Every day and in every way, David Letterman looks creepier and creepier…
- Some have been defending Letterman by saying he broke it off with Stephanie Birkitt before his son was born. As if living with Regina Lasko since 2001 doesn’t constitute some sort of commitment. Besides, evidence is (ahem) mounting that the relationship with Birkitt was ongoing until recently. First an Access Hollywood producer had an odd encounter with the two of them alone in public in 2005. Now, that could be passed off as “Just a couple of good buddies who definitely weren’t still having sex, the guy’s got a kid with his longtime live-in girlfriend, leave him alone.” But then there’s this:
Pretty former “Late Show” staffer Stephanie Birkitt revealed in her diary that she continued having sex with boss David Letterman even after moving in with her CBS-producer boyfriend, who later allegedly tried to extort him over the affair, sources told The Post yesterday.
Letterman and Birkitt enjoyed romantic hikes last fall at his sprawling ranch in eastern Montana — where he was married in March — while her boyfriend, “48 Hours Mystery” producer Robert “Joe” Halderman, stayed home in Connecticut, the sources said.
- I dunno, New York Post… “Pretty”? And this is in addition to Letterman paying for her law school and letting her watch his kid. We’re supposed to believe that Lasko knew about all this and had no problem with the whole arrangement? And if so, that makes it okay?
- Tracy Clark-Flory at Salon.com asks, “Why aren’t feminists mad at Letterman?” Maybe because their ideology is more important to them than their principles? They both hate all the same people? Just a theory.
- Not having learned their lesson with Roman Polanski: Stars Stand by David Letterman
- If you still doubt the sincerity of Letterman’s apology to the Palins a few months back, you’re right.
- Lest we forget the other major sleazoid in this story, Letterman’s blackmailer Robert Haldeman seems to have crafted a unique defense for his attempt at extortion. As his lawyer says:
“Look at the fact that there was a $2 million check. In the history of extortion, I don’t think there’s been a single case where the alleged extortionist took a check in payment. It just doesn’t make any sense.”
- So I think it’s going to go like this: Haldeman wasn’t really shaking down Letterman over the affair; he was selling Letterman his thinly fictionalized screenplay about the affair! Gotta give this guy points for chutzpah, at least.
- And just one question for Gawker’s Hamilton Nolan: If sex is no big deal, as you so subtly point out here and here, why has David Letterman spent at least a decade moralizing about other people’s sex lives? He’s made so much money looking down his nose at the human emotions and relationships of others, he could buy himself an island and fill it with interns. Heck, for all we know he has.
In Other Elderly Sex-Creep News: Roman Polanski ain’t goin’ noplace.
Related posts:
- Letterman Outcreeped by Creepy Extortionist? When the Letterman fiasco first flared up a month ago,...
- More Letterman Odds ‘n’ Ends ‘n’ Hypocrisy One thing is for sure: If all this was happening...
- Letterman Can Always Go Back to Doing the Weather in Indianapolis If David Letterman thinks muttering a few half-hearted apologies is...
- David Letterman Throws Out Extortion Story; Will It Float? The story is still developing, but the big news today...
- Letterman: More Sleazy Human Tricks! If you thought it was unsettling to watch people laugh...
I guess when its your boss pressuring you for a “relationship” and he happens to be famous it is okay. So all those women who sued the company they worked for when it happened to them were just too stupid and should have worked for someone as famous as Dave or even better Polanski.
So true. This chick is far from pretty. More like creepy. Just like Davey himself…
I put $5 on Letterman was “buying” the script.
If Haldeman is smart he recorded a conversation or has something to prove it wasn’t blackmail.
oh and I am sure Letterman thought he could turn this around by claiming to be the victim. Everyone will believe him after all America LOVES him! He is the KING of late night! Dammit, he is DAVID LETTERMAN!!
Not having learned their lesson with Roman Polanski: Stars Stand by David Letterman
- click on the link and who’s the star in the main piture? oh, none other than chris rock. a man/star who appeared on tv talking about how anyone who defends polanski is plain crazy, um, because polanski, took a CHILD and RAPED her. oh, and then fled the law.
yeah any ’star’, or anyone else for that matter, who thinks that the only crime committed here was by the blackmailer, and backs letterman, must also want to see polanski released to live a sweet life on the french riviera.
I don’t know dan, the situations are different. Letterman’s relationships were consensual, and Polanski’s was not. That doesn’t make Letterman’s relationships okay and feminists are being hypocrites given how they’ll go after nobodys for less, but the two situations here ARE different.
Dan continues to impress with his dadaesque streams of syllables.
ok, now i get that ‘failure of the british education system’ quote from the previous post. sorry i had no idea that you were one of those easily offended posters, who uses people’s grammar/spelling/whatever mistakes to make snide remarks, all the while ignoring the actual point that was made.
but you is rite; comments on gossip blogs, of all places, should be written to exam-standard english, how silly of me.
oh and in referrence to that quote, my education was a joint american + french production, the british had nought to do with it, leave them alone.
I am just so relieved that there is a small corner of the internet that is actually sensible in these matters. I also am baffled by the people (especially feminists) who claim it was “no big deal” just because he wasn’t married. Since when has marriage signified such a holy commitment to these people? When I was a teenager, I had an affair with a slightly older man who also lived with his girlfriend. He was abusive and manipulative to both of us. It was a very scarring experience for me. I am not trying to project my own past onto the Letterman situation, but I just want acknowledge that this kind of behavior usually does indicate bad things for the women… I am so confused as to why suddenly cheating on your live-in girlfriend (even ignoring the fact that it might have been happening after they were married) is okay. It’s just not! It is CREEPY. And SLEAZY. And probably MANIPULATIVE. Uhg.
Anytime you’d care to begin.
I don’t believe consensual when you’re boss is famous. Are you really going to say no to their advances? Letterman is a man of power and he used it for…this. One would hope someone with such pull wouldn’t bed young women at their job. Knowing he has his own bedroom above the studio really creeps me out. If only the Palin daughter had her own room above the Governer’s Mansion…awwwwwww sookie sookie!
The difference in the situation between Letterman & Polanski is that, so far, Letterman appears to have done nothing ILLEGAL. Yes, maybe immoral & sleazy, but not illegal. I am NO fan of Letterman, but there is a difference. No one has come forward alleging Letterman forced or coerced them or sued for harassment. Polanski is a CONVICTED CRIMINAL who confessed to his crimes and pleaded guilty. Until there is a lawsuit with a conviction, there is no comparison.
Dan, totally right about dissing the grammar instead of the message. Pure insults instead of comments frustrates me as well and lends nothing to the discussion except tension.
Neither did Bristol or Willow Palin.
Hey, if ‘Common Sense’ had been printed in broken English on the back of cocktail napkins, we most likely never would have had a revolution. If your points are cogent and imperative, you’d think that the least you could do is make sure that others can read them without pulling their hair out. This is no different than a heavily pierced and tattooed teenager who uses cuss words every six seconds bitching that they can’t find a job – sometimes how you present yourself is just as important as what you’re presenting. Well, if you want anyone to take you seriously that is.
If you can’t be bothered to take the time to make it readable, why should we take the time to try to figure it out? At that point we’re officially putting more effort into it than you did.
Oh, and BB, I thought sexual harassment WAS illegal? This is a case where a high-powered and very wealthy boss was sleeping with his underling in a secluded bachelor pad – if this was an oil company exec, every feminist in the country would be screaming sexual harassment and sexual coercion at the top of their lungs even if it was proved to be completely consensual.
Scott F. once again you have stated exactly what I was thinking and have saved me much time! Thank you.
So far, no sexual harassment has been charged, so, no, nothing illegal yet. It is only implied. Even CBS policy (though he doesn’t work for CBS but World Wide Pants) states that it understands that there will be these types of relationships in the workplace, they just want to know about it. It happens every day because the most likely place to meet someone is in the workplace. Boss/employee relationships also work out without any sexual harassment. It completely depends on the situation and, in this one, no one has yet complained. I keep saying “yet” because we still don’t have the full story.
He is still a sleazy, immoral jerk. But if that were against the law, half of my ex-boyfriends would be in jail!
A creep is still a creep no matter how you try to spin the story. Never liked David Letterman, never watched him and these stories just reaffirm why I won’t ever watch him. Stars who support men like him and Polanski need to take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves why.
Wait, feminists aren’t mad at Letterman? Melissa McEwan, a pretty prominent feminist (she was tapped as an advisor to the Edwards campaign way back when, back with Amanda Macotte of Pandagon) has been covering the Letterman scandal and she’s certainly not defending him. Feminists are not a monolith, you know.
Weird, for some reason my comment is bugging out.
Anyways, feminists don’t necessarily agree with letterman – Melissa McEwan, a prominent feminist who worked for the Edwards campaign, for instance, spoke out against Letterman and sleeping with staffers.
In addition, Letterman is regarded as a misogynist by a lot of feminists.
David Letterman Made Fun of Philanderers For Years as he Pursued Own Affairs
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,561594,00.html?test=faces
Yeah, for about a month. That was hilarious.
Don’t tell me, tell Salon.com. I’m quoting them.
Mark Sanford isn’t in jail. Larry Craig isn’t in jail. Since when is that the standard for being able to discuss something?
It doesn’t matter if Dave gets charged or not. This is a blog about *hypocrisy* (which he has in spades) not on law. Very significant difference there
@ Simon He is still a sleazy, immoral jerk. But if that were against the law, half of my ex-boyfriends would be in jail!
Mark Sanford isn’t in jail. Larry Craig isn’t in jail. Since when is that the standard for being able to discuss something?
I totally agree with you Simon. I was only defending the idea that he has done something illegal (again – nothing YET). Sanford & Craig didn’t do anything illegal either, just sleasy & immoral, which is why they are not in jail either. They are in a little more trouble due to their political moralizing while doing what they preached against. Letterman is certainly a hypocrite in the same sense, but he is a sour comedian only, not a representative of the people who can make laws affecting everyone. GOD, I hate being in the position of defending him, but, until something truly illegal is shown, he is just a giant jerk.
This originally started because people were comparing him to Polanski. Polanski is a CONVICTED criminal of raping a child. Completely different situation as there have been no allegations of rape, harassment or children involved in this situation. I hate it when people try to paint one broad brush over everything. Confessed and convicted child rapist (illegal) does not = boss/employee consensual relationship (not illegal).
I even heard a supposed news commentator state that a boss dating a subordinate is illegal as though it were fact. It is not. It is only illegal if there is some sort of quid pro quo, coercion, special treatment or harassment. A boss can date an employee without being arrested or sued if it is a consensual relationship without those factors. Many of these relationships are positive and successful with no untoward activity whatsoever.
Yeah, still got my Scott F. pom-poms.
I think we need to put together a cheerleading squad. Complete with Scott F. cheers.
If David Letterman was a Republican politician from the deepest, darkest South, nobody would be making excuses for him. The liberal feminists ran Sen. Bob Packwood, a fairly liberal Republican from Oregon, out of Washington in the 1990s because of his Letterman-esque treatment of his female staff members. But a few months later, the Clinton scandal starring Monica Lewinski broke, after the liberal feminists for years ignored sexual harassment claims and even accusations of rape against the Boy President. Their reaction? Cool by us as long as he lets us kill our babies.
See why I have zero use for “feminists?”