U.S. Contacted Iran Supreme Leader Before Election

In the aftermath of the obviously rigged Iranian elections, it is now revealed that president Obama sent a letter to the real power in Iran prior to the elections. Not president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but rather Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khameneiin. A letter in advance of the sham elections that president Obama had to know was about to occur. Khameneiin has even subsequently acknowledged receipt of the president's letter.

I for one am wondering what was in that letter. Will it ever be known? I seriously doubt it. Supposed national security and such will naturally preclude release of the letter until long after Obama is out of office and probably only after he is long since dead. Provided that this country even exist at that point in time. But it would be interesting to see what this president was passing in back channels to this totalitarian theocracy of Islamic militancy.

Am I alone in that thinking and curiosity? Am I alone in wondering what could have been of such importance, as to use back channel diplomacy to send a private communique to a totalitarian regime? Even Neville Chamberlain was more above board in his cowardly appeasing approach to Hitler. Is this the style of diplomacy that is to be revisited and revived by this president? And what other plans does he have in the making. The first question that should be asked of this president IMO is why?

Why send letters to Islamic tyrants through back channel diplomatic pouches? And why do it in advance of an election that any reasonable person (other than Jimmy Carter) would have to realize is going to be a sham. And have there been other letters sent to other extremist radical leaders? Is this why there has been no response from Obama on the intended missile launch by N Korea? Has a gentleman's agreement already been reached between him and Kim? Letters to Kim Jong? Letters to Hugo Chavez? Where does the trail end and at what level of complicity is our president involved in facilitating socialism, communism, fascism and tyranny globally.

I for one in light of what I am seeing believe these are fair questions. The problem is? We as citizens of this country have few if any individuals in media, willing to speak truth to power. And fewer than that who will ask those probing questions in our behalf. I watch the news reports and read the internet daily and I know the answers that I keep coming up with to some of these questions that I am raising. Especially in light of the president's performance on the Iranian election and the crisis that has followed since the rigged elections. IMO, legitimate and probing questions need to be asked by those claiming to be journalists and claiming to represent the best interests of "we the people." We gave them the constitutional right to ask the questions for us and they are abdicating their responsibility to the king. I

f you ask my opinion? Obama's letter was an acknowledgment of his advanced intent to do absolutely nothing in the face of what he already knew would be the result of these elections. He already knew how the Iranians intended to handle this sham election and that they intended to put down any resistance to the outcome. Obama IMO, was telling them in advance, that regardless of the published outcome in the American media or the reality of fact as would be leaked out eventually via the internet, that he would sit on his hands and do absolutely nothing. What other interpretation can be made in lieu of his actions (lack of action) as it concerns the fledgling revolution currently struggling for life in Iran.

I believe I know what other presidents of my lifetime would have done in this instance save one. Jimmy Carter would have been every bit as weak as Obama if not more, but I don't even think that Bill Clinton would have reacted so poorly and transiently and visibly weak on the international stage to the Iranians and terrorists as this president has. And I know what Reagan or either of the Bush's or the rest would have done I am fairly certain. And yesterday, after over ten days of abject refusal to address the crisis in any substantive fashion, Obama was finally cornered.

During yesterday's press conference from the White House, Major Garret of Fox news finally baited the dragon in his lair and took on the president head on. Garret asked the president pointedly and directly as it concerned his weak leadership concerning the events in Iran, "what took you so long?" (as in what took you so long to show any spine on the issue) What took you so long to denounce these repressive acts by the Iranians?


And the other networks present at the news conference suddenly seemed to find some collective balls after Garret of Fox news had finally cornered Obama on his weakness on the Iranian crisis. Here are some of the other questions that were finally unleashed by a previously cowed media.



And once again the "I am the president of the United States and they are not" was about all that Obama had as a response or retort to justifiably probing questions of his administration and its failure to address the present day realities of threats to this country. Meanwhile, Charles Gibson of ABC news is getting fitted and sized for his Lincoln bedroom slippers and bathrobe tonight, as he anchors a two hour ABC news extravaganza "Live from the White House." (The Barack Obama Socialist health care program submitted to America by the All Barack Channel.)

In any other era or at any other time where reason and common sense prevailed? Americans would be outraged and calling this production precisely what it is. They would be calling it propaganda and acknowledging the reality that we are on the cusp of Obama creating a "Ministry of Propaganda" and doing so with existing media resources. But I guess we should first allow the man to have his say through his corrupted media mouthpieces before we call the reality before us what it is.

An eye opening read, particularly in light of the present manufactured crisis's that are afoot on numerous fronts in America. And once again, the mentors of the socialist dilemma are front and center and their fingerprints are all over the canvas. "

Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Newsmax rounds out the picture:

Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth. It's all in this article. Well written and citing references that are indisputable.

To the "Arch of the moral universe."

While Rome burns (at home) and Tehran is in flames, our illustrious leader is directing us to "bear witness to the arch of the moral universe." And on the issue of N Korea, he is intent on sending signals of unity and assuring the American people that the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed and everything is under control concerning N Korea and Iran for that matter. Watch this space for updates on how all that is going.

Back of his neck feeling dirt and gritty......

Those are the headlines on the Drudge page this morning. And the Daily Presidential Tracking Poll is finally beginning to register with the people. There are now three crisis's looming on the Obama daily security briefing and here in the heartland we were told by VP Joe Biden that the president would only face one real crisis within his first six months in office. (a test he called it back then.) Little did Joe or anyone else realize then, that by the time the messiah had reached his six month in office mark, that he would be staring down three separate crisis with more looming and brewing by the day. (not including the economic crisis). Everyone with access to any media has to be familiar with the churning and growing revolution in Iran. Everyone except our president it would seem.

At a time when we need an American president to step forward and demonstrate leadership and support for those seeking to overthrow the Mullahs in Iran? We find our president cowed and in the corner watching push polls, for fear of being accused by theocratic tyrants in Iran, of interfering in Iranian internal affairs. (I wonder what Obama thinks of Jimmy Carter's meddling in Iranian internal affairs thirty years ago.) Meanwhile? Gordon Brown (Gordy the jellyfish Brown to his admirers)is stealing all of the Messiah's thunder in the press. The president of the United States should be the leader of the free world. But in the past week, we have discovered he is not. That mantle has been firmly grasped by Gordon Brown, the prime minister of Britain.

Mean while, the president is once again ignoring the rambling mad man on the Korean peninsula. As the N Korean lunatic prepares to fire a rocket that he is admittedly aiming at America! And he intends to fire it at Hawaii on America's independence day holiday in less than two weeks! Obama does what? (the sounds of chirping crickets comes to mind). And if that were not enough, we now read where Al Qaida says would use Pakistani nuclear weapons given the opportunity to use them against America. So how long before the subliminal messages that Obama has intentionally been sending to the Muslim world reaches fruition? Does anyone else notice the increased tempo of global events since Obama's Cairo speech two weeks ago? Surely they have.

The Muslims and Islamic fanatics surely have. They saw a weak president and a weakened America and they fully intend to take advantage of what they are seeing. How long before Al Qaida becomes fully emboldened and capable of seizing nuclear weapons in Pakistan? How long before they gain access to the Pakistani nuclear weapons inventory and begin staging them for use against America? And what then of our illustrious leader? How much touchy feely currency will our "first black president" have with these Islamic fanatics then.

No more than he had from the beginning IMO. And that is none. I am sorry, but I have never seen things as dire as it concerns the global tinderbox of world flash points. Certainly never to the extent that it is now. Not even when I was a kid and we were staring down the Russians during the Cuban missile crisis. At least back then, we had a president with some balls and the wherewithal to know how to play high stakes poker with tyrants. But not now. Now we have a socialist interloper play acting as president and when he isn't stumbling through trying to look presidential with the aid of his teleprompter conscience, he is getting the nation's serious business of apologizing for slavery out of the way.

These are dire times that this nation is facing, both economically and internationally. Terrorist Islamic fanatics are emboldened daily by the laissez-faire economic liberal socialism and abject sophomoric policies of our junior novice president. And America cannot afford what is about to happen once again to this country on two fronts. America is literally staring down an economic collapse of biblical proportions and the president of the United States continues to smile and drive the bus toward the cliff at a faster rate. All the while seizing more power and control over all aspects of the capitalist system that built this nation into the greatest on earth.

Meanwhile, the clouds of international Islamic fanaticism are growing and they are planning massive new attacks against this country. And the best that our president can muster to the threats, is to close Guantanamo and to assert that a new day is dawning and that America must first apologize for its mistakes. And our apologist in chief has been busily apologizing for the entire first six months of his presidency. Someone once said: "There are those would watch things happen, there are those who make things happen and there are those who wonder what happened. I firmly believe that our president has a firm grip on two of those realities as we speak. And it is only a matter of time before the latter reality becomes his epitaph.

This is one of those great inspirational stories. A triumph of will and spirit. A soul that searches only for the opportunity to be as one of us....normal.

Overheard at a Senate hearing yesterday: "Could you say 'senator' instead of 'ma'am?' It's just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title. I'd appreciate it." --Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) to Brigadier General Michael Walsh during Senate hearing Tuesday, when he the general repeatedly said, "Yes, ma'am," and "No, ma'am," when answering Boxer's questions at hearing she chaired on New Orleans' levee system.

 

What an arrogant (rhymes with witch). She worked so hard for that title? Give me a break you arrogant leftist ignoramus. You got that right sugar, it is a "thing" of yours ain't it. An unmitigated arrogance and disrespect for the military period thing.

Teen Scarred After Artist Inks 56 Tattoos on Face

OK, I have a couple of tattoos? And they ain't nothing that you can sleep through I can attest to that. You can't even be drunk and oblivious to whats going on. So unless this little girl was slap stoned out of her mind or passed out due to drugs or alcohol, or a combination of both?

There is absolutely no way in hell that she simply fell asleep and woke up to some big surprise that she never bargained for. Secondly, in my experience, tattoo artist work on a fee basis by the hour required for the art requested. That is all known and discussed before the fact and a price arrived at before the first needle touches skin. Talk about coloring outside the lines?

There is absolutely no way anyone in the business would just leave all bounds of common sense and tattoo anyone with anything that they had not already both bargained for and paid for. This ain't the Bounty on leave in in Tahiti and Mr. Christian gone mad. This girl is lying through her teeth.

Should ABC now become the acronym for America's Barack Concessions? This is absolutely unbelievable in my opinion. Never in the history of this nation, has media on any level or in any form, so thoroughly subjugated and prostituted itself so thoroughly and completely as ABC has now agreed to do with the Obama administration.

My God what is this nation coming to? An abject and utter in your face dictatorship? Tell me where I am wrong on this.

ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE

Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda: ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House. The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.

MORE

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS: Dear Mr. Westin: As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.”

This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming. Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers. In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda.

If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime. Respectfully, Ken McKay Republican National Committee Chief of Staff

MORE

ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained 'false premises': "ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers -- of all political persuasions -- even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum.

ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue. "ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience." Developing...

Letterman re-addresses Palin: 'I had no idea [Willow] was there'

I am going to paste his entire commentary and apology, as I believe that it is relevant to what has happened in review of context.

“All right, here – I’ve been thinking about this situation with Governor Palin and her family now for about a week – it was a week ago tonight, and maybe you know about it, maybe you don’t know about it. But there was a joke that I told, and I thought I was telling it about the older daughter being at Yankee Stadium. And it was kind of a coarse joke. There’s no getting around it, but I never thought it was anybody other than the older daughter, and before the show, I checked to make sure in fact that she is of legal age, 18. Yeah. But the joke really, in and of itself, can’t be defended.

The next day, people are outraged. They’re angry at me because they said, ‘How could you make a lousy joke like that about the 14-year-old girl who was at the ball game?’ And I had, honestly, no idea that the 14-year-old girl, I had no idea that anybody was at the ball game except the governor and I was told at the time she was there with Rudy Giuliani … and I really should have made the joke about Rudy …” (audience applauds) “But I didn’t, and now people are getting angry and they’re saying, ‘Well, how can you say something like that about a 14-year-old girl, and does that make you feel good to make those horrible jokes about a kid who’s completely innocent, minding her own business,’ and, turns out, she was at the ball game.

I had no idea she was there. So she’s now at the ball game, and people think that I made the joke about her. And, but still, I’m wondering, ‘Well, what can I do to help people understand that I would never make a joke like this?’ I’ve never made jokes like this as long as we’ve been on the air, 30 long years, and you can’t really be doing jokes like that. And I understand, of course, why people are upset. I would be upset myself. “And then I was watching the Jim Lehrer ‘Newshour’ – this commentator, the columnist Mark Shields, was talking about how I had made this indefensible joke about the 14-year-old girl, and I thought, ‘Oh, boy, now I’m beginning to understand what the problem is here. It’s the perception rather than the intent.’

It doesn’t make any difference what my intent was, it’s the perception. And, as they say about jokes, if you have to explain the joke, it’s not a very good joke. And I’m certainly – ” (audience applause) “– thank you. Well, my responsibility – I take full blame for that. I told a bad joke. I told a joke that was beyond flawed, and my intent is completely meaningless compared to the perception. And since it was a joke I told, I feel that I need to do the right thing here and apologize for having told that joke. It’s not your fault that it was misunderstood, it’s my fault. That it was misunderstood.” (audience applauds) “Thank you.

So I would like to apologize, especially to the two daughters involved, Bristol and Willow, and also to the governor and her family and everybody else who was outraged by the joke. I’m sorry about it and I’ll try to do better in the future. Thank you very much.” (audience applause)

The bottom line....I believe that David Letterman would have never apologized if he and CBS hadn't felt the heat on this for the past week. They have lost audience share and advertisers over this blunder. And the sad reality is? He is probably being honest in his most recent remarks as opposed to that BS apology he was floating the day after his remarks. I suppose that on the night in question, that he just felt that he was being his usual comic smart a s s and had no idea that Sarah Palin's 14 year old daughter Willow was at that ball game with her. Personally, I believe that this apology would have had far more benefit and effect had it been tendered immediately. But it wasn't. Instead, Letterman felt that he would pursue a contrived path and continue to make jokes about the incident and play stupid. Obviously that didn't work. What a difference a week makes. Never fear though, this won't have any lasting impression on Letterman's success. He will continue to have his regular audience of loyal leftist loons who will continue to swoon over his top ten lists and stupid pet tricks. But you can bet that from here on out, that he will vet anything that he plans to say about Sarah Palin and her family.

Letterman re-addresses Palin: 'I had no idea [Willow] was there'

I am going to paste his entire commentary and apology, as I believe that it is relevant to what has happened in review of context.

“All right, here – I’ve been thinking about this situation with Governor Palin and her family now for about a week – it was a week ago tonight, and maybe you know about it, maybe you don’t know about it. But there was a joke that I told, and I thought I was telling it about the older daughter being at Yankee Stadium. And it was kind of a coarse joke. There’s no getting around it, but I never thought it was anybody other than the older daughter, and before the show, I checked to make sure in fact that she is of legal age, 18. Yeah. But the joke really, in and of itself, can’t be defended.

The next day, people are outraged. They’re angry at me because they said, ‘How could you make a lousy joke like that about the 14-year-old girl who was at the ball game?’ And I had, honestly, no idea that the 14-year-old girl, I had no idea that anybody was at the ball game except the governor and I was told at the time she was there with Rudy Giuliani … and I really should have made the joke about Rudy …” (audience applauds) “But I didn’t, and now people are getting angry and they’re saying, ‘Well, how can you say something like that about a 14-year-old girl, and does that make you feel good to make those horrible jokes about a kid who’s completely innocent, minding her own business,’ and, turns out, she was at the ball game.

I had no idea she was there. So she’s now at the ball game, and people think that I made the joke about her. And, but still, I’m wondering, ‘Well, what can I do to help people understand that I would never make a joke like this?’ I’ve never made jokes like this as long as we’ve been on the air, 30 long years, and you can’t really be doing jokes like that. And I understand, of course, why people are upset. I would be upset myself. “And then I was watching the Jim Lehrer ‘Newshour’ – this commentator, the columnist Mark Shields, was talking about how I had made this indefensible joke about the 14-year-old girl, and I thought, ‘Oh, boy, now I’m beginning to understand what the problem is here. It’s the perception rather than the intent.’

It doesn’t make any difference what my intent was, it’s the perception. And, as they say about jokes, if you have to explain the joke, it’s not a very good joke. And I’m certainly – ” (audience applause) “– thank you. Well, my responsibility – I take full blame for that. I told a bad joke. I told a joke that was beyond flawed, and my intent is completely meaningless compared to the perception. And since it was a joke I told, I feel that I need to do the right thing here and apologize for having told that joke. It’s not your fault that it was misunderstood, it’s my fault. That it was misunderstood.” (audience applauds) “Thank you.

So I would like to apologize, especially to the two daughters involved, Bristol and Willow, and also to the governor and her family and everybody else who was outraged by the joke. I’m sorry about it and I’ll try to do better in the future. Thank you very much.” (audience applause)

The bottom line....I believe that David Letterman would have never apologized if he and CBS hadn't felt the heat on this for the past week. They have lost audience share and advertisers over this blunder. And the sad reality is? He is probably being honest in his most recent remarks as opposed to that BS apology he was floating the day after his remarks. I suppose that on the night in question, that he just felt that he was being his usual comic smart a s s and had no idea that Sarah Palin's 14 year old daughter Willow was at that ball game with her. Personally, I believe that this apology would have had far more benefit and effect had it been tendered immediately. But it wasn't. Instead, Letterman felt that he would pursue a contrived path and continue to make jokes about the incident and play stupid. Obviously that didn't work. What a difference a week makes. Never fear though, this won't have any lasting impression on Letterman's success. He will continue to have his regular audience of loyal leftist loons who will continue to swoon over his top ten lists and stupid pet tricks. But you can bet that from here on out, that he will vet anything that he plans to say about Sarah Palin and her family.

Netanyahu accepts limited Palestinian state

The headlines would tend to reflect some significant change or shift in the Israeli position concerning the Palestinians and the supposed two state solution. But a cursory examination of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech today doesn't quite support that reality IMO. Not on any level. Netanyahu and the Israelis are certainly being pressured to accept the supposed two state solution, but Netanyahus words today fall way short of that ever becoming a reality while he is prime minister. The plan outlined by Netanyahu requires a disarmed Palestinian state.

"In any peace agreement, the territory under Palestinian control must be disarmed, with solid security guarantees for Israel," he said.

But not so fast skippy, the Palestinians will never agree to an arrangement like that. No more than Israel would agree to a disarmament. He then followed up with this:

"I call on you, our Palestinian neighbors, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority: Let us begin peace negotiations immediately, without preconditions," he said. "Israel is committed to international agreements and expects all the other parties to fulfill their obligations as well."

Excuse me, but Netanyahu just placed the biggest precondition in existence on the table, then turns around and tells the Palestinians that they must abandon any preconditions that they may be considering. Like I said, this is not a path to peace. this was Netanyahu going through the motions and positioning himself to argue that Israel had made an offer. Never mind that it is an offer that they know the Palestinians will never accept.

US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive

I knew once I saw the banner headline on Drudge yesterday afternoon, that there must be some unique and revealing Obama perspective to be observed concerning how to muddle through this recession and save America. And sure enough? There is was. It was all laid out and explained by this genius from Flint Michigan. All that would be required? Would be for America to bulldoze our blues away.

The government looking at expanding a pioneering scheme in Flint, one of the poorest US cities, which involves razing entire districts and returning the land to nature. Local politicians believe the city must contract by as much as 40 per cent, concentrating the dwindling population and local services into a more viable area. The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County, which includes Flint.

Now, from reading this article, one might assume that this individual from Flint had stumbled across some unique and wonderful method for managing and saving cities. But what it the truth of the matter? The truth as I see it, is that about all that is accomplished, is the temporary employment of a few demolition specialists. And these would probably be paid for with Obama's stimulus package that he has mortgaged America to finance.

Bulldozing properties at public expense accomplishes what? Aside from the expenditure of public money. It certainly doesn't turn these properties into tax or revenue producing properties. But the greenies press on and now that they have a sympathetic ear in the White House? Look to see this program expanded and coming to a community near you soon. What utter idiocy! We are not talking about development or even re-development here. We are talking about spending our already dwindling capital, to effect a warm and fuzzy feeling for the back to nature folks. I am sorry, but it is plans and schemes like these that really get me steamed.

Who do these people think will pay for such flights of experimental fantasy? Sure they know that it has to be paid for, but as usual they look to OPM to get the job done for them For those unaware, OPM is other people's money. The only financial reality that has ever existed in socialist Nirvana. In the absence of OPM? Socialism immediately collapses. And it collapses faster than a bulldozed building ever could.

What is hate speech? Obviously it is what 'they' say it is. Who is they? The loyal socialist left no less.

And this is the same woman that later espoused that her rich experiences as a Latina woman gives her a better ability to judge, than the experiences of any white male. And this is the woman currently being considered as a justice on the US Supreme Court.

Did David Letterman go too far with Willow Palin joke?

Letterman owes women an apology

For the past week, the battle of words by David Letterman has been waged against Sarah Palin and her children. Once again I should say, as there always seems to be room enough for the crass and obnoxious, just as long as it is aimed at the right people.

Or should I say, just as long as it is aimed at the people on the right. David Letterman is a pathetic excuse for a comic and has been for the last two decades IMO. He wasn't that funny when those like Johnny Carson gave him his first big breaks in the business. And not a lot has changed in the past thirty years. The man's humor is more pathetic than funny and his renewed attacks against Sarah Palin just reinforce the reality of the sick minded angst that passes for humor on the left today.

Even yesterday's pathetic mea culpa wasn't really an apology by Letterman. More of a primer on why those like Sarah had somehow missed the grandiose points of humor so immediately graspable by the knowing elite. What a load of bull chips. The only good news of late as it concerns David Letterman, is that he is passing his shelf life and his network will soon be looking for something other than this stank anachronism of angst humor to pay the bills. Sarah Palin doesn't need defense against this lout, she handled him in the fashion that he should have been handled, as the filth minded diddler in insipid humor that he is. As a pervert of mind and politics and one more comfortable in the outhouse of humor than in the mainstream.