The
New York Times
has a
front page
story today on the kid gloves approach
late night television hosts have been using on Barack Obama,
explaining it away as a natural product of Obama's lack of
"buffonish" qualities. Hence, the absurd headline, "Want Obama in a
Punch Line? First, Find a Joke."
Why? The reason cited by most of
those involved in the shows is that a fundamental factor is so far
missing in Mr. Obama: There is no comedic "take" on him, nothing
easy to turn to for an easy laugh, like allegations of Bill
Clinton's womanizing, or President Bush's goofy bumbling or Al
Gore's robotic persona.
Really,
New York
Times?
That's your honest assessment? Or would you like to try again in,
say, a few paragraphs?
There is no doubt, several
representatives of the late-night shows said, that so far their
audiences (and at least some of the shows' writers) seem to be
favorably disposed toward Mr. Obama, to a degree that perhaps
leaves them more resistant to jokes about him than those about most
previous candidates.
Yes, perhaps.
Perhaps also grass is green and Saturday Night Live
was
onto
something.
Alas, it seems even the New York Times
does not fully
understand the phenomenon it strives to explain. After noting John
McCain punch lines frequently end with some variation of "He's
old," the article adds, "But there has been little humor about Mr.
Obama: about his age, his speaking ability, his intelligence, his
family, his physique."
I suppose the dig
the New York
Times is waiting for is not a knock at the senator's demigod
view of himself, but bits beginning with something along the lines
of "Barack Obama is so buff..." or "Barack Obama is so eloquent..."
or "Barack Obama is so young and vital..." Which, in a strange way,
makes
this the
treatment for the never-launched sitcom
based on Obama's life.
topics:
Barack Obama, Television, NATO
