David Letterman: Perv
My syndicated column today fixes the spotlight on David “The Perv” Letterman’s contempt for women. Yesterday morning, I noted the silence of the feminists. Last night, NOW finally spoke up — but not without taking a holier-than-thou potshot of its own. I suggest they all review the Four Stages of Conservative Female Abuse before wagging their tired old fingers again and lecturing us “inauthentic” women about not doing enough to combat sexism.
***
Dear Dave Letterman
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009
Dear David Letterman,
Will you teach your son to talk about women and girls the way you talk about Sarah Palin and her daughters?
You called the married 45-year-old mother, grandmother, and Alaska governor “a slutty flight attendant” on your national TV talk show because she happens to be a tall, beautiful, and dynamic public figure who doesn’t look, walk, or talk the way you think she should.
You joked on national television about Palin’s teenage daughters “getting knocked up” by professional baseball player Alex Rodriguez or solicited by the prostitute-addicted former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer because it’s acceptable in your social and professional circles to sneer openly at the children of politicians you despise.
You admitted that your attacks on Palin’s family were in “poor taste,” but cackled while acknowledging your sophomoric judgment.
You expressed moral indignation at being misconstrued, yet you purposely omitted the name of which daughter you were mocking.
Fourteen-year-old Willow was the one who accompanied Gov. Palin during her trip this week, not 18-year-old Bristol, whom you now claim was the target of your feckless smear – a smear you still insist is perfectly defensible. Look at yourself, Dave. Look at how lame your excuse-making was on your Wednesday night show:
“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. I mean, look at my record. It has never happened. I don’t think it’s funny. I would never think it was funny. I wouldn’t put it in a joke…”
Tell us, great comic genius, how tacking on another four years to the target daughter makes it funny? We unenlightened dim bulbs who live outside of Manhattan’s boundaries don’t get the joke.
Will you be able to explain it to your son?
Face it: David Letterman, late-night entertainer-turned-partisan hack/hitman has a deranged obsession with Sarah Palin and her family that has crossed into rank bigotry and hatred. If the CBS network cares about basic standards of decency on public airwaves and if it cares at all about bolstering its shrinking audience, the network honchos will get Letterman a therapist pronto.
Over the past year, Letterman has displayed his sexist, elitist stripes in jibe after jibe aimed at Palin. Taken cumulatively, Letterman’s mockery is about much more than expressing contempt for the popular GOP governor. It’s a handy device to deride a broad class of working-class and middle-class women he holds in contempt:
“You know, she reminds me, she looks like the flight attendant who won’t give you a second can of Pepsi. No, you’ve had enough. We’re landing. Looks like the waitress at the coffee shop who draws a little smiley face on your check. Have a nice day.”
“She looks like the dip sample lady at Safeway. She looks like the nurse who weighs you and then makes you sit alone in your underwear for 20 minutes. She looks like the Olive Garden hostess who says, ‘I’m sorry, your table isn’t ready yet.” She looks like infomercial lady who says she made $64,000 a month flipping condos.”
“[S]he looks like the lady at the bakery who yells out ’44! 45!’ She looks like a real estate agent whose picture you see on the bus stop bench. That’s who she looks like. She looks like the lady who has a chain of cupcake stores…”
In November 2008, Letterman told tanking CBS News anchor Katie Couric that he was “aroused” by Gov. Palin.
In March 2009, Letterman attacked Bristol Palin and snickered about her being “knocked up” again.
You know, David Letterman reminds me of the lecher at the school bus stop.
Or the aging creep lurking in the dirty magazine section at the 7-11.
Attention, CBS: Get him help now.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
139 CommentsPalin officially endorses desperate, clingy Orrin Hatch; time to rally around Dan Liljenquist
May 22, 2012 11:32 PM by Michelle Malkin
79 CommentsNoted MSNBC mocker of Sarah Palin’s intellect doesn’t do so well on Jeopardy
May 15, 2012 10:33 AM by Doug Powers
82 Comments
Another “novelty” swipe at a conservative Tea Party woman
April 22, 2012 10:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
105 Comments
Ann Coulter’s “novelty candidate” swipe at Sarah Palin
April 2, 2012 12:27 PM by Michelle Malkin
356 Comments
New video: ShePAC strikes back at misogynist Bill Maher
March 8, 2012 10:52 PM by Michelle Malkin
103 Comments
The war on conservative women
March 7, 2012 09:13 AM by Michelle Malkin
161 Comments
More CPAC speeches in 20 words
February 11, 2012 06:53 PM by Michelle Malkin
77 Comments
Categories: Double standards,Sarah Palin
Twitchy
» P. Diddy brags about spending millions on strippers; photographer replies: ‘pay what you owe me’AmSpecBlog
» Warren Pulls Even with Brown in New PollAmerican Thinker
» Fun & Games with Mainstream Media NumbersTwitchy
» Lil Wayne: ‘fuk Pusha T’Twitchy
» Roseanne Barr: Defending S.E. Cupp is more disgusting than Photoshopping a penis in her mouthRedstate
» Bomber Turned Left Wing Activist, Brett Kimberlin, Tries to Silence Conservative Opposition
ITookTheRedPill:
Fair enough. I disagree with your interpretation of the 1st Amendment and I think such bills would de facto establish a state religion via endorsing it. However, you’ve made your case well, I am content to let the system work itself out. As it stands, most people seem to agree with me, thankfully.
You are saying a great deal more than that. you are claiming that pretty much all isotopes used to determine the age of the Earth were tainted in a similar fashion (that is, across the board, parent isotopes are water-soluble and daughter isotopes are not).
While there are some that have this property, not all of them do. So, your “theory” falls apart. It’s wrong. Sorry. Additionally, rocks from the moon also confirm the age of 4 billion some odd years. Did the flood reach the moon too?
Only a few generations ago scientists assumed that a worldwide flood DID occur and that Noah’s story was a true story:
Link
It turns out, the facts did not support this.
700+ woo hoo~
/me plays his pipe.
ITookTheRedPill:
One more thing, have you considered very deep samples? Isn’t it obvious that there was a seafloor even in the flood?
All one has to do is dig deep enough and you will have a rock that the “floodwaters” never reached.
Your “theory” is wrong. Again, much apologies.
If you don’t think God exists, then why do you use “god” as a proper noun w/o the capitalization?
As to your claim of “no evidence,” that is perhaps the most disingenuous statement you have made to date. Despite MOUNTAINS of evidence pointed to by RedPill, R4L and others, you refuse to believe. You claim to be sincerely interested in learning, as long as it fits your preconceived paradigm. That makes YOU a hypocrite.
I will make this my last post to you WRT this thread.
MtsEdge:
What the heck are you talking about!? I DO NOT USE the word “god” as a proper noun! That is my point!
I also capitalize “Yahweh!” If I have contempt for your deity why am I capitalizing “Yahweh?”
…and here I am earnestly trying to explain to RedPill why his evidence concerning radiometric dating is wrong.
Just because you guys do not understand the evidence doesn’t mean it supports you.
I’ll believe it when I see it. No doubt you’ll be sure and tell me how I am evil in another thread. Go on then, I’ll be here for you later.
MtsEdge:
Yahweh, Jehovah, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit.
All capitalized.
I’ve really enjoyed this thread, even though I barely participated…
the reason why should be obvious!!
MtsEdge:
Briefly, as I said, just because you do not understand scientific evidence and because of that, you think it supports your deity, does not mean you are a stupid person. You are ignorant (you admit this youself) on these particular topics but not necessarily stupid.
You think that I only learn what I think fits my preconceived notions. The opposite is true. I am not the unlettered one here. You, on the other hand, haven’t even bothered reading anything that doesn’t support your worldview.
You would do well to educate yourself about such things as radiometric dating and Kant. It’s only for your benefit.
On June 16th, 2009 at 11:10 am, zeroangel said:
You’re looking for evidence of things not seen.
I was raised in a Christian home, but considered myself an agnostic for a long time.
I didn’t just blindly accept my parents’ beliefs. I questioned how someone could realy know the truth. I recognized that when you look around the world today, or look back throughout history, you don’t ever find a society without any form of religion at all. You may find some atheists as part of the population, but you never find a completely atheistic society.
That common seeking for God, across time and geography, is undeniable. Yet, there are many different faiths. So, what does that mean? I reasoned that either:
A) There is no God, and man just has a basic human need to explain what they can’t explain, so God becomes their explanation. I looked at how the Greeks explained the sun as a God because they couldn’t explain it any other way.
B) There is a God, who created us with a need to seek Him, but man often misses the mark and creates his own God instead of looking for the true God.
Again I questioned how someone could realy know the truth. I was seeking the truth, looking for evidence of an unseen God.
One of the things that impacted me greately was seeing multiple people whose lives had been completely transformed by their acceptance of Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. They were not the same now as they used to be. One in particular had been a poorly educated manual laborer before, and who had grown to become a business leader of a 10,000 person organization. I asked myself what gave him the self-image to go from where he was to where he is, and to speak in front of 10,000 people?
He credits his success to Jesus Christ.
Now here’s the thing: even as an agnostic, I knew that that man’s faith had enabled him to do something he could not have done without that faith.
Whether I believed Jesus Christ was God or not, that man’s faith in Jesus Christ was undeniably real and powerful.
That faith was real, and that faith produced real results.
That faith was evidence of things not seen.
And that faith helped draw me to faith in Jesus Christ.
It wasn’t until after I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior that I later found this explanation of what I had experienced:
ITookTheRedPill:
Many pages back, I agreed that human beings are by nature predisposed to want to believe in god or gods. It has to do with “agency” being a trait that helps one survive.
We are hard-wired that way, I agree, it doesn’t mean Yahweh, Vishnu, Zeus, or any others are real except in our minds.
A) is my answer and it is a valid answer. It doesn’t make me an evil person.
I don’t doubt that religion gives people comfort and drive. The exact same success stories you give are doubtless also present in other religions.
As I have said, atheism does that for me. Why can’t you accept that this is what works for me?
If I “establish” a restaurant, I create it, own it, and operate it.
If I “endorse” a restaurant, I am merely telling someone else that I like the restaurant, and they may want to check it out for themselves. But that doesn’t make me the owner of the restuarant.
Endorsement is not the same thing as establishment,
and endorsement does not create establishment.
The first amendment prohibts establishment, not endorsement.
Our Congress has endorsed Christianity since the very first opening prayer.
Thank you.
It depends on what you mean by “works” for you…
I accept that you are as comfortable with your beliefs as I am with mine.
For now.
I don’t accept that you will be as comfortable with your beliefs as I am with mine after our physical bodies have died.
ITookTheRedPill:
You are equivocating WRT the words endorsement and establishment.
The obvious difference is, we all have to deal with the government, whereas we don’t have to go to your restaurant.
A government that says “Atheism is the only logical choice” is clearly being hostile to a portion of it’s citizens.
Do we really need to continue the 1st Amendment argument? It’s done, I’ll agree to disagree. As I have said, you have made your case well.
ITookTheRedPill:
Then how about this, in this life, and especially on this blog, you agree to stop calling me evil just by virtue of my atheism.
After we die you can have the last laugh, how’s that?
What are the assumptions involved in coming to that number?
I’ve also heard that the depth of cosmic dust on the surface of the moon was a lot less than expected, and reflected an accumulation of about 6,000 years instead of billions of years.
ITookTheRedPill:
That observed half-life’s will continue to be the same, that sufficient samples were taken to rule out anomalies to an acceptable margin of error, and that the laws of physics will not be broken.
Rather good assumptions indeed. What is your issue?
Source? This is patently false. Do I have to refute this as well? Did you give up on your water soluble theory after I pointed out that not all parent-daughter isotopes pairs have the parent as soluble and the daughter as insoluble?
ITookTheredPill:
Do you think dinosaurs and men lived together 6000 years ago?
Were dinosaurs on the Ark?
greatelygreatlyI really don’t like it when I don’t catch my typos before submitting.
RedPill:
Don’t worry about typos. It’s important to be accurate and spell check, but let’s face it, in medium like this, some things get missed.
Yes, and yes.
They didn’t have to be full-grown, they could have been fairly young.
And the word “dinosaur” is a fairly new word. If you want a Biblical reference to what we today would call a “dinosaur”, look at the “Leviathan” of Job 41.
Link a comment where I called you evil.
So, is it safe to assume that you think a government that says “In God We Trust” is clearly being hostile to a portion of it’s citizens?
ITookTheRedPill:
Perhaps I was mistaken? Perhaps you did not say it directly. It is, however, implied.
Do you not think I am a force of evil in the world by virtue of my atheism? Do you not think I am doing Satan’s work?
I am speachless WRT dinosaurs. There is no evidence of men and dinosaurs living together, in fact all the evidence points to the contrary.
I truly do feel horrible for you. Clearly the education system has utterly failed you.
ITookTheRedPill:
Yes, although I can live with it. It’s not a big deal really, I can say “under stars” when I say the pledge and no one notices. However, it does annoy me that being religious is practically a requirement for high public office.
ITookTheRedPill:
How about this:
Can you bring yourself to stop equating atheists with the far-left:
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/12/david-letterman-perv/comment-page-1/#comment-718988
?
And why do you think that is?
Perhaps because we are a Christian nation, whose citizens consider it the duty, as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers?
ITookTheRedPill:
…or perhaps we are a nation mainly composed of Christians?
That is a different thing then being a Christian nation.
In any case, tomato, tomatoe, what’s your point?
Name one good decision involving running a nation that a Christian could come to but an atheist couldn’t.
Rulers? You mean elected representatives, of course. OK, I am being nitpicky, but still…
RedPill:
Presumably, this makes perfect sense to you:
http://www.sausageoflife.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/imaginext/images/tank.JPG
Correct?
I’m bouncing back and forth between commenting here and doing “real work”. I do have “real work” to do, so I don’t feel any obligation to answer every question. I will, however, respond to this:
I’ll let our first President respond:
ITookTheRedPill:
So what? Washington also owned slaves.
Furthermore, it’s still not an answer, it’s a dodge.
All he is saying is that he thinks you need religion for morality (you don’t).
It’s not an answer. Again:
I am sure you do have “real work” to do. So do I, but admittedly, it’s a slow week. Take all the time you need to cover every question.
Here’s a list of the outstanding ones:
1) I asked for a source on your cosmic dust on the moon theory. If you want, we can skip that one, because it’s mainly overshadowed by your Dinosaurs lunacy.
2) Do you not think I am a force of evil in the world by virtue of my atheism?
3) Do you not think I am doing Satan’s work?
4) Can you bring yourself to stop equating atheists with the far-left?
Take your time.
RedPill:
Could an atheist decide the Obama’s economic policies are flawed? Sure. I do.
Could an atheist decide to have a strong foreign policy and fully prosecute the war on Islamic Jihadist? Sure I do.
Could an atheist support 2nd amendment rights? Sure I do.
Could an atheist be against the Kyoto Accords? Sure I am.
Could an atheist be pro-life? I am not, however:
http://www.godlessprolifers.org/
Do I have to go on?
another try for the last word…
atheists are
..
as I said atheists are
‘Social Darwinism’ is often taken to be something extraneous, an ugly concretion added to the pure Darwinian corpus after the event, tarnishing Darwin’s image. But his notebooks make plain that competition, free trade, imperialism, racial extermination, and sexual inequality were written into the equation from the start- ‘Darwinism’ was always intended to explain human society.” (Desmond, Adrian [Science historian, University College, London] & Moore, James [Science historian, The Open University, UK], “Darwin,” [1991], Penguin: London, 1992, reprint, pp.xix
“The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.” (Darwin, Charles R. [English naturalist and founder of the modern theory of evolution], “The Life of Charles Darwin”, [1902], Senate: London, 1995, reprint, p.64).
charlie approved of eugenics and genocide… he was a good atheist!!!
atheists suck!!
more from your hairygod fallenangel…
Jet Jaguar:
I intend to make this the “dumping thread” that I can reference whenever another thread gets out of hand.
That said, any other ideas for a good movie? I am likely returning the 3 I rented today.
Zeroangel,
Tried to watch Hellboy II, but didn’t make it through. It just didn’t have the magic of the first one. Actually, the first time I saw Hellboy, I didn’t think much of it, but the character grew on me.
That’s too bad about what happened on the other thread. People should be allowed to express their feelings without subjecting themselves to analysis. I thought it was rude of them. Imagine if that kind of thing happened at a funeral, which it probably has, unfortunately.
good idea. You’ve seen Highlander, right? …a great film and Queen did soundtrack. Anther Christopher Lambert film that I remember liking was “The Hunted”.
Jet:
I guess I am not so surprised. When I was typing my first comment in the other thread I had a thought in the back of my mind (since this thread is probably fresh in everyone’s mind) that someone might try and do something like what Soap did.
Still, when it actually happened I nearly choked on my own tongue. It was rude, and that’s why I refused to let it go even if it meant sacrificing some of my own composure.
No doubt it has happened at funerals. Fortunately not to me, but then, other weird things have happened. I remember my cousins using my grandfather’s funeral as an opportunity to show off their FULL DRESS uniforms and brag about their medals (they were annoyed with me and one of my brothers for not showing up in uniform, despite us both being off active duty). That pissed off my whole side of the family.
I saw both Hellboy’s. They were OK. Nice flashy special effects and a real fantasy story. It was fun, but pretty lightweight if we are comparing it to a class-A movie like “LA Confidential.”
The Highlander series was great! Although I remember none of the sequels living up to the orignal and at least one of the sequels just being plain weird.
Jet:
I saw “The Hunted” too. Another fun movie. A little ridiculous for my taste, but fun nonetheless.
some oldies that I like are:
The Guns of Navarone
The Searchers
The Sting
The Color Purple
This Island Earth (the movie “Mystery Science Theater” panned this – pretty funny)
What About Bob
others:
As Good As It Gets
About Schmidt
300
The Passion Of The Christ
Apocalypto
Yes, a little ridulous, but I’m a sap for hokey martial arts movies. Some of the recently made ones are very well made:
Hero (w/Jet Li) – outstanding
The House Of Flying Daggers
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
…but if you haven’t seen it, please rent “Kung Fu Hustle”. You won’t be disappointed.
Jet Jaguar:
Have you seen “Eastern Promises” or “Michael Clayton” ?
Both excellent.
Some other George Clooney movies that are just awesome (and hyseterical):
“Burn After Reading” with John Malcovich
“Intolerable Cruelty”
“O Brother, Where Art Thou?”
Oh, and watch it in Chinese w/English subtitles (assuming you don’t know Mandarin) …the only way to go
I’ve seen “O Brother, Where Art Thou?” My whole family likes it (“We thought you was a toad.” – priceless)
I’ll have to check out the other recommendations.
I was meaning to see “Apocalypto,” but I never got around to it. Maybe I’ll check that out tonight.
I think I have pretty much seen all the hot new rentals right now.
“Quantum of Solace,”
“Bejamin Button,”
“Taken,”
“Valkyrie”
…all pretty good.
Thanks!
good animated films are:
The Iron Giant
The Incredibles
If your kids are old enough, “Home Alone 3″ is really good – way better than the first two.
My boy is a newborn so he can’t poop in the correct place much less be old enough to watch “Home Alone 3.” *smile*
I did see “The Incredibles” as an in-flight movie a little while ago. It was good.
GTG, need to do food shopping. TTYL.
Oh, Congrats! Is he your first? We have three boys, aged 17, 14, and 12. I’ll look for your response later…
Jet:
Yup, first. 17 days old as of today. I’m heading to the video store soon (just got home from shopping).
Yay! My first chance to use this thread as a dumping thead:
WE82:
…and presumably, Yahweh tossed a great deal of those victims into a furnace for not following the correct religion. I guess that makes your deity as bad as Hitler, Stalin, and Mao combined.
Letterman has gotten so creepy, his guest chairs are so sticky and slimey it looks like the creature from “Alien” has slimed on them.
Or… His guest chairs have more DNA splattered on them than former Prez. Clinton’s Oval Office Carpet. Guests are requesting bio-hazard suits!
Anyone want to combine this theme with BO’s command to, “suck it up?”
Just out of curiosity, who is that giving turdface a table dance in the pic? (I never watch the show so how would I know?)
Hey? What are you guys doing? This is my dumping thread!
*smile*
Zero,
Have you seen Marcello Mastrantonioni?
Pretty funny stuff!
Zero,
Are you there?
Jet:
Hey bro. Sorry I was taking a break from MM’s site and hanging out at my other favorite blog lately.
I can’t view that link from here. Do you have another? Otherwise it will have to wait until later.
zero,
It’s a youtube link, so your work probably blocks it.