Well played. I gotta say when you have a trump card you’re not afraid to show it.
The only one this scandal makes look bad is the blackmailer. It’s embarrassing for David and his women, sure, but unless he starts publicly decrying other comedians and such for making fun of him, he comes off fine. And this is coming from someone who doesn’t really like the guy.
The Christian Morality Police will continue having a field day with this, but I’d like to think that in the eyes of most reasonable Americans, they’re the ones that look like jackasses.
I have to disagree. Over the years, Letterman has taken shots at politicians of all varieties (as has been mentioned, Bill Clinton was, and remains, a favorite target). Furthermore, his jokes aren’t expressing a “liberal” point of view, or any kind of coherent political philosophy–they’re just attempts at getting a laugh. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don’t. Politics doesn’t really enter into it. And while many of the jokes are about a celebrity’s personal foibles, I don’t think one can accuse Letterman of hypocrisy, since Letterman’s favorite target for such jokes is… himself.
Which brings me to:
Well, his humor is certainly has a dark streak to it, which is part of his appeal for those who enjoy his sarcasm. But the people that he pokes fun at are public figures (very often including, as I said, himself), who are fair game for comedy. COMEDY. Maybe not your style of humor, but comedy all the same. You’re not supposed to take it so seriously or personally–or you’ll start to sound like that Monty Python episode about the Piranha Brothers, and their description of how viciously cruel Doug Piranha could be:
If public figures like Sarah Palin can’t take a joke, then that’s their problem. Of course, since Letterman is a public figure himself, he’s in the same position–and despite his personal privacy, he’s never shied away from poking fun at news-stories about himself, e.g. his less-than-stellar performance as host of the Academy Awards, his numerous speeding tickets, etc.
That being said, I’m not sure how he’ll handle the reaction to the blackmail story, since it deals with far more personal and sensitive topics than any of these other stories from Dave’s life. It will be interesting to see how far Letterman is willing to go with his self-deprecating character shtick, which has been a consistent part of his comedy from the beginning.
That link doesn’t work anymore, but here’s another one: http://www.iviewtube.com/videos/90710/david-letterman-blackmail-extortion-sex-scandal-10/1/2009
Letterman is still making Clinton-Lewinsky jokes after over 10 years. Hardly makes him politically biased. But it does make him seem like a hypocrite. You don’t to get to make jokes about another guy sleeping with interns if you’re doing it yourself.
Some couples have lax rules. Look at Hef and his wife. They are just now getting around to divorcing after years of living apart. I don’t think she expected Hef to be faithful at any point over the last 20 years. So maybe Dave and Regina are like Hef and Kimberley. (No, I am not reimbursing you for brain bleach.)
One very disturbing thing for Dave that I read about just today: The women he didn’t sleep with/hit on can sue for sexual harassment, because of his behavior favoring some female employees over others based on who he was sleeping with.
“Monty” got to appear on TV, did webcasts, got paid extra appearance fees, etc. That means others didn’t. Oh boy.
Nah, it just makes him seem like a hack. (I still love you Dave, but let’s hear some jokes from this century, OK?)
I’d wager that everyone who made fun of the last president’s Bushisms has transposed words or letters, or had a sentence get away from them, or simply forgotten what it was they were saying. But they weren’t president of the United States at the time.
The humor value of an act is often largely dependent on who’s doing it and under what circumstances.
That is comedy gold – that fellow is a great raconteur. Thanks for the link.
Yes, you do. And don’t think for one second that he doesn’t realize that his life will now be used as fodder for some other comedian’s gig.
Though, honestly, a single guy bagging an intern is hardly even newsworthy, provided she was over 18 and single herself.
Apparently, he’s going to explain himself a bit more tonight. Here is a clip and partial transcript.
I just watched what he said tonight and I thought it was heartfelt and that he even seemed a bit teary eyed, particularly in discussing the impact this has had on his wife and their relationship.
FWIW, I don’t recall a situation where a public figure/celebrity has had to publicly acknowledge bad behavior and done it without making an excuse for themselves. He isn’t blaming booze, pills or Satan etc. for what he did. He simply owns up to the fact it was stupid and now he is dealing with the consequences.
Of course, that’s just my two cents.
So Craig Ferguson comes out tonight looking embarrassed and ashamed, and says, “Well, I guess by now you’ve all figured out how I got the job. Oh, man!”
Excellent.
“And I’m sorry I put the staff in that position”
-Letterman
Hehe.
Well, that puts to rest any question of whether Lasko approved of his behavior, and whether he in fact was cheating, and by extension, lying.
These comments are several days old, so I won’t give a warning, but I’ll remind everybody AGAIN that personal insults aren’t allowed here.
At the time I didn’t feel the comment rose to the level of an insult but now in hindsight I can see that it does. Admonition noted. Thanks.
No, not really. She could just be hurt by the public exposure and the *public *humiliation. She could be just as private as DL is, and not approve of the whole thing being on all of the newscasts. It doesn’t necessarily say anything about her feelings at the time they happened (or she first learned of them.)
Oh please. He said specifically that it was his behavior that caused the hurt.
I swear I wonder what kind of relationships you folks are in when you twist yourselves all about trying to justify infidelity as the default assumption.
It appears Letterman and Birkitt have been continuing their affair until very recently, and it appears that Halderman’s discovery of that in her diaries, despite her claim that their relationship was “platonic”, was what led to the breakup of Birkitt’s live-in arrangement with Halderman.
It also appears that upon her graduation in 2008, Letterman offered Birkitt a high-paying job as his personal lawyer, which Birkitt used to try to convince Halderman to have children and be a stay-at-home dad.
So it seems that Regina has plenty to be mad about too. It’s clear that the guy has absolutely no qualms about cheating on his various wives, lovers and live-ins and never has.
It takes a deeply dishonest and uncaring person to live like that, and I’d wager than any future fidelity on his part is due more to concern over losing his job (and perhaps his child and a considerable amount of money) than it is due to the love he has for his wife or chagrin over the sudden realization that his behavior truly has been reprehensible.
I do grudgingly give him props for not making excuses and for the relative class he’s showing in the way he’s handling the situation. Still, I’m happy for the many people over the years (many of whom have just been tourists and people on the street) that he’s acted like a jerk to or made fun of and caused to look like rubes and dolts just for the sake of getting a laugh and who are undoubtedly delighting in the petard that he finds himself hoist upon now.
ETA: Oh, yeah…cite.
For any lawyers out there, what are the chances that Letterman will drop the charges against Halderman if he thinks making the diary entries public could further damage his reputation?
And I have to say, as laughable as it first sounded, I could almost see a jury being convinced that Halderman really was trying to sell a screenplay to Letterman. (Note: I don’t believe it for a second…but I could see a slick lawyer pulling this off…just barely.) Halderman’s stupidity just may play in his favor; after all, what kind of idiot would accept a personal check for an extortion pay-off?