If David Letterman thinks muttering a few half-hearted apologies is going to save him, he’s dreaming. (NOTE: The effectiveness of a mea culpa is somewhat blunted by rimshots.) The Associated Press today has a devastating roundup of the mess he’s put himself in. You need to read the whole thing, but here are some highlights.
First, the killer opening graf:
Turns out David Letterman doesn’t just live on a TV show. He also lives in a glass house, where for years he’s hurled comedy zingers at misbehaving politicians, even as he brashly engaged in hanky-panky of his own.
Ouch! After noting his wisecracks about Eliot Spitzer, the AP observes:
But in Spitzer’s case, [Letterman] didn’t stop at lampooning. During an indignant rant, he called for the scandalized governor to step down.
“I mean, can you imagine,” said Letterman, “if this happened to me how fast they’d have my … (backside) out of here?”
As it turns out, not all that fast!
This points out the element a lot of people are overlooking: Letterman’s commentary about other people’s sex lives has carried a strong tone of moralizing. Which was creepy even before we found out about all this other stuff. Who is he to judge?
(You know… When you consider that Stephanie Birkitt was getting a paycheck from Letterman while he was having sex with her, and he even paid her law school bills, what’s the difference between her and Ashley Dupré? The exclusive contract?)
Some of Letterman’s other targets, like David Vitter and Gary Hart, had no comment for the story. Why break the guy’s fall, right? But Letterman does get some backup from a surprising quarter:
Most of the targets of Letterman’s jokes approached by the AP chose not to weigh in on the current woes of the talk-show host. But South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford offered Letterman his best wishes.
“Both my thoughts and my prayers are with him,” Sanford said Tuesday after a speaking engagement at a Rotary Club meeting in Easley, S.C….
“There’s a lot more introspection and soul-searching on the way down than there is on the way up,” said Sanford, who is under investigation by South Carolina’s Ethics Commission, in addressing his dilemma as well as Letterman’s. “He can be a better person for it.”
Guess anything’s possible. Maybe Sanford realizes that if he fires back at Letterman, it’ll remind people that he hasn’t done the right thing and resigned. Still, nice gesture.
And what does fellow Letterman foil Mark Foley think about the whole thing?
“I feel sorry for Dave, I take no glee,” Foley said Tuesday.
He voiced concern for Letterman’s 5-year-old son, Harry, and for the child’s mother, Regina Lasko, whom Letterman married in March after many years together.
“Nobody is above making tragic mistakes. Some never get discovered; some do, in a very public way,” said Foley, adding pointedly that Letterman “can keep apologizing until the cows come home. But he’s now found his own life the subject of late-night comedians.”
Does he ever.
Speaking of which, did you know it’s wrong to make fun of Letterman? So says Tom Shales of the Washington Post:
One of many sad things about recent stanzas in the ballad of David Letterman is that now, in all media, Dave will be lumped in with other sexually misbehaving celebrities, even though he stands head and heart above most of them…
Some of those who’ve seen the current Letterman mess as a golden opportunity to trash and attack him claim that it’s fit retribution for the jokes Dave has made about naughty-boy politicians and their sexual high jinks. Letterman can continue to lampoon sleazy political figures with no real fear of hypocrisy, however, because a TV comic is not an elected official responsible for the well-being of the nation or its citizenry.
Letterman’s monologue is not a nightly sermon full of moral lessons preached to politicians or the public. His stance is that of the proverbial court jester, a clownish figure with a mandate to prick the powerful — not set himself up as a model of virtue.
Even if that were true, which in recent years it’s definitely not — see Letterman’s comments on Spitzer, for one thing — it still wouldn’t get Letterman off the hook. The fact that he isn’t an elected official somehow makes him above reproach? He can’t be called a hypocrite for repeatedly condemning behavior in others that he indulges in himself?
Does David Letterman really have less power in national politics than, say, Mark Foley? Is he really more accountable to those who give him that power than, oh, Mark Sanford? I don’t remember voting to put Letterman on CBS every night. All I can do is vote with my remote.
But hey, who am I to question the absolute moral authority of Tom Shales? Here’s what the confused, corpulent critic had to say in a follow-up online chat about his moronic Letterman column (emphasis mine):
Dunn Loring, Va.: Just wondered if you’ve noticed your habit of apologizing for media figures? For example, Polanski rapes and sodomizes a drugged 13-year-old and you write a flattering article that falsely understates his crime; Letterman jokes about the statutory rape of the teenage daughter of a conservative politician and you call the joke inartfully phrased but otherwise fine; Letterman admits to affairs with subordinate employees and you state it’s alright because he’s just a media personality. Do you ever condemn anything done on TV unless it’s done by a conservative?
Tom Shales: Hello, Dunn Loring, I didn’t want to sign off without trying to answer your question. I didn’t realize I had written a column defending Roman Polanski and minimized his crime – are you sure it was me? I mean, I? [Simon says: Yes, Tom, it was you.] There is, apparently, more to this crime than it would seem, and it may sound like a hollow defense, but in Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.
And on TV, a 62-year-old who steps out on the mother of his child isn’t really a 62-year-old who steps out on the mother of his child.
For years, Letterman has been beating up guys he doesn’t like for doing stuff he really, really likes. Pardon the rest of us if we point and laugh at him now.
Related posts:
- More Letterman Odds ‘n’ Ends ‘n’ Hypocrisy One thing is for sure: If all this was happening...
- David Letterman Throws Out Extortion Story; Will It Float? The story is still developing, but the big news today...
- David Letterman Continues to Humiliate His Family And according to the Associated Press: Letterman asked the...
- A Belated Congratulations to Newlyweds David Letterman & Regina Lasko! Those two crazy kids got married last March, and I...
- Letterman Outcreeped by Creepy Extortionist? When the Letterman fiasco first flared up a month ago,...
“[...]in Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.”
Oh you have GOT to be kidding. A thirteen-year-old must have a tutor on set and follow child labor laws. But they can be sodomized by a famous director and that makes it okay?
I guess some laws apply and some – like statutory rape – don’t.
REALLY!? Does anyone happen to know if Tom Shales has any kids? Is he saying that, if he had a 13 year old daughter, and was in Hollywood, he would let Roman take her out on a date, do the same things to her that he did to this other child, and pick up the tip for the cab ride home without uttering a word about it? Of course, that would most likely win him Father of the Year awards from these douche-nozzles, or at least get him invited to some sort of a premiere somewhere…and isn’t that really what it’s all about?
I stopped watching this unfunny man years ago. The only reason he calls them as he sees them is that it takes one to know one. He is a slime-bucket and deserves every chastising bit of ridicule. If anything, Tom Shales you sleaze-pig, Letterman is affecting society much more then even Obama; face to face, night after night.
“Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.”
Sounds like he’s been talking to Whoopi. It’s rape, but not RAPE-rape.
I for one don’t see how just because these guys are high profile their sins/crimes are any worse than the average american. But I do think that being in a position of power their punishment should be harsher than the average american. If I did it, I’d lose my wife, they do it, they should lose their wives/jobs/reputations of being a trustworthy person.
Oh, I get it. Because she lived in Hollywood and wanted to be a model, then it was okay for him to drug and rape her – when she was 13. Silly me.
Good lord. When will people who have morals step up and blast these guys?
Yeah, I couldn’t say it better than Patterico
She’s thirteen, but she’s not thirteen-thirteen.
I need to become famous ASAP so I can commit felonies and get away with them because they’re not felony-felonies.
Kinda off-topic, but as a resident of Indianapolis, let me be the first to assure you that we don’t want him back. In fact, if you send him to us, I’m pretty sure it’ll fall under the War Crimes Clause of the Geneva Convention. What did we ever do to you Simon?
“Good lord. When will people who have morals step up and blast these guys?”
I used to ask that question a lot, but I stopped years ago. You see, I live in New Jersey.
Shales the Hutt always had a creepy vibe to him. I always expect to see him confront Chris Hansen, if you know what I mean. Once he complained in a review of that “Lolita” remake from the ’90s that the teenage actress playing the title role didn’t have any nude scenes.
“in Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.”
Does Shales realize how much, with this statement, he sounds like a creepy old pedo-lecher? If he’s not afraid to write it online, can you imagine what kind of conversations go on between him and his friends/colleagues in private. Brrrr…..(shudders)
Besides, even if she was in her thirties, that doesn’t give a green light to rape someone who repeatedly said “NO” to your advances.
Shales has always been overly worshipful of Obama and too snarky for me, but this shoots past those annoyances and goes straight into WTF territory. I’m off to email the Post demanding some sort of punishment for this gem (it’s too much to hope that they’ll fire him).
If it weren’t for the Polanski drama, I’d probably be more annoyed at Letterman, but even I can only allow so much rage to escape. Plus, I have a cold, so I don’t have the energy.
So does that mean that age 13 is really age 21 in California years?
Oh oh, let the lawsuits roll!
Letterman affair banned from Ed Sullivan theatre.
Sounds like Letterman is scared to death his wife will end up with sole custody of Harry:
http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/07/lettermans-former-hookup-banned-from-cbs-set/
LOL @ F_S..Banned from the set? Isn’t that the same as closing the barn doors AFTER the cows got out?
And no, I am not calling those women “cows”….ya’ll know what I mean.
This is all going to blow over in a week or two…the thing that sucks about this is that now he has to watch what he says every time a politician gets in trouble for a similar incidents. He is no longer squeaky clean but I think people are making a big deal out of this. I think that the biggest loser in this is his wife who has been humiliated. Nevertheless though, I think people should be more outraged about things like the Polanski arrest than Letterman womanizing – at least Letterman didn’t commit a crime.
Why does that suck?
Why can’t we be outraged over both Letterman AND Polanski? We hate AIDS and cancer, right?
Part of Letterman’s job is to lampoon others, but unlike Leno, for example, he has taken a holier-than-thou moralizing position while excoriating others.
Some of these pols are grown ups, and should nut up. But some, like Bristol Palin, not to mention her mom, were unfair targets. Bristol, a 17 year old, gets pregnant out of wedlock, and Letterman makes her and her family out to be total trash. Meanwhile, old man Letterman, is is 57 YEARS OLD when he gets his GIRLFRIEND OF TWENTY YEARS pregnant. Bristol Palin messed up like a lot of TEENAGERS. What’s Letterman’s excuse for his perpetual childhood? And if Sarah Palin is such a trashy mother because her kid got pregnant, would Letterman agree that HIS mom is trailer park trash because of HIS behavior?
Except it wasn’t 18 year old or 17 year old Bristol Palin.
It was 14 year old Willow Palin.
It was Willow, FS.
But it wasn’t Willow-Willow.
[Please send tips to tips@deceiver.com. -- MGMT.]
While Willow, the 14 year old, was the child at the baseball game, after Letterman was criticized for making the joke, he claimed that he had meant it was Bristol all along.
Which makes it better. And makes it up to Willow.
I do! I send it lots of tips
Even though Dave knew that Bristol was no where near the area with her mother. In fact, Bristol was still in Alaska taking care of her newborn baby. Does not make it any better.
Oh, I get it.
The “I didn’t mean what I actually said” defense after I was criticized for it.
That would explain why he took so long to apologize for it.
“…in Hollywood I am not sure a 13-year-old is really a 13-year-old.”
It’s official, then. Tom Shales is a sick bitch. You know, I think I’m gonna make “sick bitch” my trademark comment. JRod’s trademark comment is, as we all know, “I’d hit it”, Beige says “dicksmack” quite often, to my utter delight…what do I have? Nothing! This injustice will no longer be tolerated. So “sick bitch” it is. And, unlike “I’d hit it”, “sick bitch” applies to damn near everyone featured in the blog’s posts. Especially to Jeremy Piven.
Hello Depressing klooper yet my english jer, buti traverse unsettled re utter .