Saturday Night Live is not one to shy away from controversy, but should some things be off limits? Maybe someone's disability perhaps? SNL certainly doesn't agree.

Today everyone's asking, "Did SNL go too far when they poked fun at New York Governor Paterson's blindness?" Check out Saturday's Weekend Update:

So yes Governor Paterson is clearly mock-worthy. But should his blindness have been such a focus point? Or should they just have stuck to his general ridiculousness?

Gov. Paterson himself wasn't laughing Saturday night. In an article headlined  "Paterson In A Blind Rage Over 'SNL' Skit" (classy), the New York Post reports:

"The governor engages in humor all the time, and he can certainly take a joke," Paterson's spokesman, Errol Cockfield, said today.

"However, this particular 'Saturday Night Live' skit unfortunately chose to ridicule people with physical disabilities and imply that disabled people are incapable of having jobs with serious responsibilities."

Disability advocates were equally pissed:

The skit could leave viewers with the impression that blind Americans cannot be competent employees, advocates for the disabled said.

"When you have a perception problem like we have, you take these things a little more seriously," said Chris Danielsen, spokesman for the National Federation of the Blind.

"We have 70 percent unemployment - and it's not because we can't work. Obviously, the governor of New York is blind, and he's doing the job. Whenever you have a portrayal that calls the basic capacity of [blind people] into question, that's a potential problem."

What do you think? Too funny or too far?