I think I may have changed my mind on this. I think maybe it was funny, after all. Watching Colbert's pundit character squirm was funny, and he handled it in a humorous way, and the following night Jon Stewart razzed him on the Daily Show's lead-in. So, clearly he had a sense of humor about it.

Anyway, it was a hell of a lot less uncomfortable than watching Madonna derail the Letterman show years ago!

A boring prude. Only control freaks get embarrassed by situations they are not even remotely related to or involved with. My mother is like that and it takes all the fun out of her. You missed the point that it was hilarious and Colbert was for once, deliciously, put on the spot. And he LOVED IT.

Let's remember the line that exists between Mr. Colbert the improvisational comedian and the character of Steven Colbert on "The Colbert Report." This is a character created as a parody of -- let's say a right-leaning talk show host. Watching that character squirm and blush with Hanoi Jane on his lap was a thing of beauty.

Judging from these reactions, it obviously blurred the lines between real and fictional but that's what "The Colbert Report" does best.

As far as I'm concerned Fonda's move may have stunned Colbert the improvisational actor, but it was sublime within the context of the show.

That was a pretty wacky segment and either Colbert is just as good an actor as Ms. Fonda or he was truly surprised and uncomfortable with the sit in your lap and kiss you while you so loudly protest approach from Jane.

I was amused and thought Jane really still has it doesn't she? Which is what I believe she wanted the audience to see. She was most successful in demonstrating her excellent acting skills and creating a tiny tempest in a tea cup.

And Joan, maybe you are a prude.

Good Lord, it's a comedy show. Colbert has long since proven his worth, and his performance at the 2006 White House corresponents' dinner stands with the bravest and funniest performances in American history. If you take that show, including the one with Fondle, seriously, you need to smoke something, or stop smoking something, as applicable. Get a freaking grip. 50 more dead Americans so far this month in Eye-rack. Now, that's offensive.

Jane Fonda looks like one.

Something else I'd like to say about this. Stephen asked for it. Before Jane Fonda came out, as he was leading up to her appearance, he made reference to her previous appearance, showed a clip of her kissing him, brought out his 'kiss the cook' apron, and made a lot of comments of that nature. Seems to me Ms. Fonda called his bluff. It's often okay for men to say what they would like to do to a woman. Why shouldn't it be okay for a woman to call their bluff and embarrass them?

I thought it was wonderful. Colbert loves to make his guests uncomfortable--this time one of them, and a woman at that, beat him at his own game. I wouldn't worry about him. He survived.

There were several reasons why Jane Fonda's fondling of Stephen Colbert was cringe-inducing, at least for me:

(1) Fonda seems genuinely smitten with Colbert—"You are so cute, man. And I'm not kidding—you have the best lips"—so, although she is clearly "in" on the joke, at some level, it seemes a bit too "real," and Fonda (to Colbert's discomfort and ours) is unaware of that.

It's easy to confuse that discomfort at the "realness" with prudishness but it's not—if Fonda were feigning a fight with Colbert and, partway through, she started to appear be genuinely angry with him (and was unaware of showing it), it would engender the same type of discomfort. All of a sudden, what was thought to be a joke perhaps isn't and we're witnessing someone inadvertently reveal something—it's easy to feel embarrassed in that situation.

Someone like Bette Midler, with a twinkle in her eye and an absurdly broad grin, would have had us in on the joke because she'd be in on the joke—fully—herself.

(2) As MarieA (and others) have said, Fonda isn't a comedienne. The initial moments were funny but after that Fonda really did not do much to build or sustain any comedy "momentum." In that sense, it did go on too long.

(3) Colbert's discomfort, I think, comes from both those reasons. He's playing a character and Fonda is, well, sending "mixed signals" and she doesn't exhibit any of the give-and-take of improv so he's uncomfortably stuck. There isn't much he can do. Sure, watching Colbert squirm is funny (to a point) but it is also unsettling because the scenario feels vaguely "unsafe." We're not sure where Fonda is going with it—she doesn't know herself, really—and Colbert can't salvage it.

There is a level on which the segment works, of course—Fonda playing into Colbert's persona's fatuous irresistibility and taking control. But I agree, Joan, there's a level on which it is cringe-inducing.

Oh pooh. A couple of old pros playing an improv game. Can Jane make Stephen fall out of character, or can he hold on? Fun to watch. Better than "Whose line is it anyway?"

Perhaps it made you uncomfortable because you haven't seen the wide variety of roles Colbert, the actor and comedian has played over the years. (Strangers With Candy? Wigfield?) He is hilarious, and often (purpously) squick-inducing; Jane Fonda is great, and a very good sport. I'm fairly certain this was rehearsed; TCR isn't improv. I thought it was very funny.

I think the whole thing was rehearsed. What tipped me off was the posed picture at the end. Did they just happen to have the graphics ready? Remember, being a pro means making every moment seem spontaneous.

Having a feminist icon turn the tables on harassment was as funny a concept as having two feminist icons bake bake an apple pie. Colbert's protestations were exactly what the stereotypical female harassment target would say. I thought it was fairly typical of what the show does best.