What Fresh Hell Is This?

June 14, 2009

Jack Kelly Sunday

In this week's column, Jack Kelly loyally continues his support of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (no idea why) and in doing so, he takes a swipe at David Letterman.

Good Lord, doesn't he realize how easy this is going to be?

Jack begins:

President Barack Obama is, by far, the most popular politician in America. And there is little doubt who is No. 2.

The city of Auburn in upstate New York, population 28,574, held its first annual Founder's Day celebration June 6. The most famous of the city's fathers is William Seward, who as secretary of state purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867. To commemorate the event, the city council invited the current governor of Alaska. The parade featuring Sarah Palin drew more than 20,000 people, according to press reports.

Of course he's saying it's Governor Palin. But is that the case? Is she really the second most popular politician in the country? Let's look at some poll numbers. Asking what they describe as an "open ended question," the Gallup folks have an idea:
Asked to name the "main person who speaks for the Republican Party today," Republicans across the country are most likely to name three men: Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney.
They give the overall percentage numbers as:
  • Limbaugh, 13
  • Cheney, 10
  • McCain, 6
  • Gingrich, 6
  • Bush, 3
  • Steele, 1
  • Boehner, 1
  • Romney, 1
  • Other, 9
  • No one, 14
  • Everyone, 1
  • No Opinion, 37
Take a look at the numbers for the Republicans/leaners:
  • Limbaugh, 10
  • Cheney, 9
  • McCain, 6
  • Gingrich, 10
  • Bush, *
  • Steele, 2
  • Boehner, *
  • Romney, 2
  • Other, 14
  • No one, 17
  • Everyone, 1
  • No Opinion, 29
See who isn't on either list? Interesting, isn't it? So not only doesn't Sarah Palin rate nationally on the "who speaks for the Republican party" question, she doesn't even get on the scoreboard among Republicans.

Nor is Governor Palin the most popular governor in the country, as was the case when Jack reported that factoid almost exactly a year ago.

Heck, she's not even the most popular politician in Alaska. From Seattlepi.com:
After Alaska voters gave her positive ratings as high as 86 percent in mid-2008, Gov. Sarah Palin's "positives" are down to 54 percent in the latest Hays Research Group poll of Alaska voters.

The governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee trails far behind the robust 76.3 percent approval figure scored by Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. Both Palin and Murkowski are up for reelection in 2010.

It's up to Jack to explain how his "second most popular politician in the country" isn't seen by members of her own party as speaking for that party AND how she's not even the most popular politican in her home state. That I'd like to see. In any event it's difficult to see how she's the second most popular politician in the country.

Then there's this part:
The day after that, Ms. Palin took part in a fund-raiser in Washington, D.C., for House and Senate Republicans at which former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was the keynote speaker.

"An attempt to have the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate speak at the dinner ... fell through when organizers feared she might upstage Gingrich," UPI reported.

Of course, Jack leaves out some important stuff. But given how more Republicans (at least according to the poll data above) view Gingrich as "speaking for" the GOP, it does make sense that she would not be the keynote speaker at that fundraiser. Dana Millbank, though, at the Washington Post fills in some of the blanks:
First the Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee was invited to be the keynote speaker at the party's annual congressional fundraising dinner.

Then she was not the keynoter, replaced by former House speaker Newt Gingrich.

Then she was invited to speak, again. Then that invitation was rescinded.

Then she let word slip out that she was unhappy about the whole state of events and was thinking of not attending at all.

Then -- after much public bickering between Palin loyalists and party officials -- she finally agreed to come, speaking slot or no.

But what's with the back and forth on her speech? Seems that things are running not so smooth in the GOP. That should have been the story. But my guess is that with this column, Jack is sending the message that he's plainly in Palin's camp. Everything else should be seen through that frame of reference.

Then there's Letterman. Here's Jack's take on the story:
If Sarah Palin decides she's had her fill of public life, it could be because of the attention her visit drew from the likes of "comedian" David Letterman.

In his monologue Monday, Mr. Letterman "joked" about Ms. Palin's "slutty flight-attendant look," and made two awful jokes about her daughter, one implying she'd had sex with Yankee third baseman Alex Rodriguez, the other that she'd been a prostitute for former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

"Laughter incited by sexually perverted comments made by a 62-year-old male celebrity aimed at a 14-year-old girl is not only disgusting, but it reminds us some Hollywood/New York entertainers have a long way to go in understanding what the rest of America understands -- that acceptance of inappropriate sexual comments about an underage girl, who could be anyone's daughter, contribute to the atrociously high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others," Ms. Palin responded when asked for comment.

As for the "joke" about Palin's flight-attendant look, Letterman also joked about her laughing "all the crazy looking foreigners entering the U.N." and about how she finally "met one of those Jewish people Mel Gibson's always talking about."

What? No outrage at the jokes pointing to Palin's lack of foreign policy experience or cultural ignorance? The jokes about how she looks get Dave into trouble. A bit sexist, if you ask me.

The Top-Ten list is here, if you want to see it.

But take a look at Jack's dishonesty regarding the "daughter" joke. First off, he's got his facts just a teensy bit off. I'll let the politico fact-check Jack:
Riffing on Palin’s trip to New York last weekend, Letterman joked Monday night that during the seventh inning of the Yankees game “her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.”

Letterman followed up on the line Tuesday night, joking that “the toughest part of her visit was keeping [former New York Gov.] Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter.” [emphasis added.]

It doesn't change the meaning of his argument of course, but it does show that Jack's not on top of his facts (yet again).

Left out is Letterman's explanation:
Despite maintaining his usual tone of playful sarcasm as he discussed his flap with Palin, Letterman did respond seriously to the charge that he had made a rape joke about a 14-year-old girl: "These are not jokes made about her 14-year-old daughter. I would never, never make jokes about raping or having sex of any description with a 14-year-old girl," he said. Letterman insisted the jokes were intended to be about Bristol, who is 18-years-old. "Am I guilty of poor taste? Yes. Did I suggest that it was OK for her 14-year-old daughter to be having promiscuous sex? No."
But a curious thing emerges. Take a look at exactly what Jack says and what he doesn't say in his description of Letterman's jokes. I'll help things along with a question: Does Jack Kelly say that Letterman was joking about Willow Palin, the 14-yr old?

No he doesn't. He leaves that up to the Palins themselves - he just quotes them. So what can we assume from that?

Perhaps that Jack isn't convinced that Letterman wasn't talking about Bristol rather than Willow. If he was convinced, why wasn't he clearer?

In any event, not to mention Letterman's explanation (if only to disagree with it) is, in itself, dishonesty by omission.

Can't wait for a difficult column.


EdHeath said...

I don't know, I think I would have gone in a different direction with this one. Kelly has a legitimate point here. Even if it were Bristol Palin along on this trip instead of Willow, the younger daughter, Letterman's jokes would have been out of bounds But it wasn't the older daughter at the baseball game (or in New York at all), and Letterman should have known. And I found his explanation entirely inadequate.

Lot’s of voters see no difference between the two parties. If Democrats want to lay claim to being different, if they want to say they are the more compassionate party, or the smarter one, or whatever, they need to step up on matters like this. If Democrats want to say that calling Sotomayor a racist is over a line, they need to police their own as well. If Letterman isn’t going to apologize, then CBS should, and take him of the air for a couple of weeks or something. Or at least that’s what Democratic party leaders should call for.

I’m not saying no fun at the expense of Republicans. I mean, Limbaugh on painkillers because of back surgery; sympathy. Limbaugh abusing painkillers with prescriptions at three pharmacies; object of ridicule.

Maria said...

Sorry, David, but I'm more with Ed than you on this.

First, Letterman's joke was based on a faulty premise. Bristol wasn't at the game; Willow was. So Letterman's writers are either sloppy or lazy or just don't care that even if they meant to slam Bristol, they ended up slamming Willow for the sake of a joke. I mean Willow knows she was the one at the game, no?

Second, let's say agree that they meant Bristol. Now she is 18 and she is doing PR for abstinence only ed, even though that obviously didn't work for her and she even came out at one point and stated that it was abstinence is unrealistic which does leaves her open to some jokes - like the disconnect between what she did and what she says. Also, I will give you that bringing the baby daddy to the convention and floating rumors of a soon-to-be wedding leaves Palin open to some charges of exploiting her kids.

That said, joking that “her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez" in the 7th inning and that “the toughest part of her visit was keeping Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter" does paint Bristol as both a slut and a prostitute. It plays into the whole "damaged goods" stereotype about women/girls. It's saying because we know that Bristol had sex at least once, she's a slut who'd do it with a stranger at a public place and that she's now open game for any slut references.

And, that's SEXIST BULLSHIT and that's what Letterman should have apologized for but I won't hold my breath since that is stock in trade yucks for so many funny, funny men.

viking67 said...

Oh, fuck, Letterman has made jokes about Michael Bloomberg's height, Bill Clinton's horniness, Al Gore's weight, Ted Kennedy's drinking and Hilary Clinton's coldness. Are you saying short people, horny people, fat people, boozers and emotionally distant people should be equally offended? They're jokes on a late night comedy show. That's all they are.

The daughter joke was mean, but it wasn't directed at the 14-year-old, which anyone with a brain knows. There's a shorthand that serves as frame of reference: Palin daughter/unwed mother/campaign issue. It was part of the Palin profile. When the candidate drags it into the campaign, and lies about how the kids are committed to make the awkward situation work, it's fair game.

Are you saying Palin doesn't look like a flight attendant?

Funny, Letterman can tell 100 funny jokes about what a buffoon GWB is, but it's a whole different issue when your personal ox is gored.

Maria said...

1) Bloomberg, Gore, Kennedy, Bill/Hillary are politicians. Willow and Bristol aren't.

2) "There's a shorthand that serves as frame of reference: Palin daughter/unwed mother/campaign issue."

One daughter is an unwed mother and that is Bristol, not Willow or Piper. What is this -- Pride and Prejudice? One daughter is "disgraced" so they all are?

You know the Kennedys -- that Caroline is such a fuckin' booze hound! Hmmm, doesn't quite work, does it?

3) "The daughter joke was mean, but it wasn't directed at the 14-year-old, which anyone with a brain knows."

I'm sure that gives Willow great comfort. Jesus, she the one who was at the game! Not Bristol. They are not interchangeable units. Are you interchangeable with your siblings (if you have any)? Damn, that David Kaczynski is such a murderous nut!

4) Again, I believe that Letterman thought that he was talking about Bristol, but he fucked that up. See here what he said about it tonight. People saw on the news that Willow was at the game -- not Bristol, so YES, when Letterman made a joke about Palin's daughter at the game they thought Willow (who was, after all at the game) not Bristol.

5) And, again, being an unwed mother should not leave one open to being labeled a slut for the rest of your life. As in, you'll do it with anyone cause you got "knocked up" once so you're just wide open to getting "knocked up" again by anyone you come into contact with -- however brief, like some player at a game -- for the rest of your life.

EdHeath said...

Obviously I agree with Maria on this. I see by looking at the link Maria provided that Letterman has now admitted he was way off base and confused. Hopefully that can be used as ammo against the conservative backlash (as evidenced by Jack Kelly's column).

And anyone who has read my comments on Sarah Palin or Jack Kelly here or anywhere else knows that Palin and Kelly are not my "personal ox" ( I speak for no one else). But that is exactly the point. Do the Democrats stand for some set of personal ethics? If so, should they defend those ethics, no matter who it turns out they end up defending? It is exactly the situation of the ACLU, an organization I greatly admire.

Look, I think that Palin is an idiot, I think she is not qualified for the Vice Presidency or the Presidency. But I think she is a clever politician, with very good instincts (and a dangerously little knowledge of policy). In a popularity contest she is in fact a dangerous opponent, and I hate to give her any advantage by letting her play the victim card. That's what pisses me off about what Letterman said (and puts me in the annoying position of having to agree with Jack Kelly).

viking67 said...

Nobody was paying any attention to which daughter was at the game. It doesn't matter. The joke involves "Palin's daughter." There's only one who is famous/notorious, and that's the one who had the baby. It's an issue because the high-minded, finger-wagging, "better practice abstinence" candidate couldn't even sell the concept in her own house. Given that her own daughter didn't follow that, it should have convinced her how hopeless that stance was. Yet she continued to hammer away at it. That's the issue, the hypocrisy of a VP candidate.

When your daughter comes out on stage with her fake future husband, when a kid hockey player is dressed up and turned into a family member for image-buffing photo ops, they're part of the campaign. Letterman didn't put the spotlight on them, Palin did. So spare me the "he's picking on a kid who's just trying to live her life" crap.

Letterman did the right thing by apologizing, because it puts the pressure on Palin to shut up and move on. She made an issue out of this shit, just like she tried to imply that the "pig on a lipstick" comment was calling her a pig.

She wants it both ways -- she wants to be a national candidate who takes shots at her opponents, then she wants to run away and say, "Hey, I'm just a girl" when the shit starts flying at her.

BTW, if you're so offended by this kind of humor directed at women, how is it that this blog is so supportive of John McIntire? Ever hear the bile that's part of his comedy "act?" Go over to youtube and catch his "Barack Bowler" video. Are you comfortable with his mean-spirited characterization of the mentally challenged? Have you seen the things he's said about Palin and the obscene photoshopped art of her, or the fake photos of Mary Beth Buchanan with semen on her face? Yet this blog will constantly pimp for his appearances. Lots of hypocrisy to go around, isn't there?

Maria said...

Viking 67,

Click here

You'll find a variety of posts where I (and David) criticize Palin on her policies, fitness for the office, etc. (including me at an anti Palin protest) so Letterman wasn't goring my "personal ox."

You'll also see this post where I take on McIntire on his sexism including, but not limited to, Palin.

Regarding the disgusting "bukake" references, someone emailed me and others a heads-up about that and I did intend to write something on it. However, I have about a dozen things I want to write about on any given day (you wouldn't believe, for example how many graphics I've created over the years for posts that I never ended up writing). I have meant to write about it pretty much every day since, but I don't get paid to do this and I can't spend all my time on it.

I may finally get around to writing about it today, I may not. I do have a life.

I was going to write about it after the email, but didn't have time. Then I was going to write about it after seeing offQ where he mentioned the bong joke, but not the bukake reference (guess he didn't think it would play well in that venue).

Then again when he wrote "I'm so tired of the idiotic charge that it's "sexist" to call a bimbo a bimbo" which is a perfect line for me to say something like "Actually, what's sexist is to constantly use sexual humiliation and degradation against women you don't like."

Anyone is welcome to send me a freaking check to help me spend all my time writing about everything I have in my head.

But again, I absolutely disagree with you that "it doesn't matter" which daughter gets smeared and Letterman apparently disagrees with you as well.

It also matters when we smear any pol's kid and that includes the crap that was said about Chelsea Clinton calling her a dog or Janet Reno's daughter.

viking67 said...

I wasn't branding you a Palin supporter. I read the blog enough to know that isn't the case. The "personal ox" in this case was sticking up for a woman just because she's a woman. This has been a pattern with Palin, who also decided to take great umbrage at the "pig with lipstick" comment, even though it was quite apparent no one was calling her a pig. She's quite comfortable with manufacturing outrage for personal gain.

Bristol Palin is an adult. Her mother chose to make her and her circumstances part of the campaign. This is not picking on a "kid" who is just trying to quietly live her life apart from a political parent.

Hope you get the time to comment on McIntire's idiocy and, frankly, can't believe it's taken this long for you to be offended by his pathetic attempts at humor.

Maria said...

If, as you say, I was "sticking up for a woman just because she's a woman" than I would have objected to all criticism of Sarah Palin. But that's obviously not the case. What I have done repeatedly is object to sexism and misogyny whether it comes from the right or the left.

And, yes, it particularly pisses me off when it comes from the left because I don't believe that sexism and misogyny are progressive values.

Also, to be perfectly truthful, every time I do blog about sexism and misogyny that comes from the left, I get attacked. And, yes, the attacks work to some degree because who likes getting attacked? So I do hesitate jumping in one more time.

There's only so many "pie fights" I can take.


Dayvoe said...

Of course, we'll wait on the apologies from the protesters outside the Letterman show.

A few quotations:

"Should we talk about his son?" one protester asked Green. "I believe his son was born out of wedlock. I believe there's a term for that."

"Is someone making jokes about his child?" asked another. "Especially, you know, when he had a daughter out of wedlock himself" (he doesn't; 5-year-old Harry is his only child).

"How dare he?" asked yet a third, the most offensive of all. "When he has a bastard son, and a slut for a wife" (Letterman's wife Lasko has kept a notoriously low profile).

Maria said...

I'm not defending them or Palin's charges of pedophilia towards Letterman which she herself tried to back out of (poorly) under questioning on a morning show. It still doesn't make Letterman's original joke right or not sexist. I'm really glad he apologized for it.

viking67 said...

How is it sexist when it casts both parties (Palin daughter and baseball player) as people who are so casual about sex that they'll screw anyone?

Maria said...

Because A-Rod has actually been linked with a slew of sexual partners both during his marriage and after his divorce. Bristol has only ever been linked sexually with one person: Levi, the father of her baby.

But there's always been a double standard for women/girls when it comes to sex -- words like deflower, damaged goods and slut are rarely ever applied to men. Men never wore chastity belts, there aren't "honor killings' of men because they had sex, etc., etc., etc.

Simply put: men's virginity has never taken on the fetish quality that women's has.

A-Rod does appear to be someone who may be "so casual about sex that they'll screw anyone." Where is the evidence that Bristol is "so casual about sex that they'll screw anyone"? Seriously?

Moreover not only is Bristol being labeled as someone who is "so casual about sex that they'll screw anyone" but so are all her sisters. Don't believe me? Read some of the comments at HuffPo and other blogs. There are people there literally labeling all the "Palin girls" as sluts. For Christ's sake, Piper is SEVEN YEARS OLD. But, again, it's as if we're in the 18th century and if one daughter is "disgraced" they all are.

Here's a question:

Why is it disgusting when people call Letterman's wife a slut because she was unmarried when she had a baby but not when they call Bristol a slut because she was unmarried when she had a baby?

I think it's disgusting in both instances. Do you?

viking67 said...

Why would you get worked up about people calling all the Palin daughters sluts on blogs? Doesn't that stupidity speak for itself? There are irrational people out there. Just look at the crowd that maintains Obama is a Muslim non-citizen who is intent on turning this into a Socialist state.

I assume Letterman and his wife made a conscious decision to have a baby after being in a relationship for more than a decade. Is that a little different than a young woman having unprotected sex with her high school boyfriend? From what I've seen lately, the baby's father and Palin family can barely exchange a civil word. But the Palins were happy to use him as a prop during the campaign.

Another difference: Letterman doesn't have a parent lecturing the nation on abstinence and sitting in moral judgment of others.

Maria said...

You've gone from:

It's OK to make sexist jokes if you don't like the parties involved,
to you can't complain about sexist jokes unless you complain about every sexist joke,
to it's OK to make sexist jokes if the target is an adult,
to it really wasn't a sexist joke,
to you shouldn't get so worked up over sexist jokes,
to 'hey, she really is a slut,'
back to it's OK to make sexist jokes if you don't like the parties involved.

I think sexism is wrong whether it comes from the right, the center, or the left. If I spent all my time writing about sexism than I'd have to have my own blog called 1feminist.blogspot.com. I didn't write my own post on Letterman's joke because in the grand scheme of sexism it didn't rank at the top of my list. That said, as I am one half of this blog, I didn't want to see a defense of it go unremarked upon.

The joke wasn't about hypocrisy. It was about calling someone a slut. You think it's OK to slut-shame an 18-year old because you don't like her mom. I don't.

Perhaps we should agree to disagree.

Maria said...

NOTE: I wrote:
"If I spent all my time writing about sexism than I'd have to have my own blog called 1feminist.blogspot.com."

That should have been:
However if I wrote about all the sexism out there, I'd have no time for 2pj and have to create 1feminist.blogspot.com and blog 24/7 on that.

viking67 said...

The fundamental disagreement is you keep insisting the joke is sexist. I don't see how it is, any more than I can see how it's anti-Hispanic because Alex Rodriguez is just as much of a target. Is the joke unfair? Maybe, but that's the nature of jokes, especially in these times. Is it in bad taste? Sure, but ditto. CBS didn't have a problem with it. I can hear Joan Rivers saying those words. It's certainly much less than you'd hear on a lot of morning radio shows that operate under the watch of the FCC.

If you yell sexism on something this flimsy, doesn't that cheapen the term when there's a worthy argument?

Maria said...

OMG! I see the light! Any woman/girl who has had sex outside of marriage -- even if it's just with one other person -- opens herself to charges of being a slut. (Of course that would mean that 90% of all women are SLUTS!)

Any woman/girl who dresses like your typical cable/network news anchor/reader (because that is how Palin dresses) opens herself to charges of being a slut. (Katie Couric -- what a SLUT!)

And of course there's nothing whatsoever wrong in sexualizing an 18 year-old girl for the sake of a joke. And, best of all you get to sexualize her while condemning her for being sexual. Sweet!

viking67 said...

Now I see the light -- you're irrational.

You're not reacting to the Letterman joke, you're reacting to the reaction by insane people. Kind of like blaming the Beatles for the Manson family murders because Charles Manson thought he heard secret messages in the White Album.

The poor 18-year-old girl who is being "sexualized" is the mother of a child. Maybe she "sexualized" herself? Maybe her mother did that when she paraded the unhappy young couple to the podium and made them props during a Presidential campaign? I have no reason to even know who Bristol Palin is, but her mother took care of that by pushing her into the spotlight.

And while you say you're too busy to comment on McIntire's reprehensible representation of a woman with semen splashed on her face, you have time to carry on this debate? Is that really a matter of having the time, or having the courage to stand up to someone whose tasteless and hateful attempts at humor have been heartily endorsed on a consistent basis by this blog?

Maria said...

"The poor 18-year-old girl who is being "sexualized" is the mother of a child."

Again and again and again that does not make her "so casual about sex that they'll [she'll] screw anyone" (i.e. a "slut") except apparently if you don't like her mother's politics or if you believe in some sexist, completely unrealistic view of female sexuality that no one ever applies to men (which, DUH, is what makes it SEXIST).

Following YOUR logic, as David Letterman had a child out of wedlock ACCORDING TO YOU he's a slut.

And, why don't you blog for five years and then you can tell yourself what to write about? And, wow, you can even try it under your real name.

viking67 said...

I'm still waiting for an explanation for why the original joke was sexist.

As I explained a hundred posts ago, there's a difference between a middle-aged couple in an established long-term relationship choosing to have a child and a teenage girl having an accidental pregnancy from unprotected sex with her high school boyfriend.

Really, that argument is completely devoid of logic.

And let's face facts: You're running from the McIntire issue. You're worried about a 10-second joke on a comedy show (one for which Letterman has apologized) and giving someone local a pass for posting vicious fake photos of a prominent local woman to either degrade her or make her look like a victim of sexual violence. That's weak.

viking67 said...

I'm still waiting for an explanation for why the original joke was sexist.

As I explained a hundred posts ago, there's a difference between a middle-aged couple in an established long-term relationship choosing to have a child and a teenage girl having an accidental pregnancy from unprotected sex with her high school boyfriend.

Really, that argument is completely devoid of logic.

And let's face facts: You're running from the McIntire issue. You're worried about a 10-second joke on a comedy show (one for which Letterman has apologized) and giving someone local a pass for posting vicious fake photos of a prominent local woman to either degrade her or make her look like a victim of sexual violence. That's weak.

Maria said...

I've forgotten that you are the final word on what is sexist.

viking67 said...

I never made any such claim. All I asked for was an explanation of why that joke is sexist. Still waiting.

Maria said...

I've explained it to you several times. You refuse to accept the explanation.

What has been established is that you like to call unwed teen mothers and fathers sluts and I don't.

Oh wait, we know you think it's OK to call Bristol a slut. Is Levi a slut as well?

viking67 said...

Your ability to hear things that weren't said is amazing.

Maria said...

Your inability to take responsibility for things that you think are OK like the characterization of Bristol as someone "who are [is] so casual about sex that they'll [she'll] screw anyone" (i.e. a "slut") is amazing.

And, by the way, I have no idea why you assume that Letterman planned to have a child (one of your arguments for setting a double standard). This sure doesn't make it seem as if it were anything more than an accident:

"I have an announcement to make and I'll be honest with you, I'm a little bit nervous. I have some trepidations about this. I feel a little silly because it's one of those things where I thought never in my life this would happen," said the intensely private host.

"And here I am, 56, and by all rights it shouldn't be happening. But, there's nothing we can do about it now.

Actually, I do have an idea: you like David Letterman, but you don't like Sarah Palin. And, that's all well and good. I've watched Letterman for years and I don't like Palin either, but again, that doesn't mean I'll excuse the slut-shaming of her daughter which you keep defending.

viking67 said...

Once again, you have the ability to leap to conclusions that are supported by non-existent "evidence."

Try this account of the Letterman baby:

"Stern fulfilled all expectations, beginning with a general query — “How is it that Dave has a baby and we really don’t know anything about the woman who had the baby?” — and then proceeding to the specific: Does Letterman love Regina (yes), was the baby an accident (no), do the two live together (yes), and will he push a baby carriage in public (maybe). Stern also asked if Letterman plans to marry Lasko. “Yes, absolutely,” Letterman said, “I’ll be getting married. When, we’re still negotiating.”

Not that it matters, but you're the one who raised the ridiculous point of comparing Letterman's parenthood to Bristol Palin's.

You're still trying to use sarcasm and personal attacks to avoid any real dicussion. So, tell you what: I'm done here. That way you can devote your time and energy to taking on McIntire. I don't know, I'm thinking a guy who takes the time to Photoshop photos of a female authority figure with semen on her face is a bigger issue to someone who truly cares about treatment of women than a comedian offering a joke as a 10-second throwaway.