Olive Garden disputes report that ads were pulled from Letterman

Christian Science Monitor ^ | 06.18.09 | Jimmy Orr

[curth]

A spokesman for the Olive Garden disputed a report from Politicothat the restaurant chain pulled its advertising from the David Letterman show due to jokes about Sarah Palin’s daughter.

“Information reported today by Andy Barr of Politico regarding Olive Garden’s advertising on the Late Show with David Letterman was erroneous. No authorized spokesperson for the company confirmed the information in his report,” said Olive Garden spokesman Rich Jeffers in an email to The Vote.

“The Olive Garden media schedule is planned months in advance. The schedule for the Late Show with David Letterman was completed earlier this month. We take all guest concerns seriously. And, as always, we will factor those concerns in as we plan our advertising schedule in the future,” he continued.

[humblegunner]

Can I ask why you cited my comments of her and not Reagan or Jefferson, which I believe on a par with what I state about the lady.

Certainly.

They (Reagan & Jefferson) are proven factors, Palin is not.
I like Palin. I like Limbaugh. But placing so much credence
in one untested vessel I think is unwise. I have an inherent
aversion to idol-worship. I want to see proven ability and popular
opinion I feel is a negative aspect. Kids love Yu-gi-Oh but that does
make him an awesome leader. It detracts from him. If we all love Yu-gi-Oh
then that makes him all the more suspect in my opinion.

Limbaugh and Palin are no different from Yu-gi-Oh.

When so many folks fall into line behind Palin or Limbaugh or Yu-gi-Oh they become suspect.

At least you're honest. After one or two though? I thought you Texans better able to handle your alcohol.

We find it petty to count them.

[humblegunner]

You win.

Damn right.

[jla]

I'll reply with this hypothetical - if Reagan was a governor and had been chosen as the veep on the recent GOP ticket and he now was back at his state's capital though also going out and giving speeches, granting interviews, etc., to elaborate on his vision, policy goals and beliefs and I stated the exact things about him that I now do of Palin would your opinion of it being idol worshiping alter any? Would you claim that Gov Reagan had no track record and is not a proven factor? You're bright, (I mean that) so I know you get the point I am making.

I have no clue as to what or whom Yu-gi-Oh is and the image is lost on me.

[highimpact]

If you argue with a fool for too long, it’s hard to tell who the fool is. Move on jla. Your time is better spent elsewhere. Everybody knows who the fool is. If you keep it up, humblegunner will make a run at the prize for the #2 fool. Stop now, and everybody knows who the #1 fool is. He’s going to reply to this. Let it go. He thinks he won. He won’t reply more than three times to this post. Don’t let him bait you.

Stay smart. Highimpact.

[jla]

highimpact, You are acting conspicuously as a liberal would. I do not need, nor asked for, a mediator. I am capable of choosing who, or who not, I hold a discussion with.
And not to worry, I won't report your personal attacks which are in flagrant violation of FR's posting rules.

Sorry for that rude interruption, H.G. The person, highimpact, appears to be, well...insane.

[humblegunner]

I have no clue as to what or whom Yu-gi-Oh is and the image is lost on me.

(Sigh.) Got kids? Anyway...

I stated the exact things about him (Reagan) that I now do of Palin would your opinion of it being idol worshiping alter any?

NO! Right as right may be, folks fawning over and praising the
merits of ANYONE as if they were some holy prophet sent down from
the Almighty is an IMMEDIATE negative. Jesus J. Christ could drop
Himself down here and should all the folks (online here, I mean)
line up and worship Him as the Savior I would question it.

I want to see WORKS and RESULTS.

Granted, in these times I understand the limitations of what can
be accomplished by individuals. But see.. Sarah Palin, while an
awesome person, capable of inspiring and motivating whole
masses of people, is not necessarily the be-all end-all leader.

Yeah, we all like her.

Heck, I think she's HOT.

But that does not make her capable of pulling America out of this
dumpster-dive that we seem to be in.

She can motivate, but that does not mean that she can fix the
problem which even I can not define wholly.

[Prole]

Cool.

Didn't know that until you mentioned it!

Thank you!

[humblegunner]

He won’t reply more than three times to this post

You count posts?

Stop now, and everybody knows who the #1 fool is.

Yes, stop now. For the sake of the children.

He’s going to reply to this. Let it go. He thinks he won.

HOORAY for me, I won!

[jla]

...fawning over and praising the merits of ANYONE as if they were some holy prophet sent down from the Almighty is an IMMEDIATE negative.

This is where you fail. How, please tell me, can you possibly cull an opinion like this from my statements on Palin's evident and manifested ability to govern, lead, and motivate?

Sarah Palin, while an awesome person, capable of inspiring and motivating whole masses of people, is not necessarily the be-all end-all leader.

LOL - Damn, man! Does the lady have to squeeze water out of a rock to win you over!
She will be the nominee, if she desires to run. And you, I and all of sane America will truly savor the day she is sworn in as our next POTUS.

[highimpact]

You want to ruin somebody because they said some words?

Words mean things. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” means something. “Give me liberty, or give me death,” means something. Get it through your head. Words are more powerful than any other instrument wielded by man. “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.” Ring a bell?

Word’s can make a man, and they can also destroy him. I am not trying to destroy anybody. Letterman has brought this upon himself.

When a 62-year-old [hebephile or ephebephile] announces to the entire country that he believes child rape is funny, especially when it happens to a conservative’s child, then he should have his broadcasting privileges revoked! If I had a talk show, and I joked about raping President Obama’s daughters, I would expect to have my broadcasting privileges revoked, too. I would deserve it. It would be my fault, just as this is Letterman’s fault. His joke about Willow wasn’t “in poor taste,” it was an attack. Those are “fighting words.”

If you were standing next to a 62 year old man on the street as a 14 year old girl walked by, and he asked her if she had sex with A-Rod in Yankee Stadium in front of 50,000 people, would you consider his comments to be “some words?” Are my words sinking in? Never mind. They’re just “some words.”

According to you, if the same man makes the same comment in front of a million people on live TV, it’s okay. That’s right....”some words.” Nobody should be “ruined” for “some words.” Apparently you haven’t paid attention to words. Words like:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

“Some words.” The men who wrote and ratified those words risked their lives. But what impact can “some words” have on your life?

Words mean things. Fighting words are not protected speech in the Constitution. Letterman’s comments were “fighting words.”

Read the Constitution. Or not. After all, it’s just “some words.”

jla and humblegunner think it's okay for a 62-year-old man to celebrate the rape of a 14-year-old girl, and the best they can do is to pick apart the definition of a single word.

That's equivalent to arguing a death sentence on the merits of "their's" versus "theres."

Nice linguistics, boys. Those are some handy debate skills. I'm sure you're quite impressive in-person, especially when the best you can come up with is a type-written statement that doesn't contradict a single point of logic central to the debate. Let me know when you plan to present your case in front of the Supreme Court. That would be some good comedy, if you were even remotely qualified to make a case.

"Some words."

[humblegunner]

You're a nut.

Go to sleep.

[jla]

jla and humblegunner think it's okay for a 62-year-old man to celebrate the rape of a 14-year-old girl

Speaking for myself, no I do not. I don't believe many things to be "okay" yet I differentiate between "okay" and "illegal".
People are maligned, much worse than Letterman's joke to Palin, every day. How is it that you and your cohorts aren't standing outside their homes or workplaces and protesting?

And, please, you people really need to cease with the "read the Constitution" retort. Stating you've read it doesn't mean you comprehend it. (Myself I have read it too many times to count along with what those who inspired and wrote it had to say on the matter).
So, highimpact, what do you know of the Jefferson - Callender episode(s)? And, more importantly, what did Jefferson do about it? You have five minutes to reply or else you will forever be believed to have 'Googled' to come up with an intelligent reply, and besides, I have to go to bed!

[humblegunner]

This is where you fail. How, please tell me, can you possibly cull an opinion like this from my statements on Palin's evident and manifested ability to govern, lead, and motivate?

Negative! It is EXACTLY the fact that you are so positive of her
marvelous abilities that makes her suspect. There are NO perfect solutions.

The 2012 elections are a long way off. It would be nice if we could all
get behind someone this early. I don't see it happening. Yet.

I think she would make an awesome President, but I have to see that in light
of an opposition to Obama.. where I would see a sick pig as an improvement.

Seeing one person as the be-all end-all at this point I feel is a narrow view,
restrictive of other options.

[highimpact]

Your introductory post was nonsense, you had no argument of any value to counter my reply, and you had no closing argument. I was hoping for a real debate with you. A lively debate is food for the soul. I’m disappointed.

Get some rest, and read The Constitution. When you’re ready to talk about the difference between “some words” and “fighting words,” please let me know. I look forward to some literary combat.

I won’t hold my breath.

Highimpact

[highimpact]

Cohorts? You’re an Obama troll. Go away.

[humblegunner]

I was hoping for a real debate with you. A lively debate is food for the soul. I’m disappointed.

Perhaps tomorrow.

[humblegunner]

You’re an Obama troll. Go away.

Jla is an Obama troll?

I've been talking with an Obama troll?

And here I mistook highimpact for the whacked out emotional irrational one.

I should start counting my beers, petty though that may be.

[jla]

It is EXACTLY the fact that you are so positive of her marvelous abilities that makes her suspect. There are NO perfect solutions.

I never have used the word "perfect" in describing Palin, or even Jefferson and Reagan. Each have made mistakes but the benefits of their actions far outweigh any errors.

I think she would make an awesome President

You're making my head spin! She "would make an awesome President" yet you (implausibly) have doubts about her.

[humblegunner]

You're making my head spin! She "would make an awesome President" yet you (implausibly) have doubts about her.

Stop spinning.

I think a burger would be great until someone shows up with fajitas.

I really think it is premature to throw all our gear into the little Palin boat.

A big bad boat might yet show up, and then where would our gear be?

Across the lake. In a little boat.

[highimpact]

And here I mistook highimpact for the whacked out emotional irrational one.

Please post any of my responses that are "whacked out." Include the sentence before the "whacked out" comment, and the sentence after. Don't cherry-pick my words. It's an unseemly tactic. Confusing the context of the central point is cheating. I'm looking forward to your argument, because I'm going to knock it out of the park.

"whacked out emotional irrational one."

You're clearly an English major.

Good luck. If you can't come up with something worthy of debate, don't look forward to my reply. You're out of your league, rookie. Give me all you've got.

An argument features a foundation. If you have no foundation, don't bother. You haven't offered a foundation since your first post, and I shot it down. You haven't countered my "some words" reply yet, so I'm not concerned about your ability to reply three days later.

I might not reply on Saturday. I have a life, and a business to run. I'll get to it if/when I feel like it.