What do you think of the scandal? I have always liked Letterman but thought the announcement was a bit weird. The audience obviously thought he was kidding. There hasn't been any mention of when he had sex with these women. I assume it was while he was married or it wouldn't be such a big deal. Or, maybe he pressured an employee(s) to have sex. The news reports seem to focus on the simple fact that there was sex. Anyone else think that's strange?
Sue
P.S. Last time I tried to post it appeared as someone else's post. Perhaps we're using the same password. I'm not listed as an author and don't know how to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the whole things is really strange too. I didn't see his show when he announced the affair, but I have read some of the coverage. While he's only been married a short time, he's been with the same woman (his now-wife) for over 20 years. So I guess the big deal is that he was having an affair while in a committed relationship and his girlfriend/wife probably didn't know. And while I understand how this could be so devastating to Letterman personally (and to his wife), it's really not that out of the norm (sadly) for public figures. So I'm wondering if it's a big deal only because Letterman's made it a big deal?
ReplyDeleteI thought he was gay, so was suprised he was having sex with a woman. Have never watched his show, except to see replays of his stupid animal tricks segment. All in all just don't care who he has sex with.
ReplyDeleteThe thing I think was handled nicely was that he came clean about it instead of trying to hide it or lie about it or pay off the guy. There is talk that he might lose his job over it because the women were his subordinates, and there may have been some coercion, but all of that seems to be conjecture.
ReplyDeleteI have always thought, whether it be Clinton or John Ensign or David Letterman, that what goes on their private lives should be private. The problem is that it isn't always that simple. Ensign basically paid off his mistress and family, perhaps got some of them hired elsewhere. But he was quick to criticize Clinton and others about their immoral behavior. In Letterman's case, he has not shown any hypocrisy, but it is worth looking into whether there was any sexual harassment going on. I think that IS important and worthy of public scrutiny.
As for the way Letterman announced it? That was weird, wasn't it? But there are people who handle stress through sarcasm and humor, so I guess that is what he was doing. The audience laughed at some strange things, and then once they caught on, it was dead quiet with only snickers here and there. To me, the audience reaction was more interesting than anything else. In a situation like that, what determines humor? Will they laugh at anything just because Letterman said it? Once they realized he wasn't joking, the audience reaction was more normal, but it seemed to me to be an interesting example of crowd mentality.
Linda
Sue,
ReplyDeleteI wish I could help you about the contributor thing. I'm not listed as a contributor either. You, Jocelyn and I can all sign in with the wesixgirls name and the password. Then just sign the post with your name, I guess, just like you did this time. That's what I've been doing because I don't have time to work on figuring out how to add to contributors and how to get people without google accounts on the list. Sorry. I'm glad you posted this, though.
Linda