DAVE:First of all, my ratings have gone up 37% so the truth is I feel great about all this.
(applause)
DAVE:
Yeah, there’s the issue of hurting my wife but the big risk of coming forward with this was that my numbers would take a big hit – at least for a while. Michael Jackson owes me a favor and said he’d come on the show.
(big laugh)
PAUL
He’s dead, Dave.
(Paul plays a boogie version of “Don’t Fear the Reaper.”)
DAVE: (feigning ignorance)
What? Did Liz Taylor sit on him? What happened?
(big big laugh. Paul plays an uptempo stanza of AC/DC’s “Overdose”. More laughter.)
DAVE:
Oh. Yikes.
PAUL:
It was on the news and in all the papers. Where were you?
DAVE:
Where do you think?
(big big big laugh)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh. You’d imagine with the CBS cutbacks that 48 HOURS wouldn’t have crews to cover that and me but I guess I was wrong. And for that, I’d like to apologize, ladies and gentlemen. Inadvertently, I wasn’t thinking ahead.
(applause)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh, but really, kids. This has been a trying weekend. Normally, I’d turn to my staff for help but that’s what got me in this mess in the first place.
(laughter and applause)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh. I told you, Paul. If they can forgive me for hosting the Oscars they can forgive me for anything.
(wild laughter and applause)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh. But getting back to my weekend, I met with my team of lawyers, managers, network spin people – who trust me, have enough to worry about with those THREE RIVERS reviews –
(laugh)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh. Actually I blame CBS. You know how television influences behavior. I was the one person in America who watched SWINGTOWN and that’s what all those folks were doing. I’m an impressionable viewer, what can I say?
(laugh, applause)
DAVE:
Heh heh heh. So where was I? Oh yes, my apology. This team of experts spent the better part of Saturday debating whether to deny the charges or apologize. And eventually, they worked out a compromise. So I’m admitting to having illicit affairs with members of my staff but claiming that they were all before my marriage.
(applause)
DAVE:
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Seriously, I’m touched. But there is one other issue I’d like to address. To Robert Haldeman, the CBS New Producer from 48 HOURS who hatched this extortion plot -- if you hurt a person and it's your responsibility, you try to fix it. You really hurt me, Bob. I hope when you sit in your cell for the next five to ten, you reflect on my anguish, my discomfort. And when you get out you have some serious making-up to do.
(shouts of “Yeah! Yeah!”)
DAVE: (takes a deep breath, then:
Okay, well, that’s my apology. Great show tonight! Steve Martin and Martin Short! Stay right here!
(Band plays “Saving All My Love For You” into commercial break.)
52 comments :
Wow, Ken! You are an incredible writer. You captured Letterman's voice perfectly. I could hear him saying those words! Funny.
Now my soapbox:
One thing that no one is talking about is the nature of extortion. The attempt to extort money from Letterman was reprehensible but the media (and Ken Levine) are all over Letterman for what he did. However, in order to defend himself against extortion he had to go public with his bad behavior. So, sure we can attack Letterman for being a horrible boss and a horrible husband, but I don't think there is an individual in the world who doesn't have a secret that s/he wants to keep secret. The difference is that most of us don't have the money to trigger someone to try extortion against us. So, our system fails because extortion is illegal but in order to protect oneself from it, one must disclose one's dirty secret(s). It's just not fair.
Because of this I feel for Letterman.
And honestly nothing points to the affairs happening after he was married. so we have a guy that's not married (maybe in a relationship) having sex (that nobody complained about.) When you're working 12-14 hours/day your pool kinda narrows, I'm not saying hes a saint by any means, but really? An unmarried guy having sex! heaven forbid!
Where's my fainting couch?
I wonder how many times that dude will be confused with the Watergate burglar before this is all over.
The issue isn't whether or not the women having sex with him complained. It's how his dipping his wick in the company inkwell stained all the other women.
The major woman he was allegedly sleeping with leapt from intern to personal assistant to on-air gigs, even covering the Olympics, and eventually got her law school tuition paid and a job offer as Dave's personal lawyer. I know someone who's worked in that office for years, and I'm sure every other woman there had to know what was going on and that there was no shot in hell that they would get similar fasttrack treatment, no matter how well they did their jobs. That's the "hostile work environment" argument. Thanks to Dave, women who put in years of honest work in his office will now have to scrub it off their resumes or know that every job interviewer they face for the rest of their lives will be wondering if they really earned their promotions or just slept with the boss.
If you want to sexually harass a woman you work with, do what I did: marry your writing partner and work out of a home office.
I think Merrill Markoe put it best: "As you can imagine this is a very emotional moment for me because Dave promised me many times that I was the only woman he would ever cheat on."
She should write his copy for the rest of the season.
Jerad, the New York Post says Dave and Ms. Birkitt were still at it last fall, well after his marriage:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/letterman_gal_cheated_on_new_beau_WA19v2rcZbudEEnXJ27V8K
I would have thought his guests after this apology would have been Roman Polanski and Willow Palin. Just to get some late-night equivalent to those MASH final episode numbers.
GF said:
"Jerad, the New York Post says Dave and Ms. Birkitt were still at it last fall, well after his marriage:"
WRONG! Letterman just got married this March.
I am shocked...SHOCKED...I tell you, that a rich, powerful man is having sex with younger women.
...I think Roman Polanski was busy...
When he made the announcement last
Thursday, I thought at first it was just another bit, but when he didn't start wisecracking with Paul Schaffer as he usually would do, I realized he was being serious. I then thought to myself, "Oh, God -- now he's going to announce that he's had sex with John Phillips!"....
Enough people are confusing "Joe" Halderman with legendary science fiction author Joe Haldeman that Wikipedia was compelled to add a note to the Haldeman article.
I guess this means no more fringe benefits for Dave until the next contract negotiations.
Very funny monologue Ken. Laughed my ass off.
On the more serious side, I couldn't give two hoots if Dave Letterman has an issue with keeping it in his pants. All I want from a chef is great food, and if the steak is cooked right, my business with him is done
As long as Letterman remains funny and his show entertaining, my judgement of him ends. He's not asking me to vote for him, he's not asking me to sign a petition, he's just asking me to watch his show.
On a side note, extortion is a serious crime, and the producer clown that did this should go to gaol for such intimidating and bullying behaviour.
Steve Martin and Martin Short does sound like a great show! I'm with the Letterman-defenders on this, he's not the one who's done anything illegal here so why should he get all the heat? I think Craig Ferguson said something along the lines "the day we hold entertainers to the same moral standards as politicians and clergymen is the day showbiz dies" and that's kind of a good point.
I don't think there is an individual in the world who doesn't have a secret that s/he wants to keep secret.
I must be incredibly boring. I'm so small a fish in the big world pond that not even a shark on the verge of dying from starvation wants to snack on me.
I don't have a single extortion-worthy secret.
Clearly I should reevaluate.
I would have a pretty hard time forgiving him if I were his wife, but there have been, so far, no accusations of harrassment, and to say that the fact he fraternized with some (unknown number of) his subordinates "stained all the other women" who work on the show seems pretty Victorian to me. I doubt Stephanie Birkett or any of the others (assuming there were others) felt "stained," and there's certainly no "stain" on, say Barbara Gaines. And if Letterman is an harrasser, wouldn't that be more of a "stain" on men?
I also think it should be pointed out that Letterman's wife used to be one of those subordinates. Should we assume she bore his child and married him under durress? After all, he was her boss at one point. That seems to be all the proof some people (who don't understand the concept very well) need to convict him of harrassment. I'm not defending infidelity, but harrassment is something else, and no one has even come forward to accuse him of that, yet.
Ken, you should work up a spec script for the inevitable Law & Order episode that will come from this, eh, episode. At least the comedy show backstage scenes would ring true.
I'm inclined to believe the sincerity of his distress about having to make this up to his wife... am I right fellas?
Seriously, though, unless (until) he appears on Leno to have Jay ask him, "What were you thinking?" I give him the benefit of the doubt.
Years ago, in a gay club with my wife and some of her lesbian coworkers, I danced, on a dare, with a man (jitterbug) during which I made the comment,"I guess running for mayor is out of the question now." I didn't realize at the time that it took, from me, the opportunity to be a late show host also.
I suggest all the Letterman Apologists and Justifiers take another look at Pat Reeder's Post Above...
...because he hit the nail right on the head.
Stephanie Burkitt went from intern to frequent on-air foil by sleeping with the boss, and every other woman in that work environment has a legitimate gripe.
And the argument that "whatever happens behind the curtain doesn't matter as long as I'm entertained" is the lamest of all.
The double standard is alive and well in our culture of extreme celebrity worship.
Jon
I used to work at a place where my subordinate was banging the big boss. She sucked as a coordinator, but I'm guessing she had other talents. I sure couldn't complain about her, and other staffers were always passed over in favor of Ms. Lips.
So, did Worldwide Pants pay for law school or did Dave?
Thats funny Ken. Dav should have consulted you before airing his apology. What would you have written fo Bill Clinton when he told the world he had a relationship with Monica Lewinski?
I agree with Pat Reeder. About 15 years ago, the dean of my law school (UC Berkeley) was let go after sleeping with his female students. I had had him as a professor. I joke that I'm insulted that I'm one of the few female students he didn't make a pass at. But really, since that class was graded on a curve, I wonder whether some of his conquests kept me from getting a better grade because I didn't put out.
Also, I wonder how many workers that Letterman made passes to felt that they couldn't say no if they wanted to stay employed. Or if they wanted to have sex with him in the first place, how many workers felt that they couldn't stop sleeping with him if they wanted to stay employed.
So big deal, Letterman allegedly wasn't married when he slept with his employees. He was living with a woman and had a son with her.
Maybe he's a terrific entertainer (though I've never been enamored with him), but he behaved like a jerk.
Now remember that there's a sexual harrassment policy at Worldwide Pants that allows for sex between the boss and his subordinates (that's not a direct quote, but it is true).
So I'm sure that Dave's wife knew, for the 20 years they've been together, with their six-year-old son, that he's been stupping the staff members after hours.
And since Dave feels it's perfectly fine to make fun of Palin's daughter, why should we have the same kind of fun with him. It's the funniest thing I've heard from him in years.
In fact, it would be hypocritical not to talk about the Magical Mattress of David Letterman!
What difference could any of these opinions make to anybody?
"What difference could any of these opinions make to anybody?"
We're all just dust in the wind, dude.
The lines between soap opera, reality TV and chatshow are now barely discernible. Ken, you should pitch this.
Why doesn’t anybody who matters ever trot out the universal default apology, “Hey, we’re guys, OK? Not that it matters as far as the negative effect on the workplace environment (the place we explore on the Workplace Channel), but why does everybody assume it was Letterman hitting on the women and not the other way around. I didn’t know all that career path stuff for Stephanie Birkitt, but I’ll say she was aces as his on air foil. Does anybody remember, did she start out as the droll girl in another office building window Dave used to call on air? Or was that somebody else? And yes, I keep getting both of them confused with Erlichman.
One of the great moments in the mock-Watergate film "Dick," is when Will Ferrell and Bruce McCulloch as Woodward and Bernstein are trying to get the malfeasor's identity from the two dippy teens.
"Uh, I think it was Herlichman."
Ferrell, through gritted teeth: "There is no Herlichman. There's a Haldeman and an Erlichman."
Debby G said:
"About 15 years ago, the dean of my law school (UC Berkeley) was let go after sleeping with his female students. I had had him as a professor. I joke that I'm insulted that I'm one of the few female students he didn't make a pass at. But really, since that class was graded on a curve, I wonder whether some of his conquests kept me from getting a better grade because I didn't put out."
Debby, I had the same professor. Now, I'm wondering that, since I'm a guy, maybe I was also given a lower grade than I deserved.
Then again, I have no excuses for the grades I received in all my other law school classes.
Let's all just admit it. The main reason we feel so annoyed and snarky at Letterman having sex with a younger woman is that we're all JEALOUS.
Ray
Unless they want to change Worldwide Pants to connote the sounds a sexually active guy makes when panting, maybe the zipper on the pants needs to come down now.
There's always been something creepy about Letterman and women--and not just behind the scenes. From the early days of his show on NBC until just recently, an attractive actress or model would have to put up with a host that was way too touchy, leaned in way too close, and generally acted like he was waiting for a moment of privacy to grope her. If the female guest was at all eccentric or opinionated, she would be treated with even greater disdain than Letterman displayed for Joaquin Phoenix. And if he was called on it afterwards, he'd find some new way to insult the poor woman. Occasionally, some would-be target of abuse would get the better of him (Eva Gabor turned on the charm and he folded like a cheap lawn chair, and the British madam Cynthia Payne, who looked him over with a coldly-amused eye, probably had his number even before they started talking--it was priceless). To hell with apologizing all over the place--Letterman just needs several weeks of thorough and public humiliation. It may not cure him, but it would serve him right. . .
First: As a Letterman viewer, I've seen many of the episodes in which Stephanie appeared. And they were funny, in no small part because she came off as an awkward, real person in these encounters, not a trained performer. Dave always looks for "characters" who will join him in his style of found humor, and she was a perfect choice for that. So if she was put on the air only because of a personal relationship with Dave, I'd hate to know what he's been doing behind the scenes with Biff Henderson.
Second: Comedians have messed-up personal lives? What a surprise. Screwed-up backgrounds, messed-up lives and a hunger for attention are what made many of them become comedians in the first place. Take away the need for attention, and you've got a writer. Take away the messed-up lives, and you've got Jay Leno.
Third: Enough about Sarah Palin already. That joke (which Letterman most likely didn't write himself anyway) made the guy the butt of the joke, not Palin's daughter. And he clearly meant it to be about the older daughter -- the one who was trotted out throughout the presidential campaign -- because that's the only way the joke even made sense. The fact that the younger daughter was at the game that day was a fact-checking error, not a deliberate slander on a teenager.
Fourth: Flirting with attractive celebrities, while self-deprecatingly calling yourself "creepy," is part of Letterman's act. (Just as Conan, Craig and even Jay behave similarly when confronted with a hot actress. And Jon Stewart was famous for flirting back on his old MTV talk show.) In many ways, the interviewer is the stand-in for the audience, and he needs to acknowledge how attractive the woman is (while making it clear that she's out of his league). It may be awkward, but Dave isn't the first host to do this, and he won't be the last.
I always wondered about guys who are in long-term supposedly committed relationships yet refuse to get married, even after having a kid. What are they afraid of? Do they just want to think they're free and amble on down the line like their life is a song lyric?
I think the answer for Letterman is that his Midwestern core would let him have sex with women beside the one living in his house for years as long as he wasn't married. That he could rationalize as OK
Halderman apparently knows nothing about TV or extortion. After all, Sweeps starts in just a couple weeks....
I'm just sayin'
An unmarried guy having sex! heaven forbid!
And then going home to the woman he's lived with for almost 10 years, and their young child.
I am shocked...SHOCKED...I tell you, that a rich, powerful man is having sex with younger women.
Not as shocked as Letterman is whenever a Republican does it.
My humble attempt at mockery: Top Ten Reasons to Accept That Job Offer from David Letterman
http://jimtreacher.com/archives/002126.html
And he clearly meant it to be about the older daughter -- the one who was trotted out throughout the presidential campaign -- because that's the only way the joke even made sense. The fact that the younger daughter was at the game that day was a fact-checking error, not a deliberate slander on a teenager.
Then why did it take him a week to say so? If you took your 14-year-old to a baseball game and somebody said something like that on national TV, would you give him the benefit of the doubt?
And why is it okay that he doesn't see them as individuals, just props for him to throw at their mother?
Then why did it take him a week to say so
Because he didn't think there were people that stupid that'd take it that seriously?
THE ONLY THING DAVE CAN DO NOW
TO MAKE HIS T.V. RATINGS
GO EVEN HIGHER,
AND I MEAN A LOT HIGHER,
IS TO
SHOW US
THE ROOM.
SHOW US THE ROOM, DAVE,
WHERE YOU ALL DID
IT.
COME ON, DAVE.
WE WANT TO SEE
YOUR PRIVATE SECRET
HIDDEN
LUST ROOM.
THE CBS
PORN ON THE SPOT
ROOM.
OH, AND DO A TOUR OF VERMONT.
http://crisericson.com
CRIS ERICSON
"Stephanie Burkitt went from intern to frequent on-air foil by sleeping with the boss, and every other woman in that work environment has a legitimate gripe."
No one knows to what extent the sex affected anything else Miss Burkitt did on the show.
I swear, the angry reactions people are having to this sound like they stem from folks who've sat through too many sexual harassment seminars and are pissed off that Dave didn't have to suffer right along with them.
Mike
Quite a fascinatin' coincidence that years-old affairs on the part of Letterman come to light not too long after he riles up right-wingers by mocking Sarah Palin.
It was bad enough that he made a minor error when making fun of Palin's older daughter (identifying her as being at an event that only the younger daughter was at) - but then after apologizing for the mistake he had the AUDACITY to continue mocking Palin.
In other words - if there isn't more to this 'extortion' attempt then meets the eye - I'd be surprised.
IMHO - if Dave starts laying off ridiculing idiot right-wingers like Palin, George W. Bush (etc) THAT is what will make me think less of him.
Also: where was all the "outrage" about the sexual antics of the President of CBS or the head of Viacom? Not to mention that the '09 GOP candidate for President admittedly cheated on his first wife and has possibly cheated on his current one.
I agree with Matt Patton.
I'm a longtime Letterman viewer, but the stereotypical host/guest flirting routine wore thin a loooooong time ago on the "Late Show".
Dave is in his 60's now, but continues to leer at teenagers. Even before the revelations about his office sexcapades, this was creepy to watch.
Hey, I'm a guy and we all like attractive young girls, but when Dave ends an interview by grabbing the girl's hand and kissing it, it really is a major turnoff.
Russell
To Mike:
I've never been to a sexual harrassment seminar in my life...
...but I do have the capacity for human empathy.
Think about it: You're a woman working on staff for the "Late Show". You watch Stephanie Burkitt go from intern to featured on-air celebrity and you know she's sleeping with Dave.
How is this going to make you feel?
Like the office playing field is really level and fair?
Forget jealousy - this is a logical and legitimate criticism of what took place.
And it's excused largely because of the Celebrity Double Standard.
Jon
To Jonathan:
If you did a little research, you'd find that The Late Show and WWP have many women in high-ranking positions, most of which have been with Letterman for years. In fact, his Executive Producer started with him as a secretary on his NBC morning show in 1980, and eventually worked her way to the top. You could say that perhaps she got to where she is by giving special favors to Dave, except that she is openly gay.
Not saying that inequities haven't happened in their workplace, but looking at all the facts makes it appear much less onerous than you have suggested.
On one of my facebook feeds, a famous playwright alluded to the Polanski non-sense as "sports". Other famous playswrights, who also write in Hollywood, were rattling off in commentary that went on for days -- back and forth, for Polanski and vehemently against. It was all very interesting, especially coming from certain "names" that may, or may not, have been feeling a little defensive. Or maybe it's all become just a little annoying (even for us "non-names"), this prime time infidelity gameshow.
Ultimately though, the idea of these unsavory, and sometimes criminal. sexual affairs ARE like sports. They take on a sort of low end, Roman spectacle, not nearly as interesting as the blood and gore that we really want to see on t.v., in politics, on the playing feild, etc.. Letterman is merely the latest Christian thrown to the lions. But honestly, why should I feel even a touch of sympathy for a guy who is probably going to buy his way out of the arena? Why should any of us care? Seriously though, what does it truly do for you on whatever high horse you're on?
I agree with -bee's sense of wonder of how this ties to the Palin issue. If nothing else, the idea that some right-wing politicians decided to take him down is top notch, 24ish drama. I can see her hanging, all rogue and drooling, from the side of a helicopter. She's got that high powered, Park Ranger rifle aimed at the back stage entrance to the Ed Sullivan theatre, like the new-age maveric hunter that she fancies herself. -- "C'mon out for a bagel, Mr. Comic in the fancy suit. Let's thin your liberal, ha-ha herd. You betcha'!"
I'm sort of looking at these events like George Carlin would have. He had such a great sense of dis-connection with the sad and foppish folley that too many people consider to be important. Just think of the fun we would have had if he was Letterman's first guest after the apologies. He would have been ten times funnier than Martin Short and Steve Martin, who I think is so funny, but a little too provincial and mainstream to get top tier comedy out of this silliness.
"Aaron Barnhart said...
I wonder how many times that dude will be confused with the Watergate burglar before this is all over."
I imagine never, at least among people who know what they are talking about. Haldeman was the White House Chief of staff under Nixon, and a major architect of the Watergate Cover-Up, but he was certainly NOT a "Watergate Burglar." He would never have soiled his evil hands actually committing the act itself.
I gotta line up with "Fred," the first commenter on this thread. Why on earth is everyone riled up at Dave, instead of at the Emmy-winning slimeball (also a past conquest of Miss Burkett's) who was extorting him? That is a CRIME! A MAJOR CRIME!
What passed between Dave and his staff and his family, with nary a single complaint lodged nor charge charged, is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS!!!!
I don't give a rat's ass if his "apology" was sincere or not, because HE DOESN'T OWN ME AN APOLOGY. Are there people he does owe apologies too? Sure, but that's their business, not ours, not mine.
As for all the women who feel they've been passed over for some promotion at some time or another in favor of someone schtupping the boss, and who are aiming their resentment at Target Letterman, Designated Scapegoat of the Day, shame on you. SHAME ON YOU! Join with his extortionist and make Dave's humiliation worse for your own selfish gratification and axe-grinding. Forget that LETTERMAN IS A VICTIM HERE.
After all, you should thank him. He's given you more ammunition for your "I got passed over for someone schtupping the boss" excuse. Keep using that excuse. You've convinced you. Maybe someday, you'll convince someone else.
The many women who have risen in Dave's ranks without sleeping with him, like for instance his producer, Barbara Gaines, thank you for the insult also.
"Patrick said...
Letterman is merely the latest Christian thrown to the lions. But honestly, why should I feel even a touch of sympathy for a guy who is probably going to buy his way out of the arena?"
Excuse me? If Dave were "going to buy his way out of the arena," he'd have paid off the blackmailer. Dave instead, manned up, told the world his none-of-our-business-anyway secret, took the humiliation on a scale unimaginable, rather than buy his way out and empower the extortionist, who is the one WHO SHOULD BE RECEIVING OUR DISGUST, while Dave gets points for courage under fire.
What a bunch of Puritanical finger-pointers we even find here.
Okay, so I was definately not going to respond to the previous statement, but now I have to after watching like three minutes of tonight's Letterman. First of all D., I think you may have missed the first and last part of the point I was making. It woould appear that you jumped side saddle onto your high horse, so that you might be able to shout down my throat that much faster. As I said, I'm really not invested emotionally in what happens to any of the characters in this dime novel called THE LETTERMAN AFFAIR. I really could care less either way. I know I'm snarking all over it here in this blog, but ultimately I'm not going to lose a breath if something incredible unfolds. Unless of course they find Sarah Palin lurking around the Hello Deli with viles of strange chemicals . That would get my attention and I'll watch the car chase on the freeway, the trial and every press release until the sentencing. In the meantime, just try to be reasonable, D.. Try to see how unimprtant it all is. How it just makes for mediocre entertainment. Think of the fact that now there is a mediocre underlayer of a reality t.v. plot line threading through the mediocre product pushing top layer of Late Night With... Really, you seem like an incredibly intelligent guy. Can't you see how meaningless this all is.
So this Kristin Davis woman seemed pretty sincere about saving the elephants on Late Night tonight, right? But she gets time on a major national market (AND a very high horse), she's sitting there on a highly rated talk show and starts telling me that I need to think more about the elephants in Africa, so that someday maybe my kids will be able to see them. My kids ain't going to Africa to see the elephants. I would love for them to do that, but they just aren't. Not unless I hit some serious lotto, and ... have some kids. Ninety-five percent of the kids in this country will never get to see the elephants in Africa. The elephants might be roaming Africa until kingdom come and only priveledged kids will get to see them. Like poor Mr. Letterman's kid. So Dave doesn't miss a beat, he let's this lovely actress spew her schpeel about the elephants and then he introduces the movie that he's helping to sell -- he's doing her a favor, moving things along from the sincere, possibly over-stated and time consuming public service speach that she so eleguently related. He's right on his mark, in incredible form, hardly touched by this devastating thing that could have ended his career. Great for him. World Wide Pants will continue on. Unbribed and glorioously filling the airwaves with the really important stuff that we need to know. Yes, he "manned up", but do you actually give two shits about him doing the "right thing", not getting caught with his hand in the ... Just because he beat the slime bag to the punch, does that make him somehow heroic?
So if I somehow find this all remotely entertaining and not at all devasting, and you somehow twisted this all up into me being puritanical, D., than I suggest you just continue trotting along with the rest of the people in the world who actually think that their opinions truly matter in the lives of the rich and famoous -- and sometimes extorted. I'm gonna' just continue getting my chuckle out of it all, that's all it's worth to me.
To Steve B.:
I honestly don't understand your argument. Are you saying because a few (or even many) females in the "Late Show" workplace rose on merit - and therefore not every female was subjected to a hostile work environment - that it's okay? That if only a few girls are discriminated against, directly or indirectly, then it's no harm no foul?
And further (for all the posters that have used this argument) that if no one reports a crime, then no crime has been committed?
If so, then I guess I simply disagree.
Jon
Finally, his hosting of the Oscars makes sense.
"Uma. Oprah. Oprah. Uma." wasn't a failed joke. It was a failed attempt at a three-way.
Because he didn't think there were people that stupid that'd take it that seriously?
Don't forget to call them poopieheads.
Post a Comment