboarded by Keith Olbermann.  She attacked Dick Cheney, stating that if her child had a choice between getting in a car with Dick Cheney and a car with a stranger, she would tell her child to choose the stranger.

Courageous, to be sure.

But she saved her most despicable gibe for Sarah Palin, who was not attending.  Apparently, Sykes isn’t only a shrinking violet when it comes to her lesbianism – she’s a shrinking violet when it comes to her sex.  Noting Sarah’s absence at the dinner (her husband, Todd, attended), Sykes said that Palin had pulled out at the last minute.  “Somebody should tell her that’s not really how you practice abstinence,” she chided.

This is sexism of the highest order.  Sarah Palin didn’t get knocked up before her marriage – her daughter did.  Why didn’t Sykes blame Todd, who was sitting right there?  Or why didn’t she blame Levi, who knocked up Bristol?  Or why didn’t she blame Bristol?  By focusing on Sarah, she perpetuated the stereotype that the woman is utterly and totally responsible for each and every individual act of the child – a stereotype Sykes would surely reject were she not so blindly hateful of Palin.

The bottom line: both feminism and homosexuality matter less to Sykes than kissing Barack Obama’s butt.  She didn’t utter a single joke about Obama’s out of control spending.  Not one joke about his teleprompter. Not one joke about his visit with Chavez, his messages to Iran, his Cinco De Mayo screwup, his mastery of the Austrian language, his “world without nuclear weapons,” his spreading the wealth around, his ownership of the car companies, his tax-cheat employees.

And most of all, not a single joke about Dan Choi, the first gay Arabic linguist fired by Barack Obama under the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.  Not a single joke about Obama’s interracially married parents and his refusal to stump for homosexual marriage.  Sykes pledged to “get in their face” about gay marriage, but refused to get in the face of the most powerful man on earth about it.  Instead, she chose to go after Rush Limbaugh and oxycontin – a choice for which she will surely be praised by the leftist media.

In certain times, such posturing buffoonery would have been ripped as “Uncle Tomming.”  Imagine Richard Pryor speaking at a White House Correspondents Dinner for JFK and failing to mention the civil rights movement, instead choosing to focus on Jackie Kennedy’s hairdo and JFK’s winning smile.

Nobody has the obligation to “speak truth to power” when given the opportunity.  Sometimes it’s okay just to be funny.  But if one is given the opportunity to speak truth to power, sees him/herself as a champion of “speaking truth to power,” and instead chooses to spend the time excoriating the power’s opposition, that would be sycophantic stupidity of the worst kind.

That would be Wanda Sykes.