Oh my: NOW inducts Letterman into its “Media Hall of Shame”

posted at 8:25 pm on June 11, 2009 by Allahpundit

Credit where credit’s due.

Comedians in search of a laugh should really know better than to snicker about men having sex with teenage girls (or young women) less than half their age.

The sexualization of girls and women in the media is reaching new lows these days — it is exploitative and has a negative effect on how all women and girls are perceived and how they view themselves. Letterman also joked about what he called Palin’s “slutty flight attendant look” — yet another example of how the media love to focus on a woman politician’s appearance, especially as it relates to her sexual appeal to men. Someone of Letterman’s stature, who appears on what used to be known as “the Tiffany Network” (CBS), should be above wallowing in the juvenile, sexist mud that other comedians and broadcasters seem to prefer.

On that point, it’s important to note that when Chelsea Clinton was 13 years old she was the target of numerous insults based on her appearance. Rush Limbaugh even referred to her as the “White House dog.” NOW hopes that all the conservatives who are fired up about sexism in the media lately will join us in calling out sexism when it is directed at women who aren’t professed conservatives.

People on Twitter are grumbling about that last paragraph but (a) given how peeved the sisterhood will be that they’re defending Palin, surely you won’t begrudge NOW some sort of ass-covering knock on conservatives here, and (b) their point is, unfortunately, too often valid, as a scroll through righty blog comments about Michelle Obama or Hillary Clinton (at least before 2008) will attest. A compromise, then: The right will join in calling out sexism directed at liberal women when the left stops treating conservative women as “inauthentic” or traitors to their gender because they happen to be pro-life. Deal?

Meanwhile, Michael Steele hints at a boycott of Letterman’s show. Really? Even an awful joke is still a joke. I think the PR beating he’s taking is enough.

Update (Ed): Since NOW has been good enough to put principle above politics, then I can do the same by agreeing that conservative pundits should leave menstruation out of their criticisms of Sonia Sotomayor.  If we complain about the belittling and sexualizing of conservative women in politics, then G. Gordon Liddy should stick to the substantive issues in the Sotomayor nomination.  I hadn’t heard about that one until I clicked over to NOW’s site.


Related Posts:

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 4 5 6

NOW is astutely manipulating public outrage in order to enable via gender association and the “need” to protect “special populations” Sotomayor’s nomination. AS IF Sotomayor would spread her special vested interest to protect ANY conservative, regardless.

Good for NOW to rebuke Letterman. Note well how many days they waited to poll the nation’s response, whether they SHOULD in order to manipulate their own power structure to appear as moderators. Note well the TIMING of NOW’s involvement to protect women in general, coinciding with Sotomayor’s nomination, to rally support for Sotomayor by usurping the momentum from outrage over Palin’s daughter being sexually abused on national television.

maverick muse on June 12, 2009 at 9:46 AM

A compromise, then: The right will join in calling out sexism directed at liberal women when the left stops treating conservative women as “inauthentic” or traitors to their gender because they happen to be pro-life. Deal?

I’m good with that. Just wish NOW had been more vocal in support of Gov. Palin when she was running for VPOTUS.

Meanwhile, Michael Steele hints at a boycott of Letterman’s show. Really? Even an awful joke is still a joke. I think the PR beating he’s taking is enough.

I’m good with that, too, because I stopped watching when DL’s tone became much more mean-spirited towards those whom he disagreed with to go along with his lapping up of Stewart Smalley. I will quickly add that it is a bit petty.

Update (Ed): Since NOW has been good enough to put principle above politics, then I can do the same by agreeing that conservative pundits should leave menstruation out of their criticisms of Sonia Sotomayor. If we complain about the belittling and sexualizing of conservative women in politics, then G. Gordon Liddy should stick to the substantive issues in the Sotomayor nomination. I hadn’t heard about that one until I clicked over to NOW’s site.

Wow! I had not heard that about the Rosland Capital spokesman. Wonder if he’ll lose that gig over those comments?

I’m good with holding the discourse to a higher standard, FWIW. However, I won’t hold my breathe expecting the same from the left.

Wildcatter1980 on June 12, 2009 at 9:47 AM

Uh oh… now Letterman Obama is the victim…

Uh oh…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/12/conservative-columnist-bl_n_214655.html

(go S.E.!)

Upstater85 on June 12, 2009 at 9:50 AM

except they got it wrong about Rush… he never did it…

LIMBAUGH:David Hinckley of–of the New York Daily News wrote this, and what he has–he’s got–it’s very strange. He says, In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.’ Could–could we see the cute kid? Let’s take a look at–see who is the cute kid in the White House. (A picture is shown of Millie the dog)

LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) No, no, no. That’s not the kid.

(Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton)

LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) That’s–that’s the kid. We’re trying to…

max1 on June 12, 2009 at 9:45 AM

max1 thanks for clearing the record.

Whoever listens to live talk radio knows that the host is working via staff who are producing what they ANTICIPATE the host is about to say or request. Corrections get made live time by the host who clarifies what he/she wants or is looking for, and the show goes on.

Leave it to Leftists to live life out of context.

maverick muse on June 12, 2009 at 9:51 AM

I don’t know if you are making a jab at SouthernGal, but I’ve never thought of statutory rape as being more prevalent in the South.

Upstater85 on June 12, 2009 at 12:19 AM

Until as recently as 2005, the age of consent in many southern states was 16, while you could marry at 14 with parental consent.

alliebobbitt on June 12, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Nice bit of selective reading. A few other states allowing marriage to those 14 or under with parental consent: New Hampshire, New Jersey, & New York.

I’m not a fan of 14-year-old brides (or 18-year-old ones in most cases, for that matter); but since moving to Tennessee I’ve learned that there are still some little enclaves tucked away in the hills that have not yet been brought into the 20th century, let alone the 21st. Life is hard, and the children grow up quickly. They are, of necessity, stronger and more mature at 14 than the typical urban 18-year-old.

RegularJoe on June 12, 2009 at 9:54 AM

To any and all that complain that we cannot comment on MM’s site, she has a terrific piece over on RCP about this, where you can COMMENT! Sick ‘em, boss!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/06/12/dear_david_letterman_96959.html

Laura in Maryland on June 12, 2009 at 9:55 AM

NOW hopes that all the conservatives who are fired up about sexism in the media lately will join us in calling out sexism when it is directed at women who aren’t professed conservatives.

NOW acts like up until now conservatives had the market on being sexists when they know darn well that sexism has no political boundaries. NOW also knows that for years it has looked the other way when their favorite liberal politicians have behaved in a “Hall of shame” deserving manner.

shick on June 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM

How about if we start off by agreeing that there are both left-wing and right wing jerks? Letterman’s a jerk. G. Gordon Liddy is a jerk. We can argue about the quantity or quality of said jerks, but let’s leave that argument alone for a minute and just agree to agree that a**holery is an apolitical trait.

The next one’s a bit trickier: Can we agree that some liberals AND some conservatives can be decent people? This one’s harder, because the jerks get a lot more attention, and the really decent people don’t bother to identify their political affiliation. It’s probably easier to think of people you know -your wacky Uncle Jim, for example – than a celebrity or politician who makes the cut.

And if we can do that… maybe, just maybe, we can move away from the eternal political campaign that’s getting progressively crazier in this country? Maybe? Ya think?

To quote one of my favorite conservative authors: “Wouldn’t it be pretty to think so.”

Mal Carne on June 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM

On that point, it’s important to note that when Chelsea Clinton was 13 years old she was the target of numerous insults based on her appearance. Rush Limbaugh even referred to her as the “White House dog.” NOW hopes that all the conservatives who are fired up about sexism in the media lately will join us in calling out sexism when it is directed at women who aren’t professed conservatives.

Yeah? Back at you, freaks. Where the hell were you when Palin and her family were getting smeared like (probably) no other politician in U.S. History before Election 2008? Why did you have to go back a decade-and-a-half, almost a whole freaking generation for Chrissakes, to drag that example out just so you could snark about hypocrisy? Why did you wait until now to say something in defense of Palin and her family, you useless fakes? Did you think no lines were crossed before now, or are you freaks just getting scared that things are going so far that you’re in danger of ending up on the wrong side of public opinion all of a sudden?

Just dissolve already, NOW, and stop pretending to be an advocate for women’s rights.

Aitch748 on June 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM

I do remember a lot of conservatives calling out Rush for his Chelsea jokes.

MarkTheGreat on June 12, 2009 at 9:59 AM

Meanwhile, Michael Steele hints at a boycott of Letterman’s show. Really? Even an awful joke is still a joke. I think the PR beating he’s taking is enough.

But Letterman FAILS to absolutely apologize. Furthermore, time will show Letterman baiting new prey to justify his villainy.

Ed, you’re a public figure. You know that it is not above Letterman’s pay grade to be required to make public reparations to Palin’s children. What if it were your kids being publicly ridiculed and sexually harassed on national television simply for being your children? And if it were Michelle Malkin’s child targeted? Still just a joke?

As political advocates, to squander political capital in order to appear above the fray, a cut above everyone else, there’s an element of foolish gullibility in playing the appeaser too soon.

Captain Ed, leadership skills require a unified strategy and a unified front in order to hold a line, let alone to press for improvement. Prostrate appreciation for a gesture from the Left is radical ‘moderation’, going too far, giving more than getting in the “diplomacy”. Accepting a graceful gesture from an opponent need not require one’s eyes removed from known cloak and dagger mannerisms. Maintain eye contact at all times. Measured response: a joke is not a joke that targets Children and Conservative Women, particularly for sex abuse. Brow beating conservatives to accept public status as whipping boys is nothing to enable via “generosity of spirit”. If you don’t defend Palin’s family, why should any one defend yours? E pluribus unum. United We Stand. We would never permit public ridicule of your family or Michelle Malkin’s family.

$.02 imho

maverick muse on June 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM

Just dissolve already, NOW, and stop pretending to be an advocate for women’s rights.

Aitch748 on June 12, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Well said, Aitch. NOW’s selective, disgracefully biased outrage over the last couple of decades sealed their irrelevance for me many years ago.

NOW’s silence – when conservative women are savaged by the left is utterly deafening to whatever they want to say now.

Fishoutofwater on June 12, 2009 at 10:10 AM

GOP will be annihilated in 2010 and 2012 if it keeps up its mean-spirited rhetoric against Hispanics and women who are not named Sarah Palin.

SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Hi, getalife. When are you going to ban yourself again?

Del Dolemonte on June 12, 2009 at 10:18 AM

I think the PR beating he’s taking is enough.

No, it is not enough. I want him censured publicly by his sponsors and/or fired.

/Dan Rather.

bluelightbrigade on June 12, 2009 at 10:25 AM

unwashed minion on June 12, 2009 at 10:09 AM

thanks for the link

maverick muse on June 12, 2009 at 10:27 AM

If Lettermen will not apologize and he’s producers see no wrong in correcting him, let $$$ spell it out for them.

I’m all for boycotting Letterman. Find out who advertises during his program and call them to tell them you ain’t buying their stuff until he apologizes.

shick on June 12, 2009 at 10:28 AM

We do need to give credit where credit is due, for NOW’s belated criticism of Letterman, although they might be in CYA mode, after Greta van Susteren (who calls herself a feminist) was blasting Letterman last night on Fox, for both the original jokes and Letterman’s non-apology. Greta also played a clip from ABC’s The View, dominated by liberal women, but even Barbara Walters was sharply criticizing Letterman, saying something like “it’s OK to criticize adults, but leave our daughters alone”.

The liberal media’s attacks on Sarah Palin are probably motivated by…FEAR. They’ve wanted to paint a stereotype of conservative women as unfashionable and unattractive and stuck in the past, and Sarah Palin is relatively young and attractive, and lots of people like and admire her. She does have the weakness of her daughter Bristol being a single mother, so Letterman decided to go after ALL her daughters, and Palin herself as being “slutty”. So if a conservative woman doesn’t fit the “old prude” stereotype and is young and/or attractive, she’s therefore “slutty”, and Sarah Palin isn’t the first victim–remember all the tabloids mentioning Condoleezza Rice’s leather jacket and stiletto heels, and the fact that she is unmarried? Remember all the comments about the Bush daughters, and Dick Cheney’s lesbian daughter? Even Nancy Reagan was criticized for wearing expensive dresses…

But Letterman was way over the top. According to him, Sarah Palin is a slut, and so are all female flight attendants–which is a tough job, trying to be patient and friendly while waiting on 100 or 200 sometimes demanding or grouchy passengers for hours, and trained to save them in an emergency.

A 14-year-old girl watching a baseball game with her mother is getting “knocked up”–is that an insult against baseball, against all baseball fans, especially Yankees fans? Wonder what Alex Rodriguez thinks of this, being labeled a rapist for no good reason?

But none of that bothers Letterman. Sarah Palin is young, conservative, attractive, and a threat to Letterman’s stereotype. That cannot be, so Letterman bashes away.

Steve Z on June 12, 2009 at 10:31 AM

“So last night Michell Obama went to the Lakers/Orlando game, and during the 1/2 time Kobe Bryant raped the Obama’s daughter”….hahahahaha! ummmmm, where is the laughter?

#9….Her new outfit got Arnold to ask where does she buy her steroids…
#10…Her new outfit makes her look like a slutty weight builder…
Ummmmm, where is the laughter?

right2bright on June 12, 2009 at 10:43 AM

FactsofLife on June 12, 2009 at 8:30 AM

Thanks for your response. I did watch the Ziegler clip here but didn’t get the connection last night. I understand your anger and appreciate your intent, but still don’t like the outcome in that particular post of yours last night.

However, people write, read and take things differently. So perhaps we can leave this matter as being due to a difference in our tastes.

Loxodonta on June 12, 2009 at 10:48 AM

Letterman’s words are no less offensive than Imus’s “Nappy headed hos” words.

1) Imus seems to have learned his lesson.
2) Where’s Sharpton’s uproar now?

shick on June 12, 2009 at 10:50 AM

NOW has no credibility anymore. Its meaningless. They gave up anything they had when they remained silent about Bill Clinton and all the things he did to women including rape and perjury, including using a much younger girl for oral gratification, including sexual harassment.

Yeah they have about as much right to to speak about this as the Catholic church does on pedophilia.

dogsoldier on June 12, 2009 at 11:18 AM

shick on June 12, 2009 at 10:28 AM

I read elsewhere on HA that ancestry.com dropped him due to some “feedback” they received.

dogsoldier on June 12, 2009 at 11:21 AM

GOP will be annihilated in 2010 and 2012 if it keeps up its mean-spirited rhetoric against Hispanics and women who are not named Sarah Palin.

SouthernGal on June 11, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Let’s see, would this be a strawman or is there now a strawwoman in the lexicon? Either way, more nonsense from the new looney lefty — this is the one who thinks rape jokes are no biggie! I suppose that attitude isn’t “mean-spirited” in the wondrous land of Obama.

littleguy on June 12, 2009 at 11:21 AM

AP’s point about the Michelle Obama & Hillary comments is on target. Let’s be gentlemen and ladies here, people. No need to stoop to juvenile cracks about looks – it’s degrading and just distracts from the conservative message, besides. If I could change one thing about the comments at HA, it would be to inject more common courtesy.

“But the lefties….” I don’t care. Let’s have better standards than that.

/rant

Rosmerta on June 12, 2009 at 11:24 AM

.
FactsofLife on June 12, 2009 at 8:30 AM
.
Thanks for your response. I did watch the Ziegler clip here but didn’t get the connection last night. I understand your anger and appreciate your intent, but still don’t like the outcome in that particular post of yours last night.
.
However, people write, read and take things differently. So perhaps we can leave this matter as being due to a difference in our tastes.

Loxodonta on June 12, 2009 at 10:48 AM

.
I’ll try to be somewhat more delicate next time. Thanks

FactsofLife on June 12, 2009 at 11:37 AM

Term limits are up on this turd; There’s quite a few new, good comedians, that need the work.

Cybergeezer on June 12, 2009 at 11:41 AM

I read elsewhere on HA that ancestry.com dropped him due to some “feedback” they received.

dogsoldier on June 12, 2009 at 11:21 AM

Capitalism works. It’s too bad our government doesn’t think so.

shick on June 12, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Can an attorney here comment on this question -

why can’t David Letterman be charged with a crime for this?

Doesn’t the catchall Hate Crimes Act of 2000 cover it?

BemusedMalkinite on June 12, 2009 at 12:13 PM

Although I feel that NOW’s statement admonishing Letterman is one of the signs of an upcoming apocalypse, I applaud them for finally stepping up to the plate.
With that said, I do wonder why they finally did so? They were silent throughout the campaign when Palin and her daughters were viciously attacked. They were silent when Clinton was attacked during the campaign. They were silent when Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews made snide comments about Palin and her daughters. They were silent when Miss California was attacked by the media. I think the only reason why NOW has come out against Letterman’s jokes is because they might have lost a lot of members for their non action in the situations I listed above. I wonder if there is a way to check NOW’s membership from the campaign until now? After all, not all feminists are one-trick abortion-rights ponies and some actually do care about the treatment of women. My gut tells me that NOW’s membership has been declining quickly lately and they need to find a way to bring their membership back up.

mizflame98 on June 12, 2009 at 12:14 PM

To Cybergeezer:

How about Greg Gutfeld as the new host of Late Night?

BemusedMalkinite on June 12, 2009 at 12:14 PM

mizflame98 on June 12, 2009 at 12:14 PM

They’ve been silent about a lot of other things:
1. Sharia law
2. Female circumcision
3. The UN prostitution rings in the Congo (and anywhere SMURFS are located)
4. Honor killings

NOW doesn’t care about women. NOW cares about NOW.

The same goes for Amnesty International.

bluelightbrigade on June 12, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Who’s being sexist against Sotomayor?!

It was Sotomayor that made the definitely sexist and offhandedly racist comments.

scotash on June 12, 2009 at 1:39 PM

I’m glad they did this, so I will give them credit. However, I am suspicious of their motives and wonder what took them so long. I have long wondered if I could sue NOW for liable or something. As a woman, I resent that they claim to represent me. They should have to change their name to NOLW =National Organization of Liberal Women or NOSW =National Organization of Some women; NOALW=National Organization of abortion loving women….

No, it is not enough. I want him censured publicly by his sponsors and/or fired.
/Dan Rather.
bluelightbrigade on June 12, 2009 at 10:25 AM

I’m sure Don Imus agrees with Dan.

I won’t think it is enough until Letterman has made a formal sincere apology, which he will not be able to do, because he isn’t sorry. His hatred of Palin is completely demented. I will boycott, even though snickers are my favorite candy bar. :( I hope it shuts him down, not that it will hurt him financially, since he is so rich he wouldn’t be able to spend all his money. But it would prevent him further damaging the pathetic drones who watch him and think he and his hate are so funny.

And I hope it does help curb some of the fat ‘jokes’, etc., around here. Though those don’t come close to as bad as the filth Letterman has spewed, they still reflect poorly and can be used by the hypocrites on the left to paint us in a bad light.

And I probably shouldn’t even acknowledge this, but WT*?

Yeah they have about as much right to to speak about this as the Catholic church does on pedophilia.
dogsoldier on June 12, 2009 at 11:18 AM

Do you sit around waiting for a topic that allows you to display your anti-Catholic bigotry?

P.S. Thanks to whoever it was that cleared up the Limbaugh/Chelsea Clinton controversy. I hate the way leftists get away with blatant distortion of the facts.

pannw on June 12, 2009 at 1:51 PM

To Cybergeezer:

How about Greg Gutfeld as the new host of Late Night?

BemusedMalkinite on June 12, 2009 at 12:14 PM

That’s brilliant, actually. Not on CBS, though; they’ll never hire someone who isn’t a leftie. But this could be an opening for Fox to put up head-to-head competition. There are bound to be people who aren’t digging Conan, who would be willing to look for other alternatives. And I’ve thought for years that David Letterman was just a nasty, bitter jerk who went COMPLETELY around the bend when Tonight Show went with Leno instead of him. No telling how many people are realizing that right now, after the Palin comments. I think Fox could easily bleed enough traffic from those two to make a go of it.

They might or might not want to keep Red-eye as it is, though. It’s pretty “adult” for that timeslot, unless they can dial it back just a click. If they decided to go with something a little more like the typical talkshow, I do think Gutfield would be good; but Ombudsman guy (name escapes me) might be even better. Just (PLEASE!) NOT Huck. I like him okay, but no way is he going to be competitive against the “edgy” comics. People who would watch Huck every night go to bed at 8:00.

RegularJoe on June 12, 2009 at 2:08 PM

Do you sit around waiting for a topic that allows you to display your anti-Catholic bigotry?

pannw on June 12, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Oh stop. Cry me a river. Do you sit around waiting to play the persecuted-Catholic card? Is any mention of the Catholic church automatically anti-Catholic even if the statement is true? Many are righteously furios with Rome for how it handled and still handles that scandal. But I guess we’re all just anti-Catholic. Until Rome properly deals with the problem its fair game for someone to point out its hypocrisy in this area.

It’s a perfect analogy. One that the Catholic Church deserves for both its inaction and action.

shick on June 12, 2009 at 3:00 PM

NOW has completely LOST the MORAL high ground in defending women. This is simply a back handed attempt by them to become ‘relevant’.

This is simply the beginning of a media ‘show’ in what will no doubt be some sort of attempt by NOW to regain credibility.

After the role as democratic political activists they took in the last election cycle, it will take far more than a few ‘statements of support’ for conservative women for them to regain any credibility.

Freddy on June 12, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Right-wink nut murders Holocaust Museum guard – 508 comments
Letterman – 2,628 comments

Priorities.

benny shakar on June 12, 2009 at 1:06 AM

“Right wing”? Sounds to me like the guy could’ve been one of Jeremiah Wright’s parishioners.

ddrintn on June 12, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Having a 14 year old girl joked about being pregnant (knocked up) by a man twice her age in a rape is no joke. Letterman should be forced out of his job and made to only appear in public on a dog collar. He should forfit his lands and wealth to the crown…….wait a minute. Oh, yeah, that’s right, this isn’t a dictatorship…… yet.

At least the new pay czar should make sure Mr. Letterman only makes $500,000.00 a year salary. The rest, I’m sure, Dave would donate to the liberal tax Kos. Right? Mr. Leftyman? RIGHT? Barbara Walters? Barbara Streisand? Dixie flicks? Any of you leftist high rollers? The “Boss?” I’m joking of course. Let’s just go and take it from them like the fascist country we are now. I wonder if that would finally make them all leave for Canada?

DKEN on June 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM

He is not funny, hasn’t been funny and is a pure 100% hypocrite. I relish the day he is canceled.

Oh, and he knocked up his girlfriend and didn’t marry her for 5 years.

A classic liberal “have it both ways” slimeball.

Cleveland Steamer on June 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM

except they got it wrong about Rush… he never did it…

LIMBAUGH:David Hinckley of–of the New York Daily News wrote this, and what he has–he’s got–it’s very strange. He says, In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.’ Could–could we see the cute kid? Let’s take a look at–see who is the cute kid in the White House. (A picture is shown of Millie the dog)

LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) No, no, no. That’s not the kid.

(Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton)

LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) That’s–that’s the kid. We’re trying to…

max1 on June 12, 2009 at 9:45 AM

I remember seeing that sequence on his TV show way back when. He immediately said it was unintentional, apologized and the next day told the audience that the person responsible was fired.

And to demonstrate the double standards of liberals, that week’s Saturday Night Live had a “Wayne’s World” skit that contained an unflattering comment on Chelsea’s appearance and nobody complained.

AaronGuzman on June 12, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Love what Palin said to Lauer today told him he was naive if he believed Letterman’s sorry explanation.

Other than that – you said it all – Hell has frozen over! (gee,does that even more dampen the global warming schtick?)

Minorcan Maven on June 12, 2009 at 6:46 PM

NOW speaking out against Letterman…hell MIGHT be in the process of freezing over. I won’t rejoice until I see more disintergrationg by the left–and I don’t believe we’ll have to wait too much longer. Letterman needs to get a “hubrisectomy” in the worst way. The Bible says that pride goes before a fall. I see Letterman tripping…

Driefromseattle on June 12, 2009 at 7:05 PM

disintergration: Um yeah! Late night watching Red Eye–sort of. Sorry for the typo.

Driefromseattle on June 12, 2009 at 7:05 PM

A compromise, then: The right will join in calling out sexism directed at liberal women when the left stops treating conservative women as “inauthentic” or traitors to their gender because they happen to be pro-life. Deal?

LOVE IT

OneGyT on June 12, 2009 at 7:14 PM

As Joe Piscopo used to say when he impersonated Letterman on SNL all those years ago:

“My, oh my – we are having some … fun … now. Ah hee hee heee.”

OneVision on June 12, 2009 at 8:35 PM

Oh stop. Cry me a river. Do you sit around waiting to play the persecuted-Catholic card? Is any mention of the Catholic church automatically anti-Catholic even if the statement is true? Many are righteously furios with Rome for how it handled and still handles that scandal. But I guess we’re all just anti-Catholic. Until Rome properly deals with the problem its fair game for someone to point out its hypocrisy in this area.

It’s a perfect analogy. One that the Catholic Church deserves for both its inaction and action.

shick on June 12, 2009 at 3:00 PM

Wrong. Blaming Rome for the pedo scandal is the same as blaming President Bush for Abu Ghraib. It’s the bishops in the US, not the Vatican who are culpable.

atheling on June 12, 2009 at 8:44 PM

Admittedly, I was waiting for a further “statement” from letterman…
I can see it’s not forth coming…
Let me tell ya’al a super short story along this line…
Circa, mid 70’s…
I was involved with a woman who had a pubescent daughter…sweet gentle and giving…
Her uncle…dirt bag…I nearly killed him when he tried to tap her…
After all was said and done…he did 8 yrs…
Dave…ain’t nothing funny about this topic…or anything close to it.

jerrytbg on June 12, 2009 at 9:23 PM

Hey Letterman..here’s a funny one I heard throught the grape vine…Dave Letterman’s kid is walking through Miami and Shaq knocks her up…wait she’s a he” Hairy? oh, well as I was saying…wait, he’s a toddler? Well, I would never, never, never,…blah, blah, blah…But it’s FUNNY!!!

dcheckie on June 12, 2009 at 9:36 PM

“Dave’s wife’s is so ugly, Dave won’t have to worry about birth control…her face will do just fine.”

Hey, just kidding. Just a joke. Lighten up.

luvstotango on June 12, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Credit my *ss. Check out the rest of their home page & see who they chose to call down. As far as I’m concerned all this did was to give them a great excuse to bring up Rush Limbaugh’s comment. Thanks, Rush!!!

Where is their denunciation of the Playboy “hate f*ck” article?

kg598301 on June 12, 2009 at 11:41 PM

Dave just stepped into deep water and he’s in over his head. I pity his child.

MalindaH on June 13, 2009 at 12:52 AM

“For the record, I didn’t think the “slutty stewardness” comment was all that funny, but I wasn’t offended by it. If women want to be taken seriously as leaders, they need to get beyond being shocked and outraged by stuff like that.

Infidoll on June 11, 2009 at 10:35 PM”

Let’s put this to this test, Infidoll. (In the voice of Kathy Griffen, say the following jokes:

Michelle Obama’s dress was so slutty, you know, the one she wore to NY, she looked like a ho on Times Square. But then, the one she wore in London, did you see that one?
She had little orange squishy flowers all around the hemline. It looked like she was recycling aborted fetuses. It’s Michelle’s little way in helping out in these tough times that George Bush caused.

(drum roll and applause)

Infidoll, you’re right, nothing to be offended about.

luvstotango on June 13, 2009 at 2:13 AM

I wish people like Letterman would just shut the hell up about their extreem political views. I watched and loved the Letterman show for years until I realized what a hateful liberal Letterman is with his O’reilly interview, just to name one incident…. and stopped watching. It isnt that I wont watch an entertainer who has different views than I….its just that I wont watch one who offends me personally or one who goes to great lengths to offend nearly half of the country including me. It just seems dumb on Letterman’s part. I think he is a pig.And the list of extreem Hollywood liberals who are almost militant and who have ruined my ability to enjoy their work, is a long one.

Mr2112 on June 13, 2009 at 2:31 AM

I used to love watching Craig Fergusen. Since Obama’s been president, he’s become more openly liberal. Bill Mahr, Madeleine Halfbright are now guests, instead of cute actresses. I’m down to about watching him only about 2 days of the week. I know it’s just a short time, till he sends me over the edge and will give up watching all together. I really like how cute and sweet he is, when he stay’s out of the political arena. Why piss off half your audience?

luvstotango on June 13, 2009 at 2:51 AM

Amazing how a leftist organization cannot possibly castigate a fellow traveler for their bad behavior without throwing some conservative in the mix, regardless of the number of years passed since the offense.
When Rush said what he said, he received plenty of grief over it. Dredging it up now is just a way to deflect from the criticism of Letterman. NOW is still pathetic and useless.

SKYFOX on June 13, 2009 at 10:20 AM

I used to love watching Craig Fergusen. Since Obama’s been president, he’s become more openly liberal. Bill Mahr, Madeleine Halfbright are now guests, instead of cute actresses. I’m down to about watching him only about 2 days of the week. I know it’s just a short time, till he sends me over the edge and will give up watching all together. I really like how cute and sweet he is, when he stay’s out of the political arena. Why piss off half your audience?

luvstotango on June 13, 2009 at 2:51 AM

When I had television, I enjoyed watching Ferguson, too. He always played it straight. This year I read a few of his comments on politics that did not sit well with me.

Blake on June 13, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Oh, Mahrer is creepy and over exposed. Why have him as a guest? And the same with Albright. Yech.

Blake on June 13, 2009 at 12:26 PM

The story hit slightly below 10,000 on a liberal blog. And that was buried.

:)

AnninCA on June 13, 2009 at 12:40 PM

When it was announced that Bristol Palin was pregnant Conan O’Brien commented that the teenager couldn’t protect ‘the crease’. Dave just had to top him.

BHO Jonestown on June 13, 2009 at 8:32 PM

Amazing; NOW has actually criticized someone who deserved it. The bra-burning harpies have done something useful with their sorry arses.

If only they’d go after the towelheaded cavemen who impose all manner of draconian restrictions on women because of their violent religion. Why not, say, put Al Jazeera on the Shame list?

But they never will, of course.

Dark-Star on June 13, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Some day NOW might even speak out against Rap Music Lyrics.

Geochelone on June 14, 2009 at 10:33 AM

Allah,

Imus was fired, will Letterman be Imused? It’s kind of a live by the word, die by the word deal going on here.

NOPE I won’t call for Letterman to be fired…let the Free Market deal with Letterman. Is there a market for perv comments about underage girls in the late night show arena? Letterman can corner that market…I am sure those folks will buy his sponsor’s products, they must all be high end income folks right SNARK. Letterman was bottom feeding, he shouldn’t be surprised when all he hooks on his fishing line are bottom feeders.

http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/06/hey-dave-was-she-asking-for-it.html

Dr Evil on June 14, 2009 at 11:04 AM

I am glad NOW spoke against Letterman.

There is a website trying to get Letterman fired:

http://www.firedavidletterman.com/

Going after the Letterman sponsors is a good idea.
Just like elections, words spoken on national TV have consequences.

4thQTR on June 14, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Wrong. Blaming Rome for the pedo scandal is the same as blaming President Bush for Abu Ghraib. It’s the bishops in the US, not the Vatican who are culpable.

atheling on June 12, 2009 at 8:44 PM

Nice try but the analogy fails. Bush didn’t reward officers guilty of covering the scandal by bringing them home safe within the whitehouse. Cardinal Law deserves jail time but he was absolved.

Your also suggesting that a US bishop problem isn’t a serious enough issue on its own.

shick on June 15, 2009 at 2:21 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6