Jokes, like arrows, sometimes miss their mark.

The best comedy dares to push the envelope. If you truly do watch Colbert regularly you'll know that he does this as much as anyone in television. Sometimes, what sounded funny in a writers' meeting doesn't translate when it's actually performed.

I suspect this was the case with the recent Fonda segment. Also, perhaps they perceived it was going badly and instead of bailing, tried to push it through. Wince if you like, but give her and Colbert credit for gamely giving it a go.

I agree with others who posted that Jane Fonda was "invading andconquering" and that Steven Colbert was genuinely uncomfortable.

What I'm not sure abouit is her motive: she said it was because of him speaking about his Jane Fonda fantasies ona n eariler show: was she flattered by those fantasies, or outraged?

If the former, then I am a little embarassed for her. Maybe she'd had too many cocktails before the interview (though she didn't seem tipsy). Or is she an aging starlet who is clinging to the last of her sexa ppeal glory days? LIke Liz Taylor on Letterman, plaintively asking the public at large for a date "I just want someone who will take me to dinner ..."

If it's the latter, then this was a brilliant way of saying "Don't trifle with me, Darlin'." A taste of Colbert's own medicine: you objectify me, then I objectify you, and how does it feel? Without becoming a shrill, man-hating screed. (Not that I think Colbert is a misogynist animal who treats all women like meat. I adore him. And I haven't seen his fantasy bit, but his persona does thrive on making his guests uncomfortable.)

Or maybe this was a male/female display of practical joking? Like Brad Pitt and Grorge Clooney. A perhaps unspoken dare on how far can we go before one of us breaks character? In which case, I hope these two have reached a truce (because I can't imagine what the next step in that chess atch would be, but I'm pretty sure I don't want to see it).

Wow, talk about a tempest in a teapot. I saw it yesterday during a lunch break with some people from work (including men and women both, ranging from 20 to 50 in age), and everyone thought it was hilarious.

Last night during the Bulls-Pistons game, I relayed an account of the episode to two of my buddies who missed it; they not only found it hilarious, but seemed to be genuinely aroused as well.

Those who found it disgusting must have some of the most vanilla tastes imaginable. She looks great to me, and I'm 31. Enjoy your staid missionary sex at home, in your bed, with the lights out. To those who complained that she was making Colbert uncomfortable, well, that's life. Have you seen his typical interview? Turnabout is what again? The only reason he was uncomfortable is because it was the first total rout he has ever suffered as an interviewer; she took it to him from the get-go and he couldn't reestablish his bearings. A brilliant maneuver on her part, really.

Yeah....she's a big girl, he's a big boy, if you don't like it, turn the friggin' channel or go for a walk, Tipper. The sun will still rise tomorrow. End of story.

I think you may be a bit of a prude - as a married woman, I found the segment hilarious. It's a comedy show and Colbert constantly emphasizes his own sex appeal (jokingly, obviously) - I didn't think what Fonda did was over the line in light of his joking about his fantasies about her. It's not just a matter of what people do, it's about how and why they do it and she was really funny. Usually though , funny is in the way of the beholder, so I can see people being uncomfortable with such skits.

I also see that people should lighten up, not make mountains out of molehills, etc. (insert other similar cliches here).

I, too, thought it was funny at first, then started to cringe, myself. My take on it is that Stephen was not in on it, and was flustered not only by Jane's sitting there (and her provocative kisses), but not getting the heck up to continue the interview.

Stephen's famous for controlling his interviews to the point of deliberate misinterpretation ("Thank you for supporting our President...so, which would be your choice, Bush--great President, or our greatest President?"). It's always hilarious, and of course the guest would have to re-focus on his or her own point of view.

But, in this case, Jane took control in the physical (and sexual) sense, and Stephen apparently (and understandably) wasn't in a position (so to speak) to order her off his lap or make her look bad. I think he did his best under the circumstances (I found it really cute when he sheepishly mentioned his wife).

So, in essence, the point is not only that Jane Fonda continued to do something that was perhaps okay only for a few seconds, but that Stephen LOST CONTROL of the interview, while she was focused on the sexuality of the event.

This, to me, defines what I found somewhat disturbing, and perhaps it defines Joan's reactions, as well.

I just thought JF was sort of embarrasing herself. I would think it was a lot more funny / hot, if she was a few years younger. Although I thought it did seem like harassment of Colbert (poor guy :-) AND, I also agree with Joan - I was totally jealous. Stay away from my man Jane - you ignorant slut :-) Colbert is HOT !!!

That show is taped and edited before air. If Colbert hadn't wanted us to see that segment, we wouldn't have.

Poor, poor Stephen Colbert. Joan, get a grip. It was a great segment; played perfectly by both Fonda and Colbert. It was the smart, assertive sexy mature activist woman (horrors!) totally disarming the bully O'Reilly persona that Colbert uses as his character.

I think you need to examine your own fears about how you will be received when you're in Jane Fonda's age bracket.

As a guy in his mid-40s (like Colbert), I know that actual grown up men have nothing to fear from wonderfully alive women like her. Quite the contrary... More like her, please.