Quicksand

Columbian editorial page editor John Laird examines why the humor of Mel Brooks worked and that one guy in the news lately fell, um flat:

And that brings us to the other subtle difference between Imus and Brooks that ultimately becomes a huge disparity: the intended targets. Imus crudely stereotyped members of the Rutgers women’s basketball team. Like a child pounding a hammer into a fully inflated tire, he saw his impulsive attempt at humor ricochet into his own head.

Brooks, though, used racism, sexism and vulgarities to embarrass targets that deserved to be ridiculed. Among those were his own colleagues, movie producers who had falsely glamorized the American West and deserved to be parodied. Other targets were racists. Brooks knew that mocking injustice can be a path toward removing it. The TV character Archie Bunker served the same purpose in “All in the Family.”

It's a decent editorial column, and I'm glad to see that Laird basically gets it. So I hit YouTube for a refresher, and found that Brooks provided more insight into American race relations in the first six minutes of "Blazing Saddles" than perhaps we experienced in the last week. Check it out:*

"We can't afford horses..."

*Not safe for work, unless your boss is cool. Also, if the segment seems to you more like a training video than a comedic comment on the American condition, you are at the wrong blog.