Erin Burnett’s “what I want in a man” column roils NBC brass

posted at 1:10 pm on January 10, 2008 by Allahpundit

The Monday Page Six item got lots of comments in headlines so let’s bring this one down to Times Square. I’m totally on her side, and not just because of the Pickler/Burnett rule this time.

Sources tell Page Six that Burnett, known as the “Street Sweetie,” has network suits in an uproar over the narcissistic, money-grubbing feature she penned for Men’s Health, titled “Eight Things That Would Impress Me” – with bosses worried it could hurt her and the station’s serious news image.

In the jaw-dropping piece, first revealed on this page Monday, Burnett says guys can “unlock” her heart by giving her round-trip, business-class tickets to Australia and New Zealand, sending a yoga instructor and personal chef to her apartment, and treating her and her sisters to a long-weekend spa getaway, among other suggestions.

“This has caused a lot of hand-wringing at the network,” an insider told us, suggesting Burnett comes off as a trite, gold-digging hussy. “There’s worry she’s damaged her brand. Everybody’s talking about it and asking, like, ‘Why did you do this?’ Everybody think it’s a major [bleep]-up.’ ”

A mention of the article on Dealbreaker.com ridiculed it as, “Map to Erin Burnett’s [Bleep].” The site later substituted the word “heart” for the vulgarism. “The newsroom was talking about ‘Erin Burnett’s [bleep].’ You’ve got to wonder who gave her the idea for this story,” our source said.

Grow up. She likes what she likes, she’s not afraid to make it known, and it has no effect on the shrewdness of her commentary on finance. People aren’t going to tune her out because of it, although they may, alas, occasionally enjoy a [bleep] joke at her expense. Besides: (a) it’s science; (b) her standards might disqualify 99.9% of men but Rush is still very much in the game, baby; and (c) if all else fails, she can always be set up with Adrian Grenier for a most magical meeting of the minds. The odds of sparks are slim — but you nev-ah know!

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Did she at least indicate that she would be impressed with a guy that spent time with her family, rather than just flying her and her family around?

Nope. Not even close. Here is her list:

1. Pack Your Bags
Any guy who can plan a trip to an exotic locale, such as Mongolia, Mozambique, or Papua New Guinea, would impress me.

2. Buy Me a New Atlas and Globe
You could unlock my heart by allowing me to dream up my next trip. I love to travel, and hope to eventually set foot in 100 countries. I have many more to go.

3. Do Something Special for My Parents
Family is important to me, so round-trip business-class tickets to Australia and New Zealand for my parents would earn you big points in my book.

4. Relax Me
Yoga keeps me calm, so I’d be impressed if you thought to send a yoga instructor to my apartment for private sessions.

5. Help Me Work Out
Finding an exercise bike at my door would be great for rainy days when my Raleigh M80 mountain bike and I are stuck indoors.

6. Edify Me
Reading is a passion of mine, so a gathering with a couple of my favorite authors, especially Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs, and Steel) and Robin McKinley (The Blue Sword) would make for an exceptional evening.

7. Please My Palate
Hiring a personal chef to prepare meals for the few nights a week I am home would be unforgettable.

8. Send Me Packing
A man who recognizes the importance of my time with the girls is a keeper. A long weekend spa getaway for my sisters and me would be perfection.

AP, I know you like her, but I think you’d be disapointed with who she really is.

natesnake on January 10, 2008 at 3:02 PM

In this case, she is just telling the rest of us what it will take to play at her level.

And what is “her level”?
BTW, she’s with CNBC not Fox.

MayBee on January 10, 2008 at 3:03 PM

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 2:58 PM

How noble of you :) I’m not equating TD with anything negative. There’s no insult in my statement.

Men use to tell us that we love flattery, even though we are not deceived by it, because it shows that we are of importance enough to be courted.

Read the link. Really. Then if you wish to take issue, we can canvas the subject further.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Aw, thanks, Hon. I was gonna answer myself, but really, why bother?

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 3:00 PM

If you think Emerson is wrong, I wish you would answer. I think what he says there is universally true.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM

With a decent bank account and a full time assistant, I could really, really, really, impress this ….uh hum… lady and not invest a single second doing it.

Classy.

natesnake on January 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM

What’s she supposed to say, she wants a guy with a sense of humor? At least she’s honest.

Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM

If you think Emerson is wrong, I wish you would answer. I think what he says there is universally true.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM

With all due respect, Emerson lived about 160 years ago. Now, maybe it’s just me, but I suspect culture has changed a teensy bit since the 1840s. Then again, I was just reading about some toffer messing about with this vulcanization business…

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 3:10 PM

In other words, She needs to be bought. It’s only the size of the wallet that matters with her.

roninacreage on January 10, 2008 at 3:11 PM

AP, I know you like her, but I think you’d be disapointed with who she really is.

I know who she really is. I’m under no illusions. I commend her for being honest about who she really is.

What’s she supposed to say, she wants a guy with a sense of humor? At least she’s honest.

Precisely.

Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

MC, time is not a criticism of value. That’s like saying it’s time for a new constitutional convention. There are either universal truths, or there are not. Criticize the merit, not the age. Every child knows something of Homer and Plato.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

And what is “her level”?

MayBee on January 10, 2008 at 3:03 PM

It’s been true since ancient time that people date at their own socioeconomic level. Sure there are exceptions, but those just prove the rule. When we see what happens to her audience size we will know what effect this has on the crushes that male viewers might have. Maybe she will have to cry after the next bear session to gain a new female audience.

pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 3:15 PM

That’s like saying it’s time for a new constitutional convention.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

So, suggesting that whores are different these days is equivalent to challenging freedom of speech?

Riiight.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 3:16 PM

6. Edify Me
Reading is a passion of mine, so a gathering with a couple of my favorite authors, especially Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs, and Steel) and Robin McKinley (The Blue Sword) would make for an exceptional evening.

Wow, she reads a hack like Jared Diamond?? Is this supposed to show her “intellectual” side?

What’s she supposed to say, she wants a guy with a sense of humor? At least she’s honest.

Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Yes, she is being honest. And noting what kind of woman she is (“Madame, what kind of woman you are has already been
established; what remains is just to agree on a price.”) is also being honest.

thirteen28 on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM

OK, she’s honest about being materialistic .
The problem as I see it is that she’s materialistic. What’s wrong with criticizing that?

(ps. Thanks, natesnake)

MayBee on January 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Ah. So Paris Hilton being a money-grubbing whore and not admitting it makes her a ditzy moron. Erin Burnett being a money-grubbing whore and admitting it makes her a model member of society, and something to aspire to. And yes, I said some “thing”. Guys sure as hell don’t want to have a conversation with her.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Precisely.

Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Really?

I guess all you need then AP is a American Express Black card and your in!

liquidflorian on January 10, 2008 at 3:19 PM

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 3:16 PM

I think we have veered massively off into the ditch here. I don’t know how you jump from one to the other. Emerson said there are universal truths as relating to the giving of gifts from one to another. I suggested to TD that we are all more alike then she would think at first blush. If you dismiss that, that’s fine (though I doubt you have given it much thought), but that’s unrelated to your last comment. I’m not particularly interested in chasing specious arguments. If you have a criticism on the merit, please just state that instead.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM

Hey if I could pay the toll I would say leave her alone but since I didn’t get past the first one…Zionist Whore!

ronsfi on January 10, 2008 at 3:23 PM

natesnake on January 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Night-farting is a sovereign right, not a privilege.

Kid from Brooklyn on January 10, 2008 at 3:28 PM

MB4 on January 10, 2008 at 2:44 PM

I’d have to be pretty hard up. I can tell by looking at her she’s not my type. I mean, look at where she works – Can Not Be Correct – then throw in this little tidbit about her and she drops further down my scale (which is [pretty damned loose, btw). Nope, she doesn’t anything for me. Of course, I’m sober now…

Brass Pair on January 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM

Your doubts would be as wrong as you are about TD. I considered this issue for quite a while before I met my current flame. I consider it every time I see other couples getting together, and what happens between them.

As to the “universal truth” about there being a lower boundary that separates where a gift is seen as being cheap versus being an example of sacrifice towards the person being gift, there is also an upper boundary, as I and others have discovered. Lay it on too thick and you have to deal with a number of reactions with most women, not least of which can be offense at “what kind of girl you think I am”.

Again, culture has changed since Emerson wrote his words. Culture has changed quite a bit. Gifts and courting are not what they once were.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 3:33 PM

In my neighborhood there is a word for a woman whose “heart” is unlocked with material items. The more expensive, she is referred to as a “high priced” one of those “word”.

peacenprosperity on January 10, 2008 at 3:43 PM

So, allah, her list is just the requirements for getting in the game? Provide all that stuff and she might talk to you?

Typical arrogant, foul liberal.

peacenprosperity on January 10, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Your doubts would be as wrong as you are about TD.

I don’t know how to translate that:) If I’m wrong about TD, then I’m wrong about humanity and the possibility that things are universally true. Either way I think you imply that you have given thought to Emerson’s analogy, so that’s great, I’ll hold you intellectually responsible for accurately representing him.

Necessity does everything well…Next to things of necessity, the rule for a gift, which one of my friends prescribed, is, that we might convey to some person that which properly belonged to his character, and was easily associated with him in thought..The only gift is a portion of thyself.

Here’s the material point, which is true for TD, me, you, everyone. Rarely can you give a give of necessity to a woman like Erin. She is self-sufficient. The best think you can do is to give a gift that is associated with her thought (what she values) – which she divulges in this article – travel, family, yoga, etc. For this you label her a whore (how gracious).

That’s an inaccurate appraisal. Let me frame it this way. When most people start dating, they go to dinner or meet for lunch, etc – they naturally default to [a gift of] necessity. People have to eat to live. When you have that date you learn about her interests, then what next – you take her to a movie that she’s interested in, or a play, or whatever it is that she’s into. That’s a gift of [character, association by] thought. So Erin tells you her values, gives you a specific example and you call her a whore. That’s a very shallow view, imo.

As for the further points, the cheap/thick – that’s a tangential point not related to Erin or my comment to TD, so I’ll leave that for another time.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:49 PM

When most people start dating, they go to dinner or meet for lunch, etc – they naturally default to [a gift of] necessity. People have to eat to live. When you have that date you learn about her interests, then what next – you take her to a movie that she’s interested in, or a play, or whatever it is that she’s into.

The difference is that the examples you give are examples of giving (partially) the gift of time together. The examples she gives are solely about her getting something for herself or her family- the dater is not included.
Keep in mind this is a list of “Eight Things That Would Impress Me,” not “Eight Gifts I’d Like to be Given”.
One can be impressed by things other than gifts.
One would hope.

MayBee on January 10, 2008 at 3:58 PM

This is what happens when I step away to actually DO work. Spirit, I will follow the link and actually read it..and get back to you.

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 3:58 PM

She is nothing but a gold digging money grubbing hussy! And that’s all she is and ever will be. Money may get you some happiness, but “money can’t buy you love!”

Confederate on January 10, 2008 at 4:04 PM

tickleddragon – No worries. For some reason I have difficulty focusing on caucus/primary/debate dates. No insult was intended, as you will see for yourself:)

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 4:06 PM

The difference is that the examples you give are examples of giving (partially) the gift of time together.

Highly career focused people probably have a different view of how to spend time then HotAir commenters. They probably have a greater preference for gifts that do not consume their time, but still show affection. She is also gracious enough to suggest gifts that do not require a lot of time of the giver, since as has been pointed out there are ways that even making these arrangements can be offshored.

I don’t see why people think these trifles could buy her modesty. She could have bought all of the items on that list from her salary from her first day on her job.

pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 4:08 PM

Here’s the material point, which is true for TD, me, you, everyone. Rarely can you give a give of necessity to a woman like Erin. She is self-sufficient. The best think you can do is to give a gift that is associated with her thought (what she values) – which she divulges in this article – travel, family, yoga, etc. For this you label her a whore (how gracious).

That’s an inaccurate appraisal. Let me frame it this way. When most people start dating, they go to dinner or meet for lunch, etc – they naturally default to [a gift of] necessity. People have to eat to live. When you have that date you learn about her interests, then what next – you take her to a movie that she’s interested in, or a play, or whatever it is that she’s into. That’s a gift of [character, association by] thought. So Erin tells you her values, gives you a specific example and you call her a whore. That’s a very shallow view, imo.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:49 PM

You’re saying a person is giving me values. Great. Are all values positive? Are no values negative? You’re making the assumption that her values are coming from a noble place. As you said, she’s self-sufficient. You say she values yoga. Does she ask for you to go to a yoga class with her? Perhaps a gym? No. She asks for a personal trainer to be sent to her door. She values her parents. So she wants you to send them to New Zealand. Not visit them? Spend time with them, and, one would assume, her as well? Not at all…she would much rather you write a check and send her off with her sisters to the spa.

All of these things have an underlying premise: She’s not interested in you, she’s interested in what you can buy for her. Now that’s a value. It doesn’t make it any less contemptible.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 4:10 PM

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 3:49 PM

I would be much more impressed if she had listed anything that would would have required someone’s time to do, instead of someone’s cash to buy. I have found that the most valuable thing I have is my time. I much prefer a woman that values the time I spend with her over anything I buy for her. Especially since the time is more difficult for me to come by, and it indicates that she actually cares about me not what she can get.

Buford on January 10, 2008 at 4:18 PM

They’re helpful hints, not a cover charge.

Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Is that kind of like a fee instead of a tax? What is she, a Romney supporter?

right2bright on January 10, 2008 at 4:19 PM

Money may get you some happiness, but “money can’t buy you love!”

Confederate on January 10, 2008 at 4:04 PM

Wrong, people like Donald Trump, Liz Taylor, Rudy, have been in love several times.

right2bright on January 10, 2008 at 4:22 PM

The assumption is that these are her only requirements.
A lot of women start with an ideal…must be educated, have a steady good paying job (shows drive and ambition), be hung like (well some do), have the money to spend time and effort on the one they marry.
Big deal…then reality sets in, they fall in love, and that may happen or may not…but nothing wrong with standards. Hers were “journalistic” standards, if you sat down with her, have a few drinks, you would probably hand her the keys to your car…she ain’t bad lookin.

right2bright on January 10, 2008 at 4:27 PM

“This has caused a lot of hand-wringing at the network,” an insider told us, suggesting Burnett comes off as a trite, gold-digging hussy.

Yes, but only because she’s a trite, gold-digging hussy.

None of the things she mentioned had anything to do with the man’s character or temperament. Then again, she might figure that she doesn’t have much to offer besides her looks, so she might as well sell them for what she can get.

morganfrost on January 10, 2008 at 4:29 PM

You’re saying a person is giving me values.

MC, no, I’m saying you mean someone in their value system. Not the same at all.

I have found that the most valuable thing I have is my time. I much prefer a woman that values the time I spend with her over anything I buy for her.

Buford, yes I agree as time is the only commodity you cannot get more of. However, that is a step in the natural progression for most people, not the first step. Which is why women especially value marriage as it is a promise of time (future).

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I read – the best I could with work stuff crowding my head and giving me a headache – and I have to assert that this was not an debate about whether humans want/need gifts of necessity or value. I’d never deny that I like gifts. However, there is a huge difference between desire and expectation. Expectation is presumptuous and rude.

To me, someone spending time with me is a gift. Time with her, is not indicated as needed or necessarily wanted – thus the “send me away” message in her gift suggestions. I’m not interested in what men are willing to give me to rank my attention. I’m interested in a man willing to, and wanting to spend time with me. Gifts are a thing of caring and generosity, and not at all tied to a requirement for me.

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:36 PM

MC – mean sb meet

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 4:36 PM

TD – time is a gift too.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Again, not stating that we don’t want/like gifts. What makes her so repulsive to me is the expectation and presumptuousness…that end up getting attached to all females in the eyes of men.

You notice she didn’t ask for time WITH someone.

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:38 PM

And please, don’t ever ask me to read anything that heady again at work. LOL. Some of the archaic wording was just painful for me.

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:39 PM

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:39 PM

So painful you can’t even pay attention to your email.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 4:50 PM

MC, no, I’m saying you meanmeet someone in their value system. Not the same at all.

Added the correction, and I still don’t know what you’re saying.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 4:51 PM

…and noting what kind of woman she is (”Madame, what kind of woman you are has already been
established; what remains is just to agree on a price.”
) is also being honest.

thirteen28 on January 10, 2008 at 3:17 PM

That old punchline was my first thought after reading this story.

deepdiver on January 10, 2008 at 4:54 PM

Wow a truthful female. Who would have thought it? At least you know the price tag before you marry her. Most women just nickle and dime you to death.

unseen on January 10, 2008 at 4:54 PM

This is all a stunt to take some attention back away from the Fox babes. I mean, the Fox News Foxes were one thing, but Cavuto stacked that Fox Business Network with tons of hotties too… CNBC feels the heat and set this stunt up to say “hey, we’ve got hos to, don’t flip the channel”.

RightWinged on January 10, 2008 at 4:56 PM

I’ll settle all this discussion. MKH is hotter, smarter, and wouldn’t be nearly as demanding. Now tell me what class SHE’S in.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:01 PM

There was on Craigslist a personal ad by a woman detailing her extensive income requirements for a boyfriend. And lamenting why so few on the Upper East Side met them.

A funny response by a Wall Street trader boiled down to her looks being a “depreciating asset” while his money only appreciated.

I suspect Burnett’s assets will depreciate. As a practical matter since she’s a personality not an analyst who makes people money, her “brand” as a personality has probably also been degraded. Since CNBC is in the info-tainment business of course.

whiskey_199 on January 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM

Any person calling this woman a whore is a creep. None of you would say it to her in person.

She’s honest and sounds clear about her standards. What’s wrong with that? She likes nice things and doesn’t want to end up with some ego-bruised, broke cavecreep. She has her own money and she never stated that those gifts are requirements. She listed those things which would impress her.

If someone paid for my family to travel internationally, I’d be impressed too.

Again. If you call this woman a whore, you are a creep in my book. I’d love to see the tail you chumps are tagging.

It’s time to start posting pictures.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Hey, I’d Hit it.

C-Low on January 10, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Any person calling this woman a whore is a creep. None of you would say it to her in person.

Any woman with these standards is a money-grubbing, gold-digging, narcissistic whore. If she laid them out to me in person, I’d laugh until I ran out of breath.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM

She likes nice things and doesn’t want to end up with some ego-bruised, broke cavecreep.

Oh yes, because anyone who doesn’t send her parents around the world, get her a personal chef, and send her off to the spa is obviously an ego-bruised, broke cavecreep.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:12 PM

Any person calling this woman a whore is a creep.

Again. If you call this woman a whore, you are a creep in my book. I’d love to see the tail you chumps are tagging.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM

So… “Any person calling this woman a whore [based on her own statements of what she wants from men] is a creep”, but referring to women you know nothing about as “tail” to be “tagged” isn’t creepy at all?

ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 5:15 PM

Added the correction, and I still don’t know what you’re saying.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 4:51 PM

It simple. Let’s say your gf likes humor. Whether you make a joke or take her to a comedy club, you are meeting her (with what assets you are providing – your time, your money, whatever) in her value system. Conversely if you take her to a classical music concert and she hates cm then you are not. It’s helpful to know ahead of time. If she says, it doesn’t make her a whore. The points here are she likes travel, family, yoga, etc.

You notice she didn’t ask for time WITH someone.

Which you interpret to mean what? If she had said “time with someone” on a trip would that keep people from calling her a whore?

What makes her so repulsive to me is the expectation and presumptuousness

What’s the difference between expectations and standards? Consider it in relative rather then absolute terms: if a man had a million dollars and he bought you a 50 dollar engagement ring? Is it presumptuous to think he might express his ‘love’ with more investment?

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:39 PM

Yes ma’am, I will refrain from that in the future. It was merely food for thought. I just merely addressed it now b/c MC rushed to your defense, under the assumption I assume, that the link would contain insult or slander. It’s just his introspection of humanity – a sliver of brilliance to chew on at leisure.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 5:15 PM

I’m empressed “Iron my shirt”

Texyank on January 10, 2008 at 5:17 PM

ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 5:15 PM

I have to stop laughing to respond. TOUCHE TURTLE AWAY! If you had a tip jar, I’d tip ya! Muy excelente!

And no I don’t think it’s creepy. We all have our pet names. I just don’t think a woman who has standards is a whore.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:18 PM

Well, yes. I’m sorry, but I can’t hold it against a beautiful woman that she values status and wealth in a man, the way men value beauty in women. It’s human nature. Burnett’s only sin is being willing to cop to it, so now suddenly she’s a “gold digger.” Nonsense. She’s a human being.

Allah-
If I asked you to list 8 things that could impress you regarding a woman, would all 8 be about beauty?

MayBee on January 10, 2008 at 5:21 PM

None of the things she mentioned had anything to do with the man’s character or temperament. Then again, she might figure that she doesn’t have much to offer besides her looks, so she might as well sell them for what she can get.

morganfrost on January 10, 2008 at 4:29 PM

Show me a man who has never tapped some pretty thing just because she was some pretty thing, and I will show you a liar.

Plus many successful men have eye-candy-love. Whatever draws people together is what draws them together. What are your standards? What did you do to win your wife/gf over, take her on a picnic? I’m betting that you put on a damn good show, because you thought she was worth it.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM

Any woman with these standards is a money-grubbing, gold-digging, narcissistic whore. If she laid them out to me in person, I’d laugh until I ran out of breath.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM

So you are claiming that if you were single and a woman did these things for you, that you wouldn’t be impressed?

pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM

It simple. Let’s say your gf likes humor. Whether you make a joke or take her to a comedy club, you are meeting her (with what assets you are providing – your time, your money, whatever) in her value system. Conversely if you take her to a classical music concert and she hates cm then you are not. It’s helpful to know ahead of time. If she says, it doesn’t make her a whore. The points here are she likes travel, family, yoga, etc.

And she wants those likes satisfied in extraordinarily expensive ways. Again, she likes travel? For her parents she likes travel. No mention of her going with, or you, just them. She wants the check. She likes yoga. I repeat, does she want to do yoga with you? No, she wants a personal trainer and you nowhere around. It’s not about you that she wants, it’s about your money. That’s acceptable to some, contemptible to others.

Which you interpret to mean what? If she had said “time with someone” on a trip would that keep people from calling her a whore?

Um, YES. She’s in it for personal financial gain. How else do you define whore?

What’s the difference between expectations and standards? Consider it in relative rather then absolute terms: if a man had a million dollars and he bought you a 50 dollar engagement ring? Is it presumptuous to think he might express his ‘love’ with more investment?

Fair enough, but then she wasn’t totally honest. She made an implication. She would only be interested in someone with a lot of money. If she were truly honest, she’d say “I want a man who can afford to give me any extravagance I wish…meaning a rich man.”

Then the arguments over whether she’s a gold digger would vanish, because that’s what she is.

I just merely addressed it now b/c MC rushed to your defense, under the assumption I assume, that the link would contain insult or slander. It’s just his introspection of humanity – a sliver of brilliance to chew on at leisure.

It was more the statement that “you are” all the same. Clarification helps. Sorry to jump the gun. ;)

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:25 PM

So you are claiming that if you were single and a woman did these things for you, that you wouldn’t be impressed?

pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM

I’m not making the claim that these are the things needed to garner my interest. She is.

MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 5:26 PM

Any person calling this woman a whore is a creep. None of you would say it to her in person.

I would say the same thing to her in person that I posted: We have established what kind of woman she is and now we are just negotiating price. I post nothing here that I would not say in real life given socially appropriate circumstances.

Again. If you call this woman a whore, you are a creep in my book. I’d love to see the tail you chumps are tagging.

It’s time to start posting pictures.
The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Well, now we know something about what kind of person you are too. Time to start posting pictures? See the tail? So to you the value of a woman is in her looks? Your shallowness screams out from the above comment. Maybe someone will buy you “Shallow Hal” for a Valentine’s Day present.

deepdiver on January 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM

And she wants those likes satisfied in extraordinarily expensive ways.

To you. Not to those with the ability to easily provide it.

She wants the check…It’s not about you that she wants, it’s about your money.

You are projecting unstated motive. Why? So you can categorize her. Knock yourself out, I guess.

Um, YES.

Then you disagree with TD, as that was her remark that it was left unsaid. Since both the c/p there were responses to TD, pardon me if I refrain from further comment on that right now in case she answers it also.

Clarification helps. Sorry to jump the gun. ;)

Yes, that’s why I put a smiley face and a link.

Spirit of 1776 on January 10, 2008 at 5:34 PM

[based on her own statements of what she wants from men]

I understood the list to consist of things which would “impress” her. “Impress” connotes extra-noteworthiness, not the standard, above-and-beyond. If you are unimpressed by any of those things, you two just have different gauges.

How does that make her a whore or anything nearing such a depraved station in life?

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM

Well, now we know something about what kind of person you are too. Time to start posting pictures? See the tail? So to you the value of a woman is in her looks? Your shallowness screams out from the above comment. Maybe someone will buy you “Shallow Hal” for a Valentine’s Day present.

deepdiver on January 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM

No…the pics are of the cavestuds. It’s an old request. A lot of posts about women denigrate them based on their looks or physical attributes.

I’ve never heard anyone dismiss Robert Novack or Dick Cheney based on their looks. Not true, they do that over at HuffPo, DailyKos, DU, etc.

And quite honestly I think it would make people a lot more honest about things if their faces were tied to their comments. It would be very interesting to see the mugs of these Romeos.

As far as knowing anything about me. You know what you think you know. You know your opinion. But you really know nothing about anybody in here.

Thanks for reply.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM

I have to stop laughing to respond. TOUCHE TURTLE AWAY! If you had a tip jar, I’d tip ya! Muy excelente!

And no I don’t think it’s creepy. We all have our pet names. I just don’t think a woman who has standards is a whore.

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:18 PM

She’s welcome to have any standards she wants as far as I’m concerned, within legal limits, but if those standards appear to be shallow and mercenary, it’s inevitable that people are going to point that out. If she isn’t really that shallow, or at least doesn’t want to give the public that impression, then she needs to present herself differently than she did in that article. And if she just doesn’t care what people think, that’s fine, I can respect that, but as a media figure public perception of her does affect her career.

ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM

AP, I know you like her, but I think you’d be disapointed with who she really is.
I know who she really is. I’m under no illusions. I commend her for being honest about who she really is.

What’s she supposed to say, she wants a guy with a sense of humor? At least she’s honest.
Precisely.

Allahpundit on January 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Who’s suprised here? She’s just being a golddigger… She’s far from being unique on this subject.. Her mating call sounds like Cha-Ching.. If you’re into chicks like this then go for it, if not stay away. I wouldn’t touch it with caddle prod but there’s alot of men who would… Personally, I view women like this to be a “praying mantis”, but at least she’s forewarned her victum.

whiskeytango on January 10, 2008 at 6:08 PM

If she isn’t really that shallow, or at least doesn’t want to give the public that impression, then she needs to present herself differently than she did in that article. And if she just doesn’t care what people think, that’s fine, I can respect that, but as a media figure public perception of her does affect her career.

I mostly agree with that. Perception is reality in showbiz. She could have presented herself more favorably. But maybe she just doesn’t give a crap what we think. That would not be the best approach to her developing media brand.

I think the real joke is that CNBC has any problem with this when they have paraded her around as a “sweet” piece of journalist flesh. Now there’s an uproar over her having a little fun with her own image. Please.

Anybody seen the pics?

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 6:09 PM

I understood the list to consist of things which would “impress” her. “Impress” connotes
extra-noteworthiness, not the standard, above-and-beyond. If you are unimpressed by any of those things, you two just have different gauges.

How does that make her a whore or anything nearing such a depraved station in life?

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:38 PM

I never actually used the word whore, myself, so I’m not really going to try to defend it. If you want to take that up with those who did use it, feel free. My only previous post in this thread said that if she didn’t want to give people the impression that she was all about money, then she should have listed a variety of things that impress her instead of just big-ticket items. Sure, the things she listed are all impressive to most people, but if your list is all “Fly me to Mongolia” and no “Surprise me with flowers”, people are going to–not unreasonably–conclude that spending money is the only way to impress you. Words like “whore” and “gold-digger” are probably just heavy-handed and exaggerated ways of pointing that out.

ReubenJCogburn on January 10, 2008 at 6:09 PM

To me, someone spending time with me is a gift…
tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Remember Henry Kissinger, he was quite the ladies man. One famous starlet who dated and admired him wrote that with other powerful men that she dated, she knew they were powerful and intelligent, but with Henry you knew you were the one who was powerful and intelligent.

right2bright on January 10, 2008 at 6:10 PM

I’m sorry–NBC? NBC is worried about hurting their image? Come again?

Montana on January 10, 2008 at 6:17 PM

Couldn’t she have been kidding a little bit?

mikeyboss on January 10, 2008 at 6:39 PM

Well we know what she is, the question is, how much?

It’s not uncommon for most professionals to tell you how much and require payment upfront.

TheSitRep on January 10, 2008 at 6:46 PM

The Race Card on January 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM

Your follow-up comments clarified for me and I misunderstood part of what you meant in your post.

I’m sorry–NBC? NBC is worried about hurting their image? Come again?

Montana on January 10, 2008 at 6:17 PM

Ahahahahhahahha!

deepdiver on January 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM

Yes, she is being honest. And noting what kind of woman she is (”Madame, what kind of woman you are has already been established; what remains is just to agree on a price.”) is also being honest.

Where did I say different?

Jim Treacher on January 10, 2008 at 6:54 PM

Couldn’t she have been kidding a little bit?

mikeyboss on January 10, 2008 at 6:39 PM

I think she was playing to her audience of day traders. For the cost of a bad trade, they could wake up to her making their bacon, breakfast I mean.

pedestrian on January 10, 2008 at 6:55 PM

Well,what she is really telling everybody is I’m
extremely high maintenance,much like a Ferrari,
ya know,your first tune-up is like $10,000.00,
for a few spins around the block!

canopfor on January 10, 2008 at 7:21 PM

So deer-packaging night at the Morgenholz house is out, right?

HerrMorgenholz on January 10, 2008 at 7:27 PM

Frankly I’m shocked that anyone here really gives a damn what it would take to impress her. She is obviously so impressed with herself that she comes off as and shallow superficial idiot to me. Her being honest about it doesnt add to her appeal. Just another modern day money hungry airhead!!!

devere252 on January 10, 2008 at 8:11 PM

Erin Burnett should be commended for laying her cards on the table for all to see. If all women were so honest and upfront about themselves it would make it much easier to know which ones to avoid.

Tantor on January 10, 2008 at 8:19 PM

So many here are missing point. The issue is not whether you agree with her tastes and open opinions. The issue is whether her opinions will impact her appeal to the target audience. I believe that her views, openly expressed, will have a definitely negative impact on her appeal to the public.

On another note, her views totally turn me off. I have watched her many times and now I would have a tendency to turn the channel as soon as I saw her face.

omegaram on January 10, 2008 at 9:47 PM

She’s waiting for Rush to take the bait.

wepeople on January 10, 2008 at 9:48 PM

1. Pack Your Bags
Any guy who can plan a trip to an exotic locale, such as Mongolia, Mozambique, or Papua New Guinea, would impress me.

…8. Send Me Packing
A man who recognizes the importance of my time with the girls is a keeper. A long weekend spa getaway for my sisters and me would be perfection.

PLAN a trip; SEND me on it…. She’s not looking for a companion; she’s looking for a travel agent and meal ticket.

Go over the rest of the list. BUY ME an atlas; DO SOMETHING for my parents; SEND me a yoga instructor… Buy me an exercise bike; throw me a party with some novelists… And finally: “…hire me a personal chef to prepare meals for the few nights a week I am home.”

This “lady” didn’t say anything AT ALL about the man himself; she described only what he could do for her or give to her. That’s certainly a far cry from a “street hooker.” But no one here called her that. The precise term for the ideal relationship she describes would be “kept woman,” or perhaps “mistress.” And a relatively high-class one at that.

The term “whore” is simply more generic; it covers all of the above, including any woman who is sexually promiscuous and/or supplies favors in exchange for material gain in lieu of emotional relationship.

Anyone who can’t deal with that definition has a problem with the English language, not with the people who use it.

logis on January 10, 2008 at 10:28 PM

So your justifying her instinctual urge? There are other instinctual urges that humans have…. Gold diggers are gold diggers. The admission that you have no control over your lust for unearned wealth is not something to be lauded.
MadisonConservative on January 10, 2008 at 2:34 PM

There’s not a thing in the world wrong with instinctual urges. Hell, instinctual urges are GREAT. The problem is that some people are simply stunted, and never develop the maturity to temper those urges and integrate them as a healthy part of a complete personality.

There’s nothing wrong with a woman mentioning “doing nice things for me,” or even “taking care of me” as something she likes in a man. That’s perfectly normal. But when a woman takes the time and trouble to list eight items, and NONE of them have anything whatsoever to do with his personality or the relationship between him and her that’s not selfish; that’s pathological. In any career field outside of prostitution, politics or show business, that degree of narcissism would make her technically dysfunctional.

logis on January 10, 2008 at 11:14 PM

WoW! I read her list and the words: Shallow Bitch come to mind.

Tim Burton on January 11, 2008 at 12:51 AM

This is a materialistic, narcissistic gold digger and all around creep. I really pity the fool that marries or dates this piece of trash.

dogsoldier on January 11, 2008 at 7:00 AM

I’m sure Jeff Foxworth could find a gal to come up with a list more to my level. Something tells me this chick is going to be single for a long time. She needs to write a list telling what she would do for her man.

sonnyspats1 on January 11, 2008 at 8:38 PM

You know, it’s broads like this one that make men believe we’re ALL like this.

Money is fine and all, but I’ll take quality attention and time over funds any day.

Shrew.

tickleddragon on January 10, 2008 at 2:54 PM

Attention AP!

This is what a real woman desires.
Gals like Erin are more interested in what their looks can get them than they are in true love.

Quite frankly, they don’t get the time of day from me.

conservnut on January 11, 2008 at 10:44 PM

Burnett got a little TOO close to Matthews.

She now believes all her print.

Burnett has done a public service in making this list. It’s going to serve as a warning beacon to many potential mates to avoid these rocky shoals of avarice.

Now she will attract primarliy those whose keels ride shallow through the surf.

drjohn on January 12, 2008 at 8:21 AM

Comment pages: 1 2