Baffled

Don't people understand that their words say as much about them as about the subject they're discussing?

I just flipped on the TV while upstairs making the bed, and The View was on. Danny DeVito was being introduced. After much hugging and fawning, one of the hosts asked him about a visit to the White House at Christmastime.

Apparently, he and Rhea Perlman visited during the Clinton administration, and haven't been back. Which led DeVito into a mostly bleeped diatribe about why he doesn't want to visit the White House with Bush in office. Which, fine. You're a Democrat, I get it. But his means of expressing this started off by calling Bush a numbskull, and then ranting on from there -- as I said, all of which was bleeped.

He doesn't have to like or respect Bush. I don't, and I'm a conservative. I don't know that the office of the presidency automatically deserves respect, either -- it's a concept, and the person elected is the embodiment of it during a given time. But wouldn't it have been smarter to say something along the lines of, "I don't respect Bush or his policies, and I think he's made a lot of serious mistakes," when expressing his discontent?

In my eyes that makes a stronger point than jeering like a fourth-grader on the playground, and certainly sounds a lot more intelligent.

Of course, my opinion of him may be permanently colored by the fact that he followed up his nyah-nyahs by describing how he and Rhea stayed in the Lincoln Bedroom, and how "we made it our business to wreck the place," and apparently "utilized" every surface possible, wink wink, nudge nudge.

I think I threw up in my mouth a little bit.