tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post4361804273247428998..comments2023-11-03T06:02:02.128-07:00Comments on By Ken Levine: David Letterman's REAL apologyBy Ken Levinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17305293821975250420noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-21438147248285259242009-10-12T19:55:15.451-07:002009-10-12T19:55:15.451-07:00Because he didn't think there were people that...<i>Because he didn't think there were people that stupid that'd take it that seriously?</i><br /><br />Don't forget to call them poopieheads.jim treacherhttp://jimtreacher.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-60196250060688977002009-10-12T16:23:24.538-07:002009-10-12T16:23:24.538-07:00Finally, his hosting of the Oscars makes sense.
&...Finally, his hosting of the Oscars makes sense.<br /><br />"Uma. Oprah. Oprah. Uma." wasn't a failed joke. It was a failed attempt at a three-way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-29297782293074973552009-10-09T09:30:20.827-07:002009-10-09T09:30:20.827-07:00To Steve B.:
I honestly don't understand your...<b>To Steve B.:</b><br /><br />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 <i>every</i> 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?<br /><br />And further (for all the posters that have used this argument) that if no one reports a crime, then no crime has been committed?<br /><br />If so, then I guess I simply disagree.<br /><br />JonJonathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-83182890971682713862009-10-08T21:51:42.945-07:002009-10-08T21:51:42.945-07:00Okay, so I was definately not going to respond to ...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. <br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-55301262414891167202009-10-08T18:03:17.133-07:002009-10-08T18:03:17.133-07:00"Patrick said...
Letterman is merely the lat..."Patrick said... <br />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?"<br /><br />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.<br /><br />What a bunch of Puritanical finger-pointers we even find here.D. McEwannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-53055097865744653472009-10-08T17:57:04.729-07:002009-10-08T17:57:04.729-07:00"Aaron Barnhart said...
I wonder how many ti..."Aaron Barnhart said... <br />I wonder how many times that dude will be confused with the Watergate burglar before this is all over."<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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!<br /><br />What passed between Dave and his staff and his family, with nary a single complaint lodged nor charge charged, is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS!!!!<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.D. McEwannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-30694824748273241682009-10-08T15:44:30.552-07:002009-10-08T15:44:30.552-07:00On one of my facebook feeds, a famous playwright a...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. <br /><br />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?<br /><br />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'!"<br /><br />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.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-15272498066214730612009-10-08T09:44:41.947-07:002009-10-08T09:44:41.947-07:00To Jonathan:
If you did a little research, you...To Jonathan:<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.Steve B.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-27685618430535774302009-10-08T09:07:45.264-07:002009-10-08T09:07:45.264-07:00To Mike:
I've never been to a sexual harrassm...<b>To Mike:</b><br /><br />I've never been to a sexual harrassment seminar in my life...<br /><br />...but I do have the capacity for human empathy.<br /><br />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 <i>and you know she's sleeping with Dave.</i><br /><br />How is this going to make you feel?<br /><br />Like the office playing field is really level and fair?<br /><br />Forget jealousy - this is a logical and legitimate criticism of what took place.<br /><br />And it's excused largely because of the Celebrity Double Standard.<br /><br />JonJonathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-51960008311689573222009-10-08T09:00:28.440-07:002009-10-08T09:00:28.440-07:00I agree with Matt Patton.
I'm a longtime Lett...I agree with <b>Matt Patton</b>.<br /><br />I'm a longtime Letterman viewer, but the stereotypical host/guest flirting routine wore thin a loooooong time ago on the "Late Show".<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />RussellRussellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-77401794110004216212009-10-08T08:54:15.546-07:002009-10-08T08:54:15.546-07:00Quite a fascinatin' coincidence that years-old...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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />In other words - if there isn't more to this 'extortion' attempt then meets the eye - I'd be surprised.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.-beenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-19815845608337205912009-10-08T08:49:40.776-07:002009-10-08T08:49:40.776-07:00"Stephanie Burkitt went from intern to freque..."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."<br /><br /><br />No one knows to what extent the sex affected anything else Miss Burkitt did on the show.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />MikeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-42481362862227655062009-10-08T06:40:10.394-07:002009-10-08T06:40:10.394-07:00THE ONLY THING DAVE CAN DO NOW
TO MAKE HIS T.V. RA...THE ONLY THING DAVE CAN DO NOW<br />TO MAKE HIS T.V. RATINGS<br />GO EVEN HIGHER,<br />AND I MEAN A LOT HIGHER,<br />IS TO<br />SHOW US<br />THE ROOM.<br /><br />SHOW US THE ROOM, DAVE,<br />WHERE YOU ALL DID <br />IT.<br /><br />COME ON, DAVE.<br />WE WANT TO SEE<br />YOUR PRIVATE SECRET<br />HIDDEN<br />LUST ROOM.<br /><br />THE CBS<br />PORN ON THE SPOT<br />ROOM.<br /><br />OH, AND DO A TOUR OF VERMONT.<br />http://crisericson.com<br />CRIS ERICSONAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-45269616868615151972009-10-07T22:29:56.211-07:002009-10-07T22:29:56.211-07:00Then why did it take him a week to say so
Becaus...<i> Then why did it take him a week to say so </i><br /><br />Because he didn't think there were people that stupid that'd take it that seriously?gwangunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00743626777447874196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-85456044552923116932009-10-07T20:28:13.944-07:002009-10-07T20:28:13.944-07:00And he clearly meant it to be about the older daug...<i>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.</i><br /><br />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 <i>you</i> give him the benefit of the doubt?<br /><br />And why is it okay that he doesn't see them as individuals, just props for him to throw at their mother?Jim Treacherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11017237457295504767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-45616733073849882542009-10-07T20:15:34.217-07:002009-10-07T20:15:34.217-07:00An unmarried guy having sex! heaven forbid!
And t...<i>An unmarried guy having sex! heaven forbid!</i><br /><br />And then going home to the woman he's lived with for almost 10 years, and their young child.<br /><br /><i>I am shocked...SHOCKED...I tell you, that a rich, powerful man is having sex with younger women.</i><br /><br />Not as shocked as Letterman is whenever a Republican does it.<br /><br />My humble attempt at mockery: Top Ten Reasons to Accept That Job Offer from David Letterman<br /><br />http://jimtreacher.com/archives/002126.htmlJim Treacherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11017237457295504767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-23710973607024269562009-10-07T19:14:31.535-07:002009-10-07T19:14:31.535-07:00Halderman apparently knows nothing about TV or ext...Halderman apparently knows nothing about TV or extortion. After all, Sweeps starts in just a couple weeks....<br /><br />I'm just sayin'J S Swansonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-39499967880952984482009-10-07T18:37:22.271-07:002009-10-07T18:37:22.271-07:00I always wondered about guys who are in long-term ...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? <br /><br />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 OKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-91929223799415734272009-10-07T17:42:02.845-07:002009-10-07T17:42:02.845-07:00First: As a Letterman viewer, I've seen many o...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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.BigTednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-16763961312436214112009-10-07T17:05:48.080-07:002009-10-07T17:05:48.080-07:00There's always been something creepy about Let...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. . .Matt Pattonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-72196578424544455132009-10-07T16:07:08.837-07:002009-10-07T16:07:08.837-07:00Unless they want to change Worldwide Pants to conn...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-58360451887769041942009-10-07T15:40:06.365-07:002009-10-07T15:40:06.365-07:00Let's all just admit it. The main reason we f...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.<br /><br />RayAlaskaRaynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-53649382967714718522009-10-07T14:01:55.541-07:002009-10-07T14:01:55.541-07:00Debby G said:
"About 15 years ago, the dean ...Debby G said:<br /><br />"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."<br /><br />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.<br /><br />Then again, I have no excuses for the grades I received in all my other law school classes.Wallis Lanenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-50932462647065378922009-10-07T14:01:08.154-07:002009-10-07T14:01:08.154-07:00One of the great moments in the mock-Watergate fil...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.<br /><br />"Uh, I think it was Herlichman." <br /><br />Ferrell, through gritted teeth: "There is no Herlichman. There's a Haldeman and an Erlichman."chalmersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19336675.post-64645350591805991292009-10-07T13:45:18.983-07:002009-10-07T13:45:18.983-07:00Why doesn’t anybody who matters ever trot out the ...Why doesn’t anybody who matters ever trot out the universal default apology, <b>“Hey, we’re <i>guys</i>, OK?</b> Not that it matters as far as the negative effect on the workplace environment (the place we explore on the Workplace <i>Channel</i>), 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 <i>both</i> of them confused with Erlichman.A. Buck Shortnoreply@blogger.com